[Vision2020] An Obama Dilemma
joekc at roadrunner.com
joekc at roadrunner.com
Sat Oct 4 11:43:32 PDT 2008
Well, he called you a name but that doesn't make it an ad hominem fallacy. The issue is
whether he used the insult to "support" his conclusion. And since he's just making a point,
not really giving an argument, there is no conclusion. It is more of a request that you stand by your words, as I understand it.
So, no, it is not an ad hominem fallacy.
--
Joe Campbell
---- No Weatherman <no.weatherman at gmail.com> wrote:
> 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
> > =======================================================
> >
>
> =======================================================
> 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
> =======================================================
More information about the Vision2020
mailing list