or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Fox News Murders
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Fox News Murders - Page 4

post #121 of 150
Quote:
Originally Posted by involuntary_serf View Post

The point is that the feeling that taxes are about right is quite likely to strongly correlate with those that receive net benefits (from other tax payers). In other words, I'm mostly likely to think my taxes are just fine if I'm getting more tax-funded benefits (funded by other people's taxes) than I'm paying on net.

Yes but wouldn't this senerio apply more to the ultra rich? Not so much benifits as deductions and loopholes.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #122 of 150
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Yes but wouldn't this senerio apply more to the ultra rich? Not so much benifits as deductions and loopholes.

Nope. They pay most of the income taxes (and disproportionate to their share of the national income). Even accounting for the benefits they undoubtedly receive from those taxes, they are still net payers not recipients.
post #123 of 150
The top 25% of income earners pay 86% of all federal income taxes.

The top 50% pay 97% of income taxes.

The top 1% pay 39% of income taxes.

Source: http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/05in05tr.xls

Given these numbers, how could the "ultra rich" possibly feel that taxes are about right?

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #124 of 150
Quote:
Originally Posted by involuntary_serf View Post

Nope. They pay most of the income taxes (and disproportionate to their share of the national income). Even accounting for the benefits they undoubtedly receive from those taxes, they are still net payers not recipients.

Well that's one way of looking at it. Another is is how much more do they make than the average person? Will this keep them from putting bread on the table, paying the bills, and sending their kids to college? Or will it be numbers on a balance sheet?

I've feeling in the end if this were to be allowed to contunue only the rich could afford a higher education and that's just wrong.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #125 of 150
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

One thing I always find very interesting about threads like these though is how weak-minded people with a leftist perspective must be.

Man, I could really use that "flip the bird" emoticon right now. Really, Trumptman, kiss off!
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #126 of 150
Quote:
Originally Posted by involuntary_serf View Post

Those approval lines appear to correlate fairly closely to people that are net tax recipients.

You mean the Banking and Insurance sectors of Wallstreet, right?
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #127 of 150
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

The top 25% of income earners pay 86% of all federal income taxes.

Because they have almost all of the money! Hello!!!
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #128 of 150
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Well that's one way of looking at it. Another is is how much more do they make than the average person? Will this keep them from putting bread on the table, paying the bills, and sending their kids to college? Or will it be numbers on a balance sheet?

I've feeling in the end if this were to be allowed to contunue only the rich could afford a higher education and that's just wrong.

My dad once told me, "You know son, you have every right to go out there and make as much money as you can. But don't ever forget that this is one of the only countries in the world you can do that. And if you make a fortune it is your duty as an American to pay back for the 'privilege" of being an American and living in a country where you can be rich."
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #129 of 150
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Oh oh... someone is catching on.

Some people believe that politics is personal and thus if you disagree, personal attacks are fine since they are really only political attacks.

One thing I always find very interesting about threads like these though is how weak-minded people with a leftist perspective must be.

My thoughts are my own and when I do something with my hands it will be driven by my own thoughts and not by the thoughts of others. Yet here is an entire group declaring that certain speech must be silenced due to certain people out there being unable to control themselves when hearing it.

Last I checked it was France and Socialists who were suddenly kidnapping business owners and bosses. Seems we have a lot of anger where people were having their houses staked out and death threats being made due not due to war crimes but due to financial bonuses.

It seems the left is very preoccupied with the effects of speech on weak minds. To me, it is very telling about the state of their own mind.

Not only is that broad brush strokes that might qualify as a personal attack, perhaps I should PM you and threaten to have you banned?

BOT - clearly those who's every post mimics exactly the Fox-news script know who I am referring to when I say Scarborough is your spokeman . . . but that doesn't matter really, its merely an opportunity for you who have glommed on to that, to change the subject and sidestep thought on what was shown - outright scripted hate-mongering and the distortion of truth for an agenda.
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
post #130 of 150
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

The top 25% of income earners pay 86% of all federal income taxes.

The top 50% pay 97% of income taxes.

The top 1% pay 39% of income taxes.

