Racism at Fox News

[Pogo]

I noticed that your political relativism is also able to be used to compare Jeremiah Wright with Phil Robertson. Yet, I shall repeat myself for a third time. JEREMIAH WRIGHT WAS OBAMA'S PASTOR FOR TWENTY YEARS.
In summation, political and moral relativism as a means to propagate an anti-American prejudice is an old game that has only accomplished one thing. Social,ethnic and racial divisiveness.

After six years of this crowing I still don't get the point. Jeremiah Wright was Obama's pastor............... and?

Who was George W. Bush's pastor? The Dick Cheney's? Mitt Romney's? John McCain's?

WHO CARES? The pastors were not and are not running for office.

Who were their dentists? Their telephone repair people? Their mail carriers?
Conspiring minds need to know. Scandal beckons.

If you spend 20 year in a hate-monger's congregation and if you cite him as a mentor, they're in a different category than your dentist. And then if you claim that after sitting in the congregation for 20 years, you never heard the hate -- then that's a story.

Early shades of the "is he dishonest or is he oblivious?" debate America is finally having 6 years too late.

Sorry, that's just guilt by association and a naked fallacy. It assumes not only is the outlook of A the same as the outlook of B by virtue of their sitting in the same place, but further assumes that B is incapable of independent thought and that everything A says is accepted without comment. It further assumes that if B accept's the view of A for one thing, then he must accept the view for all things. Doesn't work on any level.

My periodontist has some wacko political comments too. He likes to tell them to his assistant while he's got tools in my mouth. I have yet to adopt a single one of them in the slightest. But he does know what he's doing in his actual area of expertise.

 

[Amelia]

After six years of this crowing I still don't get the point. Jeremiah Wright was Obama's pastor............... and?

Who was George W. Bush's pastor? The Dick Cheney's? Mitt Romney's? John McCain's?

WHO CARES? The pastors were not and are not running for office.

Who were their dentists? Their telephone repair people? Their mail carriers?
Conspiring minds need to know. Scandal beckons.

If you spend 20 year in a hate-monger's congregation and if you cite him as a mentor, they're in a different category than your dentist. And then if you claim that after sitting in the congregation for 20 years, you never heard the hate -- then that's a story.

Early shades of the "is he dishonest or is he oblivious?" debate America is finally having 6 years too late.

Sorry, that's just guilt by association and a naked fallacy. It assumes not only is the outlook of A the same as the outlook of B by virtue of their sitting in the same place, but further assumes that B is incapable of independent thought and that everything A says is accepted without comment. It further assumes that if B accept's the view of A for one thing, then he must accept the view for all things. Doesn't work on any level.

My periodontist has some wacko political comments too. He likes to tell them to his assistant while he's got tools in my mouth. I have yet to adopt a single one of them in the slightest. But he does know what he's doing in his actual area of expertise.

Do you praise your periodontist as a mentor?

Do you claim a lack of awareness about what your periodontist says to you in his professional capacity?

If so, then after you're caught in a web of incongruities will you throw your periodontist under the bus after saying you could no more do that than you could disown your community?



Wright was very much a part of the thin list of accomplishments Obama had to recommend him for office. Think "Audacity".

Your comparison to professionals in non-ideology-based fields is a stretch.

I hope you realize that and are just playing with me.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I noticed that your political relativism is also able to be used to compare Jeremiah Wright with Phil Robertson. Yet, I shall repeat myself for a third time. JEREMIAH WRIGHT WAS OBAMA'S PASTOR FOR TWENTY YEARS.
In summation, political and moral relativism as a means to propagate an anti-American prejudice is an old game that has only accomplished one thing. Social,ethnic and racial divisiveness.

After six years of this crowing I still don't get the point. Jeremiah Wright was Obama's pastor............... and?

Who was George W. Bush's pastor? The Dick Cheney's? Mitt Romney's? John McCain's?

WHO CARES? The pastors were not and are not running for office.

Who were their dentists? Their telephone repair people? Their mail carriers?
Conspiring minds need to know. Scandal beckons.

If you spend 20 years in a hatemonger's congregation and if you cite him as a mentor, he is in a different category from your dentist. And then if you claim that after sitting in the congregation for 20 years, you never heard the hate -- then that's a story.

Early shades of the "is he dishonest or is he oblivious?" debate America is finally having 6 years too late.

I used to think Obama was lying when he said he never heard the things Wright said during his sermons, now I think he was telling the absolute truth. He is so egotistical and narcissistic that he, literally, doesn't hear anything that doesn't directly make him look good.

 

[Pogo]

If you spend 20 year in a hate-monger's congregation and if you cite him as a mentor, they're in a different category than your dentist. And then if you claim that after sitting in the congregation for 20 years, you never heard the hate -- then that's a story.

Early shades of the "is he dishonest or is he oblivious?" debate America is finally having 6 years too late.

Sorry, that's just guilt by association and a naked fallacy. It assumes not only is the outlook of A the same as the outlook of B by virtue of their sitting in the same place, but further assumes that B is incapable of independent thought and that everything A says is accepted without comment. It further assumes that if B accept's the view of A for one thing, then he must accept the view for all things. Doesn't work on any level.

My periodontist has some wacko political comments too. He likes to tell them to his assistant while he's got tools in my mouth. I have yet to adopt a single one of them in the slightest. But he does know what he's doing in his actual area of expertise.

Do you praise your periodontist as a mentor?

Do you claim a lack of awareness about what your periodontist says to you in his professional capacity?

If so, then after you're caught in a web of incongruities will you throw your periodontist under the bus after saying you could not more do that than you could disown your community?

Wright was very much a part of the thin list of accomplishments Obama had to recommend him for office. Think "Audacity".

Your comparison to professionals in non-ideology-based fields is a stretch.

I hope you realize that and are just playing with me.

It is in no way a stretch. Me, my periodontist, Jeremiah Wright and O'bama are four different people --- not two. I am in no way responsible for, nor do I agree with, my doctor's political rants. But I still go to him and even give him money. Hey, I always admired Pete Rose as a baseball player and would emulate his spirit. Does that mean I have any interest in gambling?

>> Guilt by association can sometimes also be a type of ad hominem fallacy, if the argument attacks a person because of the similarity between the views of someone making an argument and other proponents of the argument.
This form of the argument is as follows:

Source S makes claim C.

Group G, which is currently viewed negatively by the recipient, also makes claim C.

Therefore, source S is viewed by the recipient of the claim as associated to the group G and inherits how negatively viewed it is.

An example of this fallacy would be "My opponent for office just received an endorsement from the Puppy Haters Association. Is that the sort of person you would want to vote for?" << (Wiki)

By this fallacious logic:
David Duke is a Klan member;
David Duke is a Republican;
Therefore all Republicans are Klan members.

Fred Phelps is a Baptist.
Fred Phelps is intolerant.
Therefore, Baptists are intolerant.

Doesn't work. Never has.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

After six years of this crowing I still don't get the point. Jeremiah Wright was Obama's pastor............... and?

Who was George W. Bush's pastor? The Dick Cheney's? Mitt Romney's? John McCain's?

WHO CARES? The pastors were not and are not running for office.

Who were their dentists? Their telephone repair people? Their mail carriers?
Conspiring minds need to know. Scandal beckons.

If you spend 20 year in a hate-monger's congregation and if you cite him as a mentor, they're in a different category than your dentist. And then if you claim that after sitting in the congregation for 20 years, you never heard the hate -- then that's a story.

Early shades of the "is he dishonest or is he oblivious?" debate America is finally having 6 years too late.

Sorry, that's just guilt by association and a naked fallacy. It assumes not only is the outlook of A the same as the outlook of B by virtue of their sitting in the same place, but further assumes that B is incapable of independent thought and that everything A says is accepted without comment. It further assumes that if B accept's the view of A for one thing, then he must accept the view for all things. Doesn't work on any level.

My periodontist has some wacko political comments too. He likes to tell them to his assistant while he's got tools in my mouth. I have yet to adopt a single one of them in the slightest. But he does know what he's doing in his actual area of expertise.

I hate to point out the obvious, but you are the one with the faulty logic here. We are not discussing who he worked with during his (alleged) job as a community organizer, or even when he was a law professor. We aren't even talking about his friends, whoever they might be. Obama described Wright as his mentor, that means he chose to associate himself with Wright's views, even if he didn't know what they were. The fact that Wright's views were so offensive that Oprah decided to leave his church, but Obama still called him a mentor, is indicative of a consistent problem Obama has exhibited since his election, his personal aversion to hearing bad things. If he was more willing to accept that things are not the way he envisions them he wouldn't always be telling us about how he didn't know things.

 

[Pogo]

If you spend 20 year in a hate-monger's congregation and if you cite him as a mentor, they're in a different category than your dentist. And then if you claim that after sitting in the congregation for 20 years, you never heard the hate -- then that's a story.

Early shades of the "is he dishonest or is he oblivious?" debate America is finally having 6 years too late.

Sorry, that's just guilt by association and a naked fallacy. It assumes not only is the outlook of A the same as the outlook of B by virtue of their sitting in the same place, but further assumes that B is incapable of independent thought and that everything A says is accepted without comment. It further assumes that if B accept's the view of A for one thing, then he must accept the view for all things. Doesn't work on any level.

My periodontist has some wacko political comments too. He likes to tell them to his assistant while he's got tools in my mouth. I have yet to adopt a single one of them in the slightest. But he does know what he's doing in his actual area of expertise.

I hate to point out the obvious, but you are the one with the faulty logic here. We are not discussing who he worked with during his (alleged) job as a community organizer, or even when he was a law professor. We aren't even talking about his friends, whoever they might be. Obama described Wright as his mentor, that means he chose to associate himself with Wright's views, even if he didn't know what they were. The fact that Wright's views were so offensive that Oprah decided to leave his church, but Obama still called him a mentor, is indicative of a consistent problem Obama has exhibited since his election, his personal aversion to hearing bad things. If he was more willing to accept that things are not the way he envisions them he wouldn't always be telling us about how he didn't know things.

I don't know anything about this "mentor " thing and I see no link thereto, but it doesn't matter; I trust my periodontist for what he does with my oral health, not his political rants; I trust Pete Rose for the way he plays baseball, not his gambling; and anyone can trust their mentor for the way they personally inspire, not some single gotcha quote taken out of context and regurgitated on YouTube.

Sorry that's just cheap thought. Not buying it. Cheap stuff falls apart. And no, having a mentor in no way means one "agrees with that mentor's views". That's not what mentors do.

Hard to believe after all we know about logic that someone comes on here and tries to defend a classic fallacy as if suddenly this time it works.

 

[JohnL.Burke]

I noticed that your political relativism is also able to be used to compare Jeremiah Wright with Phil Robertson. Yet, I shall repeat myself for a third time. JEREMIAH WRIGHT WAS OBAMA'S PASTOR FOR TWENTY YEARS.
In summation, political and moral relativism as a means to propagate an anti-American prejudice is an old game that has only accomplished one thing. Social,ethnic and racial divisiveness.

After six years of this crowing I still don't get the point. Jeremiah Wright was Obama's pastor............... and?

Who was George W. Bush's pastor? The Dick Cheney's? Mitt Romney's? John McCain's?

WHO CARES? The pastors were not and are not running for office.

Who were their dentists? Their telephone repair people? Their mail carriers?
Conspiring minds need to know. Scandal beckons.

If you spend 20 years in a hatemonger's congregation and if you cite him as a mentor, he is in a different category from your dentist. And then if you claim that after sitting in the congregation for 20 years, you never heard the hate -- then that's a story.

Early shades of the "is he dishonest or is he oblivious?" debate America is finally having 6 years too late.

One must understand the left's rationalizations that hinge on the principles of relativism. It is the theory of relativism that allows some people to compare spiritual leaders to dentists. In the world of relativism a garbage man is the same thing as a surgeon. A freedom fighter is the same thing as a terrorist. The U.S. is the same as Russia. Pragmatism is the same as religious doctrine. Relativism is the rationalization of the irrational. It is a way to pretend to rise above politics by being overtly political. It is relativism that allows people to claim that the U.S. goes to war in the middle east for oil when the U.S. does not gain any extra oil. Relativism is not based on evidence or fact, it is based on an emotional need.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Sorry, that's just guilt by association and a naked fallacy. It assumes not only is the outlook of A the same as the outlook of B by virtue of their sitting in the same place, but further assumes that B is incapable of independent thought and that everything A says is accepted without comment. It further assumes that if B accept's the view of A for one thing, then he must accept the view for all things. Doesn't work on any level.

My periodontist has some wacko political comments too. He likes to tell them to his assistant while he's got tools in my mouth. I have yet to adopt a single one of them in the slightest. But he does know what he's doing in his actual area of expertise.

