Trump Restates His Immigration policy

Anyone can post and discuss breaking news that interest them (please respect posting guidelines and be sure to reference properly).
Forum rules
Please be sure to check our forum's Rules & Guidelines

Re: Trump Restates His Immigration policy

Postby toucana on January 23rd, 2018, 2:53 pm 

BadgerJelly, have you ever visited the USA or watched any of the network and cable news shows they screen over there ?

I have done so for years, and also watch the online versions of their news-feeds when back here in UK.

Out of of long habit, I normally put a 100% discount on anything uttered by Sean Hannity, Ann Coulter, Jeanine Piro, or any of the other neo-con commentators that wander across the screens of Fox News.

Life is too short to spend gold-panning through the vast torrents of racist and neo-fascist sewage they produce on a nightly basis in the vain hope of finding some tiny glinting nugget of common sense or valid talking points. It just isn't worth it.

I'm not even sure what point you think that you (or Ann Coulter ?) are making. That it doesn't matter that Donald Trump said shithole countries because it wasn't said in public? Or because he had his fingers crossed or something ?

To be honest I don't much care. In previous discussions you have openly admitted that you didn't really believe anything you had been saying, and had only been playing the role of an Advocatus Diaboli. So are you being sincere now, or are you simply adopting a contrarian position for rhetorical effect ?
User avatar
toucana
Chatroom Operator
 
Posts: 1257
Joined: 20 Sep 2006
Location: Bristol UK
Blog: View Blog (8)


Re: Trump Restates His Immigration policy

Postby SciameriKen on January 23rd, 2018, 3:01 pm 

RJG » Tue Jan 23, 2018 6:48 pm wrote:
SciameriKen wrote:Zet is calling the content and the method of message delivery stupid, short-sighted, and idiotic and that this resonates with his fan base - and it does.

...and this somehow makes it "less offensive" to Trump supporters???

If so, then I'm glad you take no offense with my saying that hypocritical-ism resonates with Trump haters? (... which it does!).


SciKen, you can't have it both ways. You can never logically 'justify' your own offending/hating while 'condemning' those that offend/hate. Hating the haters, and offending the offenders is pure hypocritical BS. No truth comes from this.


I believe the word you are looking for is hypocrisy.

If content obfuscates truth, is short-sighted, idiotic in its justification (i.e. cherry picking) or complete lack there-of, then I think this qualifies as stupid content. If Trump supporters are actively sharing this on social media than I think that qualifies as "resonating" with that audience. You are free to draw your own conclusions about what it says about an individual that resonates with stupid content.

Hypocrisy is crying about Oprah hanging out with Weinstein while simultaneously supporting Trump with his history of treatment of women.

What you are complaining about as hypocrisy is actually a description of why it is "those" that offend/hate do so.
User avatar
SciameriKen
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 1419
Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Location: Buffalo, NY


Re: Trump Restates His Immigration policy

Postby Lomax on January 23rd, 2018, 3:03 pm 

SciameriKen » January 23rd, 2018, 6:57 pm wrote:This is noble but not so easily done. There is team red and there is team blue - there is no room for a third team. As soon as you argue against one team it by default means you are on the other team. I get hit with this from both sides, just the nature of the world. Just to play Devil's advocate - why shouldn't I make these assumptions? It will most likely save me a lot of time from listening to inane comments!

Because it was the preferred debating method of Stalin, so when you adopt it, you associate yourself with him by your own logic.

We've all heard the saying about broken clocks. If you all don't think Coulter is good enough to be worth your time then don't waste it on her. By the same metric you shouldn't be writing long-winded posts about why you don't want to follow Badger's link. It depicts lower motives for making the ad hominem response.
User avatar
Lomax
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 3664
Joined: 01 Jul 2010
Location: Nuneaton, UK


Re: Trump Restates His Immigration policy

Postby RJG on January 23rd, 2018, 3:24 pm 

SciameriKen wrote:I believe the word you are looking for is hypocrisy.

No, not so. Please don't spin it into what you want it to mean.

Hypocritical-ism is the 'belief' (the "ism") in hypocrisy, as a justifiable means to commit stupid (illogical/contradictory) actions, as many Trump haters (liberals in particular) do.

Again I am glad you take no offense to my blunt (but truthful) comments.
User avatar
RJG
Banned User
 
Posts: 963
Joined: 22 Mar 2012


Re: Trump Restates His Immigration policy

Postby SciameriKen on January 23rd, 2018, 3:49 pm 

RJG » Tue Jan 23, 2018 7:24 pm wrote:
SciameriKen wrote:I believe the word you are looking for is hypocrisy.

No, not so. Please don't spin it into what you want it to mean.

Hypocritical-ism is the 'belief' (the "ism") in hypocrisy, as a justifiable means to commit stupid (illogical/contradictory) actions, as many Trump haters (liberals in particular) do.

Again I am glad you take no offense to my blunt (but truthful) comments.


Well I take no offense because you are breaking rule #1 of badgerism - assuming I am liberal based on my comments. :)
User avatar
SciameriKen
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 1419
Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Location: Buffalo, NY


Re: Trump Restates His Immigration policy

Postby SciameriKen on January 23rd, 2018, 3:54 pm 

Lomax » Tue Jan 23, 2018 7:03 pm wrote:
SciameriKen » January 23rd, 2018, 6:57 pm wrote:This is noble but not so easily done. There is team red and there is team blue - there is no room for a third team. As soon as you argue against one team it by default means you are on the other team. I get hit with this from both sides, just the nature of the world. Just to play Devil's advocate - why shouldn't I make these assumptions? It will most likely save me a lot of time from listening to inane comments!

Because it was the preferred debating method of Stalin, so when you adopt it, you associate yourself with him by your own logic.

We've all heard the saying about broken clocks. If you all don't think Coulter is good enough to be worth your time then don't waste it on her. By the same metric you shouldn't be writing long-winded posts about why you don't want to follow Badger's link. It depicts lower motives for making the ad hominem response.


I assume the second paragraph does not pertain to my post?

With regards to the first, yes I certainly don't want to be on team Stalin - so how do convince all the team red and blues out there of the same thing? Unless the team Stalin thing is an over generalization that doesn't apply. I'm gonna have to ask you to do better.
User avatar
SciameriKen
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 1419
Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Location: Buffalo, NY


Re: Trump Restates His Immigration policy

Postby toucana on January 23rd, 2018, 4:05 pm 

Hypocrite is the classical Greek word for an ‘actor’ - ΄υποκριτεσ

From ΄υπο meaning ‘under’, and κριτεσ meaning a ‘judge’.

Drama in the classical Greek period was a competitive sport that was carried out in front of a panel of judges who awarded prizes to the best plays.

Hypocrites were actors playing a role ‘in front of the judges’ - (as well as the public).
User avatar
toucana
Chatroom Operator
 
Posts: 1257
Joined: 20 Sep 2006
Location: Bristol UK
Blog: View Blog (8)


Re: Trump Restates His Immigration policy

Postby Braininvat on January 23rd, 2018, 4:21 pm 

Just curious - isn't dismissing strong disagreement with Trump's policies as "Trump hater" itself an ad hominem? Isn't it the facts that matter and not your speculation as to someone's degree of loathing? If I do happen to find Trump's personality loathesome, that doesn't mean that he is actually a competent president or that I'm suffering some pathology that causes me to erroneously discern flaws in his governance or untrue statements that he has made. Sure, a bias could cause a wrong perception, but then we have recourse to examining the public record and whatever facts may be adduced....and it's that which should concern us.

I don't read Ann Coulter because she doesn't deal in facts, so it seems pointless to spend my limited free time trying to pan for gold there, as Toucans put it. I don't personally know her, I don't hate her, I just don't care.
User avatar
Braininvat
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 6851
Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Black Hills


Re: Trump Restates His Immigration policy

Postby RJG on January 23rd, 2018, 4:53 pm 

SciameriKen wrote:Well I take no offense because you are breaking rule #1 of badgerism - assuming I am liberal based on my comments. :)

Well, it wasn’t “badgerism” per se, as it was my attempt/hope that you would take the ‘bait’, i.e. to be ‘offended’ at my coarse remarks, in hopes of proving your hypocritical-ism/liberalism, …but you (somehow?) did not bite; you did not take the bait, you are a good man, ...so I suspect that you are 'not' a liberal, or are maybe one of those rare (non-hypocritical) ones. :-)

SciKen 1 – RJG 0 --- Thanks for the good first-time conversation.


Braininvat wrote:Just curious - isn't dismissing strong disagreement with Trump's policies as "Trump hater" itself an ad hominem?

A “Trump hater” is one who hates Trump.
User avatar
RJG
Banned User
 
Posts: 963
Joined: 22 Mar 2012


Re: Trump Restates His Immigration policy

Postby Lomax on January 23rd, 2018, 5:09 pm 

SciameriKen » January 23rd, 2018, 8:54 pm wrote:I assume the second paragraph does not pertain to my post?

With regards to the first, yes I certainly don't want to be on team Stalin - so how do convince all the team red and blues out there of the same thing? Unless the team Stalin thing is an over generalization that doesn't apply. I'm gonna have to ask you to do better.

Second paragraph was aimed at a wider audience. First paragraph was not an over-generalisation. I'll spell it out. Badgerjelly asks if an argument loses legitimacy based on who says it. Those who haven't bothered to engage with Coulter's argument because they don't like her "side" (see Toucana's response, and your demonic advocacy alter-ego) are inadvertently siding with Stalin on the matter of whether this is a good enough substitute for actually debating what's she's saying. Given the problems with Team Stalin and his own commitment to untruth, it would simply follow from your own premises that your arguments are discredited by your choice of "side". That is, unless somebody here wants to play "Stalin's Advocate".
User avatar
Lomax
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 3664
Joined: 01 Jul 2010
Location: Nuneaton, UK


Re: Trump Restates His Immigration policy

Postby SciameriKen on January 23rd, 2018, 6:36 pm 

Lomax » Tue Jan 23, 2018 9:09 pm wrote:
SciameriKen » January 23rd, 2018, 8:54 pm wrote:I assume the second paragraph does not pertain to my post?

With regards to the first, yes I certainly don't want to be on team Stalin - so how do convince all the team red and blues out there of the same thing? Unless the team Stalin thing is an over generalization that doesn't apply. I'm gonna have to ask you to do better.

Second paragraph was aimed at a wider audience. First paragraph was not an over-generalisation. I'll spell it out. Badgerjelly asks if an argument loses legitimacy based on who says it. Those who haven't bothered to engage with Coulter's argument because they don't like her "side" (see Toucana's response, and your demonic advocacy alter-ego) are inadvertently siding with Stalin on the matter of whether this is a good enough substitute for actually debating what's she's saying. Given the problems with Team Stalin and his own commitment to untruth, it would simply follow from your own premises that your arguments are discredited by your choice of "side". That is, unless somebody here wants to play "Stalin's Advocate".



I'm not sure if that at all clarifies - but if it means I do not have to listen to Ann Coulter then I say Yes to it.
User avatar
SciameriKen
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 1419
Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Location: Buffalo, NY


Re: Trump Restates His Immigration policy

Postby BadgerJelly on January 24th, 2018, 3:40 am 

I think it is a big problem if you assume there are two sides and that you have to pick one. Sorry, that is an understatement! It is an overwhelming monumental, monolithic, gargantuan blind sightedness to think there are two sides and that you should pick one so you can fight against the other rather than listen to them and find a resolution and BELIEVE that a partial resolution can be found.