Source: http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/05in05tr.xls

Given these numbers, how could the "ultra rich" possibly feel that taxes are about right?

"Income taxes" aren't imposed on quite a few of the ways in which it is possible to amass wealth. The definition of "income" is surprisingly narrow when it comes to taxes, at least compared to the general usage of the term.

This isn't meant to claim anything about who is satisfied with taxes. Just pointing out that looking at only "income" tax produces quite a skewed portrayal of the tax burden.
post #131 of 150
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northgate View Post

Man, I could really use that "flip the bird" emoticon right now. Really, Trumptman, kiss off!

Man he's using that " Weak minded " stuff alot lately. You'd think he was some kind of Jedi guru or something.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #132 of 150
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northgate View Post

My dad once told me, "You know son, you have every right to go out there and make as much money as you can. But don't ever forget that this is one of the only countries in the world you can do that. And if you make a fortune it is your duty as an American to pay back for the 'privilege" of being an American and living in a country where you can be rich."

Your dad was a wise man.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #133 of 150
Why not just have a flat tax rate across the board? Like no income brackets, just a fixed percentage for everyone? That, to me, would be more fair.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #134 of 150
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

2004? And your point is?

Anyway the facts are the middleclass of america ( that's most of the people ) are tired of carrying the burden for the rich who don't even feel it when they have to pay. It's just numbers on a balance sheet.

Quote:
Originally Posted by involuntary_serf View Post

The point is that the feeling that taxes are about right is quite likely to strongly correlate with those that receive net benefits (from other tax payers). In other words, I'm mostly likely to think my taxes are just fine if I'm getting more tax-funded benefits (funded by other people's taxes) than I'm paying on net.

This explanation is still too complicated IS. Let me help you out a bit.

The few people who get all their stuff stolen from them by the looting government. They feel it is unfair. The many people who get goodies handed to them by the looting government. They think the level is just about right.
Since they take from the few and give to the many, the poll reflects that fact.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Yes but wouldn't this senerio apply more to the ultra rich? Not so much benifits as deductions and loopholes.

No because people don't like theft and those who are excused from it don't protest it too much.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Northgate View Post

Man, I could really use that "flip the bird" emoticon right now. Really, Trumptman, kiss off!

Ah, well when I start a thread called "The Daily Show Murders, feel free to to question the intellectual prowess of those who would follow the logical leaps to the same conclusion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Northgate View Post

Because they have almost all of the money! Hello!!!

Money is just the means of quantifying the exchange.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Northgate View Post

My dad once told me, "You know son, you have every right to go out there and make as much money as you can. But don't ever forget that this is one of the only countries in the world you can do that. And if you make a fortune it is your duty as an American to pay back for the 'privilege" of being an American and living in a country where you can be rich."

I'm glad my dad didn't give me a guilt trip.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pfflam View Post

Not only is that broad brush strokes that might qualify as a personal attack, perhaps I should PM you and threaten to have you banned?

BOT - clearly those who's every post mimics exactly the Fox-news script know who I am referring to when I say Scarborough is your spokeman . . . but that doesn't matter really, its merely an opportunity for you who have glommed on to that, to change the subject and sidestep thought on what was shown - outright scripted hate-mongering and the distortion of truth for an agenda.

You talk like it would be a change from the previous behavior exhibited.

BOT - clearly most of us understand allusions. When you say those people who I won't name, your post is full of shit and you are a hate-monger, that is still an ad-hom and should be reported as such.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Man he's using that " Weak minded " stuff alot lately. You'd think he was some kind of Jedi guru or something.

Sorry but telling me these aren't the ad-homs you are looking for doesn't work.

The thread premise is nothing more than a means of silencing dissent. Obama sure has brought about some change. Returning vets, and people at tax rallies are the new terrorists and they don't use bombs or guns, but merely their ideas are the new domestic threat.

We've gone from preemptive war to preemptive thought being the problem. No wonder Obama wanted to remove the War on Terror from the lexicon. He wants to reclaim the initials for a new phrase. The WOT, War On Thought.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #135 of 150
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

This explanation is still too complicated IS. Let me help you out a bit.

