Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Why is the President Lying ... again?
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 31 of 103 (147240)
10-04-2004 5:26 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by johnfolton
10-04-2004 11:43 AM


Whatever crosses another line -- we know that fact is beyond him.
If you don't want us to be a soverign nation, then whats the reason your an american,
I don't need this kind of snivling slimey jingoist snotty insult of malicious implication over something that has never been said, continually and mindlessly posed as fact by those too demonstratqably mentally incompetent to realize that they are the puppets of the most unamerican administration in the history of the nation.
YOUR PRESIDENT LIED TO YOU -- WHY DO YOU SUPPORT HIS LIES?
Either you are too blind to see the moral hypocrisy in supporting a known anti-american liar, or you willingly embrace the lie because you are a malicious anti-american that wants to disassemble those things that make this country great and what has enabled it to survive such efforts in the past
Now you have a choice: (1) apologize or (2) continue to be a fool --- your choice.
YOU HAVE NO REASON TO VOTE FOR BUSH -- ALL YOU HAVE ARE HIS CONTINUED LIES AND MISREPRESENTATIONS.
BUSH
NO PLAN
NO RESULTS
NO CHANGES
NO LEADERSHIP
When will you realize when a person is incompetent? What evidence will convince you that he is a failure?
enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by johnfolton, posted 10-04-2004 11:43 AM johnfolton has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by johnfolton, posted 10-04-2004 5:57 PM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 32 of 103 (147247)
10-04-2004 5:52 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by creationistal
10-04-2004 4:53 PM


IT's NOT ABOUT CLINTON
creationistal writes:
Sort of like Clinton getting the additional data showing he got caught lying, so he revised his conclusions on whether or not he had sexual contact with a certain intern, no?
yes, and that blue dress lie caused the death of 1060 soldiers, didn’t it?
Don't you think that the issue is a little more critical when the lies cause deaths?
creationistal, post #30 writes:
When did we get hit again? I must have missed it. If you're talking about Iraqi terrorism, I'll give you that one.
Actually we got hit again on 9/11/01 — on bush’s watch even though he had been told that Osama would try again ...
No, what you missed was the revised report from the Whitehouse on terrorism world wide for the last year: higher than ever before, excluding the wars in Afghanistan and in Iraq. The Whitehouse tried to use the report as evidence of their success in the war on terror until they were forced to correct the numbers (gee — caught lying again???)
Why do you support a proven liar? That is the question here, not who else lied in the history of the US: How can you say you support a known liar?
This message has been edited by RAZD, 10-04-2004 04:55 PM

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by creationistal, posted 10-04-2004 4:53 PM creationistal has not replied

  
coffee_addict
Member (Idle past 477 days)
Posts: 3645
From: Indianapolis, IN
Joined: 03-29-2004


Message 33 of 103 (147249)
10-04-2004 5:55 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by creationistal
10-04-2004 4:46 PM


Re: Reading abilities
The problem with whatever is he is unable to focus on any one particular topic in any kind of coherent conversation. He sounds more like a child. If you go back and read the other thread and this thread, this is the format you will see.
Whatever: claims point A.
Person 1: refutes point A.
Whatever: claims point B.
Person 2: refutes point B.
Whatever: claims point C.
Person 3: refutes point C.
Person 4: claims point D.
Whatever: instead of trying stay on topic with point D, claims point E.
This is the attitude of a child. Always trying to change the subject rather than have a coherent conversation on any one point. When any one of his claims is questioned, he immediately goes on to make another claim. Instead of answering to whoever that questioned him about the previous topic, he just ignores him and goes on to something else.
It's not the pro-Bush side that I am criticizing for now. It is the way he is debating with people. Jumping from topic to topic is annoying, to say the least, and it is definitely not debating in good faith.

For goodness's sake, please vote Democrat this November!
Why? Bush is a right wing nutcase.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by creationistal, posted 10-04-2004 4:46 PM creationistal has not replied

  
Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 34 of 103 (147250)
10-04-2004 5:55 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by creationistal
10-04-2004 5:10 PM


Re: Reading abilities
Are you saying that whatever's posts are logical? Perhaps, then you can summarize his argument in logical terms. Identify the premises, sketch the logical development of his argument, and then identify his conclusion. That would be a big help, because when I read whatever's posts all I see are a bunch of statements that don't seem to be connected in any logical manner.
As far as the "verbosity" of my post, I'm not sure how I could have made it shorter. You don't seem to know what logic is, and I was trying to explain it to you as simply as I can. Perhaps you can provide an even more concise explanation of a logical argument.
Finally, as Crashfrog has pointed out, communism has never been implemented on a national scale. I have a friend who has joined a commune in Maryland, and I know that there are still a large number of communes in the US. From his description of life there, I wouldn't necessarily say it has manifested itself in bad ways. (I would also disagree with crashfrog that socialism has ever been implemented, but I fear that we would all just argue about the definition of the words, and that wouldn't be a very satisfying topic.)
If you want to discuss socialism/communism/Marxism/anarchism, maybe a new thread would be appropriate.
Edited to correct a couple of minor typos.
This message has been edited by Chiroptera, 10-04-2004 05:12 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by creationistal, posted 10-04-2004 5:10 PM creationistal has not replied

  
johnfolton 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5591 days)
Posts: 2024
Joined: 12-04-2005


Message 35 of 103 (147251)
10-04-2004 5:57 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by RAZD
10-04-2004 5:26 PM


Razd, The facts do elude you, GWB has given Americans a tax break, the Stock Market has not crashed showing the economy is strong, you are lying to say Mr. Kerry has been honest to the american people, because you fully well know that he has not released all his medical, military records, you know he is not supposed to even be running for the office in the land, because he violated the fourteenth amendment section 3, the Vets are outraged because of this, and yet you still support the man, its quite hard to believe, actually, etc...
P.S. What needs to be done actually is to vote the democrats our of office, so its the will of the people and not the will of the activist judges, so the people are protected from having a candidate that violates our constitution, running for the highest office of the land, etc...
You truly don't want hateful people (activists judges) forcing the homosexual agenda upon the people, when the people have been allowed to vote about same sex marriage, they have consistently voted against Gay marriages, truly was not the entire nation outraged when only a few catholic homosexual pedifiles molested young boys, the nation is not for the same sex revolution, and its being spitefully, hatefully shoved down upon the citizens against their will, using hate speech laws, to force the will of only several judges, senators, etc...forcing their will over the will of the majority of the people of this land. This is clearly something that should be voted upon, not shoved upon the people, when the constitution is supposed to be the will of the people, etc...We all know its an abomination, which is why you can only Praise GWB for standing up for the rights of the churches to protect them from the infidels that would force their beliefs upon the religion of Jesus Christ, which violates the separation of Church and State, etc...Mr. Kerry has not the guts, nor the leadership to stand up to the Gay people, a real reason to not vote for the man, etc...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by RAZD, posted 10-04-2004 5:26 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by Mammuthus, posted 10-05-2004 7:49 AM johnfolton has not replied
 Message 47 by RAZD, posted 10-05-2004 9:52 AM johnfolton has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 36 of 103 (147252)
10-04-2004 5:58 PM
Reply to: Message 30 by creationistal
10-04-2004 5:24 PM


When did we get hit again? I must have missed it.
C'mon, C. Even the State Department admits that terrorism around the world has increased. It's almost doubled since we went to war with Iraq. In the meantime, our air marshalls are poorly trained and screened, our docks are critical security holes, and we're doing nothing about tightening the borders.
According to what data?
Job creation, tax revenue, spending indexes, interest rates, pretty much everything. I guess luxury item sales is up, but that's pretty much a function of the rich getting richer, not any kind of economic revival.
According to what data?
Data from the US Census Bureau, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and others.
I happily concur that government spending is out of control, and has been for a long time.
Let me refresh your memory. It's only been "out of control" since this guy has been in office. Bush inherited a significant budget surplus, remember?
Other than national security issues which we usually don't know about anyway, what are you talking about specifically?
I'm talking about everything. This administration has denied the most Freedom of Information Act requests since the act was, uh, enacted. There's been a stupendous restriction of government openness, ostensibly for security, but generally in regards to things that have nothing to do with terrorism or likely terror targets.
Again, I'm not saying that the government needs to tell us literally everything, but keeping government accountable is the only way to keep government responsible.
So Enron and Tyco and Martha Stewart and all that jazz really was about you and me, and not the biggest bust of corporate scandal in years and years?
Did you know that almost 60% of corporations pay no income tax whatsoever? But even the IRS admits they're going after low-income families instead of corporate tax cheats:
quote:
Published on Wednesday, August 6, 2003 by the Associated Press
Prove It: IRS Targets Low-Income Earners with Increased Scrutiny
by Mary Dalrymple
WASHINGTON - The Internal Revenue Service said Tuesday that 25,000 low-income earners will be asked to bolster their tax returns with proof that they qualify for a tax credit designed to lift the working poor out of poverty.
Yet:
quote:
IRS Audits of Corporates Down
Marie Leone, CFO.com
April 15, 2003
Tax prosecutions resulting from IRS investigations are about half of what they were 10 years ago, according to new research released yesterday by Syracuse University's Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC). In 1993 the IRS was the lead agency for 1,064 tax prosecutions. By 2002 that number had shrunk to 512. The report notes that if current trends continue, the number of annual tax prosecutions for 2003 is likely to fall to 360the number of civil suits filed by the IRS dropped even further: from 2,172 in 1993 to 575 in 2002.
The horribly inept tax code and beaurocracy itself costs the government billions and billions. Thank goodness Bush wants to reform the tax code.
I don't think we can afford to have Bush reform the tax code. And why do we need to bother? It worked just fine four years ago, when we had that huge surplus. What costs the government billions is not erroneously paid low-income credits; it's the billions in lost corporate revenue from not tracking down these big tax cheats.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by creationistal, posted 10-04-2004 5:24 PM creationistal has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by nator, posted 10-05-2004 8:58 AM crashfrog has not replied
 Message 44 by Quetzal, posted 10-05-2004 9:36 AM crashfrog has not replied
 Message 48 by Quetzal, posted 10-05-2004 10:05 AM crashfrog has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 37 of 103 (147253)
10-04-2004 6:00 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by johnfolton
10-04-2004 11:43 AM


Kerry not the topic
The question is why is BUSH lying
and why do YOU support a liar
do try to stay on topic.
BUSH IS LYING -- WHY DOES THE PRESIDENT OF THE USofA NEED TO LIE?
WHEN WILL HE START GIVING AMERICANS THE TRUTH?
WHEN WILL HE START TELLING THE TROOPS THE TRUTH?

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by johnfolton, posted 10-04-2004 11:43 AM johnfolton has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 38 of 103 (147363)
10-05-2004 12:36 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by coffee_addict
10-04-2004 4:45 AM


In this context, "global test" means a universal test where "your people understand fully... and you can prove to the world...."
understood. i do agree with this, i was just looking for clarification on the lie.
I'm a Kerry supporter and there are some things that I criticize him for. For example, when Kerry was asked to give an outline of his plan and a time line, Kerry tried to dodge the question by refering to what Bush is doing rather than what he (Kerry) plans to do. Furthermore, he failed to give any kind of timeline as was asked.
but in fairness, i remember screaming at bush on the television at least once "ANSWER THE F'ING QUESTION!" one of his dodges in particular was spectacular: he was asked about afghanistan, and responded by thanking lehrer, the press, etc, and then talking about iraq.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by coffee_addict, posted 10-04-2004 4:45 AM coffee_addict has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by coffee_addict, posted 10-05-2004 2:48 AM arachnophilia has replied

  
coffee_addict
Member (Idle past 477 days)
Posts: 3645
From: Indianapolis, IN
Joined: 03-29-2004


Message 39 of 103 (147399)
10-05-2004 2:48 AM
Reply to: Message 38 by arachnophilia
10-05-2004 12:36 AM


Arachnophilia writes:
but in fairness, i remember screaming at bush on the television at least once "ANSWER THE F'ING QUESTION!" one of his dodges in particular was spectacular: he was asked about afghanistan, and responded by thanking lehrer, the press, etc, and then talking about iraq.
Hahaha. The reason I let that go was because everybody dodges whenever a question is asked that is hard to answer. For example, I watched Larry King a while back when he was talking with Dean. This was after Dean gave his support to Kerry. King asked Dean why he was supporting Kerry now on the issue of Iraq even though he was criticizing Kerry so much just a month before. Well, I must say that I admire Mister Dean for such a well trained skill to dodge a question in a way that you won't know he's dodging it until about 10 minutes after he ended answering the question. I wish I could do that.
Anyway, everybody dodges questions they can't answer. This is why I am more critical of the candidate I support regarding the dodging. You could say I have higher expectation on the candidate that I support than the candidate that I don't support.
This is something that the Bush supporters seem to lack, I think. They don't seem to question him. Remember that you have to sign an agreement to support Mister Bush all the way if you want to attend one of his campaign speech rallies. Since Bush has been doing it for a while, lo and behold the net result is whatever!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by arachnophilia, posted 10-05-2004 12:36 AM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 79 by arachnophilia, posted 10-05-2004 4:57 PM coffee_addict has not replied

  
Mammuthus
Member (Idle past 6475 days)
Posts: 3085
From: Munich, Germany
Joined: 08-09-2002


Message 40 of 103 (147419)
10-05-2004 7:49 AM
Reply to: Message 35 by johnfolton
10-04-2004 5:57 PM


whatever must be gay!
quote:
We all know its an abomination, which is why you can only Praise GWB for standing up for the rights of the churches to protect them from the infidels that would force their beliefs upon the religion of Jesus Christ, which violates the separation of Church and State, etc...Mr. Kerry has not the guts, nor the leadership to stand up to the Gay people, a real reason to not vote for the man, etc...
Given the logic (or lack thereof) of this portion of the post, it would seem that whatever will in fact become a gay man if homosexuals are allowed to marry. In his fear of the billions of Gay Army soldiers marching on his church to make him gay, he proudly touts the separation of church and state to forcefully dictate his primitive dogma on the rest of the population of the US in the name of freedom and the erosion of the separation of church and state....which he apparently conflates with free-dumb (gene name dillweed, gene sybol Dw, inheritance: fundamentalist dominant), a genetic disease where the brain fails to develop beyond a pea size structure but the victim is still able to post on internet forums.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by johnfolton, posted 10-04-2004 5:57 PM johnfolton has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 41 of 103 (147421)
10-05-2004 8:42 AM
Reply to: Message 9 by johnfolton
10-04-2004 11:43 AM


Re: Kerry lacks leadership abilities, because of his double speak, etc...
quote:
I'm not a politician, but either were a soveign nation or were not, you all didn't seem outraged at the communist butchering millions of south vietnamese after we left them defenseless, truly you democrats should read up on Chamberlain, don't realize the terrorists made a house call on the pentagon, killed hundreds of our leaders, and you all sit back and say we should look to the United Nations who believe Israel shouldn't build a wall to protect the palestian children from blowing themselves up because with a wall they would not be able to cross over to blow up Israelies, etc...Globalisms, asking the UN to intercede, to make our decisions, is just not the answer, we need to be a soverign nation, not bound by International courts, so we can make our own decisions(the senate, Congress agreed as did Mr. Kerry that going to war with Sadamn based on the intelligence was the right thing to do), etc...If you don't want us to be a soverign nation, then whats the reason your an american, the problem with Kerry is that he flips positions, begging the question of his ability to lead, the world needs stability, and an unstable president that flips positions constantly, as political winds dictate, is not in our best interest, etc...
I'm not a politician, but either we want the Nazi-supporting Bush family to take us for a ride or not. Prescott Bush was a really big supporter of the Nazis during WW2 and then got in trouble for it. So, we now know that the Bush family likes to support evil regimes. Look at the ties with Saudi Arabia. There's a portrait of GHW Bush in the big Saudi palace, were friends with them even though they are an oppressive Islamic state. They even cut off peoples heads in public. If Bush gets 4 more years he will sell even more of our government to the Saudis, and its very likely that we willstart to see public beheadings here in the US because look at the Patriot act.

To occupy Iraq would instantly shatter our coalition, turning the whole Arab world against us and make a broken tyrant into a latter-day hero ... assigning young soldiers to a fruitless hunt for a securely entrenched dictator and condemning them to fight in what would be an un-winnable urban guerilla war. It could only plunge that part of the world into even greater instability.-George Bush Sr.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by johnfolton, posted 10-04-2004 11:43 AM johnfolton has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 42 of 103 (147425)
10-05-2004 8:58 AM
Reply to: Message 36 by crashfrog
10-04-2004 5:58 PM


quote:
I'm talking about everything. This administration has denied the most Freedom of Information Act requests since the act was, uh, enacted. There's been a stupendous restriction of government openness, ostensibly for security, but generally in regards to things that have nothing to do with terrorism or likely terror targets.
Again, I'm not saying that the government needs to tell us literally everything, but keeping government accountable is the only way to keep government responsible.
Yeah, like when was the last time Bush gave a press conference?
They really don't let him do that because he's seems to become Bumblebush when the questions become, well, questions.
Also, when has anybody in the administration given a press conference or answered any questions at all about the specifics of the civil rights-stripping Patriot Act?
Hell, we didn't even see Cheney's face for the first two years or so of Bush's term.
Too busy running the shadow government, I suppose.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by crashfrog, posted 10-04-2004 5:58 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 43 of 103 (147427)
10-05-2004 9:05 AM


THE PRESIDENT HAS "OVALITIS"
This is a great article regarding the debate, and this reporter's take on why he did so poorly. Very insightful.
http://www.richardreeves.com/columns/latest.html
THE PRESIDENT HAS "OVALITIS"
BY RICHARD REEVES
NEW YORK -- Frank Luntz, a Republican pollster, did a focus group with 18 "swing" voters during the first Bush-Kerry debate last week at the University of Miami. The count before the debate was 12 undecided, two for President Bush and four for Senator John Kerry. After the debate, the Luntz scorecard read: seven undecided, two for Bush, nine for Kerry.
Pretty dramatic stuff, though winning the debate -- which Kerry obviously did -- does not necessarily mean winning the election. But it beats losing the debate, as Bush did. Asked why, Luntz said: "The split-screen worked to Bush’s disadvantage. The group thought he looked angry, negative and upset."
What the President looked like was a teenager getting a lecture from his parents.
Peter Canellos, evaluating the performances for the Boston Globe also cited the cutaways of Bush listening (and squirming) as Kerry spoke, wrote this last Friday: "Bush’s repetition seemed insistent rather than firm and his body language -- sighing, clenching his teeth, rolling his eyes -- suggested a man on the defensive."
Jay Nordlinger of the National Review, the secular scripture of American conservatism, began his evaluation by saying to his pro-Bush readership, "Don’t shoot the messenger!" Then he gave them his unhappy message: "If I was a normal guy ... I would vote for Kerry. On the basis of that debate, I would."
What happened to Bush? What’s wrong with him? I would say he has bad case of Ovalitis -- an ear infection endemic to the Oval Office. Sit there long enough and you don’t hear anything you don’t want to hear.
The people who come into the President’s office know all about shooting messengers, so they bring only tidings of great joy. Anyone who doesn’t do that gets fired. That’s what happened to both his chief economic adviser, Lawrence Lindsey and the Army chief of staff, General Eric Shinsheki, when they said, correctly,that occupying and stabilizing Iraq would take more money and men than Bush had imagined. The President once knew all about the bowing and scraping, but gradually it became his due; he is the boy in the bubble. And the bubble moves with him around the country as his staff and the Secret Service protect him from any unpleasant words or people. Tickets to his rallies are given only to the loyal. He holds no press conferences. He hides away out there in the Crawford sagebrush. He’s alone.
Bush is a man who does not hear, or does not listen. That, rather than Kerry’s confident professionalism, was what was important Thursday night.
Thursday night visibly shocked Bush. He was shocked by what Kerry was saying, particularly about the poisoned chaos that is Iraq. Why the Democrat even raised questions about Ayad Allawi, the Iraqi tough guy Bush picked as prime minister -- and seemed on the verge of comparing to Winston Churchill. How could Kerry say such things about such a man? How could Kerry say things are going badly in Iraq? No one told the President that -- or he didn’t hear it. Why, that could demoralize our troops -- as if those soldier’s in harm’s way did not know what was going on long before Kerry spoke out.
Bush is a man who does not hear, or does not listen. That, rather than Kerry’s confident professionalism, was what was important Thursday night. The challenger, we know, has had problems because he hears too many voices, listens to everyone. The only people we know the President listens to are members of his small court, led by Vice President Cheney, who has been pushing the preposterous for the past three years.
This is not new. Bush gave away part of the game when he talked about never dreaming when he debated in 2000 that he would have to send troops into harm’s way. What did he think presidents do? He seemed ignorant then. But as Commander-in-Chief he quickly became imperious. Answering a question from Bob Woodward in 2002 about whether he was listening to staff and advisers as he prepared for war, Bush said: "Of course not. I’m the commander. See, I don’t have to explain why I say things ... I don’t feel like I owe anybody an explanation."
Apparently he meant that. He certainly did not make much of an attempt to explain anything in this first debate -- and that’s why he lost it.

  
Quetzal
Member (Idle past 5872 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 44 of 103 (147431)
10-05-2004 9:36 AM
Reply to: Message 36 by crashfrog
10-04-2004 5:58 PM


Hi Crash,
Just a correction to this bit:
In the meantime, our air marshalls are poorly trained and screened, our docks are critical security holes, and we're doing nothing about tightening the borders.
...especially the last part. For reference, border security budgets inside the DHS doubled between FY2002 and FY2003, and doubled again (more or less) in FY2004. The newest budget figures (for FY2005), which of course have not yet been approved, increase border security funding specifically by about 10% over FY2004. The initiatives include a fair amount of $$$ upgrade for the Container Security Initiative (which was started in FY2002, IIRC) and a number of other programs designed to enhance border security. For the FY2003 upgrades, see Border and Transportation Security, and for the proposed 2005 upgrades see Department of Homeland Security Announces FY 2005 Budget in Brief.
President Bush may be open to criticism on many areas, but your critique here might be characterized charitably as, hmmm, hyperbole to say the least. (more later)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by crashfrog, posted 10-04-2004 5:58 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
JustinC
Member (Idle past 4844 days)
Posts: 624
From: Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Joined: 07-21-2003


Message 45 of 103 (147434)
10-05-2004 9:45 AM


I have a question about Kerry's global test, which incidentally is related to the scientific philosophy. We all know that in science, proof is rarely, if ever, mentioned; at least ideally it shouldn't be. You have evidence supporting a position and evidence against a position, never proof of a position.
In Kerry's test, then, how do you prove legitimacy to the world? What if you present a lot evidence for your position, and yet the world is still unconvinced you have "proven" your case? After all, "prove" is a pretty subjective concept. Is he just saying we have to present sufficient evidence for a position from our perspective, even though other countries may disagree with our conclusion?
Now, I think if we have sufficient evidence most countries will agree with us. I'm worried, though, about countries who will disagree with us for political reasons. Do we need to prove to these countries the legitimacy of our actions before we can take action? And if so, isn't that similar to a world vote?
This post may or may not be comprehensible since it is early in the morning, but I'm sure you guys can get the jist of my concerns.

Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by Loudmouth, posted 10-05-2004 12:51 PM JustinC has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024