LawTalkers
Page 272 of 334 « First 172222262270271 272 273274282322 Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

LawTalkers (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/index.php)
-   Politics (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=16)
-   -   Know new taxes! (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=819)

Penske_Account 01-01-2009 03:57 PM
2009
 
is Obama president yet?

taxwonk 01-01-2009 04:09 PM
Re: Gaza
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sidd Finch (Post 376025)
I was just giving you a chance to blow me when you thought I wouldn't notice. You know you wanted to.
That only works with Velvet because you "fall asleep" with your wallet lying open on the table.

taxwonk 01-01-2009 04:22 PM
Re: Inquiring minds want to know.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Replaced_Texan (Post 376080)
The post shouldn't have been deleted and I was wrong to do so.
I let it go a long time ago. I suggest everyone else do the same.

Penske_Account 01-01-2009 04:42 PM
Re: Inquiring minds want to know.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by taxwonk (Post 376107)
I let it go a long time ago. I suggest everyone else do the same.
2. Same thing with the Juan the Marine controversy. No mas.

Sidd Finch 01-01-2009 04:44 PM
Re: Know new taxes!
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Secret_Agent_Man (Post 376035)
The bias of the author is indeed fairly evident, not only in the examples Hank cites but in saying that Hamas had been " unjustly ostracized by the international community for its anti-Israeli stance" prior to taking power in 2006

That doesn't necessarily make him wrong, but I wouldn't cite him.

S_A_M
Describing Qassam rockets as a "nuisance" was also cute.

Sidd Finch 01-01-2009 04:46 PM
Re: Know new taxes!
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atticus Grinch (Post 376054)
If we were to make a list of the Ten Biggest Shitbag Troll Socks in the History of Lawtalkers, Temp Sock would occupy the first, second, and fifth through ninth positions. The remainder would be occupied by Not Me.
What about Fluffy?

Sidd Finch 01-01-2009 04:48 PM
Re: Know new taxes!
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 376061)
Suppose that the author is a pedophile and a card cheat and a cad, but that everything he says after the first paragraph is, in fact, correct. Then what?
How are you assessing that it's correct? You didn't say anything to suggest that it's objectively correct, just that it "confirms" (i.e., shows that the author agrees with) your view. It's about as credible as a column by Ehud Barak would be.

Penske_Account 01-01-2009 05:15 PM
CBS news is reporting...
 
That Bill Clinton is being considered for the NY Senate seat as a two year care taker who would not run in 2010.

Despite my hatred of democrats, and America, and that I think Clinton may have been involved in a conspiracy re: murder, I suppourt this. Good on him!

Tyrone Slothrop 01-01-2009 07:43 PM
Re: Know new taxes!
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sidd Finch (Post 376113)
How are you assessing that it's correct? You didn't say anything to suggest that it's objectively correct, just that it "confirms" (i.e., shows that the author agrees with) your view. It's about as credible as a column by Ehud Barak would be.
It may not be correct, as with any other op-ed in a paper like the Post. The editors don't usually fact check op-eds as they would news pieces. It is, however, inconsistent with other things I've read, and aside from Hank's rally, I don't seem people mustering a lot of evidence that Hamas enjoys lots of support in Gaza. If you can believe that the Israeli government picked a fight because -- at least in part -- of internal politics, surely you can believe the same thing about Hamas.

Mmmm, Burger (C.J.) 01-01-2009 08:42 PM
Re: CBS news is reporting...
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Penske_Account (Post 376114)
That Bill Clinton is being considered for the NY Senate seat as a two year care taker who would not run in 2010.
Do you believe he won't run?

And for whom would he be taking care? Hillary, so when she's out as secy of state w/in 18 months, she's got an open seat?

Hank Chinaski 01-01-2009 09:08 PM
Re: Know new taxes!
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 376117)
It may not be correct, as with any other op-ed in a paper like the Post. The editors don't usually fact check op-eds as they would news pieces. It is, however, inconsistent with other things I've read, and aside from Hank's rally, I don't seem people mustering a lot of evidence that Hamas enjoys lots of support in Gaza. If you can believe that the Israeli government picked a fight because -- at least in part -- of internal politics, surely you can believe the same thing about Hamas.
so the one fact, the size of the rally, that we've seen is negative support, but it is only one fact?