The few people who get all their stuff stolen from them by the looting government. They feel it is unfair. The many people who get goodies handed to them by the looting government. They think the level is just about right.
Since they take from the few and give to the many, the poll reflects that fact.

Thanks for the help there. There does seem to be a need to dumb things down for comprehension. So, I think, what you're basically saying is:

Some people don't like to be robbed, and others don't mind when someone robs for them.
post #136 of 150
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

This explanation is still too complicated IS. Let me help you out a bit.

The few people who get all their stuff stolen from them by the looting government. They feel it is unfair. The many people who get goodies handed to them by the looting government. They think the level is just about right.
Since they take from the few and give to the many, the poll reflects that fact.



No because people don't like theft and those who are excused from it don't protest it too much.



Ah, well when I start a thread called "The Daily Show Murders, feel free to to question the intellectual prowess of those who would follow the logical leaps to the same conclusion.



Money is just the means of quantifying the exchange.



I'm glad my dad didn't give me a guilt trip.



You talk like it would be a change from the previous behavior exhibited.

BOT - clearly most of us understand allusions. When you say those people who I won't name, your post is full of shit and you are a hate-monger, that is still an ad-hom and should be reported as such.



Sorry but telling me these aren't the ad-homs you are looking for doesn't work.

The thread premise is nothing more than a means of silencing dissent. Obama sure has brought about some change. Returning vets, and people at tax rallies are the new terrorists and they don't use bombs or guns, but merely their ideas are the new domestic threat.

We've gone from preemptive war to preemptive thought being the problem. No wonder Obama wanted to remove the War on Terror from the lexicon. He wants to reclaim the initials for a new phrase. The WOT, War On Thought.

Quote:
No because people don't like theft and those who are excused from it don't protest it too much.

This could apply to the ultra rich as well as they are the only ones who can take advantage of some of these loopholes.

Quote:
The thread premise is nothing more than a means of silencing dissent.

I could say the same for some other threads I've seen here.

Quote:
I'm glad my dad didn't give me a guilt trip.

So a slam against his father.

" Weak minded " sure sounds like a slam to me.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #137 of 150
Quote:
Originally Posted by involuntary_serf View Post

Thanks for the help there. There does seem to be a need to dumb things down for comprehension. So, I think, what you're basically saying is:

Some people don't like to be robbed, and others don't mind when someone robs for them.

Careful, make it too easy to understand and the personal attacks will ensue so the issue itself doesn't have to be addressed.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #138 of 150
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

Careful, make it too easy to understand and the personal attacks will ensue so the issue itself doesn't have to be addressed.

Yes but where will they come from?
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #139 of 150
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

This could apply to the ultra rich as well as they are the only ones who can take advantage of some of these loopholes.

AMT anyone?

Quote:
I could say the same for some other threads I've seen here.

I could say that flying monkeys and unicorns are pretty.

Quote:
So a slam against his father.

" Weak minded " sure sounds like a slam to me.

Dude, give it up.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #140 of 150
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

AMT anyone?



I could say that flying monkeys and unicorns are pretty.



Dude, give it up.

Quote:
Dude, give it up

Absolutely not.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #141 of 150
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

This explanation is still too complicated IS. Let me help you out a bit.
Ah, well when I start a thread called "The Daily Show Murders, feel free to to question the intellectual prowess of those who would follow the logical leaps to the same conclusion.

Show me the lists in killers bags with the name of Jon Stewert in it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

You talk like it would be a change from the previous behavior exhibited.

BOT - clearly most of us understand allusions. When you say those people who I won't name, your post is full of shit and you are a hate-monger, that is still an ad-hom and should be reported as such.

Revealing the nature of the content of another's post is not an ad-hom -even when the post happens to consist of shit. If someone is thriving off of a discourse that thrives on covert hate, then saying their ideas are hate-mongering is only an ad-hom in that the hom is full of hate.

S
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

The thread premise is nothing more than a means of silencing dissent. Obama sure has brought about some change. Returning vets, and people at tax rallies are the new terrorists and they don't use bombs or guns, but merely their ideas are the new domestic threat.

