[Vision2020] An Obama Dilemma

Sat Oct 4 11:30:46 PDT 2008

Sunil,

What words have I not stood behind, or is this another ad hominem argument?

I call upon Dr. Campbell to decide.

On 10/4/08, Sunil Ramalingam <sunilramalingam at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>  If Big Windbag wants to persuade others and discuss issues, he should be
> able to stand behind his words.
>
> Sunil
>
> ________________________________
> From: idahovandal1 at live.com
> To: vision2020 at moscow.com
> Date: Sat, 4 Oct 2008 10:52:05 -0700
>
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] An Obama Dilemma
>
>  If you're really so concerned about persuading voters not to vote for
> Obama, you're wasting a lot of ammo doing so on a little listserve in a
> little town in Idaho.  Rest assured, it's far more likely that Angelina will
> leave Brad and the kids, move to Moscow to live with me and support me in
> the manner to which I'd like to become accustomed, before our state's 4
> electoral votes go to anyone other than a Republican.  Perhaps your efforts
> would be better spent on a similar forum in a state such as, say, Indiana,
> which I understand is very much in play.  Just a thought. And to shift
> gears, regarding Thursday's debate, this from Kathleen Parker, no screaming
> liberal.  Let me say for myself, while Ms. Palin may possibly endear herself
> to Joe Sixpack, she does nothing for Carl HalfaCase...Carl Westberg
> Jr.............".Well, darnit all, if that dadgum girl (wink, wink) didn't
> beat the tarnation out of Joe Biden. Maverick Sarah Palin fersure surpassed
> expectations and said everything under the sun, also. And Biden smiled and
> smiled.
>  Palin is a populist pro. She hit all the notes that resonate with non-elite
> Americans: family (Hi Mom and Dad!), "Can I call ya Joe?" personal
> responsibility, Wall Street greed, children with special needs. Her most
> effective technique was speaking directly to the American people and letting
> Joe know that's what she was gonna do, doggonit.
>  Stylistically, she used the language of the people to great effect. And,
> you know what? If you want to know what the American people care about, you
> can go to a kid's soccer game on Saturday and ask parents how they feel, and
> "I'll betcha you're going to hear some fear."
>  I'll have to go to the transcript to figure out what Palin actually said
> and try to figure out whose facts were right. But there's no question: She
> won the debate on popularity. She did her homework, studied hard, and
> delivered with spunk. Still, I had the uneasy feeling throughout that I was
> witnessing a data dump from a very appealing droid. Even the winks and jaw
> juts seemed slightly programmed. And the question remains: Is she ready to
> be president should the need arise?"
>  By Kathleen Parker |  October 3, 2008
>
> > Date: Sat, 4 Oct 2008 06:39:09 -1000
> > From: no.weatherman at gmail.com
> > To: vision2020 at moscow.com
> > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] An Obama Dilemma
> >
> > "This is really a silly game. Below is just another bad argument. Some
> > of your opinions are facts and some not and it is doubtful that you
> > are the best judge about which is which."
> >
> > I noted your fallacies and you call it "silly" and "another bad
> > argument." I wonder what the technical name for that one is.
> >
> > "Also, why should I answer your questions if you don't answer mine?
> > That's not fair."
> >
> > I caught you equivocating, or having it both ways, with the word
> > "fact" and when I called you on it, you ignored my question and
> > proceeded to ask me a string of loaded questions. If this is not true,
> > please show me where I'm wrong. Otherwise, don't complain about "fair"
> > to me.
> >
> > "And why are you so upset about this? If you are not either a critic
> > of Christ Church or affiliated with Christ Church, why would it bother
> > you that someone thought that you were?"
> >
> > I am not the least bit upset, I am not bothered at all, and you cannot
> > produce any evidence to the contrary. However, I can produce several
> > posts written by you, Ms. Mix, Ms. Lund, and Mr. Hanson where you four
> > have been extremely upset and bothered. You are projecting your traits
> > on me.
> >
> > "I must say if you are trying to prove that you're not, you are doing
> > a very bad job. Not nearly as bad as your case against Obama but still
> > pretty bad. And it is silly indeed since you could prove your point
> > easily by using your real name, or meeting me for lunch later today.
> > I'll treat! Of course, if you can't since you're, say, out of the
> > country, that would explain a lot!"
> >
> > I am in the country and I sincerely appreciate the offer but I'll take
> > a rain check. Now, what fallacy, if any, are you committing when you
> > infer a false conclusion from my answer?
> >
> > "Anyway, if you won't use your name or meet me for lunch, I'll have to
> > go back to trying to ignore you. Not that I'm very good at it but I'll
> > try to be better!"
> >
> > You're very good at misquoting me and misrepresenting me, and you're
> > even better at evading responsibility for your dishonest statements.
> > But I'm struggling with all those posts that you wrote insisting that
> > you never read a word I wrote, yet, now, suddenly and miraculously,
> > you have the uncanny ability as a trained logician to describe the
> > previously and until-now ignored posts as full of "fallacy after
> > fallacy."
> >
> > Rather than ignoring me, I would appreciate it if you actually tried
> > to engage me — or better yet, engage my one single point that has thus
> > far gone unnoticed by the handful of extremely vocal Obama supporters
> > on this list.
> >
> > Barrack Hussein Obama is 47 years old but 20 of his years are a
> > complete mystery to America. In the modern history of the US the press
> > has never given any candidate such a pass as they have given Obama,
> > and yet none of the Obama supporters on this list appear the least bit
> > bothered by these facts.
> >
> > Since I originally engaged you, I have had one question in mind: How
> > do you account for this, Dr. Campbell?
> >
> >
> > On 10/4/08, joekc at roadrunner.com <joekc at roadrunner.com> wrote:
> > > This is really a silly game. Below is just another bad argument. Some of
> your opinions are facts
> > > and some not and it is doubtful that you are the best judge about which
> is which.
> > >
> > > Also, why should I answer your questions if you don't answer mine?
> That's not fair.
> > >
> > > And why are you so upset about this? If you are not either a critic of
> Christ Church or
> > > affiliated with Christ Church, why would it bother you that someone
> thought that you were?
> > >
> > > I must say if you are trying to prove that you're not, you are doing a
> very bad job. Not nearly as
> > > bad as your case against Obama but still pretty bad. And it is silly
> indeed since you could prove
> > > your point easily by using your real name, or meeting me for lunch later
> today. I'll treat!
> > > Of course, if you can't since you're, say, out of the country, that
> would explain a lot!
> > >
> > > Anyway, if you won't use your name or meet me for lunch, I'll have to go
> back to trying to ignore
> > > you. Not that I'm very good at it but I'll try to be better!
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Joe Campbell
> > >
> > > ---- No Weatherman <no.weatherman at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > I read your words very carefully, because you concluded by jumping
> > > > from "as far as I can tell" to "isn't this FACT telling?"
> > > >
> > > > As far as I can tell you concluded by calling it a "fact." Is my
> > > > reasoned opinion wrong, good Doctor?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 10/4/08, joekc at roadrunner.com <joekc at roadrunner.com> wrote:
> > > > > I said as far as I can tell, it is a reflection of my own reasoned
> opinion. And I said anonymous
> > > > > posters are either supporters or critics. Please read my words more
> carefully.
> > > > >
> > > > > And that conclusion follows with a good deal more certainty than any
> of your conclusions about
> > > > > Obama, which are all -- everyone of them -- based on fallacies.
> > > > >
> > > > > What reason is there for your curious double-standard, that I need
> to prove my claims yet you can
> > > > > make any reckless statement you want without a hint of real support?
> > > > >
> > > > > And why not deny the allegation if you thought I made it and it is
> false. You are curious indeed!
> > > > >
> > > > > And as others have asked time and time again, what possible reason
> is there for you to post
> > > > > anonymously if you are not trying to hide some affiliation? Use your
> real name and I'll be done.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Joe Campbell
> > > > >
> > > > > ---- No Weatherman <no.weatherman at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > AHA!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What evidence can Dr. Campbell produce to show that I am either a
> folk
> > > > > > of Christ Church or a critic of Christ Church?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Some of you would do well to answer this question and do some
> self-examination.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 10/4/08, joekc at roadrunner.com <joekc at roadrunner.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > What evidence is there that the five noted by Gary below are
> "left wing"? In fact, what they all
> > > > > > > have in common is that they were critics of Christ Church. That
> is it.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > So the anonymous posts, as far as I can tell, are either from
> folks at Christ Church or from
> > > > > > > critics of Christ Church. Does anyone have a counterexample to
> this and isn't this fact telling?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Joe Campbell
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ---- "g. crabtree" <jampot at roadrunner.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I believe that Rodger means that the names were brought up
> (listed) by
> > > > > > > > myself and someone else as examples of anonymous posters. Not
> that those
> > > > > > > > vision members were posting currently.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > g
> > > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > > > From: "Craine Kit" <kcraine at verizon.net>
> > > > > > > > To: "Chasuk" <chasuk at gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > Cc: <vision2020 at moscow.com>
> > > > > > > > Sent: Friday, October 03, 2008 8:24 PM
> > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] An Obama Dilemma
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >I didn't get any postings by either "heridotus" or "Ford
> yesterday.
> > > > > > > > > I haven't seen anything from either in quite some while. Am
> I
> > > > > > > > > missing something?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Kit Craine
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Oct 3, 2008, at 12:36 PM, Chasuk wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >> On Fri, Oct 3, 2008 at 12:31, lfalen <lfalen at turbonet.com>
> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >>> There were about 5 listed in posts yesterday by Gary and
> someone
> > > > > > > > >>> else. Two of them were Heridotus and Ford.
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> Ah. I would consider J.Ford more a harmless crank than a
> real
> > > > > > > > >> "left-winger." The others I am unfamiliar with.
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >>
> =======================================================
> > > > > > > > >> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> > > > > > > > >> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> > > > > > > > >> http://www.fsr.net
> > > > > > > > >> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> > > > > > > > >>
> =======================================================
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> =======================================================
> > > > > > > > > List services made available by First Step Internet,
> > > > > > > > > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> > > > > > > > > http://www.fsr.net
> > > > > > > > > mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> > > > > > > > >
> =======================================================
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> =======================================================
> > > > > > > > List services made available by First Step Internet,
> > > > > > > > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> > > > > > > > http://www.fsr.net
> > > > > > > > mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> > > > > > > >
> =======================================================
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> =======================================================
> > > > > > > List services made available by First Step Internet,
> > > > > > > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> > > > > > > http://www.fsr.net
> > > > > > > mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> > > > > > >
> =======================================================
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> =======================================================
> > > > > > List services made available by First Step Internet,
> > > > > > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> > > > > > http://www.fsr.net
> > > > > > mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> > > > > >
> =======================================================
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> =======================================================
> > > > List services made available by First Step Internet,
> > > > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> > > > http://www.fsr.net
> > > > mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> > > >
> =======================================================
> > >
> > >
> >
> > =======================================================
> > List services made available by First Step Internet,
> > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> > http://www.fsr.net
> > mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> > =======================================================
>
> ________________________________
> Get more out of the Web. Learn 10 hidden secrets of Windows Live. Learn Now
> =======================================================
>   List services made available by First Step Internet,
>   serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>                http://www.fsr.net
>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>  =======================================================
>