Now I think I fully understand the deviousness of the Alinskyites

[degsme]

You know, I think Jesus Christ is about the only person who hung out with thieves and prostitutes who could actually warrant the deconstruction of the Guilt by Association fallacy in the way you present it.

Guilt by association is a logical fallacy. In essence that's what Godwin's law and its corrolary about who loses is all about

By the way, I think Sun Tzu was fantastic! Alinsky was an ass.

right... because Sun Tzu was such a supporter of individual liberties....

 

[degsme]

and how bad yours sucks.

Cherry picking, definition of "constitutionist," non-representative statements, thread spamming with literally hundreds of posts containing nothing but noise, using your own definitions of words, imaginary poli-sci dictionaries, dishonest debating with "bait and switch" tactics and convenient memory lapses. . .

Yes, were talking about your credibility.

. . .and how bad it sucks.

Mind you, I'm not leveling these accusations directly AT you, merely at your statements. You don't suck. Your words do.

hmm really? more ad hominem... Without any actual support for it.

BTW I wonder if Dave thinks there is a distinction in the sort of ad hominem attack you just made

 

[888888]

Indeed.... there is an observalbe pattern but because none of them sat down to pen ad admission of it the left will always feel as though none of it rises to the level of proof.

Proof to the right is anything that is written or spoken that reaffirms their beliefs and once it is written or spoken it now becomes evidence it is true.

 

[gabriel]

how you gonna enforce that ultimatum son?

 

[Angel of Dearth]

Well, dad. . .

I was planning on doing this if he doesn't comply.

I'll need your help. Specifically, your trunk.

[video=youtube;A2y_LEbdEVE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A2y_LEbdEVE[/video]

 

[gabriel]

ill check back tommorow to see if anyone paid u any mind. meanwhile im gonna report your dad for molesting his kid

 

[Angel of Dearth]

ill check back tommorow to see if anyone paid u any mind. meanwhile im gonna report your dad for molesting his kid??

lol

 

[degsme]

ill check back tommorow to see if anyone paid u any mind. meanwhile im gonna report your dad for molesting his kid??

lol

notice how your "contributions" to this thread seems to have reduced participation? What was it that the missing thread was showing in its polling data?

 

[Yuri Zhivago]

ill check back tommorow to see if anyone paid u any mind. meanwhile im gonna report your dad for molesting his kid??

lol

if lying and bold deliberate distortions caused death would you put any charity in your will before your next post?

 

[Angel of Dearth]

In a court of law, the standard is "preponderance of evidence"

Only in civil court, not criminal. This is neither.

The more logical fallacies you resort to, the less persuasive your arguement.

I think now is a good time to ask the question that's been out there but nobody has voiced yet.

What fallacies have YOU resorted to?

Oh it matters. It's tu quoque but it matters. See, I've been making the case that a good portion of your "issues" deals with projecting your short comings onto others. It's kind of a living on going tu quoque with you. Every single challenge is met with distraction and bull: Cherry picking, defining "constitutionist," defining "socialism" etc.

IRP addresses the topic. You do NOT. You distract. You deploy red herrings like salmon deploy eggs.

Your reply to this?

Tu quoque and ad hominem.

. . .and something else you'll pull out of your crevice.

I know you'd like to go toe to toe with me on fallacies in a

for tat exchange. But nobody gives a damn about that. . .and you'd lose anyway just like you lost the cherry picking and definition exchanges.

It's an invitation to waste more time. No thanks.

 

[Angel of Dearth]

if someone is using a tactic that is older than Alinsky, calling that an "Alinsky" tactic then is the logical fallacy of Guilt By Association.

Not in the larger context. As I said, it takes more than just the use of a tactic to be an "Alinskyite."

 

[Angel of Dearth]

Why don't you create a poll that asks readers to gauge my credibility?

What could go wrong?

 

[Angel of Dearth]

Hey degs! Check out this poll!

You should really check it out and vote on it. Do it quick before it gets axed like yours did (for whatever reason).

I'm very interested in your input!

 

[Angel of Dearth]

New poll for you degs! Check it out right here!

You should really look into it and vote. Do it quick before it gets axed like yours did (for whatever reason--that's a real head scratcher).

I'm very interested in your input!

 

[Angel of Dearth]

Let's get right down to it! Check out this poll!

You should really check it out and vote on it. Do it quick before it gets axed like yours did (for whatever reason).

I'm very interested in your input!

 

[Angel of Dearth]

You sure it's due to MY contributions? Do I smell a fallacy? Hey! [snap!] I got an idea!

Check out this poll!

You should really check it out and vote on it. Do it quick before it gets axed like yours did (for whatever reason).

I'm very interested in your input!

 

[Angel of Dearth]

I think more people should weigh in on the subject. I'd like to hear what the rest of PJers think.

Check out this poll, degs!

You should really check it out and vote on it. Do it quick before it gets axed like yours did (for whatever reason).

I'm very interested in your input!

 

[Angel of Dearth]

Hey degs! Check out this poll!

You should really check it out and vote on it. Do it quick before it gets axed like yours did (for whatever reason).

I'm very interested in your input!

P.S. I reserve the right to completely disregard poll results at my discretion as any kind of basis for my near future posting style. Poll results may or may not influence my content and posting frequency.

 

[degsme]

I think more people should weigh in on the subject. I'd like to hear what the rest of PJers think.

Check out this poll, degs!

You should really check it out and vote on it. Do it quick before it gets axed like yours did (for whatever reason).

I'm very interested in your input!

Well as various PJers have commented elswhere AoD -they tend to avoid threads that have much of your presence because they feel you will spam them with invalid logic, made up definitions, ad hominem and selective facts.

 

[degsme]

You sure it's due to MY contributions? Do I smell a fallacy? Hey! [snap!] I got an idea!

Check out this poll!

You should really check it out and vote on it. Do it quick before it gets axed like yours did (for whatever reason).

I'm very interested in your input!

Um yeah - others have commented that they fear responding to threads with posts by you lest they get spammed by you....not my comment, its what others have said.