We've gone from preemptive war to preemptive thought being the problem. No wonder Obama wanted to remove the War on Terror from the lexicon. He wants to reclaim the initials for a new phrase. The WOT, War On Thought.

Except, since you probably didn't even read the post about Scarsburough, the report about extremist goups was authored under Bush - it is a Bush administration report, and follows on the heels of a report about Left-Wing extremist group threats.

Deny it if you will but Right-wing groups are targeting disaffected military personnel precisely because they know military training, and more often than not attitudes that are grouped under 'the right' favor means of force - in almost all taxonomic usage of the term 'Right wing' when used to discuss positions and attitudes of other groups beyond US politics, one of the qualities of demarcation is the embrace of military force and means of violence.

The left have militancy too, though generally in the US the term is used to denote groups that favor peaceful means or damage to property not persons - hence the nature of the warnings in the report on the Left-extremes

Just look:

Left: broken bulldozers and burned, parked SUVs
Right: Blown up day care center, killed policemen, church murders (stopped short luckily)

And also, one of the primary rhetorics motivating extremist groups is anti-government, and since the vets are prone to feel that their government shafted them by throwing them into hell for no real reason they are prone to dislike the easy target of 'big gubmint' -
with the new added bonus that the new government is led by a black man -and face it, many many of the current right-extremists groups are organized around race. (both white and black)
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
post #142 of 150
Doh! Pfflam with the facts!!! Right on brother!
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #143 of 150
Quote:
Originally Posted by pfflam View Post

Show me the lists in killers bags with the name of Jon Stewert in it.

Not only will I not do that, I also won't look up the books he had checked out from the library nor check his iTunes song list to lay blame on the band.

See I don't need to engage in that tactic because I don't think any of those sources would be responsible for causing the actions of another. I don't feel the need to censor to protect weak minds so I don't need a list.

Quote:
Revealing the nature of the content of another's post is not an ad-hom -even when the post happens to consist of shit. If someone is thriving off of a discourse that thrives on covert hate, then saying their ideas are hate-mongering is only an ad-hom in that the hom is full of hate.

Yes and you know ol' Joe is their spokesperson because you can read their minds? This is a classic strawman. Bringing up and knock down Joe is easier to address than the poster statements. Additionally you take the claimed intent, ad-hom it, and declare this okay because of the mind-reading.

Quote:
SExcept, since you probably didn't even read the post about Scarsburough,

I see so because you don't agree with my conclusions, I'm ignorant. I must NOT have read it. The concept that I could have read the information and come to a different conclusion is just impossible, so impossible that since I have that different conclusion you must know the TRUE SOURCE of the information behind it and can thus begin addressing/adhom-ing that instead.

You can't have read that because then you would think X.

Since you think Y I know you must secretly be thinking and reading this fear/hate monger.

That's just great!

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #144 of 150
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Not only will I not do that, I also won't look up the books he had checked out from the library nor check his iTunes song list to lay blame on the band.

See I don't need to engage in that tactic because I don't think any of those sources would be responsible for causing the actions of another. I don't feel the need to censor to protect weak minds so I don't need a list.



Yes and you know ol' Joe is their spokesperson because you can read their minds? This is a classic strawman. Bringing up and knock down Joe is easier to address than the poster statements. Additionally you take the claimed intent, ad-hom it, and declare this okay because of the mind-reading.



I see so because you don't agree with my conclusions, I'm ignorant. I must NOT have read it. The concept that I could have read the information and come to a different conclusion is just impossible, so impossible that since I have that different conclusion you must know the TRUE SOURCE of the information behind it and can thus begin addressing/adhom-ing that instead.

You can't have read that because then you would think X.

Since you think Y I know you must secretly be thinking and reading this fear/hate monger.

That's just great!

1 - Lists and notes specifically referring to sources from Fox as inspiration have been found in recent killers' possession.

2 - You throw the term 'straw man' around a lot, this is not a 'straw man' since the entire issue with this thread is how Fox inspires hate - the Scarborough post is specifically an example of how he has deliberately and knowingly made false accusations - namely that Obama is trying to scrutinize the minds of returning vets and that his report lays out some sort of malicious and infernal plan - in order to whip up anti-government fear and distrust - the kind that spurs anger among the fringe.

Scarborough is no 'Straw man" in this case, he is a picture perfect example of the entire point of the thread.

3 - You might not actually understand why I assumed you had not read the link or the post, and here is the reason why this may be the case:

-my post and link point out a FACT that Scarborough chooses not to state, in fact one he pointedly reverses - namely, he blames Obama for this report, and links its findings to some vague aura of totalitarianism that he wants to drape around anything Obama. But the FACT remains - the report is from a BUSH commissioned agency and plan, it is a BUSH era report that came to fruition after much research.

Its not that your conclusion is one to be disagreed with or not; you made the same association that Scarborough made even after the fact that that association has proven to be a lie - so whether my opinion is that the sky is pink or purple matters not, you acted as if you had some sort of knowledgeable response to my post and the link but did not even digest its most salient FACT.

Consequently my conclusion that you didn't even read it . . . after all if someone reads this phrase "the table is red" then they will know that someone said that the table is red. If they didn't read that they might claim that the person was talking about meteor showers or cats . . .they would, in fact, be ignorant.


Here's just a reminder of Scarborough's real intent:
Quote:
SCARBOROUGH: This is scary.

BRZEZINSKI: This is --

SCARBOROUGH: This is scary.

Yeah . . . be afraid, don't pay your share of taxes, be afraid, buy more guns, be afraid, buy bigger trucks, be afraid, start militias, be afraid, secede, be afraid, bomb federal buildings
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
post #145 of 150
Quote:
Originally Posted by pfflam View Post

1 - Lists and notes specifically referring to sources from Fox as inspiration have been found in recent killers' possession.

So what! When we go back through every person who has ever gone on a killing spree, I'm sure they all have more of SOMETHING by SOMEONE in their possession. I'd no more ban or blame Fox News than I would Marylin Manson for Columbine. It is simple averages. You roll the numbers and occasionally you get a nut job PERIOD. It's like blaming someone for the full moon.

Quote:
2 - You throw the term 'straw man' around a lot, this is not a 'straw man' since the entire issue with this thread is how Fox inspires hate - the Scarborough post is specifically an example of how he has deliberately and knowingly made false accusations - namely that Obama is trying to scrutinize the minds of returning vets and that his report lays out some sort of malicious and infernal plan - in order to whip up anti-government fear and distrust - the kind that spurs anger among the fringe.

Scarborough is no 'Straw man" in this case, he is a picture perfect example of the entire point of the thread.

Let me help you with your own words...

Quote:
Look at the way your spokesmen distort the truth in order to build support, and specifically a kind of support that will translate into violence . . .

BOT - clearly those who's every post mimics exactly the Fox-news script know who I am referring to when I say Scarborough is your spokeman . .

That is addressing poster intent. No one on here mentioned Scarborough but you. The only intention in doing so is in your post. He is an example of hate. You believe someone's (you won't name them) post is "following that script" and thus since Joe is a hate-monger, so are they.

The whole thread is about Fox News. This turns it into a discussion about POSTER intent so as to ad-hom them. This is also why other people in the thread who are not me, asked you where the hell you got YOUR SPOKESMAN from because they understand the ad-hom and strawman as well.

Dfiler noted it and you never addressed him because this was a drive-by ad-hom.

Quote:
It comes across like you're accusing every reader of this thread, which hopefully isn't the intention.

Quote:
3 - You might not actually understand why I assumed you had not read the link or the post, and here is the reason why this may be the case:

So I don't understand why you're claiming I'm ignorant because I'm stupid.

Word of advice, stop digging.

Here is the reality. The Obama administration released the report. If the report is shit, then choosing to release shit is still his responsibility. Blaming your predecessor forever doesn't work. Why was there no broad media coverage of the left wing report, because the media has no interest in trying to eliminate the discussion from that side of the political aisle.

