ryguy wrote:Ray - I suppose my mistake here is in attempting to defend Obama from the numerous points you've been making against him out of one side of your mouth, while out of the other side of your mouth you admit they are both dirty pols. Which of course is clever because by forcing someone to counter the one-sided bashing, gives you more ammunition to continue bashing one side in a disproportionate way.
So, let me at least say this - you are absolutely correct that they are both dirty pols. Unfortuantely, these are the two shmucks we've got to choose from, and I've read too much about our nation's bloody history and what it took for us to have the vote to simply not vote. I can't do that, it goes against everything I believe in.
So, stuck with a choice between these two, we're forced to choose the one who stinks less. I've read all of the charges against Obama (including all of the ones that you've repeated here over and over), as well as the many charges against McCain. For me it just comes down to the fact that one stinks far less than the other - McCain's joined-at-the-hip-with-Bush voting pattern alone is enough to win my vote for Obama.
But again, given a choice between the two, Obama is clearly the less stinky of two smelly politicians.
Access Denied wrote:In either case is your repeated badgering of Ryan really necessary? In my opinion you’ve yet to provide any evidence he’s blindly endorsing Obama.
You Can Call Me Ray wrote:If a BS artist shows up here (like Lear) and starts spouting crap, the members of RU will oblige by putting the screws to him. Our rules demand that when people point out issues where their crap falls apart, that they have to address those issues. If they continue to ignore them, they are warned. If they still continue to ignore them, they are banned.
Now please apply this same template to Ryan. SEVERAL pages back I provided clear evidence that not only is Obama guilty of confirmation bias in his interview with Anderson Cooper, but I also provided the evidence of the whole interview to Ryan, since he made a remark suggesting I took that quote out of context. I did not. I provided evidence to confirm Obama's confirmation bias.
Given the lack of response, why do you think I should think anything differently than I would think of a BS hoaxer who refuses to cop to evidence which shows him wrong.
But beyond that... there is more than one example on these boards where, when I am confronted with evidence that shows me wrong, I suck-it-up, and post an admission of my erroneous comments/statements.
It is symptomatic of confirmation bias. Were it a BS hoaxer, it would not be considered "badgering" but rather diligence in getting them to admit their BS. But apparantly, Ryan is given a pass. Could it be a bias inherent in the fact that he is one of the "RU Three"? Sure smells like it from where I sit.
Would it really hurt Ryan so much to say something like: "You were right, Ray, and you clearly showed Obama was guilty of confirmation bias."
But to do that, Ryan would also have a chink in his armor in that he would have to admit he gave Obama the benefit of the doubt, and my point is NO POL deserves the benefit of the doubt, especially those from the Republicrat Parties.
NONE of their nonsense will change the fact that my vote is going for the Libertarian candidate. And without sounding too arrogant, at some point I believe other Americans who are sick of this will catch up with people like me and realize that voting for "none of the above" (from Republicrat tickets) is sending a message to the PTB. A protest vote is just as valid as any other vote.
ryguy wrote:Now please apply this same template to Ryan. SEVERAL pages back I provided clear evidence that not only is Obama guilty of confirmation bias in his interview with Anderson Cooper, but I also provided the evidence of the whole interview to Ryan, since he made a remark suggesting I took that quote out of context. I did not. I provided evidence to confirm Obama's confirmation bias.
This is a good example - you read the interview and conclude that it's "evidence" that Obama is guilty of confirmation bias. How is your interpretation of the interview evidence? We could line up 10 to 20 people who would read the interview and likely half of them would disagree with your analysis that Obama is guilty of confirmation bias. It's too subjective - how you read it depends too much on your own personal interpretations of the interview,
COOPER: And, Senator Obama, my final question -- your -- some of your Republican critics have said you don't have the experience to handle a situation like this. They in fact have said that Governor Palin has more executive experience, as mayor of a small town and as governor of a big state of Alaska.
What's your response?
OBAMA: Well, you know, my understanding is, is that Governor Palin's town of Wasilla has, I think, 50 employees. We have got 2,500 in this campaign. I think their budget is maybe $12 million a year. You know, we have a budget of about three times that just for the month.
So, I think that our ability to manage large systems and to execute, I think, has been made clear over the last couple of years. And, certainly, in terms of the legislation that I passed just dealing with this issue post-Katrina of how we handle emergency management, the fact that many of my recommendations were adopted and are being put in place as we speak, I think, indicates the degree to which we can provide the kinds of support and good service that the American people expect.
COOPER: Senator Obama, thank you for your time.
OBAMA: Great to talk to you, Anderson.
Confirmation bias refers to a type of selective thinking whereby one tends to notice and to look for what confirms one's beliefs, and to ignore, not look for, or undervalue the relevance of what contradicts one's beliefs.
ryguy wrote:Again - being shown evidence from a photographic expert that a picture is hoaxed is clearly "evidence" that a claim is false. Being shown an interview that could be interpreted in a multitude of different ways depending on your subjective perspective...I can't believe you're calling such a thing "evidence."
Just for the record, Alaska's FY2008 operating budget is $11.2 billion, and the state employs approximately 15,000 people. Those certainly aren't huge numbers in federal terms, but they're a good bit bigger than the Obama campaign.
COOPER: And, Senator Obama, my final question -- your -- some of your Republican critics have said you don't have the experience to handle a situation like this. They in fact have said that Governor Palin has more executive experience, as mayor of a small town and as governor of a big state of Alaska.
What's your response?
OBAMA: Well, you know, my understanding is, is that Governor Palin's town of Wasilla has, I think, 50 employees. We have got 2,500 in this campaign. I think their budget is maybe $12 million a year. You know, we have a budget of about three times that just for the month.
So, I think that our ability to manage large systems and to execute, I think, has been made clear over the last couple of years.
And, certainly, in terms of the legislation that I passed just dealing with this issue post-Katrina of how we handle emergency management, the fact that many of my recommendations were adopted and are being put in place as we speak, I think, indicates the degree to which we can provide the kinds of support and good service that the American people expect.
torbjon wrote:um... this is still Friendly, right?? The last time I saw this level of hostility and butted in you guys both told me that you do this all of the time and enjoyed it...
this is still fun and productive, yes??
If you guys really Are getting angry and frustrated with each other then Bernays wins again and we all lose...
It would break my heart to lose two good minds like yours to the likes of them...
just asking.
sorry for the intrusion.
Access Denied wrote:If so then please explain in detail how you came to this conclusion and if not then I think you owe Ryan and this board an apology for your behavior.
Seriously.
They in fact have said that Governor Palin has more executive experience, as mayor of a small town and as governor of a big state of Alaska.
What's your response?
Well, you know, my understanding is, is that Governor Palin's town of Wasilla has, I think, 50 employees. We have got 2,500 in this campaign. I think their budget is maybe $12 million a year. You know, we have a budget of about three times that just for the month.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests