Just because a "socialist" says something doesn't make it untrue. ("Ad hominem" attacks are a well-known logical fallacy.) And I'm not necessarily saying every word in that article is true: I merely pointed to it. Still, CNN, USA Today, the New York Times, and also some other "socialist" organizations have also pointed out some suspicious patterns in the election. Finally, even if none of those allegations of fraud pan out, it's certainly true that little has been done to reform the voting system, that some electronic voting systems leave no paper trail and are unverifiable, and that some of them can be manipulated without detection. As for Kerry and Vietnam: first, he was there (as neither you nor I was); and what he said about its uselessness as a war is by this point pretty much universally accepted. What he said about the conduct of troops was that some (not all) U.S. soldiers had committed atrocities: this has been established beyond doubt (google "My Lai"). So I'm not sure what "lies" you're referring to.
Without getting too much into philosophy, the ad hominem attack on the "capitalist" website is not only a fallacy but also a poor source to prove a point. I could get all my information from FoxNews or GWB.com but I would be suspect of the validity of those sources since they are clearly one sided.
I would agree that there are some strange things going on not only in FL with the voting machines but in in other states as well. I will violate my own rule rule, using a Post hoc ergo propter hoc, and cite Drudge to show an attack against the Democrats concerning voter fraud. SOURCEI feel like Doc Holliday in Tombstone with all this Latin thrown around.
So with both sides allegedly fixing voting machines I guess the Republicans outsmarted the Democrats? I would like to believe, based on other sources of electronic voting maching malfunctions, that these things are just pieces of shit. The states know this, the party candidates know this, but still they use them.
As for some Kerry lies about Vietnam I had to use another source since I was not there either. He may have pulled some people out of the water but I think he also embellished his stories. He started his political career when he met behind the United States back with the Vietamese leaders. He has groomed himself for November 2, 2004 his whole life and the grooming depended upon his Vietnam record. Well, more precisely, his career was founded in defaming the soldiers who fought in that war.
I have no doubt that Vietnam was a bad decision and agree with you on that point. My father served there and won 2 purple hearts (one short of Kerry but my father flew P-2's and was shot down). He, in his own words, "gave the medals back." I didn't get into any further detail because talking about the war always makes him choke up. This lends nothing to Kerry's credibility just a personal note from me in that although my father was against the war he didn't make sure the world was watching when he protested.
Here is one link about Kerry's dubious Vietnam record. SOURCE
You've apparently mistaken a weblog for a news or academic site. I write many different kinds of things here - it's absurd to expect every post to conform to standards of argument. The "Casino Billy" comment was parenthetical, i.e., clearly marked as being outside the main point about mandates. True, it gestures in the direction of a certain moral hypocrisy among so many virtuecrats, who not only can't live up to the values they espouse (in itself, that isn't hypocrisy), but deny those failings and continue to insist on imposing them upon others. And that might be tangentially relevant to a discussion of someone who can take the lowest margin of victory in years and call it a "mandate."
I find it ironic that exit polls supposedly showed a Kerry win but all the major pollsters predicted a Bush win. Are we to discard this information because it isn't "Kerry friendly"?
"Knave": I'm not sure what you mean...but at least one of the polls at the site you mention (sorry, no time right now to look at all of them) called the election for Kerry - and Zogby (http://zogby.com) at 5pm on Election Day predicted a Kerry electoral victory, somewhere around 311 votes. (Evidently, that's different from the listed "Zogby/Reuters" - and I can't now locate that Zogby forecast. John Zogby himself was on The Daily Show the week before the election, and unhesitatingly said he felt Kerry would win. For what that's worth...) But of course: no, any investigation into election irregularities shouldn't disregard anything relevant, no matter which candidate such irregularities appears to favor.
Sound files are posted as an incentive to encourage you to hear and purchase music, and will be removed within a few weeks of posting (unless I have permission to keep them up permanently) or by request. (Request via e-mail: humans can decode the e-mail address in the "About Me" section below.) If you like what you hear, and the song's commercially available, please support musicians by purchasing the song or CD. Really, you should get out of the house and go to a good, locally-owned record store...before it shuts down.
2fs is only as large as an ant and is hiding in your car.
(e-mail me at ton erb omb atw arp mai ldo tnet getting rid of spaces and substituting the appropriate characters for the usual words.)
6 comments:
Just because a "socialist" says something doesn't make it untrue. ("Ad hominem" attacks are a well-known logical fallacy.) And I'm not necessarily saying every word in that article is true: I merely pointed to it. Still, CNN, USA Today, the New York Times, and also some other "socialist" organizations have also pointed out some suspicious patterns in the election. Finally, even if none of those allegations of fraud pan out, it's certainly true that little has been done to reform the voting system, that some electronic voting systems leave no paper trail and are unverifiable, and that some of them can be manipulated without detection. As for Kerry and Vietnam: first, he was there (as neither you nor I was); and what he said about its uselessness as a war is by this point pretty much universally accepted. What he said about the conduct of troops was that some (not all) U.S. soldiers had committed atrocities: this has been established beyond doubt (google "My Lai"). So I'm not sure what "lies" you're referring to.
Without getting too much into philosophy, the ad hominem attack on the "capitalist" website is not only a fallacy but also a poor source to prove a point. I could get all my information from FoxNews or GWB.com but I would be suspect of the validity of those sources since they are clearly one sided.
I would agree that there are some strange things going on not only in FL with the voting machines but in in other states as well. I will violate my own rule rule, using a Post hoc ergo propter hoc, and cite Drudge to show an attack against the Democrats concerning voter fraud. SOURCEI feel like Doc Holliday in Tombstone with all this Latin thrown around.
So with both sides allegedly fixing voting machines I guess the Republicans outsmarted the Democrats? I would like to believe, based on other sources of electronic voting maching malfunctions, that these things are just pieces of shit. The states know this, the party candidates know this, but still they use them.
As for some Kerry lies about Vietnam I had to use another source since I was not there either. He may have pulled some people out of the water but I think he also embellished his stories. He started his political career when he met behind the United States back with the Vietamese leaders. He has groomed himself for November 2, 2004 his whole life and the grooming depended upon his Vietnam record. Well, more precisely, his career was founded in defaming the soldiers who fought in that war.
I have no doubt that Vietnam was a bad decision and agree with you on that point. My father served there and won 2 purple hearts (one short of Kerry but my father flew P-2's and was shot down). He, in his own words, "gave the medals back." I didn't get into any further detail because talking about the war always makes him choke up. This lends nothing to Kerry's credibility just a personal note from me in that although my father was against the war he didn't make sure the world was watching when he protested.
Here is one link about Kerry's dubious Vietnam record. SOURCE
You've apparently mistaken a weblog for a news or academic site. I write many different kinds of things here - it's absurd to expect every post to conform to standards of argument. The "Casino Billy" comment was parenthetical, i.e., clearly marked as being outside the main point about mandates. True, it gestures in the direction of a certain moral hypocrisy among so many virtuecrats, who not only can't live up to the values they espouse (in itself, that isn't hypocrisy), but deny those failings and continue to insist on imposing them upon others. And that might be tangentially relevant to a discussion of someone who can take the lowest margin of victory in years and call it a "mandate."
I find it ironic that exit polls supposedly showed a Kerry win but all the major pollsters predicted a Bush win. Are we to discard this information because it isn't "Kerry friendly"?
SOURCE
"Knave": I'm not sure what you mean...but at least one of the polls at the site you mention (sorry, no time right now to look at all of them) called the election for Kerry - and Zogby (http://zogby.com) at 5pm on Election Day predicted a Kerry electoral victory, somewhere around 311 votes. (Evidently, that's different from the listed "Zogby/Reuters" - and I can't now locate that Zogby forecast. John Zogby himself was on The Daily Show the week before the election, and unhesitatingly said he felt Kerry would win. For what that's worth...) But of course: no, any investigation into election irregularities shouldn't disregard anything relevant, no matter which candidate such irregularities appears to favor.
Hey Jeff. I did put the link to the pollsters and, in fact, there were 3 that did call for Kerry, one of which being FoxNews!
I was just stirring up the proverbial poop pile; I would much rather talk music instead of politics.
Post a Comment