Penske_Account 01-01-2009 09:19 PM
Re: CBS news is reporting...
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.) (Post 376119)
Do you believe he won't run?

And for whom would he be taking care? Hillary, so when she's out as secy of state w/in 18 months, she's got an open seat?
Yes/Hillary/and yes.

Sidd Finch 01-01-2009 09:40 PM
Re: Know new taxes!
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 376117)
It may not be correct, as with any other op-ed in a paper like the Post. The editors don't usually fact check op-eds as they would news pieces. It is, however, inconsistent with other things I've read, and aside from Hank's rally, I don't seem people mustering a lot of evidence that Hamas enjoys lots of support in Gaza. If you can believe that the Israeli government picked a fight because -- at least in part -- of internal politics, surely you can believe the same thing about Hamas.
The question isn't whether the editors of the Post believe it, but whether you do. You posted this op-ed as something that confirmed what you believed. When several people pointed out reasons to question the reliability of the op-ed piece, and its author, your response was something like "he may be a cad but what if he's right?" I asked how you assess whether he's right, and you say it's inconsistent with other things you've read.

In sum, you have me thoroughly confused about why you think this op-ed was even worth reading, let alone posting or discussing.

As for the last thing you said -- well, I suppose that if I might believe something about Israel's government, then I necessarily should be willing to believe the same thing about Hamas. They're quite similar, right? And nice twist on what I actually said -- that domestic politics played some part, because certainly no one making a policy decision could have ignored domestic politics. Unlike you, I don't think the Israeli government decided to risk soldiers' lives in order to garner votes.

As for Hamas, I'm more likely to believe that it 'picked a fight' (meaning, continued to shoot rockets into civilian neighborhoods) because, at core, the party stands for and advocates the destruction of Israel.

Tyrone Slothrop 01-01-2009 09:59 PM
Re: Know new taxes!
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 376121)
so the one fact, the size of the rally, that we've seen is negative support, but it is only one fact?
For the reason I stated before, I don't think the size of the rally is a good indicator of the breadth of Hamas support. I'm sure there are a lot of fervent Hamas supporters in Gaza. That's not the issue.

Tyrone Slothrop 01-01-2009 10:17 PM
Re: Know new taxes!
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sidd Finch (Post 376123)
When several people pointed out reasons to question the reliability of the op-ed piece, and its author, your response was something like "he may be a cad but what if he's right?" I asked how you assess whether he's right, and you say it's inconsistent with other things you've read.
What reasons to question the reliability? I'm still waiting for one. Everyone is reacting to the first paragraph, with which I disagree. I don't see it as undercutting the description of Hamas' position. Which is why I asked that question to Diane.

How do I assess whether he's right? The same way I assess the reliability of whatever else I read in a newspaper.

Quote:
Unlike you, I don't think the Israeli government decided to risk soldiers' lives in order to garner votes.
If the Israeli government were somehow immune from the susceptibility to letting domestic political considerations affect its foreign policy, unlike just about any other government anywhere, that would be pretty amazing. The head of the government is up for re-election next month. Go and read Ha'aretz or other Israeli newspapers and you will the relevance discusssed frankly without any of this "risk soldiers lives" crap.

Quote:
As for Hamas, I'm more likely to believe that it 'picked a fight' (meaning, continued to shoot rockets into civilian neighborhoods) because, at core, the party stands for and advocates the destruction of Israel.
That's certainly nice and simple. It doesn't explain why they stopped for six months though, so maybe a more complex view of their motives would be useful.

If you don't mean to imply that I don't understand that Hamas advocates the destruction of Israel then don't kiss my ass. If you do, then ask yourself why I think that strengthening Hamas is a bad idea.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:32 PM.
Page 272 of 334 « First 172222262270271 272 273274282322 Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
Hosted By: URLJet.com