IntenseDebate - Skeeve

12 years ago @ Breitbart.com - Defendant\'s views deb... · 0 replies · +1 points

Hate Crime? Give me a freakin' break.... every crime against another human being is a "hate crime". Classifying crimes in this way does nothing more than create a special minority class of people who get special privledges. When will actions of radical islamic terrorists be classified as "hate crimes"? The sword cuts in 2 ways, friends.

12 years ago @ Big Peace - The Boiling Pot Axis: ... · 0 replies · +1 points

Sorry for the late reply - I agree, Israel can indeed take on the combined strength of Syria, Jordan, Hezbollah & Hamas. Ever read Psalm 83? Read it again once more.... it's coming. (The ancient names are all equivalent to Israel's bordering countries)

12 years ago @ Big Peace - The Boiling Pot Axis: ... · 3 replies · +5 points

Iran may be only a couple years away from having deliverable nuclear weapons. But even without them, Iran may be using the mere threat of becoming a nuclear power to manipulate and provoke Israel into a pre-emptive strike. Should Israel take the bait, Iran will have succeeded in the court of world opinion, and she may use this to induce her proxies (Syria, Jordan, Hezbollah, Hamas) into an outright counter-attack against Israel. If Israel holds back a strike, then Iran will acquire nukes, and all the world will be worse off. Therefore, Israel may soon have no choice anyway.
Assuming the pre-emptive strike scenario, a large-scale Middle East war may be the result - much to the delight of Iran and her apocalyptic-minded leaders - but one in which Israel will ultimately be victorious. Then, the world, weary over 6 decabes of Palestinian & Arab-Israeli conflict will finally breathe of sigh of relief. But this respite may, in fact, not last very long. For another war will then be on the horizon...

13 years ago @ Big Government - Five Lessons for Ameri... · 0 replies · +1 points

Thanks - just don't let him use the "bait and switch" tactic of getting you to think that the subject is about corporations when the subject is government spending. The libs do that all the time because they have no real, logical, arguments.

13 years ago @ Big Government - Five Lessons for Ameri... · 0 replies · +1 points

Thanks Oldman Rick. Spotting logical fallacies is a little hobby of mine now. They are so easy to spot from liberals, although conservatives are just as guilty sometimes. (I've called a few of them out, some received my comments constructively, which is a good sign).

My real passion, though, lies in spotting the logical fallacy of evolutionary science. (And...lol..."evolutionary science" is a logical fallacy of equivocation in and of itself! Because such "science" is not science at all, but a philosophy about the past.)

13 years ago @ Big Government - Five Lessons for Ameri... · 0 replies · +1 points

Now you are using a logical fallacy of relevance commonly known as the "Bait and Switch" by shifting the subject to corporations. __Regardless of what the GOP says, Regardless of whether higher taxes even affect corporations at all - the statement: Higher taxes leads to higher spending, not lower deficits - is true! Think about it. You earn $1000 a month. You spend $900 a month. Now suppose you earn $2000 a month - you think you will still be spending $900 a month?? No. Well neither would the government. (You may be disciplined but our government certainly is not) Now we can debate on how corporations are affected another time - but that's not the subject, my friend, and "bait and switch" tactics don't work with me.

13 years ago @ Breitbart.com - Walken: Went to bed, a... · 0 replies · 0 points

I was 13 years old in 1981 - but I particularly remember this incident because Natalie Wood was my mom's favorite actress and the day of her death coincided with my mom's 37th birthday. Now, 30 years later I am the same age Natalie was at her death.

Truly a tragic event - I doubt that Wagner or Walken intended on doing her harm, but I do think that alcohol impaired one or both of their judgments and perhaps the captain was intimidated or feared for his job (if he was not likewise impaired as well). Lesson learned - drinking and boating are just as dangerous as drinking and driving.

13 years ago @ Big Government - Five Lessons for Ameri... · 0 replies · +4 points

I agree that there is not much hope. In fact, I believe that the fall of America as we know it is a mathematical certainty. But unfortunately - there is no where better to go! The Islamic world is far worse, Europe's doom is more certain than even America's, and China has shot her own foot off with her 1-child per family policy which will seal her fate by 2040.
There is, therefore, only one hope left. And I place everything on Him, for only He is reliable in this broken world: The Almighty Creator of Heaven and Earth, the Lord Jesus Christ. I can only believe that He must be coming soon - for if He tarry's, I shudder to think what may become of us.

13 years ago @ Big Government - Five Lessons for Ameri... · 12 replies · +15 points

There are 2 Logical Fallacies in your statement.
The first is called a Fallacy of Equivocation. You are equating the "lower deficits" in the quote from the article with corporate instability. The statement Higher taxes lead to higher spending, not lower deficits - has no implications for corporations at all.

The 2nd is harder to spot, and is called the "Post Hoc, Ergo, Propter Hoc Fallacy" a.k.a. Before this, therefore, because of this". It applies to your statement that after the Bush tax cuts, we got deficits. Implicit in your statement is that the deficits were caused by the tax cuts. You will have to do a lot more convincing for people to believe that. Especially with the burst of the housing bubble and involvment in major military activities going on in the same time period.

13 years ago @ Big Hollywood - Exclusive Photos: Mich... · 0 replies · +1 points

You are Doubly wrong. The America Dream was Never, ever about putting people on an equal playing field. That is a denial of reality. No 2 people are born with equal talents, abilities, or into the same environment - so how could there ever be an equal playing field? Oh - this isn't fair? Who ever said Life was Fair? Neither our founding fathers nor Abe Lincoln ever believed in this fictional "equal playing field" you are referring to - they believed in FREEDOM. And any society that tries to equal the playing field, must necessarily sacrifice freedom.

2nd reason you're wrong: Michael Moore certainly isn't helping to equal the playing field, do you really believe that? Where is he leading by example?

IntenseDebate Comment System

Description

Connect with Skeeve

People I'm following

Skeeve