Palin & Family Guy

Cicero said:
If you knew who Zinn was then why would you need to "investigate" his writings? What does "unfamiliar" mean to you? Is there any chance you have opted to inform yourself about Zinn since January 29?
Click to expand...

There's a difference between knowing who someone is and having read everything he wrote.

Cicero strikes out again!
 
Cicero said:
If you knew who Zinn was then why would you need to "investigate" his writings? What does "unfamiliar" mean to you? Is there any chance you have opted to inform yourself about Zinn since January 29?
Click to expand...

Wow. That's some seriously epic missing of the point, Cicero. Even for you.

I'm impressed!
 
For anyone who actually cares, I picked Sniper Wolf as avatar because a) she's a badass woman, b) she looks cool and c) I'm too lazy to search for anything better at the moment.

It's really THAT simple. Sorry to disappoint.
 
Cicero said:
Everything? How about anything? If you knew of Zinn, how could you not know his forte?
Click to expand...

You had an opinion of Zinn's suitability and acumen as a historian. Skeptic Ginger apparently had an opposite opinion. The Central Scrutinzer doesn't trust the opinions of either one of you (justifiably so, in your case), and expressed that distrust via a mocking desire to investigate this issue further, since the usual (and usually successful) tactic of automatically believing the opposite of what you and Skeptic Ginger say was rendered invalid by your disagreement with Skeptic Ginger.

You accused The Central Scrutinizer of not even knowing who Zinn is because of this. That's missing the point on a scale that approaches non sequitur.
 
ANTPogo said:
You had an opinion of Zinn's suitability and acumen as a historian. Skeptic Ginger apparently had an opposite opinion. The Central Scrutinzer doesn't trust the opinions of either one of you (justifiably so, in your case), and expressed that distrust via a mocking desire to investigate this issue further, since the usual (and usually successful) tactic of automatically believing the opposite of what you and Skeptic Ginger say was rendered invalid by your disagreement with Skeptic Ginger.

You accused The Central Scrutinizer of not even knowing who Zinn is because of this. That's missing the point on a scale that approaches non sequitur.
Click to expand...

Not surprising you are incapable of recognizing the difference between Skeptic Ginger's fustian opinion of Zinn and a true analysis of Zinn backed up with numerous factual instances of why Zinn was never an historian, but merely a pundit.

As for The Central Scrutinizer's cluelessness of Zinn as expressed in that thread, your cluelessness of Zinn is even more troublesome since you may have actually read something authored by Zinn.
 
Last edited:
ANTPogo said:
You had an opinion of Zinn's suitability and acumen as a historian. Skeptic Ginger apparently had an opposite opinion. The Central Scrutinzer doesn't trust the opinions of either one of you (justifiably so, in your case), and expressed that distrust via a mocking desire to investigate this issue further, since the usual (and usually successful) tactic of automatically believing the opposite of what you and Skeptic Ginger say was rendered invalid by your disagreement with Skeptic Ginger.

You accused The Central Scrutinizer of not even knowing who Zinn is because of this. That's missing the point on a scale that approaches non sequitur.
Click to expand...

Bingo.

I suspect this will fly past Cicero in both lanes.
 
tyr_13 said:
This is one of those threads that someone might read a page or two, assume that's the end, then come back a week later to see it has gone on to page ten and be flabbergasted.
Click to expand...

Surprised no one has said "If I see a man on a plane with Down's Syndrome ..." yet.
 
The Central Scrutinizer said:
Bingo.

I suspect this will fly past Cicero in both lanes.
Click to expand...

Cicero said:
Not surprising you are incapable of recognizing the difference between Skeptic Ginger's fustian opinion of Zinn and a true analysis of Zinn backed up with numerous factual instances of why Zinn was never an historian, but merely a pundit.

As for The Central Scrutinizer's cluelessness of Zinn as expressed in that thread, your cluelessness of Zinn is even more troublesome since you may have actually read something authored by Zinn.
Click to expand...

To quote one Malcolm Reynolds:

"...huh."
 
Here's the deal:

Q: Has Sarah Palin ever tried to make some political mileage off of the fact that she has a Down's Syndrome child?

A: Yes. Many many times

Q: If Sarah Palin put her child into the realm of public discussion, are other permitted to discuss him as well?

A: Yes, obviously.

So it is much like the "outrage" Sarah Palin had when Newsweek put that sexy picture of her on the cover. The picture she posed for. For a magazine. She simply wants it both ways. All the time. About everything.
 
Tricky said:
Here's the deal:

Q: Has Sarah Palin ever tried to make some political mileage off of the fact that she has a Down's Syndrome child?

A: Yes. Many many times

Q: If Sarah Palin put her child into the realm of public discussion, are other permitted to discuss him as well?

A: Yes, obviously.

So it is much like the "outrage" Sarah Palin had when Newsweek put that sexy picture of her on the cover. The picture she posed for. For a magazine. She simply wants it both ways. All the time. About everything.
Click to expand...

Your depth of knowledge regarding the facts behind S.P. "outrage" is decidedly tricky.

"On the cover of this week’s issue of Newsweek is a photo that was shot for the August 2009 issue of Runner’s World, in which Sarah Palin was featured on the monthly “I’m a Runner” back page. Runner’s World did not provide Newsweek with the image. Instead, it was provided to Newsweek by the photographer’s agent, without Runner’s World’s knowledge or permission."
 
Cicero said:
Your depth of knowledge regarding the facts behind S.P. "outrage" is decidedly tricky.

"On the cover of this week’s issue of Newsweek is a photo that was shot for the August 2009 issue of Runner’s World, in which Sarah Palin was featured on the monthly “I’m a Runner” back page. Runner’s World did not provide Newsweek with the image. Instead, it was provided to Newsweek by the photographer’s agent, without Runner’s World’s knowledge or permission."
Click to expand...

Who claimed Runner's World provided Newsweek with the photo?
 
Cicero said:
Your depth of knowledge regarding the facts behind S.P. "outrage" is decidedly tricky.

"On the cover of this week’s issue of Newsweek is a photo that was shot for the August 2009 issue of Runner’s World, in which Sarah Palin was featured on the monthly “I’m a Runner” back page. Runner’s World did not provide Newsweek with the image. Instead, it was provided to Newsweek by the photographer’s agent, without Runner’s World’s knowledge or permission."
Click to expand...

So? Tricky is still right. Newsweek, Runner's World, doesn't matter. Tricky said:
So it is much like the "outrage" Sarah Palin had when Newsweek put that sexy picture of her on the cover. The picture she posed for. For a magazine. She simply wants it both ways. All the time. About everything.
Click to expand...

What I've bolded is what the point is....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom