pixiamom
|
posted on June 19, 2008 04:31:29 AM new
Roadsmith, I learned the phrase in a comparative linguistics class which included a smattering of Latin phrases. At that age, I focused on "capture the day" rather than some of the more complex offerings. The class was presented in Swedish, which presented more challenges. Still, it was one of the most valuable courses I ever took- I have cherished the nuggets I took with me and regret the nuggets I left behind. Thanks for retrieving one of them for me.
|
Helenjw
|
posted on June 19, 2008 04:52:28 AM new
For the past several years "ad hominem attack" has been a topic often discussed here.
I'm surprised that anyone is surprised about that. 
|
pixiamom
|
posted on June 19, 2008 06:34:58 AM new
I have not heard it discussed here. If it has, it still crops up and deserves to be discussed again.
|
Helenjw
|
posted on June 19, 2008 07:06:43 AM new
Were you posting here or perhaps a lurker when the emoticom "LOL" became known as a horse laugh, a sort of appeal to mockery?
|
pixiamom
|
posted on June 19, 2008 07:16:03 AM new
?????????
|
Helenjw
|
posted on June 19, 2008 07:39:57 AM new
Pixiamom, you stated, "I have not heard it discussed here. If it has, it still crops up and deserves to be discussed again."
I am so sorry if my response, intended to be humorous, was confusing to you. Continue with your discussion of ad hominem.
I'm on my way to an estate sale.
[ edited by Helenjw on Jun 19, 2008 07:42 AM ]
|
roadsmith
|
posted on June 19, 2008 09:48:10 AM new
Helen and Pixi: The only mention I recall (but with no discussion here) was within the last few years when I brought up the subject. I honestly don't remember a discussion about it; it was sort of ignored, in my memory at least.
Always good for a reminder, isn't it.
_____________________
|
Helenjw
|
posted on June 19, 2008 12:17:49 PM new
Roadsmith, maybe it is always on my mind when so many posters use the strategy.
Actually, I do remember several discussions of that fallacy. Does use of the latin term impart some special significance to the strategy of attacks on one's opponent in an effort to bolster a weak case?
If we failed to call the strategy "Ad Hominem" was our discussion without meaning? Did the discussions not occur?
|
Helenjw
|
posted on June 19, 2008 12:37:26 PM new
In other words, if it quacks it's a duck.
|
roadsmith
|
posted on June 19, 2008 12:40:03 PM new
I have to ponder why the Latin phrase has stuck in my mind. I guess it's because I hadn't ever considered, in my long life, that good ideas can come from bad people, and bad ideas can come from good people.
I had to learn that the hard way. In politics, I tried very hard not to dismiss an idea simply because I couldn't stand the person proposing it. It helped me a lot at that job.
Using the Latin phrase wasn't aimed at Helen or Pixi--there are others here who may be in the same mindset that I used to be in, and I thought that knowing it's actually called something!! could help others to consider it.
_____________________
|
Helenjw
|
posted on June 19, 2008 01:25:11 PM new
Roadsmith said, "Using the Latin phrase wasn't aimed at Helen or Pixi--there are others here who may be in the same mindset that I used to be in, and I thought that knowing it's actually called something!! could help others to consider it."
Been there done that, Roadsmith. With a quick search I found that I mentioned the topic to Linda several times and actually used the latin term! Needless to say, she wasn't impressed or enlightened.
|
cblev65252
|
posted on June 19, 2008 02:55:26 PM new
I mentioned the topic to Linda several times and actually used the latin term! Needless to say, she wasn't impressed or enlightened.
Oh, now that's a big surprise. 
Cheryl
|
Helenjw
|
posted on June 19, 2008 03:21:56 PM new
Cheryl
She didn't even put her obnoxious horse laugh to rest!
LOL
|
cblev65252
|
posted on June 19, 2008 03:42:51 PM new
Maybe I'm asking for trouble, but whatever happened to Linda and the rest of the, ahem, troublemakers? I've been gone too long.
A black councilwoman here, Stephanie Tubbs Jones, has been ridiculed because she did not support Obama. She instead supported Clinton. I was just watching the news about it. People feel that she should have supported Obama because she's black and she may lose re-election over it. Why on Earth should she have to support anyone she doesn't want to? This is what is causing a lot of problems for Obama especially in this area. Just because a person is black that doesn't mean they should or would vote for Obama. That's absurd. Not that it matters now, but she and Clinton have been friends for years.
So, does that mean because I'm white I should vote for McCain? The thinking works both ways.
Cheryl
|
desquirrel
|
posted on June 19, 2008 04:05:48 PM new
LOL. This thread started from O'Reilly's choice of a politically incorrect phrase, meanwhile Obama's people refused to let 2 female Muslims in traditional dress sit in the audience behind him. You're never going to keep up on the pc rules, just ignore them.
|
coach81938
|
posted on June 19, 2008 05:40:09 PM new
You can thank the idiotic, persistent and wrong rumor about Obama being Muslim for that. A VOLUNTEER, worried that it would feed into that rumor, took it upon him/herself to move the Muslim women.
|
cblev65252
|
posted on June 19, 2008 07:14:18 PM new
I remember that one, coach. I still have to correct people who think he's a Muslim (and let's not forget that he's not patriotic because he doesn't wear a flag pin). It's hard to convince them. It's mainly because of his name. I lived among many, many Muslims. I don't have a problem with any of them. As a matter of fact, I find them the most polite and the most generous of people. I wouldn't hesitate dealing with any of them!! My daughter's landlord is Muslim. She's lived in the house for 10 years. Not only has he taken very good care of the house she lives in, he's only raised the rent one time.
You can't blame every Muslim for 9/11 just like you can't blame every German for the slaughter of millions of Jews or every Japanese for Pearl Harbor! And you shouldn't hold it against Obama because he's a Christian with a Muslim name.
Cheryl
[ edited by cblev65252 on Jun 19, 2008 07:15 PM ]
|
desquirrel
|
posted on June 19, 2008 07:16:54 PM new
There is no quarter given in the pc war.
|
pixiamom
|
posted on June 19, 2008 07:45:29 PM new
Cheryl, expecting a council woman to vote for someone only because he is Afro-American is WRONG- especially if she has strong ties and convictions to another candidate. I've never been a fan of Clinton, yet was prepared to vote for her if she won the primary. My mom stayed loyal to Clinton until the very end and I did not lose any respect for her.
|
coach81938
|
posted on June 19, 2008 08:30:14 PM new
Cheryl, It amazes me that I hear this over and over from people who believe every e-mail they receive. One minute they are calling Obama a Muslim and the next they are complaining about Rev. Wright and his (Christian)church. Make up your mind! Another thing that bothers me: Even if Obama were a Muslim, so what! There are millions of law abiding, peaceful Muslims in the world. Most Muslims are not terrorists, bent on destroying America. Obama is an American. What reason would he have to destroy the U.S.A.? The fear instilled in America by the Bush administration has caused paranoia and illogical thinking.
I received a forwarded e-mail today that was mind-boggling. It was written by someone named Bill Brown, supposed right hand man to Billy Graham at one time. In this e-mail was a list of Obama's bad points (in his opinion.) They included:
He voted against banning partial ' birth abortion.
* He voted no on notifying parents of minors who get out-of-state
aborti ons.
* Supports affirmative action (racial preferences) in Colleges an d
Government.
* In 2001 he questioned harsh penalties for drug dealing.
* Instead, says he will deal with street level drug dealing as minimum
wage affair.
* Admitted his own marijuana and cocaine use in high school and in
college.
* His religious convictions are very murky - even before the Rev.
Wright fiasco.
* He is willing to meet with Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez, Kim Jung Il
andMahmoud Ahmadinejad to negoiate our cooperation.
* Has said that one of his first goals after being elected would be to
have a conference with all Muslim nations.
* Opposed the Patriot Act which has kept 9/11 terrorists from further
success on U.S. soil.
* The first bill he signed that also passed was campaign finance
reform.
* Voted No on prohibiting frivolous law suits against gun
manufacturers.
* Supports universal health-care similar to Europe and Canada (the rich
from there come here for better health care).
* Voted y es on providing habeas corpus for Guantanamo detainees (war
prisioners in our courts??).
* Supports granting driver's licenses to illegal immigrants even though
that ID would, for instance, allow them to vote.
* Supports extending all welfare benefits to illegal immigrants.
* Voted yes on the comprehensive immigration reform bill that failed
after a public outcry against amnesty.
* Voted yes on allowing illegal aliens to participate in Social
Security.
* Wants to make the minimum wage a 'living wage'.
* Voted with Democratic Party 96 percent of 251 votes.
* Is a big believer in the separation of church and state - no religion
in the public square.
* Opposed to any efforts to Privatize Social Security and instead
supports massive increase in the amount of tax paid.
* He voted No on repealing the Alternative Minimum Tax * He voted No
on repealing t he 'Death' Tax * He wants to raise the Capital Gains Tax.
* Has rep ea tedly said the surge in Iraq has not succeeded; and will
retreat as rapidly as possible regardless of conditions on the ground.
* He is ranked as the most liberal Senator in the Senate today and that
takes some doing.
In my opinion, most of the above are good reasons to vote for Obama.
|
desquirrel
|
posted on June 19, 2008 09:04:00 PM new
And why he'll probably lose.
|
profe51
|
posted on June 19, 2008 11:03:25 PM new
Another one-liner from squirrel. By what measure do you see him losing? Which poll shows him behind McCain?
|
coach81938
|
posted on June 20, 2008 05:50:38 AM new
"And why he'll probably lose."
Squirrel--Yes, you are right oh all seeing one who knows what every American thinks. A living wage, separation of church and state, supporter of the constitution---what an evill man.
|
desquirrel
|
posted on June 20, 2008 07:42:18 AM new
It is not genius to know the average person does not think aliens should have taxpayer supported benefits of ANY kind. Much of the "list" is a no-brainer.
And I'm surprised profe is so confident with a couple of percentage points considering how early in the campaign it is, the baggage Obama has, and the fact that huge numbers of twits when a microphone is stuck in front of their faces gush about how handsome Obama is and how he dresses. These same twits are clueless and tend to respond "Oh my God, he said that???" when asked about Obama's platform (if he has one).
|
cblev65252
|
posted on June 20, 2008 08:07:55 AM new
* Supports extending all welfare benefits to illegal immigrants.
I'm a democrat and I'm opposed to taxpayer paid benefits to illegal aliens. I work three jobs and have no benefits because I'm essentially self-employed. I can't afford self-paid insurance. I do not qualify for Medicaid or Medicare or Food Stamps or any other taxpayer benefit even though I pay taxes. Yet, I struggle to afford medical care and food. Why should I pay for someone who is not a legal citizen to get the same benefits I cannot? I'm not the only dem I know that feels exactly the same way. However, that is not enough to stop me from voting for him. He cannot extend that benefit on his own. There would be many hurdles to get over and I doubt he could get over all of them.
Cheryl
|
desquirrel
|
posted on June 20, 2008 09:55:28 AM new
What no one has EVER explained to me is their BASIS for this incredible extension of rights and privileges to non-citizens.
|
profe51
|
posted on June 20, 2008 10:50:48 AM new
As far as taxpayer paid benefits, I'm opposed to them too as a general rule, but making a statement like "supports extending all welfare benefits.." is misleading and an oversimplification. Pretty typical of these worthless forwarded emails. I don't know about anyone else here, but the only ones I ever get come from the right. Nobody ever sends me any bull$hit forwards from the left. I'm not saying they aren't out there, but I never get any.
A lot has to do with how each program's regulations are written. The WIC program for example provides small grocery subsidies for mothers of infants without regard to citizenship. Food stamps on the other hand,administered by another agency require a child to be of American birth, but are doled out according to the number of children who meet the qualification. I know one family whose kids are in my school. Two older kids were born in Mexico and the youngest was born here. Because of the youngest's citizenship, the family gets a whopping 12 bucks a week worth of food stamps. As far as education is concerned, we are not legally allowed to question citizenship and as a public school must accept all comers.
I really think anyone with half an ounce of sense ought to be asking what "welfare benefits" means before swallowing this junk.
|
desquirrel
|
posted on June 20, 2008 11:03:46 AM new
You just mentioned a bunch of them. "All comers" w/o question? This is how a simple thing becomes "complicated".
Non-citizen=NOTHING. Period. End.
Yes, and they will probably "feel bad" and "families will be torn a part", etc, etc. Families are torn apart when daddy robs a liquor store also, but you still lock daddy up.
|
coach81938
|
posted on June 20, 2008 12:00:37 PM new
Cheryl and Profe--I agree with you both. That's why these forwarded e-mails are full of baloney. They make broad statements with little or no proof. We have no idea what was meant by "welfare benefits." I do not believe illegals should receive every benefit of a U.S. citizen, nor do I believe we should let children starve.
Squirrel-When Daddy robs a liquor store and goes to jail, should we let his children starve? Daddy should pay for what he did, but why do his children have to?
|
desquirrel
|
posted on June 20, 2008 12:50:49 PM new
If the kids are not citizens, mail them back to their country and let their fellow citizens take care of them.
|