I hate to point out the obvious, but you are the one with the faulty logic here. We are not discussing who he worked with during his (alleged) job as a community organizer, or even when he was a law professor. We aren't even talking about his friends, whoever they might be. Obama described Wright as his mentor, that means he chose to associate himself with Wright's views, even if he didn't know what they were. The fact that Wright's views were so offensive that Oprah decided to leave his church, but Obama still called him a mentor, is indicative of a consistent problem Obama has exhibited since his election, his personal aversion to hearing bad things. If he was more willing to accept that things are not the way he envisions them he wouldn't always be telling us about how he didn't know things.

I don't know anything about this "mentor " thing and I see no link thereto, but it doesn't matter; I trust my periodontist for what he does with my oral health, not his political rants; I trust Pete Rose for the way he plays baseball, not his gambling; and anyone can trust a mentor for the way they personally inspire, not some single gotcha quote taken out of context and regurgitated on YouTube.

Sorry that's just cheap thought. Not buying it. Cheap stuff falls apart.

I see the problem here, you expect me to believe that you are completely unbiased and perfect.

I would call you a liar, but that would be an insult to liars.

 

[Pogo]

I noticed that your political relativism is also able to be used to compare Jeremiah Wright with Phil Robertson. Yet, I shall repeat myself for a third time. JEREMIAH WRIGHT WAS OBAMA'S PASTOR FOR TWENTY YEARS.
In summation, political and moral relativism as a means to propagate an anti-American prejudice is an old game that has only accomplished one thing. Social,ethnic and racial divisiveness.

After six years of this crowing I still don't get the point. Jeremiah Wright was Obama's pastor............... and?

Who was George W. Bush's pastor? The Dick Cheney's? Mitt Romney's? John McCain's?

WHO CARES? The pastors were not and are not running for office.

Who were their dentists? Their telephone repair people? Their mail carriers?
Conspiring minds need to know. Scandal beckons.

If you spend 20 years in a hatemonger's congregation and if you cite him as a mentor, he is in a different category from your dentist. And then if you claim that after sitting in the congregation for 20 years, you never heard the hate -- then that's a story.

Early shades of the "is he dishonest or is he oblivious?" debate America is finally having 6 years too late.

And I have no evidence that Jeremiah Wright is a "hatemonger" anyway, so the premise doesn't even hold water.

And no, I'm not about to take a ten-second YouTube clip taken completely out of whatever its context was to draw that conclusion, especially when it was extracted by a political demagogue. As I said ----- cheap thought.

 

[Amelia]

Sorry, that's just guilt by association and a naked fallacy. It assumes not only is the outlook of A the same as the outlook of B by virtue of their sitting in the same place, but further assumes that B is incapable of independent thought and that everything A says is accepted without comment. It further assumes that if B accept's the view of A for one thing, then he must accept the view for all things. Doesn't work on any level.

My periodontist has some wacko political comments too. He likes to tell them to his assistant while he's got tools in my mouth. I have yet to adopt a single one of them in the slightest. But he does know what he's doing in his actual area of expertise.

Do you praise your periodontist as a mentor?

Do you claim a lack of awareness about what your periodontist says to you in his professional capacity?

If so, then after you're caught in a web of incongruities will you throw your periodontist under the bus after saying you could not more do that than you could disown your community?

Wright was very much a part of the thin list of accomplishments Obama had to recommend him for office. Think "Audacity".

Your comparison to professionals in non-ideology-based fields is a stretch.

I hope you realize that and are just playing with me.

It is in no way a stretch. Me, my periodontist, Jeremiah Wright and O'bama are four different people --- not two. I am in no way responsible for, nor do I agree with, my doctor's political rants. But I still go to him and even give him money. Hey, I always admired Pete Rose as a baseball player and would emulate his spirit. Does that mean I have any interest in gambling?

>> Guilt by association can sometimes also be a type of ad hominem fallacy, if the argument attacks a person because of the similarity between the views of someone making an argument and other proponents of the argument.
This form of the argument is as follows:

Source S makes claim C.

Group G, which is currently viewed negatively by the recipient, also makes claim C.

Therefore, source S is viewed by the recipient of the claim as associated to the group G and inherits how negatively viewed it is.

An example of this fallacy would be "My opponent for office just received an endorsement from the Puppy Haters Association. Is that the sort of person you would want to vote for?" << (Wiki)

By this fallacious logic:
David Duke is a Klan member;
David Duke is a Republican;
Therefore all Republicans are Klan members.

Fred Phelps is a Baptist.
Fred Phelps is intolerant.
Therefore, Baptists are intolerant.

Doesn't work. Never has.

Your examples are not applicable at all.

Jeremiah Wright was an Obama mentor, with an influence which supposedly spanned 20 years of Obama's life. Come up with an example which includes mentorship by David Duke or Fred Phelps.

 

[Pogo]

I hate to point out the obvious, but you are the one with the faulty logic here. We are not discussing who he worked with during his (alleged) job as a community organizer, or even when he was a law professor. We aren't even talking about his friends, whoever they might be. Obama described Wright as his mentor, that means he chose to associate himself with Wright's views, even if he didn't know what they were. The fact that Wright's views were so offensive that Oprah decided to leave his church, but Obama still called him a mentor, is indicative of a consistent problem Obama has exhibited since his election, his personal aversion to hearing bad things. If he was more willing to accept that things are not the way he envisions them he wouldn't always be telling us about how he didn't know things.

I don't know anything about this "mentor " thing and I see no link thereto, but it doesn't matter; I trust my periodontist for what he does with my oral health, not his political rants; I trust Pete Rose for the way he plays baseball, not his gambling; and anyone can trust a mentor for the way they personally inspire, not some single gotcha quote taken out of context and regurgitated on YouTube.

Sorry that's just cheap thought. Not buying it. Cheap stuff falls apart.

I see the problem here, you expect me to believe that you are completely unbiased and perfect.

I would call you a liar, but that would be an insult to liars.

I expect you to believe nothing about me. I said nothing about me except to offer personal examples. What I expect is for you to recognize standard accepted logical fallacies for what they are and drop the double standard bullshit. Not to mention the ad hominem you invariably go to when you've lost the point.

 

[Amelia]

Sorry, that's just guilt by association and a naked fallacy. It assumes not only is the outlook of A the same as the outlook of B by virtue of their sitting in the same place, but further assumes that B is incapable of independent thought and that everything A says is accepted without comment. It further assumes that if B accept's the view of A for one thing, then he must accept the view for all things. Doesn't work on any level.

My periodontist has some wacko political comments too. He likes to tell them to his assistant while he's got tools in my mouth. I have yet to adopt a single one of them in the slightest. But he does know what he's doing in his actual area of expertise.

I hate to point out the obvious, but you are the one with the faulty logic here. We are not discussing who he worked with during his (alleged) job as a community organizer, or even when he was a law professor. We aren't even talking about his friends, whoever they might be. Obama described Wright as his mentor, that means he chose to associate himself with Wright's views, even if he didn't know what they were. The fact that Wright's views were so offensive that Oprah decided to leave his church, but Obama still called him a mentor, is indicative of a consistent problem Obama has exhibited since his election, his personal aversion to hearing bad things. If he was more willing to accept that things are not the way he envisions them he wouldn't always be telling us about how he didn't know things.

I don't know anything about this "mentor " thing and I see no link thereto, but it doesn't matter; I trust my periodontist for what he does with my oral health, not his political rants; I trust Pete Rose for the way he plays baseball, not his gambling; and anyone can trust their mentor for the way they personally inspire, not some single gotcha quote taken out of context and regurgitated on YouTube.

Sorry that's just cheap thought. Not buying it. Cheap stuff falls apart. And no, having a mentor in no way means one "agrees with that mentor's views". That's not what mentors do.

Hard to believe after all we know about logic that someone comes on here and tries to defend a classic fallacy as if suddenly this time it works.

So now we get to the meat of the matter. Because of the lack of meaningful debate in 2007 and 2008 about who Obama is and what we could expect from him in the future, you are unaware of things such as what Jeremiah Wright stood for and how he supposedly influenced Obama.

Thanks for finally admitting that you are uninformed on this matter.

The important points in this discussion have now been covered.

 

[JohnL.Burke]

I am all for lowering or dependence of foreign oil if it doesn't harm our economy in the process. Oil pipe line, tapping shale oil reserves, opening up Alaska. There are ways of lowering or dependence of foreign oil that DOES NOT involve draconian measures that cost people jobs while giving a centralized authority more power to decide what we are worthy of having.

in short, you are happier to hand money to our enemies than to let the damned government tell you what kind of car to drive. Got it.

....

The conspiracy theory about AGW comes from the left. Misquoting studies, fake studies and politicizing science is the domain of the liberal agenda.
I'm of course not happy with giving money to our enemies for oil which is why I believe in shale, utilizing Alaska and the Keystone pipeline. I'm unaware of our government telling us what kind of car we should drive.

Ahh... oil doesn't work that way dood.

Number one, "we" don't drill for oil in Alaska, the OCS, or anywhere else; Big Oil does that, and Big Oil's loyalty is to the bottom line, not to the flag of the US or Holland or the UK or wherever they're based. And to that end they will drill, process and sell wherever it makes the most money. They will also not-drill if it's not deemed profitable at the time, and part of profitability means not putting out too much supply so that the price goes down. There is no relationship between oil drilled here and oil consumed here. None. So unless you want to nationalize the oil companies and buck the whole system of the world oil market, whether the gas in your car comes from Alaska or Nigeria is just the luck of the draw and you can't force oil to be drilled where it doesn't serve the bottom line.

Number two, that pipeline thingy ... all it does is facilitate Canadian crude getting down to Houston for refining. Why Houston? Because it's a port from which refined products can be shipped, to India, China, wherever the market says the profit is. All the pipeline does is help to hand it off and make that profit easier to attain. Good for them, but let's not pretend that pipeline's feeding the Texaco station in Dubuque. It isn't.

Some of the oil would go overseas. Some of the oil wouldn't. The oil we send overseas would help the trade imbalance by bringing in billions of dollars. In an emergency of course we wouldn't be sending oil overseas. In other words, having more oil is better than having less oil.

 

[S.J.]

After six years of this crowing I still don't get the point. Jeremiah Wright was Obama's pastor............... and?

Who was George W. Bush's pastor? The Dick Cheney's? Mitt Romney's? John McCain's?

WHO CARES? The pastors were not and are not running for office.

Who were their dentists? Their telephone repair people? Their mail carriers?
Conspiring minds need to know. Scandal beckons.

If you spend 20 years in a hatemonger's congregation and if you cite him as a mentor, he is in a different category from your dentist. And then if you claim that after sitting in the congregation for 20 years, you never heard the hate -- then that's a story.

Early shades of the "is he dishonest or is he oblivious?" debate America is finally having 6 years too late.

And I have no evidence that Jeremiah Wright is a "hatemonger" anyway, so the premise doesn't even hold water.

And no, I'm not about to take a ten-second YouTube clip taken completely out of whatever its context was to draw that conclusion, especially when it was extracted by a political demagogue. As I said ----- cheap thought.

There went any credibility you may have had.

 

[Pogo]

Do you praise your periodontist as a mentor?

Do you claim a lack of awareness about what your periodontist says to you in his professional capacity?

If so, then after you're caught in a web of incongruities will you throw your periodontist under the bus after saying you could not more do that than you could disown your community?

Wright was very much a part of the thin list of accomplishments Obama had to recommend him for office. Think "Audacity".

Your comparison to professionals in non-ideology-based fields is a stretch.

I hope you realize that and are just playing with me.

It is in no way a stretch. Me, my periodontist, Jeremiah Wright and O'bama are four different people --- not two. I am in no way responsible for, nor do I agree with, my doctor's political rants. But I still go to him and even give him money. Hey, I always admired Pete Rose as a baseball player and would emulate his spirit. Does that mean I have any interest in gambling?

>> Guilt by association can sometimes also be a type of ad hominem fallacy, if the argument attacks a person because of the similarity between the views of someone making an argument and other proponents of the argument.
This form of the argument is as follows:

Source S makes claim C.

Group G, which is currently viewed negatively by the recipient, also makes claim C.

Therefore, source S is viewed by the recipient of the claim as associated to the group G and inherits how negatively viewed it is.

An example of this fallacy would be "My opponent for office just received an endorsement from the Puppy Haters Association. Is that the sort of person you would want to vote for?" << (Wiki)

By this fallacious logic:
David Duke is a Klan member;
David Duke is a Republican;
Therefore all Republicans are Klan members.

Fred Phelps is a Baptist.
Fred Phelps is intolerant.
Therefore, Baptists are intolerant.

Doesn't work. Never has.

Your examples are not applicable at all.

Jeremiah Wright was an Obama mentor, with an influence which supposedly spanned 20 years of Obama's life. Come up with an example which includes mentorship by David Duke or Fred Phelps.

"Mentor" is irrelevant. Being called a "mentor" doesn't just ditch the laws of logic. I have mentors whose views I disagree with on some topic; I'm sure you do too.

I don't know why this wasn't laughed out of the public discourse six years ago. This has no more validity than George Bush robo-calling voters in South Carolina to tell them John McCain has "an illegitimate black baby" (Bangladeshi adoptee really, but "black" sells fear in SC).

It's political demagoguery puppetry bullshit. Dump it already. It didn't sell six years ago, it's not selling now, and it won't sell tomorrow even when the names change.

 

[Pogo]

I am all for lowering or dependence of foreign oil if it doesn't harm our economy in the process. Oil pipe line, tapping shale oil reserves, opening up Alaska. There are ways of lowering or dependence of foreign oil that DOES NOT involve draconian measures that cost people jobs while giving a centralized authority more power to decide what we are worthy of having.

in short, you are happier to hand money to our enemies than to let the damned government tell you what kind of car to drive. Got it.

....

The conspiracy theory about AGW comes from the left. Misquoting studies, fake studies and politicizing science is the domain of the liberal agenda.
I'm of course not happy with giving money to our enemies for oil which is why I believe in shale, utilizing Alaska and the Keystone pipeline. I'm unaware of our government telling us what kind of car we should drive.

Ahh... oil doesn't work that way dood.

Number one, "we" don't drill for oil in Alaska, the OCS, or anywhere else; Big Oil does that, and Big Oil's loyalty is to the bottom line, not to the flag of the US or Holland or the UK or wherever they're based. And to that end they will drill, process and sell wherever it makes the most money. They will also not-drill if it's not deemed profitable at the time, and part of profitability means not putting out too much supply so that the price goes down. There is no relationship between oil drilled here and oil consumed here. None. So unless you want to nationalize the oil companies and buck the whole system of the world oil market, whether the gas in your car comes from Alaska or Nigeria is just the luck of the draw and you can't force oil to be drilled where it doesn't serve the bottom line.

Number two, that pipeline thingy ... all it does is facilitate Canadian crude getting down to Houston for refining. Why Houston? Because it's a port from which refined products can be shipped, to India, China, wherever the market says the profit is. All the pipeline does is help to hand it off and make that profit easier to attain. Good for them, but let's not pretend that pipeline's feeding the Texaco station in Dubuque. It isn't.

Some of the oil would go overseas. Some of the oil wouldn't. The oil we send overseas would help the trade imbalance by bringing in billions of dollars. In an emergency of course we wouldn't be sending oil overseas. In other words, having more oil is better than having less oil.

I'm afraid we would, because "we" don't send oil anywhere. The oil companies do that. Again, do you want to nationalize oil companies? We have no more or less oil because we allow an oil company a cheaper way to do its business. They're simply not related. To pretend they are is to subscribe to the same cheap thought factory that uses guilt by association on a ten-second YouTube clip of Jeremiah Wright. It just ain't that simple.

But I must say it's beyond surreal to be talking how oil works in a Media thread about the racism on Fox News.

 

[Pogo]

I hate to point out the obvious, but you are the one with the faulty logic here. We are not discussing who he worked with during his (alleged) job as a community organizer, or even when he was a law professor. We aren't even talking about his friends, whoever they might be. Obama described Wright as his mentor, that means he chose to associate himself with Wright's views, even if he didn't know what they were. The fact that Wright's views were so offensive that Oprah decided to leave his church, but Obama still called him a mentor, is indicative of a consistent problem Obama has exhibited since his election, his personal aversion to hearing bad things. If he was more willing to accept that things are not the way he envisions them he wouldn't always be telling us about how he didn't know things.

I don't know anything about this "mentor " thing and I see no link thereto, but it doesn't matter; I trust my periodontist for what he does with my oral health, not his political rants; I trust Pete Rose for the way he plays baseball, not his gambling; and anyone can trust their mentor for the way they personally inspire, not some single gotcha quote taken out of context and regurgitated on YouTube.

Sorry that's just cheap thought. Not buying it. Cheap stuff falls apart. And no, having a mentor in no way means one "agrees with that mentor's views". That's not what mentors do.

Hard to believe after all we know about logic that someone comes on here and tries to defend a classic fallacy as if suddenly this time it works.

So now we get to the meat of the matter. Because of the lack of meaningful debate in 2007 and 2008 about who Obama is and what we could expect from him in the future, you are unaware of things such as what Jeremiah Wright stood for and how he supposedly influenced Obama.

Thanks for finally admitting that you are uninformed on this matter.

The important points in this discussion have now been covered.

Jeremiah Wright was not on the ballot. Why should I pretend that he was? And if he was, I would have taken the time to find out more about who he is. Since he wasn't --- I didn't.

