As said so many times here its impossible to prove negatives.
"Appeal to Ignorance (Proving a Negative): an argument that asserts a claim is true because no one can prove it is wrong; this shifts the burden of proof to the audience or opponent rather than the claimant"
With all due respect, Anders, you're giving me logically fallacious bull.
I would suggest visiting John Kerry.com, reading his stances on the issues, or watching his stump speech videos. You will absolutely find a candidate with a plan or an idea for the future- vision. You pretty much have to agree to that. In fact, visit the websites of Howard Dean, John Edwards, and Wesley Clark as well. You'll find a similar vision expressed by the candidates of the Democratic Party.
And of course Kerry is a visionary, or someone characterized by vision. How else would he distinguish himself, or fail to distinguish himself from anyone else on the issues? (Unless you mean visionary as characterized by foresight. My case would weaken somewhat then, but the case for President Bush as characterized by foresight would be almost totally destroyed)
Comments
Originally posted by Anders
As said so many times here its impossible to prove negatives.
"Appeal to Ignorance (Proving a Negative): an argument that asserts a claim is true because no one can prove it is wrong; this shifts the burden of proof to the audience or opponent rather than the claimant"
With all due respect, Anders, you're giving me logically fallacious bull.
I would suggest visiting John Kerry.com, reading his stances on the issues, or watching his stump speech videos. You will absolutely find a candidate with a plan or an idea for the future- vision. You pretty much have to agree to that. In fact, visit the websites of Howard Dean, John Edwards, and Wesley Clark as well. You'll find a similar vision expressed by the candidates of the Democratic Party.
And of course Kerry is a visionary, or someone characterized by vision. How else would he distinguish himself, or fail to distinguish himself from anyone else on the issues? (Unless you mean visionary as characterized by foresight. My case would weaken somewhat then, but the case for President Bush as characterized by foresight would be almost totally destroyed)
This is silly, Anders.