O'Reilly evidence

quote:

---

I think the deeper issues this time round are so serious and so fundamental that our very system of government is at stake

---

Riiiiiiiiightt......and the whole thing will collapse under extreme, oppressive, fundamentalist, right wing, nazi, fascist, civilization ending republicans. Now, do you feel better?Geez, I'll say it again, THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE. The minority party always feels like it's the end of the world especially after losing the presidency and both houses. Ok, the republicans have been in control for 12 years, big deal. It's easy to forget 40 years of corrupt, left wing, extreme, liberal, communist loving, arrogant democratic dominance.So just hang on and ride it out little buckaroo, your time will come, the pendulum will swing, and the sun will come out tomorrow.

Oh, you didn't get it? I didn't realize I'd need to be so explicit.One side would impose its own narrow interpretation of the bible on everyone else. That same side would make our system of government and laws subservient to the bible. The other side feels that people should be able to decide for themselves whether or not to live according to the bible.In other words, one side wants to remove our personal freedoms, while the other does not.So there is a difference. I thought you'd be able to see it, but I'm not so surprised to find that I was wrong.

---

Keep America Safe AND Free!

quote:

---

Riiiiiiiiightt......and the whole thing will collapse under extreme, oppressive, fundamentalist, right wing, nazi, fascist, civilization ending republicans. Now, do you feel better?

---

Well, no.This process is well under way already.The current presidency is the most secretive and closed we have seen in decades. The President gives no press conferences. The white house secertly pays journalists to promote it's ideas.This first Patriot act is a serious assault upon our civil rights, so much so that Americans no longer have a right to due process (habeas corpus). It is being abused by law enforcement as we speak.There is even a Patriot Act 2 which would go even further towards creating a police state, allowing secret arrests and secret trials (essentially making someone "dissappear"), the removal of citizenship and deportation of native-born Americans even if they have not done anything illegal. All police restrictions upon spying on citizens would be removed. Anti-war protesters and any dissidents, under the PA2, could be defined as terrorists.Furthermore, none of these activities would be under Congressional (or any outside) oversight.I absolutely do believe that the US is sliding into Facism, and I am heartbroken that we put these assholes back in power.Laurence W. Britt, Facism Anyone?

Yes, you are wrong. The majority of republicans are not extreme fundamentalist, just as the majority of democrats are not atheists communist. Our laws will not become subserviant to the Bible. The only place that will happen is in forum debates by fear mongering democratic partisans.

quote:

---

The majority of republicans are not extreme fundamentalist,

---

But who are the Republicans in power?That's right, the extreme fundamentalists!

quote:

---

just as the majority of democrats are not atheists communist.

---

Um, there are no Democrats who are Communists. Then they would be in the Communist party, not the Democratic party. Democrats are Democrats.And let me just point out to you that we can point to many actual examples of real people in power which represent the extreme right wing of the Republican party, currently and past, but we cannot do that at all with the extreme left wing. There have been no socialist presidents.

quote:

---

Our laws will not become subserviant to the Bible.

---

Some of them already are.Stem cell research is severely restricted because of Christian religious beliefs.Bush has cut out international family planning funding because of his opposition to legal abortion.Revently, Creationists and other fundamentalits Christians have ratcheted up their demands that religion be tausht as fact in public schools.The Faith Based Initiatives agenda clearly dumps a great deal of public money into organizations which can legally discriminate and also indoctrinate people into a particular religion.Edited to add: I forgot one. The Gay Marriage Ban is certainly an instance of US becoming subservient to the Bible.Oh, another one is the movement to overturn Roe V. Wade.This message has been edited by schrafinator, 04-26-2005 07:20 AM

Rrhain stated his position and supplied a lot of evidence to support it.You stated your position, yet here in this post, where normally you would address Rrhain's specific evidence in a rebuttal, you simply reassert your original claim.

quote:

---

I realize there is nothing that would convince you that your cherished democrats are not as power hungry and corrupt as Republicans.

---

How do you know this?You haven't actually provided any evidence for us to consider.You have only made vague, general allegations that "Democrats are just as bad", yet haven't provided any specific evidence that this is so.You say you "know" that they are. Surely you have some examples for us of how Democrats have behaved similarly to the NeoCons.

quote:

---

Geez, I'll say it again, THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE.

---

Yes, you keep saying this, over and over again, but you have yet to actually support it with any evidence.Repeating a claim doesn't make it more true.Supporting it with evidence does.

I've started a new Coffee House thread on the US and facism.Hope to see you there.

truthlover responds to me:

quote:

---

quote:

---

In the current year, it's 33%

---

​

I gave you the source for the 37% in the other thread.

---

And I showed you that it was wrong.

quote:

---

Finding a new percentage for the current year is irrelevant.

---

Incorrect. The current year is the highest percentage of non-white students in Florida universities. If it is significantly lower than O'Reilly's stat, then the number he cited cannot possibly be correct.

quote:

---

37% did not come from nowhere, just as I said it didn't.

---

Yes, it did. O'Reilly pulled it, just like most all of his other stats, out of his ass.

quote:

---

Worse, not only is your last post irrelevant

---

(*blink!*)You did not just say that, did you?Was or was not O'Reilly's point that there is some sort of discrimination going on against whites in the Florida University system? I remind you that the topic was Jeb Bush's "One Florida" program regarding the state of affirmative action in Florida universities. As J. Bush said in introducing the program: Now, O'Reilly's comment was defending the program to Florida State Senator Kendrick Meek: Therefore, shouldn't we be looking at the racial population of the state of Florida, which the Florida university system is supposed to serve, in order to see if the admissions policies of the university system are biased against whites?And if we should find that whites are overrepresented in the population of students compared to the population of Floridians, doesn't that make us question the claim that there is a barrier to the Florida university system for white students? Especially in light of the fact that the vast majority of non-white students are going to only two of the ten schools in question and that those two schools have historically had tiny populations of white students?Hint: Before you answer, do not assume that I am in favor of affirmative action.

quote:

---

(and thus inaccurate, no matter how accurate any of the individual figures might be)

---

(*blink!*)You did not just say that, did you?Because something is accurate but irrelevant, that makes it inaccurate? That makes no sense.In a discussion about the conjugation of the verb "tener" in the preterit in Spanish, the statement "2 + 2 = 4" suddenly becomes inaccurate simply because it is irrelevant? That makes no sense.

quote:

---

but the only possible effect any of this could have is to take the focus off what ought to have been a pretty rousing recommendation for a book

---

Incorrect.This has nothing to do with Franken's book. It has to do with your gullibility into believing anything that comes out of O'Reilly's mouth.

---

Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

berberry responds to me:

quote:

---

Why can't you be civil?

---

Excuse me? Civility demands that those who lie be called out. Outrageous behaviour requires an outrageous response. Have you not read your Miss Manners? When faced with someone who has failed to maintain a standard of honesty and integrity, the proper response is to point it out.You are entitled to your opinion, yes. You are not entitled to your facts. When someone says something that is factually and substantively incorrect and has been shown the evidence that the claim is factually and substantively incorrect, then it is dishonest to play into that dishonesty by refusing to step up and declare the statement a lie.Would you prefer that I refer to him as insane? That is the only other reason to continue to state something that you know to be untrue and he knows that it is untrue because he has been shown the direct evidence that belies his claim. It's called "cognitive dissonance" and we've all seen it. It's one of the mind's adaptive reactions to information that challenges core beliefs. When you are shown that the fundamental basis for your worldview is naught but a lie, it is not uncommon to simply refuse to believe it despite the fact that it happened right in front of your eyes.But to say that would require me to psychoanalyze people over the Internet and I am incapable of that. And in the end, I don't care why people tell lies. But when they tell them, I call them out.It's the polite and civil thing to do. I give them the chance to correct their statements.Why are you asking me to be rude to everybody else here and coddle him?

---

Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

AdminJar responds to me:

quote:

---

Present evidence for your belief

---

I did.Truthlover claimed that O'Reilly's stat was actually about the entire minority population in Florida schools and that O'Reilly misspoke himself by applying it to blacks.The problem, as I pointed out when he originally brought it up by giving references, is that O'Reilly's number doesn't even represent the entire minority population in Florida schools.Therefore, for him to repeat the claim that the minority population in Florida schools was 37% when he has been shown that it was never that high means that he is lying. That's the definition of a lie, is it not? Stating something that you know to be false?He is entitled to his opinion.He is not entitled to his facts. He does not get to hide behind a claim of "I don't believe it." Facts are not subject to belief.Civility and polite behaviour demands that lies be pointed out. You do not coddle people who refuse to behave with honesty and integrity.

---

Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

Monk responds to me:

quote:

---

I realize there is nothing that would convince you that your cherished democrats are not as power hungry and corrupt as Republicans.

---

(*chuckle*)Where did I say I cherished the Democrats? You seem to have confused the fact that I despise the Republicans with the idea that I like the Democrats.

quote:

---

You are wrong to think democrats are above republicans and do not stoop to the same level of false propaganda.

---

Huh? Why is it that the last Democratic administration was much more open about its activities than the current one? Why is it that the last Democratic administration, despite being the most investigated administration in history, couldn't find anything on anybody? Compare this to the Reagan administration that had literally dozens of convictions.To be more specific:Fourteen people were convicted regarding Iran-Contra.
Two were convicted over illegal lobbying.
Sixteen were convicted regarding HUD.Caspar Weinberger had been indicted on five counts but Bush pardoned him before they went to possible conviction.Regarding Whitewater, the travel office scandal, the FBI files, Lewinsky, Babbit, and Espy for Clinton, not a single conviction. Hubbell was convicted of embezzlement but for actions he did before he joined the Clinton administration.That you do not see a difference between the actions of the Republicans and the actions of the Democrats means you have a severely different definition of "crave power" than I do.Reminder: That I detest the Republicans does not mean I like the Democrats.

---

Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

Republican psychology is very similar to that of theists: the other side is just as opinionated, all opinions are equal, thus there is no "truth". I would suggest this is becuase they are both Utopian.

End of discussion. Do it again and you will be suspended.This message has been edited by AdminJar, 05-04-2005 06:33 AM

---

quote:

---

End of discussion. Do it again and you will be suspended.

---

Yep. You can TELL lies, and nobody objects. You just can't point out that a claim is a lie - that, apparently, is unforgivable.