Rolling Stone reports that Bush did indeed steal the election in 2004

[kpbuckeye 2]

Who says this isn't my real name, like your previously well throught out arguement, you managed to avoid offering any proof to the contrary.

 

Please by all means then discredit the article and documentation, instead of the author, out of hand. I guess it's just easier offering up cliches and the same tired fallacies you use in every arguement.

 

 

I say you are an puzzay alias. Like I said show some balls.

 

I tell you what, learn the definition of 'fallacies' and then figure out how to use it correctly in a sentence.

Also state what 'fallacies' I have used. good luck moron.

 

btw MDC is a welcher

[Jeff Garcia 8]

I got a free subscription to Rolling Stone this year. Everytime it comes in the mail I just throw it away. It's more political now than anything. It's like MTV, everything but the music.

 

 

 

The good thing is we only have 2 years left of Bush.

[MDC 5,902]

I say you are an puzzay alias. Like I said show some balls.

 

I tell you what, learn the definition of 'fallacies' and then figure out how to use it correctly in a sentence.

Also state what 'fallacies' I have used. good luck moron.

 

btw MDC is a welcher

 

You forgot to misspell a bunch of things and call someone a h0mo. HTH.

[BMoney 0]

i AM looking forward to newsweeks top 50 albums of 2006 edition...

[kpbuckeye 2]

You forgot to misspell a bunch of things and call someone a h0mo. HTH.

 

 

you sir, are a homo.

now go make another pot of coffee.

[Gephardt69 0]

Rolling Stone should follow Hunter S. Thompson's example....they are such an established mouthpiece now

[PIK 95 2]

This is a really long article. I've been reading alot and am only 2/3 done with the first of 4 pages. It's quite disturbing too. There was a heck of a lot of vote tampering going on, I['m just astonded the Dem party isn't making a bigger stink of this.

 

 

I can't believe the dems let this go. Idiots!

[Jeff Garcia 8]

I can't believe the dems let this go. Idiots!

And I can't believe the government planned 9/11.

[Snoopy1 0]

I say you are an puzzay alias. Like I said show some balls.

 

I tell you what, learn the definition of 'fallacies' and then figure out how to use it correctly in a sentence.

Also state what 'fallacies' I have used. good luck moron.

 

btw MDC is a welcher

 

 

LMAO

 

ok, source=kennedy

no history of any kennedys being biased.

 

that's called an Ad hominem arguement, that's a fallacy. Perhaps you should ask a teacher to help you out in creating constructive arguements, junior.

[kpbuckeye 2]

LMAO

that's called an Ad hominem arguement, that's a fallacy. Perhaps you should ask a teacher to help you out in creating constructive arguements, junior.

 

 

The major difficulty with labeling a piece of reasoning as an ad hominem fallacy is deciding whether the personal attack is relevant. For example, attacks on a person for their actually immoral sexual conduct are irrelevant to the quality of their mathematical reasoning, but they are relevant to arguments promoting the person for a leadership position in the church. Unfortunately, many attacks are not so easy to classify, such as an attack pointing out that the candidate for church leadership, while in the tenth grade, intentionally tripped a fellow student and broke his collar bone.

 

 

really? Like I said, learn the definition of what a fallacy is and then learn what a true ad hominen argument is. Apparently you don't know either do you grandpa? If Kennedy was an indpendent source then you might have a case, but its a kennedy and bias is a valid argument.

BTW, still waiting on the links.

 

 

how about the next post you show some balls and not post as a homo alias.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

Makes you wonder why the only people charged with voter intimidation are a few DEMS in Ohio.

[torridjoe 0]

Makes you wonder why the only people charged with voter intimidation are a few DEMS in Ohio.

 

...and the head of George Bush's re-election campaign in New England...

[Snoopy1 0]

really? Like I said, learn the definition of what a fallacy is and then learn what a true ad hominen argument is. Apparently you don't know either do you grandpa? If Kennedy was an indpendent source then you might have a case, but its a kennedy and bias is a valid argument.

BTW, still waiting on the links.

how about the next post you show some balls and not post as a homo alias.

 

I am truly amazed at your absolute stupidity. Let’s start with the basics.

