• Hello!

    Either you have not registered on this site yet, or you are registered but have not logged in. In either case, you will not be able to use the full functionality of this site until you have registered, and then logged in after your registration has been approved.

    Registration is FREE, so please register so you can participate instead of remaining a lurker....

    Please be certain that the location field is correctly filled out when you register. All registrations that appear to be bogus will be rejected. Which means that if your location field does NOT match the actual location of your registration IP address, then your registration will be rejected.

    Sorry about the strictness of this requirement, but it is necessary to block spammers and scammers at the door as much as possible.

priceless ...

The_Thunderer said:
So having a different POV means having no logic or sense? Just what I thought about the left all along... they PREACH TOLERANCE, but hardly, if ever, PRACTICE it.
Click to expand...
Not at all. There are several people in this topic with strongly different viewpoints from my own thast have used sense and logic to support their POV. tsst, wstphal, and Blutengel have all three used sound reasoning, good logic , and strong evidenciary support for every one of their posts in this thread. Every time I read a post from tsst I am forced to think about his position, my position and this topic.

I wrote my statements about sense an logic in response to comments made by the fatman and LeeW(ade). Show me a single post of theirs in this topic that uses sense and logic to support their POV. Good luck, because I've tried to find it. Instead, their posts are argumentative and insulting. For example, anyone disagreeing with them has no sense of humour or is "foolish". There is no sense. There is no logic. There are insults, accusations, and argumentative statements...but nothing to back them up.

I have a great deal of respect for tsst and wstphal. We do not always agree on political philosophies. In fact, I don't think tsst and I have ever agreed on a philosophical level. But we always respond with respect for each other, and we both try to use logic, reason, and evidenciary support to back up our statements. We don't have to agree to be respectful, and when we continue to disagree, we can shake hands, have a beer, and still get along. That is wholly and completely different from the statements and responses made by people like the bfatman and wade...I mean LeeW....
 
Thanks tyflier ;p

I do think the fatman and LeeW are 'poking' you more because they think it is funny to see how you keep responding, then for any other reason. My guts tell me they might agree more with you then they show, they just like a bit of 'bullying' someone who is very/too serious in defending their POV by 'polarising' it.
 
Again Chris, you are spot on in every point you made above, including stuff in parenthesis.

And Blutengel, if I am not understanding your point, please help me to understand it. I have been trying to make you understand mine for a few lengthy posts already but keep getting the same responses from you, saying that I either don't understand you or I don't have enough support to my claims. Please don't give up on me yet! :)
 
LOL My point is that one does not know for a fact why the joker made this picture, so one cannot say it definitely is propaganda or scare tactics (unless he tells us). You don't seem to understand that your conclusion that the joker is using scare tactics ain't a fact but an opinion. Maybe it is the most probable conclusion, but it is not a fact. Since you seem to want facts to back up logic, I ask you to tell me yours. That's all :)
 
Logic doesn't need to be backed up by facts. Logic and facts are often used together to prove points.
With that said, you are right about me not having factual evidence about the joker using scare tactics. I haven't talked to the person who added the captions to the picture. I am getting to that conclusion based on the logic previously explained on posts #128 & 131.
 
Then I mixed you up with another poster who wants facts to back up logic.

I must say that I can only agree with someones logic if they can back it up with facts. Of course logic leans on reasoning and correct deduction and such, but to go along with someones logic, you need to agree on the precise rules of logic you are using. If your logic tells you a certain candidate is going to make the world a lot scarier, I have to agree on what is scary before I can agree with you. If I don't, I still might agree that you apply your logic correctly. For example; the candidate is going to make the world scarier, I don't want that so I won't vote for him. Pure logic, but if I don't agree with your opinion that he wil make the world scarier, I won't agree with you that one should not vote for him if you don't want the world to get scarier.

