|
|
#121
09-06-2007, 04:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Official Thread on the Foxnews Republican Debate
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Is there any youtube up of the after-debate? [/ QUOTE ] http://youtube.com/watch?v=8YnmAHjM9FQ Copernicus, watch it again. And keep posting your analysis. You're changing more minds than Borodog. Hannity is pretty good at tossing out the sensational argument in a way that's almost impossible to respond with a straight face. I think Paul does a good job of fouling off his nonsense in his alloted 15 seconds or so, and really shines when he talks to Colmes. Hannity seems confident during his Iran questioning, but then seems tilted after Paul talks to Allen and manages to get a few words in (and basically owns Hannity and his agenda). [/ QUOTE ] Id really like to sit some of these guys down and explain logical fallacies to them. Some great points made by Paul are completely side-stepped "Iran May have nuclear weapons" "Russia had nukes and we didn't invade them" "uhhhhh" 
|
|
#122
09-06-2007, 04:40 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Official Thread on the Foxnews Republican Debate
Well, one must also consider that the Russians didn't feel they had an obligation to God to kill Americans. They wanted war just as little as we did, both nations knew nuclear weapons were not really an option. In fact, we trusted their government enough to leak our security measures for nuclear missiles out to them. The idea being that they would then have more security, making it more difficult for a random madman to go in and launch a missile.
|
|
#123
09-06-2007, 05:19 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Official Thread on the Foxnews Republican Debate
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Is there any youtube up of the after-debate? [/ QUOTE ] http://youtube.com/watch?v=8YnmAHjM9FQ Copernicus, watch it again. And keep posting your analysis. You're changing more minds than Borodog. Hannity is pretty good at tossing out the sensational argument in a way that's almost impossible to respond with a straight face. I think Paul does a good job of fouling off his nonsense in his alloted 15 seconds or so, and really shines when he talks to Colmes. Hannity seems confident during his Iran questioning, but then seems tilted after Paul talks to Allen and manages to get a few words in (and basically owns Hannity and his agenda). [/ QUOTE ] Id really like to sit some of these guys down and explain logical fallacies to them. Some great points made by Paul are completely side-stepped "Iran May have nuclear weapons" "Russia had nukes and we didn't invade them" "uhhhhh" [/ QUOTE ] If you bother to listen under Paul's interruptions (which people seem to be fond of accusing SH of) you will find that his response wasn't "uhhhhh". Since there is no link between your two quotes there is no logical fallacy involved. they are independent statements.
|
|
#125
09-06-2007, 06:50 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Official Thread on the Foxnews Republican Debate
[ QUOTE ]
If you bother to listen under Paul's interruptions (which people seem to be fond of accusing SH of) [/ QUOTE ] LOL I watched the clip again just in case you got something correct for a change. I think RP was actually beyond respectful in letting Hannity finish his thoughts, considering the way SH was misrepresenting RP's views, and even facts. Though I'm sure you disagree that this misrepresentation ever occurred. By my count, RP cuts him off once when SH blatantly lies, and briefly cuts him off a second time to ask "Who did?" and then remains quiet when SH asks to finish. Hannity consistently asks loaded questions and then cuts Paul off the second he starts to formulate a logical response. It's what he does. And then the kicker was that he even butted in while RP was answering one of Allen's questions, and then interrupted AGAIN when RP was addressing SH's interruption! I realize they have their time restraints and myopic points that they need to deliver for their audience (people like you) and whatnot, so I'm not trying to blame SH for talking over him. It was nothing out of the ordinary and no big deal. That's how cable news works, and RP knows it when he goes on. But if you're suggesting it was actually RP who was not being fair, you just sound silly. RP is very willing to have a drawn out, logically formulated debate. That's what he's best at. The 10 second sound bites/constant interruptions is Hannity's game (and RP isn't all that great at it), and you've gotta be naive if you honestly don't see that. EDIT: I don't mean anything personal Copernicus. I watch Fox News all the time (for entertainment, and some loose idea of what's going on in the world). Just take it with a grain of salt and admit that SH is sensational. You can defend your values without having to defend TV personalities who hijack them. When you try to defend it, you just dig a hole for yourself.
|
|
#126
09-06-2007, 07:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Official Thread on the Foxnews Republican Debate
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] lol, paul is winning the text in vote. [/ QUOTE ] proof how meaningless those polls are [/ QUOTE ] More like proof that the sheep don't watch the debates as much as people who actually understand the issues.
|
|
#127
09-06-2007, 07:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Official Thread on the Foxnews Republican Debate
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] If you bother to listen under Paul's interruptions (which people seem to be fond of accusing SH of) [/ QUOTE ] LOL I watched the clip again just in case you got something correct for a change. I think RP was actually beyond respectful in letting Hannity finish his thoughts, considering the way SH was misrepresenting RP's views, and even facts. Though I'm sure you disagree that this misrepresentation ever occurred. By my count, RP cuts him off once when SH blatantly lies, and briefly cuts him off a second time to ask "Who did?" and then remains quiet when SH asks to finish. Hannity consistently asks loaded questions and then cuts Paul off the second he starts to formulate a logical response. It's what he does. And then the kicker was that he even butted in while RP was answering one of Allen's questions, and then interrupted AGAIN when RP was addressing SH's interruption! I realize they have their time restraints and myopic points that they need to deliver for their audience (people like you) and whatnot, so I'm not trying to blame SH for talking over him. It was nothing out of the ordinary and no big deal. That's how cable news works, and RP knows it when he goes on. But if you're suggesting it was actually RP who was not being fair, you just sound silly. RP is very willing to have a drawn out, logically formulated debate. That's what he's best at. The 10 second sound bites/constant interruptions is Hannity's game (and RP isn't all that great at it), and you've gotta be naive if you honestly don't see that. EDIT: I don't mean anything personal Copernicus. I watch Fox News all the time (for entertainment, and some loose idea of what's going on in the world). Just take it with a grain of salt and admit that SH is sensational. You can defend your values without having to defend TV personalities who hijack them. When you try to defend it, you just dig a hole for yourself. [/ QUOTE ] Ive got nothing to defend. Last night was the first time Ive watched SH or Fox News for more than 5 minutes in a week. I dont watch TV except for hockey and poker (and an occasional primary debate).
|
|
#128
09-06-2007, 07:10 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Official Thread on the Foxnews Republican Debate
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] lol, paul is winning the text in vote. [/ QUOTE ] proof how meaningless those polls are [/ QUOTE ] More like proof that the sheep don't watch the debates as much as people who actually understand the issues. [/ QUOTE ] As opposed to those who take the time and spend the money to go to the Iowa straw poll? Doubtful
|
|
#129
09-06-2007, 08:20 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Official Thread on the Foxnews Republican Debate
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Copernicus, I'm not really that big of a Ron Paul fan - hadn't heard of him until I saw his name in every thread at 2+2 but even I have to acknowledge that he did very well in the debate, and very well in the after-debate with Hannity. To say Hannity took him to school (or any such comment) is ridiculous, in my opinion. [/ QUOTE ] he may have come off well in terms of argueing...but he looked awful. frazzled, angry, etc. He's a lost cause anyways and just one of those wacky fringe canidates that people seem to always love...but if he really wanted to try to make some true headway he needs to come off as more presidential looking, at least in the way that most average americans seem to think a "president" should look. [/ QUOTE ] Yeah, appearances > issues.
|
|
#130
09-06-2007, 08:43 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Official Thread on the Foxnews Republican Debate
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] lol, paul is winning the text in vote. [/ QUOTE ] proof how meaningless those polls are [/ QUOTE ] More like proof that the sheep don't watch the debates as much as people who actually understand the issues. [/ QUOTE ] As opposed to those who take the time and have their candidate spend money for them to go to the Iowa straw poll? Yes. [/ QUOTE ] The Iowa Straw Poll is like a big party. Fits right into the "football politics" mentality of the sheep. Debates put them to sleep.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
