|
|
| | |
Welcome, Guest.
The Collector Zone is a free community for trading card collectors - both sports and non-sports. There are forums for all of the major sports, non-sports, autographs and other hobby-related information. In addition, there are areas to trade, buy and sell with other collectors. Our members have now completed over 48,125 collector-to-collector transactions using our easy-to-use Transaction Manager.
With over 30,500 collectors and over 2,750,000 posts, there's plenty of ways to get involved with the other members - either in discussions or with trading. So, are you ready to join and start meeting other collectors?
If you're not a member, click here: Register
If you're already a member, login here:
Sheesh |
Posted on: Nov 12 2007, 03:14 PM |
MVP
Posts: 2,157
Joined: 16-July 05
From: Mariposa, California
|
QUOTE(bob_TCC @ Nov 12 2007, 01:02 PM) That's fine, Sheesh. By the way, I didn't actually expect you to acknowledge that your post was out of line. Instead, you want to play the "let's see what happens next" game. I hope I've made myself clear though. The rules about acceptable behavior are the same for the Politics forum as the rest of the Collector Zone. -Bob Yes, Dad. You've made your position clear. And, you are right. I do not see that my post was out of line. |
|
Forum: Politics
· Post Preview: #959204
· Replies: 75
· Views: 3,698
|
Sheesh |
Posted on: Nov 12 2007, 03:13 PM |
MVP
Posts: 2,157
Joined: 16-July 05
From: Mariposa, California
|
QUOTE(bluejaysfan1992 @ Nov 12 2007, 01:02 PM) but bin laden feels that he must extinguish or commit a sort of genocide in name o his faith. does bush kill directly or is the loss of life a consequence of something that bush thought was nesscary? Where to you get the idea he wants a genocide? Please, provide links to proof. Both Bin Laden and Bush are "generals" presiding over an ideological conflict, using their pawns for what they believe are a strategic advantage. |
|
Forum: Politics
· Post Preview: #959199
· Replies: 54
· Views: 3,016
|
Sheesh |
Posted on: Nov 12 2007, 02:53 PM |
MVP
Posts: 2,157
Joined: 16-July 05
From: Mariposa, California
|
QUOTE(bluejaysfan1992 @ Nov 12 2007, 12:47 PM) the bush administration didnt lie. the un and other the us ijntelligence was mistaken. they made a mistake. well i dont think they did because they found bunkers with traces of chemical residue on the ground(but the media wont tell you that) and all the gases they had. and what about the benifits of freeing a nation under a dictator? Again, do some research. Even the rats jumping off of the ship are coming back telling the Administration lied. Regarding freeing a nation, I wonder if 250,000 Iraqi civilians dead, 2 MILLION Iraqi refugees and civilians enduring the next 10 or more years in strife would think it was worth it. |
|
Forum: Politics
· Post Preview: #959149
· Replies: 54
· Views: 3,016
|
Sheesh |
Posted on: Nov 12 2007, 02:51 PM |
MVP
Posts: 2,157
Joined: 16-July 05
From: Mariposa, California
|
QUOTE(bluejaysfan1992 @ Nov 12 2007, 12:45 PM) Surely you must be kidding. There are 100s of quotes of Islamic Radicals that rival preschoolers' sayings. and you called Bin Laden a terrorist. do you think Bin Laden calls himself a terrorist. do you think Bin Laden wants to kill people or is it because he feels he has to for the faith? Bold Added There is little difference (in my mind) between the two. BOTH are engaged in criminal ideological wars that have resulted in thousands (hundreds of thousands in Bush's case) of mostly civilian deaths. Terrorism is in the eye of the beholder. |
|
Forum: Politics
· Post Preview: #959144
· Replies: 54
· Views: 3,016
|
Sheesh |
Posted on: Nov 12 2007, 02:40 PM |
MVP
Posts: 2,157
Joined: 16-July 05
From: Mariposa, California
|
QUOTE(bluejaysfan1992 @ Nov 12 2007, 12:33 PM) your right ....illegal thats why everyonbe agreed that we should go into iraq including clinton and kerry.... only because they were systematically lied to by the Bush Administration I added the bold. So, sure. When the American people were being lied to by the Bush administration, there was overwhelming support for invading Iraq; when their lies and other misdeeds (including committing treason in the Plame case) came to light, public support for the Iraq war has dwindled to it's current all-time low. Please. Do some research on these subjects before interjecting. Do not rely on the exclusive word of your parents. Think for yourself and use multiple forms of media to form your opinions. Fenway: You mean the Revolutionaries were employing guerrilla warfare - TERRORISM - to achieve their goal. See, there really isn't much difference between then and now. You know, an occupying country and freedom fighters.... And, soon, you might have your wish to go to war - this time in Iran. |
|
Forum: Politics
· Post Preview: #959130
· Replies: 54
· Views: 3,016
|
Sheesh |
Posted on: Nov 12 2007, 02:36 PM |
MVP
Posts: 2,157
Joined: 16-July 05
From: Mariposa, California
|
QUOTE Description of Ad Hominem
Translated from Latin to English, "Ad Hominem" means "against the man" or "against the person."
An Ad Hominem is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument. Typically, this fallacy involves two steps. First, an attack against the character of person making the claim, her circumstances, or her actions is made (or the character, circumstances, or actions of the person reporting the claim). Second, this attack is taken to be evidence against the claim or argument the person in question is making (or presenting). This type of "argument" has the following form:
1. Person A makes claim X. 2. Person B makes an attack on person A. 3. Therefore A's claim is false.
The reason why an Ad Hominem (of any kind) is a fallacy is that the character, circumstances, or actions of a person do not (in most cases) have a bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim being made (or the quality of the argument being made).
Description of Ad Hominem Tu Quoque
This fallacy is committed when it is concluded that a person's claim is false because 1) it is inconsistent with something else a person has said or 2) what a person says is inconsistent with her actions. This type of "argument" has the following form:
1. Person A makes claim X. 2. Person B asserts that A's actions or past claims are inconsistent with the truth of claim X. 3. Therefore X is false.
The fact that a person makes inconsistent claims does not make any particular claim he makes false (although of any pair of inconsistent claims only one can be true - but both can be false). Also, the fact that a person's claims are not consistent with his actions might indicate that the person is a hypocrite but this does not prove his claims are false. Which one? And, provide the link/proof/quote. |
|
Forum: Politics
· Post Preview: #959114
· Replies: 54
· Views: 3,016
|
Sheesh |
Posted on: Nov 11 2007, 04:53 PM |
MVP
Posts: 2,157
Joined: 16-July 05
From: Mariposa, California
|
QUOTE(tex333 @ Oct 21 2007, 01:03 PM) Welcome to the NFL. Hopefully gaining 80 yards on 25 carries against a decent defense will show everyone how overrated you really are. Good luck staying healthy, and keep up the good work, though I doubt you can. QUOTE(fenway1990 @ Nov 11 2007, 09:23 AM) i bet you feel really dumb right about now |
|
Forum: Sports News
· Post Preview: #957707
· Replies: 50
· Views: 2,115
|
Sheesh |
Posted on: Nov 10 2007, 10:12 PM |
MVP
Posts: 2,157
Joined: 16-July 05
From: Mariposa, California
|
Richard, I particularly like: QUOTE —Synonyms 1. grasping, acquisitive, avaricious, covetous. —Antonyms 1. altruistic, idealistic, unselfish. In regard to these mercenaries VS any civil servant and the important functions that they contribute to our society, which would you want? I want those who can be described by that list of antonyms. |
|
Forum: Politics
· Post Preview: #956569
· Replies: 41
· Views: 2,108
|
Sheesh |
Posted on: Nov 10 2007, 06:10 PM |
MVP
Posts: 2,157
Joined: 16-July 05
From: Mariposa, California
|
doyal, you are splitting hairs - as is the Bush administration - regarding the definition of mercenary. Foreign or not, they are people who are not connected to a government's military who are replacing conscripts/volunteers for monetary gain. ALL definitions of the term Mercenary begin with being a solider for financial gain. Here are a few from dictionary.com: QUOTE mer·ce·nar·y /ˈmɜrsəˌnɛri/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[mur-suh-ner-ee] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation adjective, noun, plural -nar·ies. –adjective 1. working or acting merely for money or other reward; venal. 2. hired to serve in a foreign army, guerrilla organization, etc. –noun 3. a professional soldier hired to serve in a foreign army. 4. any hireling. [Origin: 1350–1400; ME mercenarie < L mercénnārius working for pay, hired worker, mercenary, perh., repr. earlier *mercéd(i)nārius, equiv. to *mercédin-, s. of *mercédō, a by-form of mercés, s. mercéd- payment, wage (akin to merx goods; cf. merchant) + -ārius -ary]
—Related forms mer·ce·nar·i·ly /ˌmɜrsəˈnɛərəli, ˈmɜrsəˌnɛr-/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[mur-suh-nair-uh-lee, mur-suh-ner-] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation, adverb mer·ce·nar·i·ness, noun
—Synonyms 1. grasping, acquisitive, avaricious, covetous. —Antonyms 1. altruistic, idealistic, unselfish. Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006. American Heritage Dictionary - Cite This Source - Share This mer·ce·nar·y (mûr'sə-něr'ē) Pronunciation Key adj.
1. Motivated solely by a desire for monetary or material gain. 2. Hired for service in a foreign army.
n. pl. mer·ce·nar·ies
1. One who serves or works merely for monetary gain; a hireling. 2. A professional soldier hired for service in a foreign army.
I feel no sympathy for the mercenary thugs "serving" in Iraq (and were doing their thug thing in New Orleans after Katrina, too). The only positive that they have brought is proof that privatization of inherently governmental functions is neither efficient nor effective. Were it not for them, we would have long ago been out of Iraq due to the lack of true military personnel AND this war would not have cost as much to boot. While I would never think of spitting on soldiers returning from Iraq, I would consider it for these unethical Blackwater types. I just better do it here in the US and in public, as they have been known to kill civilians and then not be prosecuted, right? |
|
Forum: Politics
· Post Preview: #956029
· Replies: 41
· Views: 2,108
|
Sheesh |
Posted on: Nov 9 2007, 12:14 AM |
MVP
Posts: 2,157
Joined: 16-July 05
From: Mariposa, California
|
QUOTE(bluejaysfan1992 @ Nov 8 2007, 07:56 PM) by the way sheesh.. do you believe that this country was founded by god fearing men?...just a side ques. One Nation, Indivisible |
|
Forum: Politics
· Post Preview: #953106
· Replies: 54
· Views: 3,016
|
Sheesh |
Posted on: Nov 8 2007, 08:56 PM |
MVP
Posts: 2,157
Joined: 16-July 05
From: Mariposa, California
|
QUOTE(cdoyal @ Nov 8 2007, 12:54 PM) The word "compassionate" means appeasement in liberal speak. Show me a time in history where appeasement has ever worked??? Nice. How simple: the world is white and black. Good and evil. Right and wrong. With some of the "cons" they're always in the white/good/right and illustrate easy judgment/malice/malevolence to everyone else who are black/evil/wrong - in other words who don't share their narrow world view. Glad you are a politically dying breed, doyal |
|
Forum: Politics
· Post Preview: #952749
· Replies: 13
· Views: 1,104
|
Sheesh |
Posted on: Nov 5 2007, 08:49 PM |
MVP
Posts: 2,157
Joined: 16-July 05
From: Mariposa, California
|
Not certain what kind of cards you are interested in, but I have a ton from between 1980 and 2002. All sports. Recently been doing player sorts, so they are ready to go if you have a shop, sell, etc. See my website for an inkling of what w have at http://members.sti.net/redrock/index.htm Sorry, it hasn't been updated for over a year - doesn't really need to be as I've only sold approximately 150 items in that timespan. Thanks! |
|
Forum: Everything Else Trading
· Post Preview: #947220
· Replies: 2
· Views: 565
|
Sheesh |
Posted on: Oct 26 2007, 02:54 PM |
MVP
Posts: 2,157
Joined: 16-July 05
From: Mariposa, California
|
Not a good week for the CONs. First, Republicans don't even show up for Iraq budget hearings. Now, this during a Cabinet meeting regarding the California wildfires: Its happened before: April 21, 2006 May 12, 2006 July 14, 2007 It's not too much to ask that our Vice President stay awake during normal working hours, is it? |
|
Forum: Politics
· Post Preview: #929777
· Replies: 9
· Views: 897
|
Sheesh |
Posted on: Oct 25 2007, 03:11 PM |
MVP
Posts: 2,157
Joined: 16-July 05
From: Mariposa, California
|
The restriction of gun ownership by the left is a myth. I'm as radical as anyone on the left and will defend anyone's right to own and possess a firearm. I own an 18" barrel shotgun for security purposes (and grizzly bear!). Try to take it from me!
What the left IS for is a ban on auto and semi auto assault rifles. I agree with this. Who the heck needs an assault rifle? That said, my mind could be change as we delve deeper and deeper into a police state. I want the same kind of firearms and ammunition as those who might want to oppress me.
On another tangent, I find it odd that the right is usually against any protection of wilderness/land. For the most part, land is to be developed, logged, mined and roaded. What is forgotten is when the police state comes down on the populous, where are you going to run? Two places: Urban jungles and wilderness mountain tops - for guerrilla warfare. Therefore, the protection of wide open land is in people's self interest as a refuge from, and attack base on, the police state. |
|
Forum: Politics
· Post Preview: #928187
· Replies: 6
· Views: 805
|
New Replies No New Replies Hot Topic (New) Hot Topic (No New) |
Poll (New) Poll (No New) Locked Topic Moved Topic |
|
| | | | |
| |