Biv -

What were the facts that Ann Coulter said in the clip I posted you believe to be false? I am VERY curious about this. Haiti has the highest rate of HIV in the Caribbean. She is certainly dishonest/biased in her view of people voting to curb "immigration." It is undoubtedly on the minds of the general public though (in the UK it is always an issue being contended with.)

The general point is not wanting people from impoverished and deeply corrupt countries that are falling apart to be welcomed with open arms. I would argue against Coulter when it comes to war zones though, and I think it is in human interest to help provide for people suffering in war zones, and if the people seeking a safe haven are screened well enough and (more importantly) given the resources to settle in a new country and given the means to adjust to a possibly deeply foreign culture and way of life - of course this is all just scratching the surface, but Coulter mentioned at the end something along the lines of keeping the US strong (and yes, there is plenty to say about whether or not Trump is doing that! This is, however, one way of managing immigration and I think the tensions in the US are going to be big enough, soon enough, without people using what is said in private meetings to create a media shit storm.)

There is some misrepresentation for sure, but if you watch carefully it is not a one-way stream of opinion and purposeful misrepresentation (true, Good Morning is pretty much a program that sets out to be provocative, and Ann Coulter has openly admitted to being a provocateur because she feels the need to raise difficult questions; Katie Hopkins does the same and there is some value in what she says if not in the manner she says it.)

Lomax -

It is not just that. It is the conflation of speech from one person to another that I find most worrying. I have openly stated in the past that I am not the biggest fan of the US, but that doesn't mean I have the same opinion of people from the US (of which I have met many who are quite hostile to their fellow Americans in some cases.)

I am now considered a racist for saying I have issues with the US? I think given the current rhetoric I will be looked upon in a different manner because of sensationalist nonsense.

note: I never imagined I'd be saying anything in favour of Katie Hopkins! haha! I still think about this everytimee I hear her name: DAMN! Cannot find the sketch :(
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5360
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


Re: Trump Restates His Immigration policy

Postby BadgerJelly on January 24th, 2018, 4:22 am 

Sci -

This is noble but not so easily done.


I'll leave you to figure that out! ;) In the UK my first vote was for the Lib Dems, simply to open up a more viable third option in the future.

Is the easy option the optimal option? Usually not in my limited life experience.
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5360
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


Re: Trump Restates His Immigration policy

Postby SciameriKen on January 24th, 2018, 10:34 am 

SciameriKen » Tue Jan 23, 2018 10:36 pm wrote:
Lomax » Tue Jan 23, 2018 9:09 pm wrote:
SciameriKen » January 23rd, 2018, 8:54 pm wrote:I assume the second paragraph does not pertain to my post?

With regards to the first, yes I certainly don't want to be on team Stalin - so how do convince all the team red and blues out there of the same thing? Unless the team Stalin thing is an over generalization that doesn't apply. I'm gonna have to ask you to do better.

Second paragraph was aimed at a wider audience. First paragraph was not an over-generalisation. I'll spell it out. Badgerjelly asks if an argument loses legitimacy based on who says it. Those who haven't bothered to engage with Coulter's argument because they don't like her "side" (see Toucana's response, and your demonic advocacy alter-ego) are inadvertently siding with Stalin on the matter of whether this is a good enough substitute for actually debating what's she's saying. Given the problems with Team Stalin and his own commitment to untruth, it would simply follow from your own premises that your arguments are discredited by your choice of "side". That is, unless somebody here wants to play "Stalin's Advocate".



I'm not sure if that at all clarifies - but if it means I do not have to listen to Ann Coulter then I say Yes to it.



If I could take this a different direction - The issue I have with your argument is that it is ad hitlerism. You raise Stalin because he is a murderous bastard therefor your logic would flow that anything Stalin does and that we also do would also make us murderous bastards. But quite the opposite, by not watching Ann Coulter I have less desire to kill someone. The logic fails because there is no connection between the fact that Stalin does not listen to certain voices and him killing people. Trump doesn't listen to "fake media" and he isn't killing millions of people (yet.. hmm maybe we should watch that one).

A second point - its not that my demonic advocates disregarding content from people that are not liked - rather, its disregarding content from known propagandist. I think that is an important distinction.
User avatar
SciameriKen
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 1419
Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Location: Buffalo, NY


Re: Trump Restates His Immigration policy

Postby Braininvat on January 24th, 2018, 11:56 am 

....second point - its not that my demonic advocates disregarding content from people that are not liked - rather, its disregarding content from known propagandist. I think that is an important distinction.


Ken, this is what I was getting at earlier.

One can make a rational assessment that Coulter is a partisan hack based on the many partisan hatchet jobs she has performed in the past. Her selection bias is obvious and life is short. No one calls me a Stalin for also ignoring Alex Jones and Rush Limbaugh.

If the National Review prints a thoughtful piece on immigration woes, I will read it, because they feature conservative thought not propaganda. They aren't a State newspaper that only runs Trump surrogates.
User avatar
Braininvat
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 6851
Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Black Hills


Re: Trump Restates His Immigration policy

Postby SciameriKen on January 24th, 2018, 1:55 pm 

BadgerJelly » Wed Jan 24, 2018 7:40 am wrote:What were the facts that Ann Coulter said in the clip I posted you believe to be false? I am VERY curious about this. Haiti has the highest rate of HIV in the Caribbean. She is certainly dishonest/biased in her view of people voting to curb "immigration." It is undoubtedly on the minds of the general public though (in the UK it is always an issue being contended with.)


I think there is a widely held misconception that propaganda is all lies. The reality is most propaganda provides just enough truth to elicit the desired response. Ann Coulter is a propagandist. She will say or take any position that advances the ideals of conservatism, which often aligns with defending Trump by any means possible. This being said, I watched the video and to your credit Ann brings up a strong point at the end, granted its a very common question in terms of how do we choose who gets to immigrate - should the US take in the broken people of the world - in a sense why is that our job?

A plaque that lies beneath the statue of liberty reads: “Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

This is not US government policy, it is however, how most American's envision our immigration policy to be. This likely is rooted in the fact many of the immigrants that have come to this country in the past fit this description quite well, and its this diversity that has contributed to the strength this country has.

I do not agree that Trump's description of "Shithole" countries was driven entirely by racism - I would not be surprised if Trump has racist tendencies, but I felt Trump's point was more about, if you have to take Immigrants then you should take the best of the best.

I personally do not agree with this notion. I feel great people come from all walks of life and in terms of survival and building a strong country, diversity is a friend.

However- watching that video was a waste of time.
User avatar
SciameriKen
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 1419
Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Location: Buffalo, NY


Re: Trump Restates His Immigration policy

Postby BadgerJelly on January 24th, 2018, 7:58 pm 

Sci -

You seem like a sensible type. Being someone who is an admirer of Jung I know well enough that everyone has some form of cloaked prejudice. We've all said and done things we're ashamed of, and even hold opinions and views that distrub us.

I think it's better to confront them, talk about them, and come to understand how to cope with our "shadow." The consequences of not doing so often lead to the greatest human horrors. The outrage we feel about people's words and actions is really the simple horror of understanding that we, ourselves, are just as capable of holding such opinions and following them through - understandably many people don't want to accept this; sadly not accepting this means you're most likely to become that you refuse to face.
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5360
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


Re: Trump Restates His Immigration policy

Postby SciameriKen on January 25th, 2018, 12:40 am 

BadgerJelly » Wed Jan 24, 2018 11:58 pm wrote:Sci -

You seem like a sensible type. Being someone who is an admirer of Jung I know well enough that everyone has some form of cloaked prejudice. We've all said and done things we're ashamed of, and even hold opinions and views that distrub us.

I think it's better to confront them, talk about them, and come to understand how to cope with our "shadow." The consequences of not doing so often lead to the greatest human horrors. The outrage we feel about people's words and actions is really the simple horror of understanding that we, ourselves, are just as capable of holding such opinions and following them through - understandably many people don't want to accept this; sadly not accepting this means you're most likely to become that you refuse to face.



Are you saying I can't prejudge Trumpers?
User avatar
SciameriKen
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 1419
Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Location: Buffalo, NY


Re: Trump Restates His Immigration policy

Postby BadgerJelly on January 25th, 2018, 1:06 am 

I said what I was saying. It appears my use of "seem" was, in hindsight, a very well placed word.

I'll end on this in regards to the problem of immigration that has run through the ages:

Grant them removed, and grant that this your noise
Hath chid down all the majesty of England;
Imagine that you see the wretched strangers,
Their babies at their backs and their poor luggage,
Plodding to the ports and coasts for transportation,
And that you sit as kings in your desires,
Authority quite silent by your brawl,
And you in ruff of your opinions clothed;
What had you got? I’ll tell you: you had taught
How insolence and strong hand should prevail,
How order should be quelled; and by this pattern
Not one of you should live an aged man,
For other ruffians, as their fancies wrought,
With self same hand, self reasons, and self right,
Would shark on you, and men like ravenous fishes
Would feed on one another….
Say now the king
Should so much come too short of your great trespass
As but to banish you, whether would you go?
What country, by the nature of your error,
Should give you harbour? go you to France or Flanders,
To any German province, to Spain or Portugal,
Nay, any where that not adheres to England,
Why, you must needs be strangers: would you be pleased
To find a nation of such barbarous temper,
That, breaking out in hideous violence,
Would not afford you an abode on earth,
Whet their detested knives against your throats,
Spurn you like dogs, and like as if that God
Owed not nor made not you, nor that the claimants
Were not all appropriate to your comforts,
But chartered unto them, what would you think
To be thus used? this is the strangers case;
And this your mountainish inhumanity.

William Shakespeare - The Book of Sir Thomas More
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5360
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


Re: Trump Restates His Immigration policy

Postby Lomax on January 25th, 2018, 8:37 am 

SciameriKen » January 24th, 2018, 3:34 pm wrote:If I could take this a different direction - The issue I have with your argument is that it is ad hitlerism. You raise Stalin because he is a murderous bastard therefor your logic would flow that anything Stalin does and that we also do would also make us murderous bastards.

Ken, I'm sorry it passed you by that that was exactly my point. Take Toucana's (since (s)he did not claim to be playing Devil's Advocate) response to Badger, when Badger linked us to Ann Coulter, and tried to pre-empt all this tedium by acknowledging that Coulter is not likely to be popular here. Rather than engage with Coulter's points, Toucana gave us a long post discrediting her - pointing out, among other things, that Trump likes her. Now he (and you, in your Advocacy disguise) cannot have it both ways - if Coulter having something in common with Trump means that we need not engage her arguments, then your having something in common with Stalin (ie. this tendency to ad hominem by association) means that we need not engage yours, or Toucana's. Obviously I don't believe political debate should work that way. Which is my whole point. I don't know how to make it clearer.
User avatar
Lomax
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 3664
Joined: 01 Jul 2010
Location: Nuneaton, UK


Re: Trump Restates His Immigration policy

Postby toucana on January 25th, 2018, 9:25 am 

Why should I waste two seconds of my time examining the thoughts of a woman who thinks that

“There is burgeoning evidence that excess radiation operates as a sort of cancer vaccine.”

There is actually video of her saying this live on Fox News US network in 2011 at the time of the Fukushima disaster (it's at 1:10 elapsed on the WP video compilation I supplied a link to earlier).

You wonder if she subsequently went on a good-will visit to Japan afterwards to explain the 'burgeoning benefits of excessive radiation" to the survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, as well as the victims of the Fukushima reactor leak which was a category 7 nuclear disaster incidentally (an MCA or 'maximum credible accident').

Some political 'commentators' are so malevolently ignorant and comprehensively deranged that they should never be given any respect or attention in any civilised universe of discourse IMHO.

