Ugh, Our Government Names a Naval Vessel After Gabrielle Giffords

[Publius1787]

Youve no logic behind calling it a horrible choice.

Yes, this is not an answer to my post, and thus, the argument has now become contradiction. You are now just taking the opposite position without explanation. I have already addressed this, you chose not to listen. Furthermore, you chose not to convey a counterargument. So what am I to make of the above? Are you just posting for no other reason than to trick yourself into thinking you’re on the right side of a losing argument? If so, seek help.

This is what we call psycho-babble.

In reality, you're being called to the floor for whining, and you have no merit behind your whine.

If that were true then why reply at all? I will tell you why, and here I go repeating myself again.

Yes, this is not an answer to my post, and thus, the argument has now become contradiction. You are now just taking the opposite position without explanation. I have already addressed this, you chose not to listen. Furthermore, you chose not to convey a counterargument. So what am I to make of the above? Are you just posting for no other reason than to trick yourself into thinking you’re on the right side of a losing argument? If so, seek help.

 

[Publius1787]

Again, you have yet to demonstrate why it was boneheaded. Other than you don't like the woman.

We have aircraft carriers named after Reagan, Bush and Jerry freakin' Ford.

Another carrier, the John C. Stennis, was named after a Senator who supported segregation.

So again, the problem here is your irrational hatred for Ms. Giffords, who had the audacity to survive after being shot by a crazy person and actually pointing out it's too easy for crazy people to get guns.

The above assumes that crappy names in the past should justify crappy names in the future, or in other words, justifying a wrong with a perceived wrong.

Your opinion of what's crappy is irrelevant to logic. It's mere opinion, not logic.


To be logically consistent, all ships would NOT be named after vets or war heros.

whjat's the standard, then, and on what merit?

I see your point. Getting shot = get your name on a ship. If thats the standard then there are thousands of Americans that qualify.

 

[G.T.]

Yes, this is not an answer to my post, and thus, the argument has now become contradiction. You are now just taking the opposite position without explanation. I have already addressed this, you chose not to listen. Furthermore, you chose not to convey a counterargument. So what am I to make of the above? Are you just posting for no other reason than to trick yourself into thinking you’re on the right side of a losing argument? If so, seek help.

This is what we call psycho-babble.

In reality, you're being called to the floor for whining, and you have no merit behind your whine.

If that were true then why reply at all? I will tell you why, and here I go repeating myself again.

Yes, this is not an answer to my post, and thus, the argument has now become contradiction. You are now just taking the opposite position without explanation. I have already addressed this, you chose not to listen. Furthermore, you chose not to convey a counterargument. So what am I to make of the above? Are you just posting for no other reason than to trick yourself into thinking you’re on the right side of a losing argument? If so, seek help.

To let you know that it's transparent. That's why.

 

[G.T.]

The above assumes that crappy names in the past should justify crappy names in the future, or in other words, justifying a wrong with a perceived wrong.

Your opinion of what's crappy is irrelevant to logic. It's mere opinion, not logic.


To be logically consistent, all ships would NOT be named after vets or war heros.

whjat's the standard, then, and on what merit?

I see your point. Getting shot = get your name on a ship. If thats the standard then there are thousands of Americans that qualify.

But not thousands of ships to be named, so a grand "so stfu" would be in order.

 

[Publius1787]

I was just asking why you all hate this woman this much...

Incidently, the decision to name the boat after her was made back in 2012...

you are only screaming about it now because she's becoming the face of oppossition to our crazy gun laws.

Strawman Fallacy 1: My position on the woman has no merit in assessing whether she should have a ship named after her over thousands of fallen heroes. The question diverts the thread away from the merits on whether she should have a ship named after her i.e. chasing the straw man.

Strawman Fallacy 2: The date of the ships naming has no merit in assessing if the ship should have been named for her. The question diverts the thread away from the merits on whether she should have a ship named after her i.e. chasing the straw man.

Assuming facts not in evidence: No, I was against the USS John Murtha and he actually served in the military. The only problem was that he claimed that Marines (Now exonerated) were cold blooded murders. Indeed, I have been screaming about politicians names on ships for years (Save presidents who served).

Yawn, guy, just because you quote the fallacy doesn't mean you understand it.

(It's actually called "beating the straw man", you set up a straw man argument and then beat it. Chasing it would be impractical, since straw men can't run.)

Clearly, we name a lot of ships after people who aren't fallen heroes or even served in the military... Right, wrong, whatever. That's what we do.

You simply don't like what Giffords has been doing AFTER she got the ship named after her by her fellow congressfolks who kind of felt bad she got a bullet to the head for doing her job.

Whatever they're still fallacies. But yes, it's called a strawman and there is little need for you to take an opposing position on something we both agree on.

Justifying a bad name by other bad names doesn’t make it a good name.

"Yawn"? Why the self-comfort typing? Why portray an image of yourself, or at least, how you wish to be seen? What does that have to do with anything? How does that help your case? If you answer all these questions honestly you will find that typing "Yawn," "lol," "lmao," etc. are all self-comforting gestures that people type as to portray an image opposite of their feeling as to regain security in an losing argument.

 

[Crackerjaxon]

Is it an old ship used for target practice?

Just wondering.

 

[G.T.]

Strawman Fallacy 1: My position on the woman has no merit in assessing whether she should have a ship named after her over thousands of fallen heroes. The question diverts the thread away from the merits on whether she should have a ship named after her i.e. chasing the straw man.

Strawman Fallacy 2: The date of the ships naming has no merit in assessing if the ship should have been named for her. The question diverts the thread away from the merits on whether she should have a ship named after her i.e. chasing the straw man.

Assuming facts not in evidence: No, I was against the USS John Murtha and he actually served in the military. The only problem was that he claimed that Marines (Now exonerated) were cold blooded murders. Indeed, I have been screaming about politicians names on ships for years (Save presidents who served).

Yawn, guy, just because you quote the fallacy doesn't mean you understand it.

(It's actually called "beating the straw man", you set up a straw man argument and then beat it. Chasing it would be impractical, since straw men can't run.)

Clearly, we name a lot of ships after people who aren't fallen heroes or even served in the military... Right, wrong, whatever. That's what we do.

You simply don't like what Giffords has been doing AFTER she got the ship named after her by her fellow congressfolks who kind of felt bad she got a bullet to the head for doing her job.

Whatever they're still fallacies. But yes, it's called a strawman and there is little need for you to take an opposing position on something we both agree on.

Justifying a bad name by other bad names doesn’t make it a good name.

"Yawn"? Why the self-comfort typing? Why portray an image of yourself, or at least, how you wish to be seen? What does that have to do with anything? How does that help your case? If you answer all these questions honestly you will find that typing "Yawn," "lol," "lmao," etc. are all self-comforting gestures that people type as to portray an image opposite of their feeling as to regain security in an losing argument.

"UGH"

pot, kettle.

 

[Publius1787]

Your opinion of what's crappy is irrelevant to logic. It's mere opinion, not logic.


To be logically consistent, all ships would NOT be named after vets or war heros.

whjat's the standard, then, and on what merit?

I see your point. Getting shot = get your name on a ship. If thats the standard then there are thousands of Americans that qualify.

But not thousands of ships to be named, so a grand "so stfu" would be in order.

I will take this as you just playing around. If you are serious than you have problems that need to be addressed.

 

[G.T.]

I see your point. Getting shot = get your name on a ship. If thats the standard then there are thousands of Americans that qualify.

But not thousands of ships to be named, so a grand "so stfu" would be in order.

I will take this as you just playing around. If you are serious than you have problems that need to be addressed.

Projection.

If your thread is serious, well - you know....

 

[Publius1787]

Yawn, guy, just because you quote the fallacy doesn't mean you understand it.

(It's actually called "beating the straw man", you set up a straw man argument and then beat it. Chasing it would be impractical, since straw men can't run.)

Clearly, we name a lot of ships after people who aren't fallen heroes or even served in the military... Right, wrong, whatever. That's what we do.

You simply don't like what Giffords has been doing AFTER she got the ship named after her by her fellow congressfolks who kind of felt bad she got a bullet to the head for doing her job.

Whatever they're still fallacies. But yes, it's called a strawman and there is little need for you to take an opposing position on something we both agree on.

Justifying a bad name by other bad names doesn’t make it a good name.

"Yawn"? Why the self-comfort typing? Why portray an image of yourself, or at least, how you wish to be seen? What does that have to do with anything? How does that help your case? If you answer all these questions honestly you will find that typing "Yawn," "lol," "lmao," etc. are all self-comforting gestures that people type as to portray an image opposite of their feeling as to regain security in an losing argument.

"UGH"

pot, kettle.

One problem with your assertion. I was arguing with no one when that was posted, and thus, no self comforting gesture necessary. You really didn't think that reply through now did you? RE-READ WHAT YOU HIGHLIGHTED. I am now justified apersonal attack. Moron!

 

[rightwinger]

Why would anyone object to naming a ship after Gabby Giffords?

Are Republicans really that big a bunch of assholes?

 

[Publius1787]

But not thousands of ships to be named, so a grand "so stfu" would be in order.

I will take this as you just playing around. If you are serious than you have problems that need to be addressed.

Projection.

If your thread is serious, well - you know....

Yeah.

 

[JoeB131]

[

Whatever they're still fallacies. But yes, it's called a strawman and there is little need for you to take an opposing position on something we both agree on.

Justifying a bad name by other bad names doesn’t make it a good name.

"Yawn"? Why the self-comfort typing? Why portray an image of yourself, or at least, how you wish to be seen? What does that have to do with anything? How does that help your case? If you answer all these questions honestly you will find that typing "Yawn," "lol," "lmao," etc. are all self-comforting gestures that people type as to portray an image opposite of their feeling as to regain security in an losing argument.

Guy, you are the one on here arguing for three pages that they named a boat after someone you don't like, and that makes you mad, even though it has no effect on your life at all.