Finally regardless of who created it, sort of the entire premise of this thread again, the real judgment is always reserved for WHO ACTS on it. So I don't care if the Bush or Obama administration each produced 10,000 scary reports about all sides of the political spectrum. We know about this now because it is being broadcast and acted on. This was sent out to law enforcement agencies and they were saying, here is who you need to slap the cuffs on.

So being consistent, I'll lay the blame on the actions, not the thoughts or words.

The senior Democrat of the House committee with oversight of the department said the report raises privacy and civil liberty issues. "This report appears to have blurred the line between violent belief, which is constitutionally protected, and violent action, which is not," Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., wrote in a letter to Napolitano.

Exactly!

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #146 of 150
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Not only will I not do that, I also won't look up the books he had checked out from the library nor check his iTunes song list to lay blame on the band.

See I don't need to engage in that tactic because I don't think any of those sources would be responsible for causing the actions of another. I don't feel the need to censor to protect weak minds so I don't need a list.



Yes and you know ol' Joe is their spokesperson because you can read their minds? This is a classic strawman. Bringing up and knock down Joe is easier to address than the poster statements. Additionally you take the claimed intent, ad-hom it, and declare this okay because of the mind-reading.



I see so because you don't agree with my conclusions, I'm ignorant. I must NOT have read it. The concept that I could have read the information and come to a different conclusion is just impossible, so impossible that since I have that different conclusion you must know the TRUE SOURCE of the information behind it and can thus begin addressing/adhom-ing that instead.

You can't have read that because then you would think X.

Since you think Y I know you must secretly be thinking and reading this fear/hate monger.

That's just great!

Quote:
weak minds

The new buzz words!

Quote:
Blaming your predecessor forever doesn't work

Tell that to the many on your side of the tracks that still blame Clinton, still give the republicans credit for any of the good times we've had in the last 30 years, and still think some of this mess can be left at the doorstep of the Democrats that were only in the last administration for two years out of 8!
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #147 of 150
What's this? A "left-wing" extremist committing acts of violence against fellow Americans? But...but....that's IMPOSSIBLE!

FBI's newest 'Most Wanted' terrorist is American

Which media outlet should we blame for this guy's actions?

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #148 of 150
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

What's this? A "left-wing" extremist committing acts of violence against fellow Americans? But...but....that's IMPOSSIBLE!

FBI's newest 'Most Wanted' terrorist is American

Which media outlet should we blame for this guy's actions?

How about all of them?

But the really nice bit will be to see how little coverage it receives among the liberal talking heads.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #149 of 150
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamac View Post

Very true, so news reporters should be included in the "Responsible for their action" thing, right?

The other issues you mention obviously play a role. Unfortunately, people who own guns are not all sportsmen. I do not know the percentage but many of them own guns because of fear, mental instability, emotional issues, irrational fear of other people, irrational fear of some invasion from outer space, irrational fear of a North Korea invasion force, irrational fear of Al Qaeda, irrational fear of homosexuals.. you get the theme. Gun sales are cranking up the economy right now, people FEAR there won't be enough guns. Thanks!

You forgot to mention the many rational reasons, which may put you squarely in the "irrational fear of gun owners" camp.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #150 of 150
Quote:
Originally Posted by sammi jo View Post

This one will be debated by Constitutional scholars forever... but in practical terms, the right of the people to bear arms is now common law as well, in the same way that it is common law for corporations to have the same (or even more) rights as individual citizens.

It may well be debated forever, but at least in the case of District of Columbia vs. Heller, (a case which has been underreported for it's importance) the Supreme Court sided with the people and their right to bear arms.

There is no call in the Constitution for the government to register people who have or want arms, nor is there any allowance for the government to impede access to weapons. The framers of the Constitution foresaw a time when the people may need to rise against the powers that be if they became too powerful.

Imagine an intelligent bunch of people who had that foresight. I imagine Pres. Obama, being a Constitutional scholar is quite aware of this, and I'd like to think he would support this. He seems like a bit of a radical to me, anyway.

Also, interestingly this just came across the wires:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...BA1V1760BI.DTL

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Fox News Murders