Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
It's not a strawman argument. You reason that there is some merit in the philosophy of Mao while disregarding the fact that he was responsible for the death of 62 million lives. To credit someone for their supposed merits, you have to also accept their faults.
I am not crediting Mao, the person with merits. I am saying that there are merits in what he has said - his philosophy. The strawman is in attempting to tie the two together - that if you praise the one, you are therefore praising the other.
And all of it is ridiculous because Dunn was using Mao's quotes in a very specific context.
You can't separate Mao's philosophy from Mao. You can't say.. "follow his philosophy but make sure you stop when you reach the part about killing the people in your way.
Ame®icano;1634753 said:Well, kids... if you follow your principles, you may be as successful as Mao was.
I am not crediting Mao, the person with merits. I am saying that there are merits in what he has said - his philosophy. The strawman is in attempting to tie the two together - that if you praise the one, you are therefore praising the other.
And all of it is ridiculous because Dunn was using Mao's quotes in a very specific context.
You can't separate Mao's philosophy from Mao. You can't say.. "follow his philosophy but make sure you stop when you reach the part about killing the people in your way.
How dare you insult the great architect of Chinese Communism!!!!!
Nice strawman.
It's not a strawman argument. You reason that there is some merit in the philosophy of Mao while disregarding the fact that he was responsible for the death of 62 million lives. To credit someone for their supposed merits, you have to also accept their faults.
I am not crediting Mao, the person with merits. I am saying that there are merits in what he has said - his philosophy. The strawman is in attempting to tie the two together - that if you praise the one, you are therefore praising the other.
And all of it is ridiculous because Dunn was using Mao's quotes in a very specific context.
Nice strawman.
It's not a strawman argument. You reason that there is some merit in the philosophy of Mao while disregarding the fact that he was responsible for the death of 62 million lives. To credit someone for their supposed merits, you have to also accept their faults.
I am not crediting Mao, the person with merits. I am saying that there are merits in what he has said - his philosophy. The strawman is in attempting to tie the two together - that if you praise the one, you are therefore praising the other.
And all of it is ridiculous because Dunn was using Mao's quotes in a very specific context.
It's not a strawman argument. You reason that there is some merit in the philosophy of Mao while disregarding the fact that he was responsible for the death of 62 million lives. To credit someone for their supposed merits, you have to also accept their faults.
I am not crediting Mao, the person with merits. I am saying that there are merits in what he has said - his philosophy. The strawman is in attempting to tie the two together - that if you praise the one, you are therefore praising the other.
And all of it is ridiculous because Dunn was using Mao's quotes in a very specific context.
What she said was that Mao was one of the two political philosophers she turns to...yes...paraphrased....but the gist was that she admired more than just one or two of the things he has said.
I suggest you litsen to the speech she gave so you can hear what she said...in context....
Yes, she admitted it is strange for her to couple Mother Teresa with Mao...but as she continued, she MORE THAN ONCE said that he was one of the two she turns to..
Yes....I agree.....Simpson is a murderer...but that does not mean he was not a great runningback....but listen to what she said. She admired more than just one or two of his words.
So, lets take a look at the big picture here.
Lets take a look at those Obama keeps at arms length. At least those he still has to keep at arms length because FOX news is causing him to constantly chuck them under the bus once they expose the dirty bastards for being the dirty bastards they truly are.
Van Jones (Communist). Thanks to FOX, his ass is outta there.
Anita Dunn (MAO loving liberal nutjob)
Mark Lloyd (Chavez loving marxist dirtbag)
Harold Kho (Sharia law loving lunatic)
Cass Sunstein (Bat shit fucking crazy socialist loon)
Kevin Jennings (Perverted piece of liberal shit)
Now, take into account Obama's own admissions of his admiration of fabian socialist George Bernard Shaw and, his statement that his picks for personnel would fully define his agenda, and it becomes quite clear that his agenda is downright asinine. His agenda goes against everything that has made, and continues to make this country great. His agenda MUST be crushed!
So, it really comes as no surprise that Dunn would fully define herself as a complete dirtbag. She perfectly fits in with all the nutjobs, too include this nutjob president.
I'm not going to waste time with what boils down to a "am/am-not" kindergarten recess exchange. I have my opinion - I stated it. Others are obviously free to to hold their own differing opinion. It would be boring if everyone agreed with each other all the time. But I find it equally boring to waste time with silly, made up "what you really said was ...." claims.
I'm not going to waste time with what boils down to a "am/am-not" kindergarten recess exchange. I have my opinion - I stated it. Others are obviously free to to hold their own differing opinion. It would be boring if everyone agreed with each other all the time. But I find it equally boring to waste time with silly, made up "what you really said was ...." claims.
Ame®icano;1634856 said:I am not crediting Mao, the person with merits. I am saying that there are merits in what he has said - his philosophy. The strawman is in attempting to tie the two together - that if you praise the one, you are therefore praising the other.
And all of it is ridiculous because Dunn was using Mao's quotes in a very specific context.
What she said was that Mao was one of the two political philosophers she turns to...yes...paraphrased....but the gist was that she admired more than just one or two of the things he has said.
I suggest you litsen to the speech she gave so you can hear what she said...in context....
