Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 59 (9164 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,923 Year: 4,180/9,624 Month: 1,051/974 Week: 10/368 Day: 10/11 Hour: 1/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   farenheit 9/11 (the "liberal media", other things relating to film maker Michael Moore)
Morte
Member (Idle past 6133 days)
Posts: 140
From: Texas
Joined: 05-03-2004


Message 266 of 304 (129191)
07-31-2004 10:54 PM


Waaaaaay off-topic, but...
Oy... having read a few of them, I have to wonder how it is that you two continue to get into debates with each other... ?
The trend I've noticed is that one of you finds a trivial detail to debate and incorporates it into your response, and before you know it, the original topic is miles behind (just look at the last several posts and note how much is spent on the actual topic, and how much of the post is about the opponent himself) and you're arguing against each other's form of arguing, rather than the actual argument. Insert misquote accusations, those "Dude, I'm sorry..." comments that one of you seems so fond of (bad memory for names, not sure who but I remember a lot of it on one of the marriage amendment threads), quotes that take up the majority of the message instead of responses, and ad hominem somewhere arong the way.
Seconding Nosy's comment, I think that both of you are good, respectable debaters, but somehow when you're in the same thread your forms degrade considerably.
Either one of you have the, uh, guts to move back to what you were debating about before all the irrelevant flak started showing up, without resorting to insults or the "bring it on"-type requests that have recently been favored (shouldn't that level of maturity be reserved for the president, anyway? )? Where you debate your opponent's points and not his spelling/improper use of a word/posting format?
***
On topic (somewhat), I believe I read around 9/11 that when Bush was told of the first plane it was presented as an accident, not an attack, and only when the second plane hit was he informed of it as an attack (if I understand, it is the seven minutes after the second that you are referencing, though. Sorry, it's been a week or two since I read the earlier pages of this thread). Don't know how accurate this is, but I recall it being described as such in the San Antonio Express-News. I haven't looked into it at all, so feel free to correct if this is false.

Replies to this message:
 Message 267 by Silent H, posted 08-01-2004 7:08 AM Morte 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