Liberal free for all coming to an end

[smc]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

Hawaii Gov. Neil Abercrombie (D) suggested in an interview that a long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate for Barack Obama may not exist within the vital records maintained by the Hawaii Department of Health.



But no long-form birth certificate. And no typed original document like what BO has posted online. Looks like it's time to start asking questions again.

This is insanity. You do yourself such an injustice by posting such drivel, when there are real issues that matter.

[randolph]

Democrat
You have two cows
Your neighbor has none
You feel guilty for being successful
You vote people into office that put a tax on your cows, forcing you to sell one to raise money to pay the tax.
The people you vote for then take the tax money, buy a cow and give it to your neighbor.
You feel righteous.
Barbara Steisand sings for you.

Republican
You have two cows
Your neighbor has none.
So?

Socialist
You have two cows
The government takes one and gives it to your neighbor.
You form a cooperative to tell him how to manage his cow.

Communist
You have two cows.
The government seizes both and provides you with milk
You wait in line to get it.
It is expensive and sour.

American corporation
You have two cows
you sell one, lease it back to yourself and do an IPO on the 2nd one.
You force the two cows to produce the milk of four cows.
You are surprised when one cow drops dead.
You spin an announcement to the analysts stating you have downsized and are reducing expenses.
Your stock goes up.

[TracyCoxx]

Logical fallacy: Appeal to ridicule

Originally Posted by smc

This is insanity. You do yourself such an injustice by posting such drivel, when there are real issues that matter.

[smc]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

Logical fallacy: Appeal to ridicule

I suggest you review what the logical fallacy called "appeal to ridicule" actually involves. I have created no straw man. You have, Tracy, by bringing up something that has nothing to do with the actual policies being implemented with which you disagree. In doing so, you seek to negate the man rather than address his policies (at least in this post and with this argument), thus contributing to the ridiculous hyperbole of others in which policies that are not that different from ones proposed by Republicans over the years (e.g., the healthcare plan is based in large part on Romney's Massachusetts plan and the plan Dole campaigned on for the presidency; etc.) are stated to be the end of our freedom, the death of America, and so on.

And before you accuse me of putting words in your mouth, note carefully that I said you are "contributing to the ridiculous hyperbole of others."

As has been pointed out on this site again and again, no matter how much civil discourse we have about politics, and no matter how substantive the discussion gets on the issues, it seems we can always count on you to revert at some point, and in some way either large or small, back to arguments and views that are facile, questionable as to their verity, and (as in this particular case) irrelevant. That is precisely what this birther crap is. When you are arguing substantively, it is obvious that you are so much smarter than those who take such crap as good coin, and it's a shame you can't seem to help but go swimming in their muck from time to time.

And before you accuse me of insulting another member of this Forum, note carefully that I am writing of your occasional opinions, not of you. You will not get ad hominem arguments out of me.

[TracyCoxx]

Appeal to Ridicule does not always involve a strawman. I did not accuse you of insulting me. I accused you of ridiculing my statement, like you said, without addressing the statement.

[smc]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

Appeal to Ridicule does not always involve a strawman. I did not accuse you of insulting me. I accused you of ridiculing my statement, like you said, without addressing the statement.

You should read more carefully. My point about "insulting" was relevant to my last post, not your post that first brought up the false "logical fallacy."

And I did address your statement. It is unworthy of serious discourse. That is my response.

Again, there are serious issues to discuss. This birther crap is not among that set.

I have typically avoided political discussions on this forum mainly because, as I?ve said before, I don?t enjoy discussing complex issues unless I know who I?m talking to. Get me in a room with my students, friends, or colleagues however, and it is a completely different ballgame! One of the basic problems of online discussion is that it is next to impossible to fully argue a solution to a complex problem such as what to do about health care, global warming, or the economy in a short text response. We unfortunately tend to take a side and cling to it, failing to hear what others are saying, and then attacking or labeling their beliefs--often incorrectly.

What I have seen of political discourse on the Internet in general is discouraging. Unfortunately so is it here. The few ?political? threads I have seen on ?TLB? all seem to be dominated by the same person with the express goal of stating their own views and excluding or ridiculing all others. The same pattern occurs over and over again: whether it be universal health care, Obama?s nationality, net neutrality, or a supposed ?liberal free for all.? The stage is ?set in advance?--like a trap--with loaded arguments and titles like ?There Goes the Internet.? The issue is presented not for discussion--but rather as a challenge--to see who will dare to question the OP.

Many well thought out and reasonable arguments have indeed been presented in each thread, both for and against the OP. However almost all statements ?against? the OP have been dismissed with ridicule, denial that something was ever said, labeling, sarcastic remarks, and reliance on statements that make me think too much time is spent listening to Rush Limbaugh, watching Fox news, and not getting out of the house. Almost never is an idea attacked or supported on its own merits or with real evidence. Personally I want nothing to do with this sort of political ?discussion,? nor do I believe that it belongs in this forum.

[randolph]

Tracy, you sometimes appear to belong to the "don't confuse me with the facts crowd".
The following is an excerpt from Wikipedia.

"In 2008 the Obama campaign released his birth certificate, certified by the Hawaii Department of Health, and posted a scanned image of it online. The posted certificate states that Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawaii, on August 4, 1961.[1] The certificate also states, "This copy serves as prima facie evidence of the fact of birth in any court proceeding". Frequent arguments of those questioning Obama's eligibility are that he has not released a photocopy of his "original" or "long form" birth certificate, but rather a redacted "short form" version. It has also been claimed that the use of the term "certification of live birth" on the document means it is not equivalent to one's "birth certificate". These arguments have been debunked numerous times by media investigations,[13] every judicial forum that has addressed the matter, and Hawaiian government officials?a consensus of whom have concluded that the certificate released by the Obama campaign is indeed his official birth certificate.[14] Asked about this, Hawaiian Department of Health spokeswoman Janice Okubo stated that Hawaii "does not have a short-form or long-form certificate".[15] Moreover, the director of her Department has confirmed that the state "has Sen. Obama?s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures".[16][17]"

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by randolph

Tracy, you sometimes appear to belong to the "don't confuse me with the facts crowd".
The following is an excerpt from Wikipedia.

I admit I hadn't done my Wikipedia research. That's interesting about the long form birth certificate. Although there's a woman in a paper I saw who had twins born at the same hospital as BO on the day after he was born, and she's showed their birth certificates. I don't know if it's officially called a long form, but it requires a lot more information than BO's certificate has (image attached).

What keeps me curious is the fact that his own grandmother ID'd him at the birth canal in Kenya, and that he later had Indonesian citizenship (not dual since that was not allowed in Indonesia). And now this thing with the governor of Hawaii, who seems to be trying to help BO isn't doing him any favors LOL. And the fact that he goes to great lengths to conceal his original birth certificate isn't doing himself any favors either. Unless it doesn't exist, in which case I guess he would be doing himself a favor by refusing to show it.