Don, I seldom limit my responses to specific argument/debate rules. I do my best to be honest, clear, use an emoticon when using irony or humor, etc. However, since you so nicely asked, while the information online is almost endless, here is a simple list of a few methods we all could use to keep our discussions going with less misunderstanding and/or strife.
http://www.paulnoll.com/Books/Clear-English/debate-advice.html I must admit that when very sloppy thinking, such as making unconscious assumptions that may not hold water, is used, I become a bit rattled. I see it a lot. For some reason, I decided to go to your most recent post ...even though I didn't expand and in effect used 'you are wrong' comments rather than an expanded reasoning in most cases. No, I didn't google obama concerned. I have enough humor in other realms in my life! ;-) When he was a legislator, I did look up his entire voting record and then compared the 'present' votes with what others did. I found he merely adapted to his environment and used that vote like the others do/did. So, in this way I couldn't fault him more than the entire group. In other ways, overall, I find him no more deceptive nor lacking in integrity than his colleagues so don’t hold him up to ridicule as I do and have done with other leaders who stood out in these areas. I know this is a sad commentary on our current day political processes…and, that is the way it is. On Jul 6, 1:47 am, Don Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > Yeah, I can be bombastic. Nice word by the way, I'd heard it before > but had to look it up anyway. I generally try to be heavy on the > humor and don't spare myself in the self-depreciation department, I'm > well aware I'm a poor writer. Poor spelling and an unfortunate habit > of ending sentences in prepositions not the least of my problems. The > quotes you've provided are indeed a nice representation of my 'style.' > I also tend to use sarcasm, by the way, another weak argument tactic. > > The 'voting present' comment was well used. It's a tactic used by > politicians to show opposition without the political fallout of > actually opposing a measure. As a leader, one generally doesn't have > this luxury. Obama is apparently still trying to employ it. > Doesn't seem to be working as well for him as it did when he was in > the legislature. Now people expect him to DO something. As I've said > before, he's a smart guy and hopefully he'll figure this out soon and > I really hope what he does isn't along the lines of genuflecting to > whatever despot ends up in control of Iran. > > Not being completely void of vanity I am gratified that you felt the > need to copy so much of my 'work' in your post. I'd greatly > appreciated it if you would give me some fine examples of what you > consider good argument skills in reply rather then brief two or three > word denials. Did you try the 'Obama concerned' google? It really is > kinda funny seeing all that together on one page. Then try to see > what he's actually doing about it. Not a whole lot of info available. > I tend to hold my leaders accountable. I did it with Bush and I'll > do the same with Obama. > > dj > > > > On Sun, Jul 5, 2009 at 12:01 PM, ornamentalmind<[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Don, I’m learning about your hyperbolic and somewhat bombastic writing > > style. And, in particular, the gratuitous use of innuendo. > > Examples: “I was lamenting the fact that we are hearing and seeing > > something > > truly extraordinary and yet we are apparently doing nothing about > > it.” (not true) > > “This makes Gitmo and Abu Graib(anybody remember that?) look like a > > sweet 16 party.” (entirely dissimilar analogy) > > “. It's like page 6 somewhere near the bottom news, if > > that.” (not true) > > “where is the leader of the free world on this?” (well known) > > “Try this, google 'Obama concerned' and check out all the hits. It'd > > be hilarious if it wasn't so depressing. He's the most concerned > > president in history and yet he's so nuanced he doesn't do anything > > but say how concerned he is” – (entirely untrue) > > “He's still voting 'present.'” (where? When he did it in congress, it > > was absolutely no more than the rest of those in congress did. Check > > it out.) “Amazing.” (not so much) > > “And no, I'm not all right, I think I've managed to rupture my spleen > > thinking about this.” (while I care about those who are ill, hurting > > ones self seems less sympathetic. For sure it makes for a poor > > argument.) > > > On Jul 5, 1:47 am, Don Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I was lamenting the fact that we are hearing and seeing something > >> truly extraordinary and yet we are apparently doing nothing about it. > >> This makes Gitmo and Abu Graib(anybody remember that?) look like a > >> sweet 16 party. It's like page 6 somewhere near the bottom news, if > >> that. WTF? While this is encouraging... > > >> http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/05/world/middleeast/05iran.html?