Yes, she admitted it is strange for her to couple Mother Teresa with Mao...but as she continued, she MORE THAN ONCE said that he was one of the two she turns to..
Yes....I agree.....Simpson is a murderer...but that does not mean he was not a great runningback....but listen to what she said. She admired more than just one or two of his words.
Soooo, who is more saint. Mao or Mother Teresa?
George Bush Reccommended a book on Mao to Karl Rove
McCain quoted Mao on the campaign trail
Gingrich: "War is politics with blood; politics is war without blood," said the Speaker, citing the late Chinese Communist leader Mao Tse-tung.
is it surprising that Beck might jump on a peripheral quote and try to gin up something sinister out of it? Isn't that his typical M.O.? Pity the fools who get tooled by this court jester.
Reading a book on Mao or even using a quote from Mao is not the same as saying Mao was "my favorite political philosopher"
Really wouldn't Plato or Socrates, Nelson Mandela, MLK, or anyone who wasn't a mass murderer have been a better choice to quote for a commencement speech?
I'm not going to waste time with what boils down to a "am/am-not" kindergarten recess exchange. I have my opinion - I stated it. Others are obviously free to to hold their own differing opinion. It would be boring if everyone agreed with each other all the time. But I find it equally boring to waste time with silly, made up "what you really said was ...." claims.
Dude. You can't compartmentalize Mao's words away from his actions.
Nothing redeeming is borne of evil.
Ame®icano;1634856 said:What she said was that Mao was one of the two political philosophers she turns to...yes...paraphrased....but the gist was that she admired more than just one or two of the things he has said.
I suggest you litsen to the speech she gave so you can hear what she said...in context....
Yes, she admitted it is strange for her to couple Mother Teresa with Mao...but as she continued, she MORE THAN ONCE said that he was one of the two she turns to..
Yes....I agree.....Simpson is a murderer...but that does not mean he was not a great runningback....but listen to what she said. She admired more than just one or two of his words.
Soooo, who is more saint. Mao or Mother Teresa?
No one is talking about saintity...
She admired specific quotes and portions of his philosophy that are, frankly admirable and she admired them in specific contexts - not generally.
Ame®icano;1634856 said:What she said was that Mao was one of the two political philosophers she turns to...yes...paraphrased....but the gist was that she admired more than just one or two of the things he has said.
I suggest you litsen to the speech she gave so you can hear what she said...in context....
Yes, she admitted it is strange for her to couple Mother Teresa with Mao...but as she continued, she MORE THAN ONCE said that he was one of the two she turns to..
Yes....I agree.....Simpson is a murderer...but that does not mean he was not a great runningback....but listen to what she said. She admired more than just one or two of his words.
Soooo, who is more saint. Mao or Mother Teresa?
No one is talking about saintity...
She admired specific quotes and portions of his philosophy that are, frankly admirable and she admired them in specific contexts - not generally.
Ame®icano;1634856 said:Soooo, who is more saint. Mao or Mother Teresa?
No one is talking about saintity...
She admired specific quotes and portions of his philosophy that are, frankly admirable and she admired them in specific contexts - not generally.
I suggest you not just listen to snippets...listen to her entire speech as it pertains to Mao. NO ONE who has the ability of comprehension would see her as saying she admired a couple of his quotes.....it cxan not even be spun that way no matter how hard one tries.
Do yourself a favor...and count how many times she refers to HIM, not just his "words".....but how HE is one of her favorite political philosophers.
They ALL do poorly, according to the study, FOX would be 23% and many of the others are just 24%.I will say Fox is a pretty easy target - I mean only 23% of Americans find Fox believable anyway. They rank below CNN, Local newscasts, NPR, C-SPAN, NBC, ABC, and MSNBC in believability among broadcast news outlets.
So there's little or no chance of blowback.
I found your poll numbers were exactly the same as a May 2008 NBC poll. Interesting as another poll put it this way:
Americans see:
-- Growing media attempts to influence public opinion and policies
-- Poor quality
-- A strong liberal bent in most media
-- Fox News, CNN and NBC as the most accurate
Americans Slam News Media on Believability | Reuters
Fox does poorly in believability - ranking in the bottom third according to Journalism.org- The State of the News Media 2009 which is the site what Nodog was referencing.
I'm not going to waste time with what boils down to a "am/am-not" kindergarten recess exchange. I have my opinion - I stated it. Others are obviously free to to hold their own differing opinion. It would be boring if everyone agreed with each other all the time. But I find it equally boring to waste time with silly, made up "what you really said was ...." claims.
Dude. You can't compartmentalize Mao's words away from his actions.
Nothing redeeming is borne of evil.
Yes. You can. People do it all the time. Including a good many political figures and military stratigists (as was quoted by others).
No one is talking about saintity...
She admired specific quotes and portions of his philosophy that are, frankly admirable and she admired them in specific contexts - not generally.
I suggest you not just listen to snippets...listen to her entire speech as it pertains to Mao. NO ONE who has the ability of comprehension would see her as saying she admired a couple of his quotes.....it cxan not even be spun that way no matter how hard one tries.
Do yourself a favor...and count how many times she refers to HIM, not just his "words".....but how HE is one of her favorite political philosophers.
You are quite correct - you have dispatched the Dunn supporters with Dunn's own words.
Well Done!
Dunn...