Sorry this whole pretense is as abjectly silly as if someone said "don't vote for Romney because as a Mormon he wears magic underwear".

 

[Mertex]

I noticed that your political relativism is also able to be used to compare Jeremiah Wright with Phil Robertson. Yet, I shall repeat myself for a third time. JEREMIAH WRIGHT WAS OBAMA'S PASTOR FOR TWENTY YEARS.
In summation, political and moral relativism as a means to propagate an anti-American prejudice is an old game that has only accomplished one thing. Social,ethnic and racial divisiveness.

After six years of this crowing I still don't get the point. Jeremiah Wright was Obama's pastor............... and?

Who was George W. Bush's pastor? The Dick Cheney's? Mitt Romney's? John McCain's?

WHO CARES? The pastors were not and are not running for office.

Who were their dentists? Their telephone repair people? Their mail carriers?
Conspiring minds need to know. Scandal beckons.

If you spend 20 years in a hatemonger's congregation and if you cite him as a mentor, he is in a different category from your dentist. And then if you claim that after sitting in the congregation for 20 years, you never heard the hate -- then that's a story.

Early shades of the "is he dishonest or is he oblivious?" debate America is finally having 6 years too late.

But, isn't it dishonest to then say that Obama is "Muslim" if he spent 20 years in a Christian church? Just sayin.........

 

[Amelia]

It is in no way a stretch. Me, my periodontist, Jeremiah Wright and O'bama are four different people --- not two. I am in no way responsible for, nor do I agree with, my doctor's political rants. But I still go to him and even give him money. Hey, I always admired Pete Rose as a baseball player and would emulate his spirit. Does that mean I have any interest in gambling?

>> Guilt by association can sometimes also be a type of ad hominem fallacy, if the argument attacks a person because of the similarity between the views of someone making an argument and other proponents of the argument.
This form of the argument is as follows:

Source S makes claim C.

Group G, which is currently viewed negatively by the recipient, also makes claim C.

Therefore, source S is viewed by the recipient of the claim as associated to the group G and inherits how negatively viewed it is.

An example of this fallacy would be "My opponent for office just received an endorsement from the Puppy Haters Association. Is that the sort of person you would want to vote for?" << (Wiki)

By this fallacious logic:
David Duke is a Klan member;
David Duke is a Republican;
Therefore all Republicans are Klan members.

Fred Phelps is a Baptist.
Fred Phelps is intolerant.
Therefore, Baptists are intolerant.

Doesn't work. Never has.

Your examples are not applicable at all.

Jeremiah Wright was an Obama mentor, with an influence which supposedly spanned 20 years of Obama's life. Come up with an example which includes mentorship by David Duke or Fred Phelps.

"Mentor" is irrelevant. Being called a "mentor" doesn't just ditch the laws of logic. I have mentors whose views I disagree with on some topic; I'm sure you do too.

I don't know why this wasn't laughed out of the public discourse six years ago. This has no more validity than George Bush robo-calling voters in South Carolina to tell them John McCain has "an illegitimate black baby" (Bangladeshi adoptee really, but "black" sells fear in SC).

It's political demagoguery puppetry bullshit. Dump it already. It didn't sell six years ago, it's not selling now, and it won't sell tomorrow even when the names change.

It didn't "sell" 6 years ago because the media abdicated its responsibility.

And now they are "shocked" by their discovery of his dishonesty and/or obliviousness.

There was no reason for surprise.

There was only betrayal of the reason they have Constitutional protection.




Jeremiah Wright was a pivotal person in the molding of the person who leads our nation now. He had deep and longterm influence on Obama, per Obama's own words. He mattered.

 

[S.J.]

After six years of this crowing I still don't get the point. Jeremiah Wright was Obama's pastor............... and?

Who was George W. Bush's pastor? The Dick Cheney's? Mitt Romney's? John McCain's?

WHO CARES? The pastors were not and are not running for office.

Who were their dentists? Their telephone repair people? Their mail carriers?
Conspiring minds need to know. Scandal beckons.

If you spend 20 years in a hatemonger's congregation and if you cite him as a mentor, he is in a different category from your dentist. And then if you claim that after sitting in the congregation for 20 years, you never heard the hate -- then that's a story.

Early shades of the "is he dishonest or is he oblivious?" debate America is finally having 6 years too late.

But, isn't it dishonest to then say that Obama is "Muslim" if he spent 20 years in a Christian church? Just sayin.........

A "Christian church" that honored Louis Farrakhan?