_r=1&r... > > >> where is the leader of the free world on this? Try this, google > >> 'Obama concerned' and check out all the hits. It'd be hilarious if it > >> wasn't so depressing. He's the most concerned president in history > >> and yet he's so nuanced he doesn't do anything but say how concerned > >> he is. He's still voting 'present.' Amazing. And no, I'm not all > >> right, I think I've managed to rupture my spleen thinking about this. > > >> Oh, and just who is it that are pulling the > > >> > puppet strings of our leaders? -gruff > > >> The Illuminati of course. In league with visitors from outer space. I > >> just hope they're not here to eat us. > > >> The day we send our ex-politicians off to the UN to be tried is the > >> day we are officially dead as a world leader. That doesn't happen to > >> super powers. We may be winding down as a super power but we aren't > >> finished yet. No sir, not yet. > > >> dj > > >> On Sat, Jul 4, 2009 at 11:18 PM, gruff<[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > If anyone is offended or put off by an all-in-one reply to a number of > >> > posts, please let me know. > > >> > Don, I don't want to rain on your 4th but there is rejoicing to be had > >> > hiding in the midst of the slaughter. What is the news is that it is > >> > received from hidden cell phone videos and twitter. And that news > >> > celebrates freedom. The freedom that happens when a government can no > >> > longer keep the voice of it's people locked up and shut away. That is > >> > the freedom that moves me the most this 4th of July. It's a new > >> > freedom that most people don't realize has emerged as yet. > > >> > And yeah. It was an apology. Gee, George, we're real sorry but we're > >> > taking our leave of you and shake the dust off our sleeves in the > >> > process. The iconic phrase 'dear john' should really be a 'dear > >> > george'. However, I do think the signers went a little overboard with > >> > the details. A few cursory acknowledgments should have been > >> > sufficient given that we merely did what we could as soon as it became > >> > financially feasible. We were lucky we didn't have to face off all > >> > of Europe with what we were trying to pull off. A fully elected > >> > government? My god, man. What were we thinking? > > >> > iam, we are completely and securely sheltered under the rule of law. > >> > It never went anywhere. It just got stronger. And eliminate the > >> > corporations? Because that's what would happen if you took away their > >> > status as persons. That would be as bad a jolt as the elimination of > >> > all the banks. Everything would come to a screeching halt. Riots > >> > would erupt like instant cancers across the land. Why would you wish > >> > something like that? I don't think you really meant that, did you? > > >> > And Jackson? I was just beginning to think we as a species may be > >> > behaving rationally when along comes this circus with half the world > >> > drooling over the center ring and who's that in the box office > >> > twirling his mustache and counting the lucre? That and letting some > >> > sports event preempt the Nightly World News. They both ring of > >> > idiocy. > > >> > Tinker, think about it. The rule of law is not supposed to be in the > >> > hands of the people. It's supposed to be in the hands of government. > >> > That is one of the reasons people create governments. Otherwise we'd > >> > have pretty much ad hoc chaos. Rules are necessary on several levels, > >> > but I find a general rule of law in civil torts that's we are all held > >> > to. Civil law in most developed nation is based on the concept of > >> > fair dealing and the behavior of a prudent person. The standard is > >> > laid out in four elements. There must be a duty to behave in a > >> > certain manner. That duty must have been violated. That violation > >> > must have caused damages for which people then turn to the courts for > >> > reparation. We can't just whip out our swords and chase down the bad > >> > guy ourselves anymore. Oh, and just who is it that are pulling the > >> > puppet strings of our leaders? I'd like to have their names. Your > >> > rant seems to be winding up and becoming somewhat frenetic. Are you > >> > all right? > > >> > Don, it may not be up to just the people of the United States to > >> > decide whether to go after past administrations for anything like war > >> > crimes. We've done it and other nations do it all the time and it's > >> > possible one of our allies or even a neutral middle-east nation might > >> > be able to investigate and prosecute perceived war crimes. We > >> > certainly did it after WWII, Korea, Vietnam, and probably every other > >> > war. > > >> > As a for real right now for instance, the U.N. recently launched an > >> > investigation into Arizona's wild west Sheriff Joe Arpaio for human > >> > rights violations. I mean, everything is still quiet down here, but I > >> > think the reality and shock of it may have not yet worn off. The U.N. > >> > aimed right for the jaws of the beast tackling the most popular > >> > sheriff in Arizona. Joe's already told the press he's not afraid of a > >> > U.N. investigation. He's trying to go down in hisory with the other > >> > Arizona greats. Earp, Holliday, Dillon, Cartwright and Little Joe. > >> > Arpaio was recently elected to his third term as Sheriff of Maricopa > >> > County. > > >> > Rigsy, I'm sorry, but at one time or another about half the country > >> > felt like you do now, and about half feels the other way. Actually, > >> > slightly more than half. That's what it's like astride a democracy in > >> > action. Imagine what it's like in a nation where rebels overnight > >> > take over the government where you live? > > >> > The Force is copyrighted? How can that be? It's ... its ... The > >> > Force? > > >> > Nixon was real dirty but I still liked the guy. I think he did a lot > >> > of good. But he got caught with his hand in the pot wrapped around > >> > the smoking gun with a shit-eating grin on his face. He had to fall. > >> > Either that or shoot it out with the people. And in the instant > >> > issue, I don't think you can prosecute someone for being stupid. Now > >> > Cheney, he may be a feather off a different horse along with a few > >> > other second round hitters. I wouldn't mind seeing Ashcroft go to > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