 

The article was written as a persuasive argument, bias is inherent; the author takes a position, and then supports it with facts (none of which you have disputed BTW). So your claim of the author being biased is in fact a fallacy, since you have dismissed the entire article based on who wrote it. IT DOESN’T MATTER WHO WROTE IT, you twit, it’s meant to BIASED.

 

Independent sources, there were 208 of them, all of which you have conveniently ignored.

 

Very impressive that you went to the trouble of looking up what Ad hominem means, perhaps you can explain how the definition you presented refutes my position. Here’s a clue, it doesn’t

 

Links, you haven’t asked for any, this would be called be a “straw man”, if you were actually trying to posit an argument. Personally I believe you are too stupid to realize that you haven’t asked for any sort of documentation, and just threw that one out as a standard FFT argument.

 

Anyway, enjoy your stupidity; I’m not going to follow up on this anymore, since you clearly are incapable of carrying on any sort of intellectual debate with me. Honestly, I don’t think you could debate a monkey with it’s mouth taped shut. You are living proof that some children indeed do get left behind. Sincerely, I hope that wherever you live there is a strong need for ditch-diggers.

[kpbuckeye 2]

I am truly amazed at your absolute stupidity. Let’s start with the basics.

 

The article was written as a persuasive argument, bias is inherent; the author takes a position, and then supports it with facts (none of which you have disputed BTW). So your claim of the author being biased is in fact a fallacy, since you have dismissed the entire article based on who wrote it. IT DOESN’T MATTER WHO WROTE IT, you twit, it’s meant to BIASED.

 

Independent sources, there were 208 of them, all of which you have conveniently ignored.

 

Very impressive that you went to the trouble of looking up what Ad hominem means, perhaps you can explain how the definition you presented refutes my position. Here’s a clue, it doesn’t

 

Links, you haven’t asked for any, this would be called be a “straw man”, if you were actually trying to posit an argument. Personally I believe you are too stupid to realize that you haven’t asked for any sort of documentation, and just threw that one out as a standard FFT argument.

 

Anyway, enjoy your stupidity; I’m not going to follow up on this anymore, since you clearly are incapable of carrying on any sort of intellectual debate with me. Honestly, I don’t think you could debate a monkey with it’s mouth taped shut. You are living proof that some children indeed do get left behind. Sincerely, I hope that wherever you live there is a strong need for ditch-diggers.

 

 

You a little slow on the uptake huh?

If I were you I would go away and not follow either, since you don't seem to be able to follow.

way to try and change your position though, been watching torrid?

Links?

try reading the posts before sticking your foot in your mouth. YOU brought up the fallacy remarks and have yet to provide proof that I commited one. I provided plenty of proof of your ignorance, why can't you do the same for me? you run like a little girl though, it suits you.

[Snoopy1 0]

You a little slow on the uptake huh?

If I were you I would go away and not follow either, since you don't seem to be able to follow.

way to try and change your position though, been watching torrid?

Links?

try reading the posts before sticking your foot in your mouth. YOU brought up the fallacy remarks and have yet to provide proof that I commited one. I provided plenty of proof of your ignorance, why can't you do the same for me? you run like a little girl though, it suits you.

 

 

QUOTE

ok, source=kennedy

no history of any kennedys being biased

 

BTW, the above didn't require a link, but a quote. Perhaps, if you spoke the english language, people would be able to understand what you were asking. Link <> Quote

 

Anyway, enjoy your stupidity; I’m not going to follow up on this anymore, since you clearly are incapable of carrying on any sort of intellectual debate with me. Honestly, I don’t think you could debate a monkey with it’s mouth taped shut. You are living proof that some children indeed do get left behind. Sincerely, I hope that wherever you live there is a strong need for ditch-diggers.

[Soonerman 0]

Predictably enough, the Kennedy article was full of distortions and tinfoil hattery:

 

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2006/06/03/kennedy/

[Snoopy1 0]

Predictably enough, the Kennedy article was full of distortions and tinfoil hattery:

 

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2006/06/03/kennedy/

 

 

See, KB, this is how an intelligent person argues, they bring evidence to refute the arguements brought up, they don't attack the author for bias in an ARTICLE THAT IS WRITTEN AS A PERSUASIVE ARGUEMENT.