A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » General
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

funny things to do on a bike



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #411  
Old May 22nd 04, 06:52 AM
Tim McNamara
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Why they hate us, was ( funny things to do on a bike)

gwhite writes:

The question isn't who is admired, or how moral one is regarding
individual wealth (as the judgement goes). The question is about
designing a political system (laws and rights) with the least amount
of defects and is best in terms of tradeoffs. Only a fool claims
perfection. The question is regarding the total balance. On the
balance, it is better to have a few filthy rich folks -- moral or
not -- than to head down the road to serfdom: socialism.


Is it better to be the serf of Bill gates than the serf of a socialist
government? Unfreedom is unfreedom, no matter who is holding the
rains. Unfortunately, binary thinkers like yourself seem incapable of
seeing anything between libertarianism and socialism. Grow up and get
a politcal philosophy that works.
Ads
  #412  
Old May 22nd 04, 06:41 PM
Tim McNamara
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Why they hate us, was ( funny things to do on a bike)

Tim McNamara writes:

gwhite writes:

The question isn't who is admired, or how moral one is regarding
individual wealth (as the judgement goes). The question is about
designing a political system (laws and rights) with the least amount
of defects and is best in terms of tradeoffs. Only a fool claims
perfection. The question is regarding the total balance. On the
balance, it is better to have a few filthy rich folks -- moral or
not -- than to head down the road to serfdom: socialism.


Is it better to be the serf of Bill gates than the serf of a socialist
government? Unfreedom is unfreedom, no matter who is holding the
rains. Unfortunately, binary thinkers like yourself seem incapable of
seeing anything between libertarianism and socialism. Grow up and get
a politcal philosophy that works.


I apologize for my poor proofreading of this before I posted it.
Sheesh, how embarrassing.
  #413  
Old May 23rd 04, 03:30 PM
Mark Hickey
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Why they hate us, was ( funny things to do on a bike)

Keith Willoughby wrote:

Mark Hickey wrote:

Keith Willoughby wrote:

He didn't write a book - Ron Suskind did.

[...]

Again, you choose to believe a guy who is obviously upset at being
fired by GWB, and who made a lot of money writing a sensational book.

If you're going to argue, at least get your facts right.


It's a giant conspiracy. Why, I KNOW at least 70% of the people in
the US THINK he wrote that book. He must have said he did. I can't
find the quote, but it's because it was all a carefully crafted
deception.


It's OK to admit you were wrong sometimes, you know.


You mean, like admit maybe O'Neill never actually said he wrote the
book, even though somehow 70% (or more) of the US population somehow
believe he did?

You go first....

LOL.

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $695 ti frame
  #414  
Old May 23rd 04, 03:40 PM
Keith Willoughby
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Why they hate us, was ( funny things to do on a bike)

Mark Hickey wrote:

Keith Willoughby wrote:

Mark Hickey wrote:

Keith Willoughby wrote:

He didn't write a book - Ron Suskind did.

[...]

Again, you choose to believe a guy who is obviously upset at being
fired by GWB, and who made a lot of money writing a sensational book.

If you're going to argue, at least get your facts right.

It's a giant conspiracy. Why, I KNOW at least 70% of the people in
the US THINK he wrote that book. He must have said he did. I can't
find the quote, but it's because it was all a carefully crafted
deception.


It's OK to admit you were wrong sometimes, you know.


You mean, like admit maybe O'Neill never actually said he wrote the
book, even though somehow 70% (or more) of the US population somehow
believe he did?


I take it you pulled this 70% from your arse. Your biggest straw man
yet, I'd say, and that's some pretty hot competition you've got going.

You go first....


And do what? Waste my time arguing made up numbers?

OK. 84.7% of people on this newsgroup think you just sunk to a new low.

--
Keith Willoughby http://flat222.org/keith/
Train whistle blowing, makes a sleepy noise
  #415  
Old May 23rd 04, 04:02 PM
Mark Hickey
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Why they hate us, was ( funny things to do on a bike)

(Jonesy) wrote:

Mark Hickey wrote...
(Jonesy) wrote:

If you were to write a book about someone who fired you, why would I
believe it would be balanced?


See, here's what is a classic case of ad hominem commentary. By
questioning the character and honesty of a person, rather than the
actual content of his writings.


Bringing up the fact that he's writing about someone who fired him
(and by all accounts, a firing he's still quite upset about) is hardly
an "ad hominem" commentary. That should be obvious.

Resorting to ad hominem commentary is a sure sign that you have lost.
Someone said that - I can't remember who...


How about resorting to claiming an ad hominem when there isn't one?
O'Neill's book has been thoroughly discredited by those who were
there.

It's well known there was a contingency plan for Iraq

There's a difference between some plan on a shelf (invasion of Mexico,
for instance) and the private foreign policy focus of "we need to take
that ******* down." (A paraphrase of Bush's quote "**** Saddam.")


[ad hominem snipped]


Heh. This is your day for accusing me of ad hominem (this accusation
must be VERY weak if you can't even leave the original quote).

I notice you don't actually address my point.


O'Neill's account of that era doesn't coincide with any other member
of the cabinet.

Explicitly, no (I've said as much) Implicitly, well, you'd have to be
a total idiot, or have you head firmly up your ass not to see ANY
implication.


Heh heh heh. So point one out.


Already have. If you have a problem with the logic presented, you may
wish to bring up which part is not logical.

Show me the quote that forces people
to believe there is a direct connection.


Look up the definition of "implication," Mr. Strawman.


Heh heh heh. So you can't point out anything that Bush said that led
anyone to the conclusion, but remain firmly convinced that somehow he
managed to do it - with words that don't support the conclusion.

So which is he, a dupe or an evil genius who can say things and yet
convince the majority of those listening (or even those not listening
since more than 30% don't even bother to listen) that Iraq was
directly connected to 9/11?

It's not an ad hominem argument. It's a direct insult. They are two
different things.


Either indicates you're nasty when backed into a corner.


I agree that ad hominem commentary is a losing game. Insults are only
opinions, and have no bearing on the logic of the argument.

While you being an asshole is my opinion, you being pedantic is quite
obvious. Hingeing your whole case on what was or was not implied
means that you really don't have much of a case. And real world data
suggest that you are in a small minority in your belief.


I have no case ? - and you can't provide a single quote to prove your
point. Heh.


I have already proved my point logically. Maybe you just don't
understand what the conversation is about.


Let's look at your logic...

1) Bush never actually said anything to support the conclusion that
Iraq and 9/11 are directly connected.
2) 70% of the US population believe there is a direct connection
3) Therefore Bush is responsible for the belief

I don't consider that "logic". But you remain convinced so I think we
are wasting our time discussing it - don't you agree?

snip
The fact that near 70% of Americans at one time thought as
much proves this point.


I rest my case.

[snip Liebermann quote]

If two people, one from the Republican party, the other from the
Democratic party, say that the moon is made of green cheese, does that
make it true? Is it a fact then?


You really like strawmen.


This is called an "analogy." Look it up. Just because Bush and some
Democrat(s) think something doesn't make it true. Plenty of folks
used to think the world was the center of the universe, for example.


Your definition of a strawman doesn't seem to agree with the textbook.
That is, a hypothetical situation that is concocted in such a way to
be easy to destroy (like your "green cheese" example).

Do you really think that there's only one
Democrat who believes there was a connection between Iraq and Al
Qaeda?


This is the perfect example of a strawman. Oh, I get it, you think I
like them, so you keep constructing them. Not the sharpest knife in
the drawer, are you?


Shall we compare sharpness in this drawer? Asking whether you believe
only one Democrat believes there's a connection between Iraq and AQ
consitutes a strawman in your mind? Heh heh heh.

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $695 ti frame
  #417  
Old May 23rd 04, 04:11 PM
Mark Hickey
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Why they hate us, was ( funny things to do on a bike)

Frank Krygowski wrote:

Mark Hickey wrote:

Frank Krygowski wrote:


Oh, and in that confined space, how many thousands were killed?


Seven.


Seven thousand were killed?? I had no idea. I thought it was several
orders of magnitude lower.


C'mon... you know exactly what I meant.

Are you trying to say that sarin is NOT dangerous?


Well, prior to this, I thought that it was dangerous to those
immediately next to it, but difficult to deploy effectively over a wide
area.

I thought it was analogous to the gasoline in a fuel-air (or aerosol)
bomb. Those are the bombs in which a liquid like gasoline is first
dispersed, but not ignited, into a large cloud of droplets. A second
explosion detonates the cloud.


Bad analogy. Yes, it's difficult to get the fuel/air mixture just
right. But in the case of sarin, all you have to do is get a small
drop on someone's skin and they're probably going to die.

One drop of gasoline won't kill anyone.

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $695 ti frame
  #418  
Old May 23rd 04, 04:12 PM
Mark Hickey
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Why they hate us, was ( funny things to do on a bike)

Frank Krygowski wrote:

David Kerber wrote:


Oh, come on! You are intentionally mis-reading his post. He meant 7
people, not 7 thousand people, and you know it.


:-) It's good to clear that up. After all, I directly asked "How many
thousands?" and he directly answered "Seven."

But now there's a problem. Mark was using that incident to "prove" that
primitively-deliverd sarin is a weapon of mass destruction.

A small handgun can kill seven people. So can a club.

Is there anything that is _not_ a "weapon of mass destruction," by this
standard?


So Frank - just to make sure I understand.

You're saying sarin in the hands of terrorists is NOT a danger, right?

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $695 ti frame
  #419  
Old May 23rd 04, 04:15 PM
Mark Hickey
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Why they hate us, was ( funny things to do on a bike)

(JP) wrote:

Mark Hickey wrote in message . ..
(Jonesy) wrote:

You will notice Mark even defends the
spewings of Rush Limbaugh, *even after clearly admitting* that he
doesn't listen to Rush often. How on earth can you defend something
you have not heard yourself? Easy - Rush is conservative, so what he
says must be True(tm) and Right(tm). After all, conservatives are
never wrong, on anything, ever.


What I said is that he can be entertaining (and he can...) and that
(contrary to liberal opinion), having Rush state a fact doesn't change
the veracity of that fact.


Unfortunately, Rush often presents lies as facts, so the problem is
how to tell the difference, and the True Believers (affectionately
known as "Dittoheads") don't even bother to try. For instance, he was
one of the main sources of the lie that Ken Lay had stayed in the
Lincoln Bedroom during the Clinton administration. I personally saw
that lie stated as fact on Limbaugh's website.


I tripped over the history of that incident a while ago. I don't
recall the source of the confusion (as I recall, Ken Lay DID stay at
the White House, but not in the Lincoln bedroom). It was a great
"story" and made the rounds in pretty short order.

Still, if we discount any sources of "news" (op-ed or otherwise) that
has an occasional gaff, we're going to have to be rely on our own eyes
(and even they'll let us down occasionally).

FWIW... I look at Rush as mainly entertainment.

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $695 ti frame
  #420  
Old May 23rd 04, 11:04 PM
Mark Hickey
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Why they hate us, was ( funny things to do on a bike)

"G.T." wrote:

You are off your rocker. You believe they somehow escape property
taxes, income taxes, sales taxes,... etcetera?


Escape property taxes? No. Sales taxes? Of course not. Income taxes?
Absolutely.


Errrr, then why do the upper 5% pay 53.3% of the total income tax (on
32% of the income)? Doesn't sound like they really "escaped" to me.
Their percentage of the total tax burden has been steadily climbing
since it was in the mid-30 percentages back in the early 1980s.

(the above based on 2001 tax data - there is a wealth of statistical
information about actual income vs. tax trends there that surpise most
people who read it...)

http://www.taxfoundation.org/prtopincometable.html

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $695 ti frame
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
buying my first road bike Tanya Quinn General 28 June 17th 10 10:42 AM
True Cost of a Supermarket Bike Elisa Francesca Roselli General 41 January 25th 04 05:18 AM
Secure Bike Parking.? M. Barbee General 14 January 6th 04 03:00 AM
my new bike Marian Rosenberg General 5 October 19th 03 03:00 PM
Best Way to Travel with a Bike on an Airplane F1 General 5 August 14th 03 10:39 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:26 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.