Liberals - Practice Conservative Argument Techniques

*ahem*

dyslexia wrote:

McGentrix wrote:

Actually, seems like babies lives are at stake from what you have written here...

I suppose this is in reference to the national debt? You really should branch out as there are other reasons babies might feel threatened such as lack of available health care, the deteroriation of the environment, global warfare lasting multi-generations, the Patriot Act and attendant loss of freedom, religious persecution of all non-pentacostals, joblessness, and general malaise connected to having career republicans hold public office.

If any of this gibberish had any bearing on any thing based in reality, you could probably sell it to Salon.

This technique would never win a prize. Not even at the liberal county fair.

This morning, the ACLU filed a federal lawsuit charging that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld bears direct responsibility for the torture and abuse of detainees in U.S. military custody. The lawsuit seeks a court declaration that Secretary Rumsfeld violated the U.S. Constitution and international laws.

Officials at the highest levels of government bear the ultimate responsibility for the actions of the U.S. military. I urge you to join us in our call for accountability by viewing a two-minute Web movie and calling on the Attorney General to appoint an outside special counsel to investigate how our government's torture policies took such a misguided path.

This landmark lawsuit was filed by a coalition of human rights advocates on behalf of eight former detainees who were incarcerated in U.S. detention facilities in Iraq and Afghanistan, where they were subjected to torture and other cruel and degrading treatment. None of the men was ever charged with a crime.

McGentrix wrote:

Actually, seems like babies lives are at stake from what you have written here...

I suppose this is in reference to the national debt? You really should branch out as there are other reasons babies might feel threatened such as lack of available health care, the deteroriation of the environment, global warfare lasting multi-generations, the Patriot Act and attendant loss of freedom, religious persecution of all non-pentacostals, joblessness, and general malaise connected to having career republicans hold public office.

dyslexia wrote:

McGentrix wrote:

Actually, seems like babies lives are at stake from what you have written here...

I suppose this is in reference to the national debt? You really should branch out as there are other reasons babies might feel threatened such as lack of available health care, the deteroriation of the environment, global warfare lasting multi-generations, the Patriot Act and attendant loss of freedom, religious persecution of all non-pentacostals, joblessness, and general malaise connected to having career republicans hold public office.

They might feel just a tad less threatened by those issues than the "hammer and vaccum" treatment. Just an observation. They might like to take their chances with those other little issues you mentioned. Suppose?

Lola:-

No.I don't see.I was connecting untrammeled greed with imbecility.

I'm not wholly convinced that "we" do too much "observing and following political arguments".

You might have to define "political arguments" just to begin.You might,like Foxy,only follow those arguments you wish to follow which is fair enough but it is a limiting case.

Basically,you seem to be saying,we had better get as good as Mr Bush's team which is a type of admiration.

Hitler wasn't engaged in genocide at first.He was elected in 1933.By the time the genocide got going he had dispensed,more or less,with rhetoric.Naked power sufficed.

Surely "word smithing" is at the least trickery

I have a bit of a post lined up about advertising techniques but I'm waiting for the right signal.

I don't remember referring to dys as a "bear".I thought I used "cutie".

Hemingway committed suicide I heard.Mailer said something about that.There's packing a wallop and then there's PACKING A WALLOP!!!!!.

Ticomaya wrote:

dyslexia wrote:

McGentrix wrote:

Actually, seems like babies lives are at stake from what you have written here...

I suppose this is in reference to the national debt? You really should branch out as there are other reasons babies might feel threatened such as lack of available health care, the deteroriation of the environment, global warfare lasting multi-generations, the Patriot Act and attendant loss of freedom, religious persecution of all non-pentacostals, joblessness, and general malaise connected to having career republicans hold public office.

They might feel just a tad less threatened by those issues than the "hammer and vaccum" treatment. Just an observation. They might like to take their chances with those other little issues you mentioned. Suppose?

Let's see, what do we have here? Thank you Tico for practicing with us. You've provided an excellent demonstration of the technique.

I can see that you have little respect for women who recognize their responsibility to consider whether they are able to provide a growth environment before bringing innocent babies into this world. Not to mention zero respect for the innocent babies themselves. These babies have no say in the matter of whether they are brought into this world without the necessary provisions to lead a good, productive life.

I have less respect for those who would suggest it was okay to kill little babies.

The natural extension of your thinking would be to allow a young lady who has given birth to her child, to promptly

You're starting to get a little scary, Lola.

I wonder if the technique isn't responsible for at least part of the behavior? It could be self-reinforcing...

Cycloptichorn

There is always adoption. A fine alternative to death.