Most of these people seem to work for Fox News, and Ann Coulter is definitely one of the 'crême de la crême' - rich and thick.
User avatar
toucana
Chatroom Operator
 
Posts: 1257
Joined: 20 Sep 2006
Location: Bristol UK
Blog: View Blog (8)


Re: Trump Restates His Immigration policy

Postby Lomax on January 25th, 2018, 10:16 am 

If you wrote that post in fewer than two seconds, Toucana, I will be impressed.
User avatar
Lomax
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 3664
Joined: 01 Jul 2010
Location: Nuneaton, UK


Re: Trump Restates His Immigration policy

Postby SciameriKen on January 25th, 2018, 10:59 am 

Lomax » Thu Jan 25, 2018 12:37 pm wrote:
SciameriKen » January 24th, 2018, 3:34 pm wrote:If I could take this a different direction - The issue I have with your argument is that it is ad hitlerism. You raise Stalin because he is a murderous bastard therefor your logic would flow that anything Stalin does and that we also do would also make us murderous bastards.

Ken, I'm sorry it passed you by that that was exactly my point. Take Toucana's (since (s)he did not claim to be playing Devil's Advocate) response to Badger, when Badger linked us to Ann Coulter, and tried to pre-empt all this tedium by acknowledging that Coulter is not likely to be popular here. Rather than engage with Coulter's points, Toucana gave us a long post discrediting her - pointing out, among other things, that Trump likes her. Now he (and you, in your Advocacy disguise) cannot have it both ways - if Coulter having something in common with Trump means that we need not engage her arguments, then your having something in common with Stalin (ie. this tendency to ad hominem by association) means that we need not engage yours, or Toucana's. Obviously I don't believe political debate should work that way. Which is my whole point. I don't know how to make it clearer.


First of all there is no need to condescend my advocate of demonism. If what you have written here pertains solely to what you have quoted of mine then you are ignoring the half of my post that I argue against the point we both made. As a side point, I bolded that one section because you are saying you will engage in the very activity you are admonishing Toucana and my Advocate for :D

If my advocate may continue and expand on what I've written above - the point you and badger is raising is ideal but I believe relies upon an assumption, that each party of a debate seeks the truth. This implies each party is willing to consider all evidence, debate its merits, and arrive at an agreed upon conclusion. This assumption is not true for American politics (and probably most countries). An individual who argues from the standpoint of propaganda argues from the conclusion first and restricts/includes evidence into the debate as they see fit. This is why my devil friend and Toucana advocate such people should not be allowed into a debate and the justification is a track record of such behavior.
User avatar
SciameriKen
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 1419
Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Location: Buffalo, NY


Re: Trump Restates His Immigration policy

Postby Braininvat on January 25th, 2018, 11:06 am 

I think the main problem in the US is the mistaking of TV personalities ( people paid handsomely to say shocking and inflammatory things) for journalists. The best thing to do is stick with print media, established papers subject to libel laws, and avoid celebrity "infotainment.". Go to Politifacts, or similar independent fact-checking organization, and see how many lies they have logged for Sean Hannity or Tucker Carlson or Coulter or any other infotainer/Trump surrogate. In the world of actual journalism, lies and slander get you sued, then fired, then blackballed. Real news organizations have to print retractions and corrections, and (e.g. the NY Times) may pay out millions in damages when they print falsehoods. So they are strongly motivated, not only by professional scruples, but by economic necessity, to verify facts.
User avatar
Braininvat
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 6851
Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Black Hills


Re: Trump Restates His Immigration policy

Postby Lomax on January 25th, 2018, 11:15 am 

SciameriKen » January 25th, 2018, 3:59 pm wrote:As a side point, I bolded that one section because you are saying you will engage in the very activity you are admonishing Toucana and my Advocate for :D