You still imply that your opinion is logic, but as long as you don't have facts that show that the guy is using scare tactics, I don't agree on your logic so I keep saying that your conclusion is an opinion, foormed by your logic and not a fact.
 
tyflier said:
I wrote my statements about sense an logic in response to comments made by the fatman and LeeW(ade). Show me a single post of theirs in this topic that uses sense and logic to support their POV. Good luck, because I've tried to find it. Instead, their posts are argumentative and insulting. For example, anyone disagreeing with them has no sense of humour or is "foolish". There is no sense. There is no logic. There are insults, accusations, and argumentative statements...but nothing to back them up.
Click to expand...

Tyflier, I am not going to reread this entire thread but I did go back and reread the last 4 or 5 pages. I can not find a single post were I said anything that could be construed as insulting to you. Not once did I say that you have no sense of humor or were foolish.

I have made light of your argument because I am having a hard time taking it seriously. First off, I don't agree with any part of your argument, but lets just say it is political propaganda. So what? Aren't all political statements propaganda in one form or another? How would this be any different?

Scare tactics? Are you serious? So this man using a cell phone is going to frighten someone? Don't you think that is a little extreme?

My picture of the Lavender KKK was poking fun at your out of the blue reference to the KKK. You often like to make extreme hypothetical comments that later become part of your argument.

If you are going to use my name and talk about me, please try to confine yourself to reality. Yes I have made jokes about some of your comments, but then I feel your argument in general has been somewhat of a joke.

To repeat myself, if all that you say is true about this picture and the motives of the people involved in its publication, SO WHAT?
 
Fact: Most Democrats favor government assistance while most Republicans oppose it
Fact: The captions have a political connotation
Fact: There is no proof the man is homeless, that the blackberry is his, that he is actually receiving a meal or just happened to be there to take a picture, etc.
Fact: Scare tactics work on some people who may react in an anticipated way, specially when reasoning is not involved.

Logic: Someone inserted the political captions to a picture of a person taking a picture of MO (a political figure) while she volunteered at a homeless shelter, therefore his/her intention was to cause some type of reaction related to politics.
Logic: Some people who read the captions may react to the "fact" that the "homeless" person is receiving government assistance while being able to afford an expensive phone and the bills associated with it, therefore government help is wasting their money (a bad thing)
Logic: Most people don't like when government waste their money with "homeless" people who can afford expensive cell phones, therefore they should do something to stop it.
Logic: A way to stop it would be to change who controls the government, from "money wasters" to another political party who would decrease the waste, therefore in the next elections, I should vote for the other party.

I hope I presented enough facts this time to backup my logic.
 
jpccusa said:
Fact: Most Democrats favor government assistance while most Republicans oppose it

I believe you on this

Fact: The captions have a political connotation

The above is an opinion to me. The joker might just think it is funny to capture someone abusing the system, whether he agrees on government assistance for the poor or not

Fact: There is no proof the man is homeless, that the blackberry is his, that he is actually receiving a meal or just happened to be there to take a picture, etc.
Fact: Scare tactics work on some people who may react in an anticipated way, specially when reasoning is not involved.

Agreed on

Logic: Someone inserted the political captions to a picture of a person taking a picture of MO (a political figure) while she volunteered at a homeless shelter, therefore his/her intention was to cause some type of reaction related to politics.

The above is YOUR personal logic, not everyone's else. This is, again, what you don't seem to get. If you don't get this, we'd better stop this debate, since we will only be repeating ourselves.

Logic: Some people who read the captions may react to the "fact" that the "homeless" person is receiving government assistance while being able to afford an expensive phone and the bills associated with it, therefore government help is wasting their money (a bad thing)

Agreed on

Logic: Most people don't like when government waste their money with "homeless" people who can afford expensive cell phones, therefore they should do something to stop it.

Agreed on

Logic: A way to stop it would be to change who controls the government, from "money wasters" to another political party who would decrease the waste, therefore in the next elections, I should vote for the other party.

Agreed on

I hope I presented enough facts this time to backup my logic.
Click to expand...

i hope the above shows why I don't agree on your opinion being a fact. If you'd only were able to see that your opinion is not a fact, since there might something else be going on, we'd could agree to have a different opinion.

My logic tells me that I need more information to know what is going on, while your logic tells you that this is propaganda/scare tactics.Our logic does not match, we have a different opinion, that's it.
 
Fact: The captions would not be political and still would be funny if line # 3 read "catching a "homeless" man taking a picture of Michelle Obama (optional) with his $300 Blackberry (+$100/month service): Priceless.
 
My father in law's niece got one of those government paid for phones and is allowed to make up to $200 worth of phone calls to anyone, anywhere per month. Maybe that is a bit much?
 
Do you see that by adding the unfounded sentence "while receiving his free government provided meal" the captions became political, Blutengel?

(political: Of, relating to, or dealing with the structure or affairs of government, politics, or the state.)
 
jpccusa said:
Fact: Most Democrats favor government assistance while most Republicans oppose it
Fact: The captions have a political connotation
Fact: There is no proof the man is homeless, that the blackberry is his, that he is actually receiving a meal or just happened to be there to take a picture, etc.
Fact: Scare tactics work on some people who may react in an anticipated way, specially when reasoning is not involved.

Logic: Someone inserted the political captions to a picture of a person taking a picture of MO (a political figure) while she volunteered at a homeless shelter, therefore his/her intention was to cause some type of reaction related to politics.
Logic: Some people who read the captions may react to the "fact" that the "homeless" person is receiving government assistance while being able to afford an expensive phone and the bills associated with it, therefore government help is wasting their money (a bad thing)
Logic: Most people don't like when government waste their money with "homeless" people who can afford expensive cell phones, therefore they should do something to stop it.
Logic: A way to stop it would be to change who controls the government, from "money wasters" to another political party who would decrease the waste, therefore in the next elections, I should vote for the other party.

I hope I presented enough facts this time to backup my logic.
Click to expand...

Fact: Most people don’t like to see government money wasted, weather they be Democrat, Republican, or any other party.

Fact: From the picture, posted below, there is no proof the photo was taken by the author of the caption. There is no proof we are actually looking at a homeless shelter. There is no proof that we are looking at homeless people or passers-by. There is no proof that Michael Oboma hasn’t been Photo Shopped into the picture.

Fact: There is no proof the premises in the picture are on the planet earth.

Fact: There is no proof the man is taking a picture of MO and not just looking at a photo of his girlfriend.

Fact: There is no proof that MO is happy to be there having her picture taken and no just giving a fake smile.


Logic: Alien beings from the galaxy Andromeda have abducted MO and are holding her hostage.

Logic: People of the planet earth have gathered together and started a campaign to bring awareness to the need to be more conservative with government spending.

Logic: The alien double who is masquerading as MO would not smile for the nice man so the Secret Service man goosed her in the butt with is pistol.

Logic: Terrified people world wide sold their stock in Verizon Wireless fearing a collapse of the entire system.

Logic: Tyflier won’t like this post either.
 

Attachments

  • homeless.JPG
    homeless.JPG
    70.8 KB · Views: 31
Fact: Many people are unable to contribute to a productive debate due to lack of critical thinking and/or knowledge about a subject.

Logic: "I don't understand what these people are saying, therefore I should stay out of this thread."

Believe me, I apply this logic in many threads where Corn Snake morphs and genetics are being discussed. ;)
 
Leew said:
Tyflier, I am not going to reread this entire thread but I did go back and reread the last 4 or 5 pages. I can not find a single post were I said anything that could be construed as insulting to you. Not once did I say that you have no sense of humor or were foolish.
Click to expand...
I distinctly remember you OR fatman saying "you look foolish" directly at me. Try to pay better attention to what you say to people. I disagree with you.

I have made light of your argument because I am having a hard time taking it seriously. First off, I don't agree with any part of your argument, but lets just say it is political propaganda. So what? Aren't all political statements propaganda in one form or another? How would this be any different?
Click to expand...
It isn't any different. Propoganda is prevalent in politics, and it sucks in every avenue of it's use. I dislike propoganda, even when I happen to agree on some level with the sentiment. Propoganda is not a joke, it's not funny, and it undermines the intelligence of the public.

