Sublime Opinions of the Masses (give or take a few)
https://acompletewasteofspace.com/
please enlighten me what my faith has to do with the facts of this discussion. you cant because it doesn't. it was just a jack-ass back handed statement and just ANOTHER attempt on your part to stray off topic because you cannot discus the facts of the issue. but keep tryingcallmeslick wrote:so, when you step away from your spoonfed right-wing fundamental Christian hysteria,
An Ad Hominem is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument. Typically, this fallacy involves two steps. First, an attack against the character of person making the claim, his/her circumstances, or his/her actions is made (or the character, circumstances, or actions of the person reporting the claim). Second, this attack is taken to be evidence against the claim or argument the person in question is making (or presenting). This type of "argument" has the following form:
Person A makes claim X.
Person B makes an attack on person A.
Therefore A's claim is false.
The reason why an Ad Hominem (of any kind) is a fallacy is that the character, circumstances, or actions of a person do not have a bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim being made (or the quality of the argument being made).
factoid for ya slick. I can disagree with a mans policies without hating him. I know that's a hard concept for you to understand but it is reality An Ad Hominem is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument. Typically, this fallacy involves two steps. First, an attack against the character of person making the claim, his/her circumstances, or his/her actions is made (or the character, circumstances, or actions of the person reporting the claim). Second, this attack is taken to be evidence against the claim or argument the person in question is making (or presenting). This type of "argument" has the following form:
Person A makes claim X.
Person B makes an attack on person A.
Therefore A's claim is false.
The reason why an Ad Hominem (of any kind) is a fallacy is that the character, circumstances, or actions of a person do not have a bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim being made (or the quality of the argument being made).
well, perhaps I'm wrong, but your arguments against the most moderate group of Palestinians in the mid-east seems to show a certain knee-jerk Israeli bias, not one I haven't seen before from you. I suspect that might be partially(emphasize partially) due to Christian fundamentalism, which you are proud of, and of which I don't discredit, merely suggest it colors your opinions.CUDA wrote:I see you still haven't explained to me what My faith has to do with the discussion. so just go ahead and keep on with the attack dog path that your taking.
as I tried to point out, comparing money spent by State with money cut by another department(at various times Secret Service, Interior, etc) isn't discussing the sequester or it's administration. It's selective outrage, with no relation to how the bill is worded.all you do it just discredit your own arguments. and I have discussed the sequester with you. and gotten no where. you see you don't discuss. you deflect, dodge, and change the subject, and attack those that disagree with you
sorry, my friend, but you have been a blind Obama hater for years. I have no problem with anyone's policy disagreements, but many of yours veer into blind naysaying for the sake of disrespecting the man and the office. The Benghazi thing is close to that, frankly, and if you'd like me to dig up lots more, I could, although would prefer not to.and now I'm an Obama Hater.
Here ya go Slick..."a bus load of stupid" as requested, a back seat if ya will..callmeslick wrote:still unwilling to address true sequester comparisons, or real-world cut vs spend determinations within departments, I see. Well, CUDA, I'll be here to discuss sequestration when you get off the Obama-hate busload-o-stupid.