Seriously, if you are going to try to cast yourself as an intellectual, you need to make an intelligent, meaningful argument.

You don't think Gabby deserves to have a ship named after her. Her fellow members of Congress disagree with you. Take it up with them.

 

[G.T.]

Whatever they're still fallacies. But yes, it's called a strawman and there is little need for you to take an opposing position on something we both agree on.

Justifying a bad name by other bad names doesn’t make it a good name.

"Yawn"? Why the self-comfort typing? Why portray an image of yourself, or at least, how you wish to be seen? What does that have to do with anything? How does that help your case? If you answer all these questions honestly you will find that typing "Yawn," "lol," "lmao," etc. are all self-comforting gestures that people type as to portray an image opposite of their feeling as to regain security in an losing argument.

"UGH"

pot, kettle.

One problem with your assertion. I was arguing with no one when that was posted, and thus, no self comforting gesture necessary. You really didn't think that reply through now did you?

Oh, so now we only *dont* type these things if we are debating. If we aren't debating, they're not a self comforting gesture. (just asking, we have to keep the pseudo-intellectual book of rules straight so that we don't mess up in the future, Socrates.)

 

[G.T.]

Why would anyone object to naming a ship after Gabby Giffords?

Are Republicans really that big a bunch of assholes?

No, just the OP. And Steph, apparently.

 

[Publius1787]

"UGH"

pot, kettle.

One problem with your assertion. I was arguing with no one when that was posted, and thus, no self comforting gesture necessary. You really didn't think that reply through now did you?

Oh, so now we only *dont* type these things if we are debating. If we aren't debating, they're not a self comforting gesture. (just asking, we have to keep the pseudo-intellectual book of rules straight so that we don't mess up in the future, Socrates.)

You highlighted the word "argument" and you didn't think that my statement pertained to an argument? Are you reading comprehension skills really that jacked up?

Yawn"? Why the self-comfort typing? Why portray an image of yourself, or at least, how you wish to be seen? What does that have to do with anything? How does that help your case? If you answer all these questions honestly you will find that typing "Yawn," "lol," "lmao," etc. are all self-comforting gestures that people type as to portray an image opposite of their feeling as to regain security in an losing argument.

 

[G.T.]

One problem with your assertion. I was arguing with no one when that was posted, and thus, no self comforting gesture necessary. You really didn't think that reply through now did you?

Oh, so now we only *dont* type these things if we are debating. If we aren't debating, they're not a self comforting gesture. (just asking, we have to keep the pseudo-intellectual book of rules straight so that we don't mess up in the future, Socrates.)

You highlighted the word "argument" and you didn't think that my statement pertained to an argument? Are you reading comprehension skills really that jacked up?

You started the thread on a debate forum, ya dope.

 

[Desperado]

Look at the other names in this class of ships:
Medgar Evers, Cesar Chavez, John P. Murtha, Gabrielle Giffords and Lyndon B. Johnson
Name choices were made by Democratic Navy Secretary Ray Mabus. Mabus, since taking office in June 2009, has named 32 ships, and has also had a hand in ship-class naming conventions.

 

[Publius1787]

[

Whatever they're still fallacies. But yes, it's called a strawman and there is little need for you to take an opposing position on something we both agree on.

Justifying a bad name by other bad names doesn’t make it a good name.

"Yawn"? Why the self-comfort typing? Why portray an image of yourself, or at least, how you wish to be seen? What does that have to do with anything? How does that help your case? If you answer all these questions honestly you will find that typing "Yawn," "lol," "lmao," etc. are all self-comforting gestures that people type as to portray an image opposite of their feeling as to regain security in an losing argument.

Guy, you are the one on here arguing for three pages that they named a boat after someone you don't like, and that makes you mad, even though it has no effect on your life at all.

Seriously, if you are going to try to cast yourself as an intellectual, you need to make an intelligent, meaningful argument.

You don't think Gabby deserves to have a ship named after her. Her fellow members of Congress disagree with you. Take it up with them.

1) I enjoy arguing, even on behalf of positions I disagree with.

2) Insulting someone by using the phrase "cast yourself as an intellectual," is a means of ceding the argument i.e. (this guy thinks he's smart and that hurts my feelings as I have no reply so we'll just imply that he is a phony intellectual.) Why the word intellectual? Did I say that? Did I claim that? Who brought up intellectual? You did. Now honestly answer (to yourself) why you chose that word above all others to place after "phony."

3) Congress is not in charge of naming ships.

4) You owe me for the education you just received. You got a hell of a lot more out of it than I.

 

[Publius1787]

Oh, so now we only *dont* type these things if we are debating. If we aren't debating, they're not a self comforting gesture. (just asking, we have to keep the pseudo-intellectual book of rules straight so that we don't mess up in the future, Socrates.)

You highlighted the word "argument" and you didn't think that my statement pertained to an argument? Are you reading comprehension skills really that jacked up?

You started the thread on a debate forum, ya dope.

Thats no excuse for your ignorance. Oh, wait. Huh? So I was arguing with someone in this thread the moment I made it? How is that possible?