Scare tactics? Are you serious? So this man using a cell phone is going to frighten someone? Don't you think that is a little extreme?
Click to expand...
I never said anything about scare tactics. I said propoganda relies on instigating fears or anger over percieved wrongdoings. I never said anything about scare tactics. You should pay closer attention to what everyone says if you're going to participate in topics like this.

My picture of the Lavender KKK was poking fun at your out of the blue reference to the KKK. You often like to make extreme hypothetical comments that later become part of your argument.
Click to expand...
So...the KKK is part my argument? When did that happen? :shrugs:

If you are going to use my name and talk about me, please try to confine yourself to reality. Yes I have made jokes about some of your comments, but then I feel your argument in general has been somewhat of a joke.
Click to expand...
Like I said, some people are capable of debating a topic using logic, sense and reason. Others prefer to attack their opponent, in an effort to make "their side" look stronger.

To repeat myself, if all that you say is true about this picture and the motives of the people involved in its publication, SO WHAT?
Click to expand...
So what? Really, so what? You don't have a problem with the dissemination of propoganda and false inofrmation? I'm sorry. I'm really sorry you don't have a problem with that.

I do have a problem with that. Just as you have a right to blindly swallow anything the media feeds you, I have a right check the ingredients...
 
jpccusa said:
Do you see that by adding the unfounded sentence "while receiving his free government provided meal" the captions became political, Blutengel?

(political: Of, relating to, or dealing with the structure or affairs of government, politics, or the state.)
Click to expand...

Ok, the captions are made up the way they are to point out that the government provided this meal. Why did the joker put the captions to it?

- To let us know that he thinks the government needs to watch out whom to serve free meals
- To let us know that he saw that people are abusing government support (his conclusion about the situation); caught in the act
- To scare us that this government is wasting our money, so we should not vote for Obama again. (I would have expected more explicit captions then)

Ok, you convinced me that the captions most probably are political, but I'm not convinced the joker wants to influence peoples opinion about the government.

You're good for achieving this :) I don't like it a lot but I'm always willing to change my POV if people come up with good arguments. I still hope someone else succes fully disputes your convincing post though :duck: :crazy01:
 
tyflier said:
So...the KKK is part my argument? When did that happen? :shrugs:

You brought it up, I didn't.


Like I said, some people are capable of debating a topic using logic, sense and reason. Others prefer to attack their opponent, in an effort to make "their side" look stronger.

Instead, their posts are argumentative and insulting. For example, anyone disagreeing with them has no sense of humour or is "foolish". There is no sense. There is no logic. There are insults, accusations, and argumentative statements...but nothing to back them up.

So what? Really, so what? You don't have a problem with the dissemination of propoganda and false inofrmation? I'm sorry. I'm really sorry you don't have a problem with that.

No I have no more problem with the Democrats or the Republicans spinning things, nor do I have a problem with your spin. It is all politics and it all lacks any real substance. I hope the American people as a whole are smart enough to realize that. I think they are.
Click to expand...

I find it interesting that if I say it or if some other person who doesn't subscribe to every word you say says it, then it is propaganda and will lead to a decline in the morality of the American youth. You can see no middle ground Ty, it is all black and white to you and quite frankly that is not the way it is in the real world.
 
Just a word of caution. The statement below has political undertones. I have changed the names of those involved as to not offend anyone living today. I have also chosen two characters who were both Democrats and both of the same race so no one group would feel discriminated against.

Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Harry S. Truman somehow ended up at the same barbershop.

As they sat there, each being worked on by a different barber, not a word was spoken. The barbers were even afraid to start a conversation, for fear it would turn to politics.

As the barbers finished their shaves, the one who had Truman in his chair reached for the aftershave. Harry was quick to stop him saying, 'No thanks, my wife Bess, will smell that and think I've been in a brothel.'

The second barber turned to Roosevelt and said, 'How about you, sir ?' Roosevelt replied, 'Go ahead, my wife doesn't know what the inside of a brothel smells like.'
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top