Oh my word! How can I say it without condescending? I am saying I would engage in that activity if I had your mind frame. Here I am engaging with you, and I ended my previous post by saying I don't approve of that (emboldened) approach. You must have encountered the reductio ad absurdum before. Surely.
User avatar
Lomax
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 3664
Joined: 01 Jul 2010
Location: Nuneaton, UK


Re: Trump Restates His Immigration policy

Postby Lomax on January 25th, 2018, 11:27 am 

Put it this way. If, instead of saying "here's Ann Coulter pointing out that what Donald Trump said was not a public statement", Badgerjelly had simply said "what Donald Trump said was not a public statement" then instead of wasting well over two seconds of your time telling us why you don't like Ann Coulter you'd all be answering the argument itself - perhaps pointing out that Trump was nonetheless speaking in his capacity as a public servant, for example. Since we already know that Trump didn't say what he said on telly or Twitter I don't see what difference it makes that Ann Coulter is an unreliable source of facts.
User avatar
Lomax
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 3664
Joined: 01 Jul 2010
Location: Nuneaton, UK


Re: Trump Restates His Immigration policy

Postby SciameriKen on January 25th, 2018, 11:37 am 

Lomax » Thu Jan 25, 2018 3:15 pm wrote:
SciameriKen » January 25th, 2018, 3:59 pm wrote:As a side point, I bolded that one section because you are saying you will engage in the very activity you are admonishing Toucana and my Advocate for :D

Oh my word! How can I say it without condescending? I am saying I would engage in that activity if I had your mind frame. Here I am engaging with you, and I ended my previous post by saying I don't approve of that (emboldened) approach. You must have encountered the reductio ad absurdum before. Surely.


The condescesion was not the bolded line - it was this "Ken, I'm sorry it passed you by that that was exactly my point." It did not pass me by as it were, it was that you assumed it did because you stopped reading after my first paragraph.
User avatar
SciameriKen
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 1419
Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Location: Buffalo, NY


Re: Trump Restates His Immigration policy

Postby SciameriKen on January 25th, 2018, 11:42 am 

Lomax » Thu Jan 25, 2018 3:27 pm wrote:Put it this way. If, instead of saying "here's Ann Coulter pointing out that what Donald Trump said was not a public statement", Badgerjelly had simply said "what Donald Trump said was not a public statement" then instead of wasting well over two seconds of your time telling us why you don't like Ann Coulter you'd all be answering the argument itself - perhaps pointing out that Trump was nonetheless speaking in his capacity as a public servant, for example. Since we already know that Trump didn't say what he said on telly or Twitter I don't see what difference it makes that Ann Coulter is an unreliable source of facts.


Its an appeal to authority - Badger is in effect saying - trust my argument more because Ann Coulter says it. Badger should trust in himself more and just raise the argument.

*Edit - Just to expand more - in legal terms this is called "Fruit of the poisoned tree" where if there is corrupt evidence (obtained illegally or without proper court procedure) presented then any evidence that builds from this piece of evidence is likewise to be tossed out. In Badger v Toucan, Ann Coulter is a source of corrupt evidence therefore anything that follows should likewise be ignored.
User avatar
SciameriKen
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 1419
Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Location: Buffalo, NY


Re: Trump Restates His Immigration policy

Postby BadgerJelly on January 25th, 2018, 12:07 pm 

Sci -

Two posts now where you're, for reasons unknown, suggesting I am saying things I have not been saying.

Let me know if/when the ball drops.
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5360
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


Re: Trump Restates His Immigration policy

Postby SciameriKen on January 25th, 2018, 12:12 pm 

BadgerJelly » Thu Jan 25, 2018 4:07 pm wrote:Sci -

Two posts now where you're, for reasons unknown, suggesting I am saying things I have not been saying.

Let me know if/when the ball drops.


We've addressed the first instance - the second instance was raised by Lomax. If it makes you feel any better I am addressing arguments made by a fictional personality by the name of "Badger" whereas you are in fact BadgerJelly.
User avatar
SciameriKen
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 1419
Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Location: Buffalo, NY


PreviousNext

Return to News Discussion Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests