• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Watch CSPAN Sometime....

CFLarsen said:
Sheesh....

You complain that people aren't addressing the "actual issues".

Yet, you can't name these "actual issues".

:hb:
Click to expand...

Because I am talking about issues. Issues in general. Issues: Period. As in, not attacking each other, but arguing using logic and arguments not, "HE TOOK CRACK AS A KID!"

The fact that you can't comprehend this is intriguing. But, since you used the emoticon, it's fitting here.

:hb:
 
Lonewulf said:
Because I am talking about issues. Issues in general. Issues: Period. As in, not attacking each other, but arguing using logic and arguments not, "HE TOOK CRACK AS A KID!"

The fact that you can't comprehend this is intriguing. But, since you used the emoticon, it's fitting here.

:hb:
Click to expand...

Are you going to name the "actual issues", or not?
 
Lonewulf said:
I fail to see why I need to.

If you understood what I was saying, you would not feel the need to ask your question.
Click to expand...

M....kay.

If I don't understand what you are saying, and you refuse to explain what you mean, it is all my fault?

How is that going to solve any problems?
 
CFLarsen said:
What about the everyday, hum-drum issues? Who will decide those, and how?
Click to expand...

Do you mean like, what's for dinner? What color shirt should I wear? Where are my shoes? Where are my cigarettes? Those issues? I don't want my government voting on those.
 
CFLarsen said:
M....kay.

If I don't understand what you are saying, and you refuse to explain what you mean, it is all my fault?
Click to expand...

Because every time I explain what I mean, you continue not to understand. The answer is either your intelligence, or my ability. Considering past conversations with you, it's the former; I've been able to explain it to people that are normally reasonable.

How is that going to solve any problems?
Click to expand...

What? Having debates using evidence and scientific explanations instead of either emotional rhetoric or ad hominem attacks?

I really need to explain that? Really?

:jaw-dropp

You call yourself a skeptic? Seriously? You consider ad hom or emotional rhetoric or slander to be a perfectly acceptable alternative to arguments with some meat to them, actually dealing with the issues at hand (whatever they may be, such as war, famine, disease, whatever else the apocalypse harbinges)?

Wow.
 
This list is from
Types of government -ocracies

Choose your poison:

TYPES OF GOVERNMENT
("-ocracies")
The following types of government are categorized according to the answer to the question, “who rules?”

Aristocracy: A form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the principal persons of a state, or in a privileged order; an oligarchy

Autocracy: Government by a single person having unlimited power; despotism (domination through threat of punishment and violence)

Bureaucracy: Administration of a government chiefly through bureaus or departments staffed with non-elected officials

Democracy: Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives

Gynecocracy: Government by women

Kakistocracy: Government by the least qualified or most unprincipled citizens.

Kleptocracy: A government characterized by rampant greed and corruption

Meritocracy: A group of leaders or officeholders selected on the basis of individual ability or achievement

Monarchy: a government in which power is vested in a king, queen, emperor or empress who can pass power on to his heirs.

Monocracy: Government or rule by a single person; autocracy

Oligarchy: A government in which a few people such as a dominant clan or clique have power

Plantocracy: A ruling class formed of plantation owners, leadership or government by this class of people

Plutocracy: A government or state in which the wealthy rule.

Stratocracy: Government by the armed forces

Technocracy: A government or social system controlled by technicians, especially scientists and technical experts

Theocracy: A government ruled by or subject to religious authority
Click to expand...


.
 
Technocracy sounds pretty cool. I think I'll have that tonight.

Does a Technocracy go well with fish?
 
UnrepentantSinner said:
You should watch Washington Journal... especially when Greta Wodele is hosting.
Click to expand...

Scrut, you can thank me for bumping a zero reply thread of yours thats gone over 30 responses later, but I expect you to thank me for this post immediately.

Greta just happened (thank you God) to be hosting today and I took these photos of my television. They're not as good as screencaps, but they're what I've got to work with.
 

Attachments

  • Greta1.jpg
    Greta1.jpg
    39.7 KB · Views: 8
  • Greta2.jpg
    Greta2.jpg
    49.7 KB · Views: 8
  • Greta3.jpg
    Greta3.jpg
    33.4 KB · Views: 6
  • Greta6.jpg
    Greta6.jpg
    56.7 KB · Views: 6
UnrepentantSinner said:
Scrut, you can thank me for bumping a zero reply thread of yours thats gone over 30 responses later, but I expect you to thank me for this post immediately.

Greta just happened (thank you God) to be hosting today and I took these photos of my television. They're not as good as screencaps, but they're what I've got to work with.
Click to expand...

Wow, a hottie!! I've suddenly regained an interest in politics!!!
 
The Painter said:
Do you mean like, what's for dinner? What color shirt should I wear? Where are my shoes? Where are my cigarettes? Those issues? I don't want my government voting on those.
Click to expand...

Which issues do you want your government to deal with, then?

Lonewulf said:
Because every time I explain what I mean, you continue not to understand. The answer is either your intelligence, or my ability. Considering past conversations with you, it's the former; I've been able to explain it to people that are normally reasonable.


What? Having debates using evidence and scientific explanations instead of either emotional rhetoric or ad hominem attacks?

I really need to explain that? Really?

:jaw-dropp

You call yourself a skeptic? Seriously? You consider ad hom or emotional rhetoric or slander to be a perfectly acceptable alternative to arguments with some meat to them, actually dealing with the issues at hand (whatever they may be, such as war, famine, disease, whatever else the apocalypse harbinges)?

Wow.
Click to expand...

You want to use evidence and scientific explanations as the sole basis for political decisions? Is that what you are saying?
 
CFLarsen said:
You want to use evidence and scientific explanations as the sole basis for political decisions? Is that what you are saying?
Click to expand...

"As the sole basis"? No. I never said that, either; one strawman for you! I am annoyed with ad hominem and personal attacks, or emotional rhetoric with no rationality behind it, being one of the major driving forces behind politics. Are people opposed to gay marriage for rational reasons? If you think so, Larsen, read the following line:

CFLarsen, seriously. Get a clue. Then come back. Maybe then, you'll have one.
 
Lonewulf said:
"As the sole basis"? No. I never said that, either; one strawman for you! I am annoyed with ad hominem and personal attacks, or emotional rhetoric with no rationality behind it, being one of the major driving forces behind politics. Are people opposed to gay marriage for rational reasons? If you think so, Larsen, read the following line:

CFLarsen, seriously. Get a clue. Then come back. Maybe then, you'll have one.
Click to expand...

Please learn the difference between a strawman and a question aimed to clarify.

Gay marriage cannot be opposed for "rational" reasons? What are the "rational" reasons in favor or gay marriage?

Which issues can be determined "rationally"?
 
CFLarsen said:
Gay marriage cannot be opposed for "rational" reasons? What are the "rational" reasons in favor or gay marriage?
Click to expand...

There is no harm in gay marriage. The only arguments against are slippery slope arguments or argue with a religious basis; but I guess you have no problem with that, being a skeptic and everything? Oh, wait.

Which issues can be determined "rationally"?
Click to expand...

Did you just ask that question? Seriously?

Global warming, war, economy...

Just about everything the public takes seriously...

Are you seriously going to say that no political issue can be helped by rationality? Wow. Just seriously. Wow.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom