Apparently, we cross-posted there.
Anyhow, demonstrate the ad hominem in the statement you brought up as reference.
timber, You're acting dumb on this topic only amuses.
An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin, literally argument against the person), personal attack or you-too argument, involves replying to an argument or assertion by attacking the person presenting the argument or assertion rather than the argument itself. It is a logical fallacy.
Demonstrate that any person or persons, as opposed to the manner of exposition proceeding therefrom, be the subject of the criticism I presented.
No need; it's still an ad hominem.
Demonstrate how that be so.
Is, not! -
is, too!-
is, not!-
is, too!-
is, not!-
is, too!
...just thought I'd try to save y'all some time....
timber, We'll just let the readers decide this one.
cicerone imposter wrote:timber, We'll just let the readers decide this one.
I have no doubt most already have done so.
The point at discussion in the current digression is that a participant has been called upon to support his allegation another participant had engaged in ad hominem attack. To this juncture in the digression, no such support has been presented. Any may infer from that as they see fit.
c.i., don't bogart that doob...
Conservative Andrew Sullivan on George Bush:
[W]e have a president prepared to lie through his teeth about the central issue of our time. He is dishonoring his office and shirking his responsibility. In peacetime, this is disgrace enough. In wartime, it is unforgivable.
I wonder,if the unemployment rate now is a lie,using false numbers,that begs the question...
During the last Dem Presidents admin,the dems were touting the low unemployment rate as a sign the economy was doing great.
Now,those numbers are a lie.
Since they are calculated the same way now as they were then,were they a lie during the last dem admin?
mm wrote: During the last Dem Presidents admin,the dems were touting the low unemployment rate as a sign the economy was doing great.
Now,those numbers are a lie.
Okay, you made the claim, now prove it.
Prove what? Clinton inherited one of the greatest economic expansions in history and rode it to a second term. That much of it was due to the smoke and mirrors of the dot-bomb industry is beside the point I suppose.
cicerone imposter wrote:mm wrote: During the last Dem Presidents admin,the dems were touting the low unemployment rate as a sign the economy was doing great.
Now,those numbers are a lie.
Okay, you made the claim, now prove it.
Provr what?
Prove the claim that the left has made that the unemployment numbers are false?
Or prove that the dems under the last Dem President claimed that the unemployment numbers proved how good the economy was doing at the time?
cjh is a troll; he's really a gnat; about as meaningful to human life.
BINGO! It's this statement: Or prove that the dems under the last Dem President claimed that the unemployment numbers proved how good the economy was doing at the time?
