View Single Post
Old 09-19-2007, 04:13 PM   #13
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
Re: In Defence of George W. Bush

Quote:
Mike Sigman wrote: View Post
Since "not=George Bush alone" means including George Bush, I made no misrepresentation, thanks.
Sorry, but, yes, you did. An ad hominem implies a personal attack. Claiming that Bush is part of a group of dangerous men with accompanying documentation is hardly an ad hominem.

Not that I'd expect you to acknowledge the difference, but one can hope...

Quote:
Your "figures" have been openly questioned in the past.
By you, and only you. And so what if they did?? What RELEVANCE does this have to do with determining an ad hominem??

Questioning the validity of one's figures does not = determining the nature of an ad hominem

Quote:
They're from the same sorts of people that say George Bush is an alcoholic
So, let me get this weird, twisto logic straight:

1. "A" makes an ad hominem attack;

(example: "A" says, "George Bush is a heartless killer, little better than Charles Manson or Hitler, for carelessly ignoring the over 1 million people murdered as part of his idiotic, ideologically-driven policies.")

2. Anyone who uses the same documentation as user,

(Example: "B" says that over a million people died from the Administration's policies, making them very dangeous)

is ALSO guilty of using ad hominems...

Nope, it's just as twisto as when I started.

Quote:
(hope you caught the humour in my "chemical addiction" remarks toward people who were accusing George Bush of a form of chemical addiction).
Yah, very "funny:" until you started including ME (a person not participating in your discussion) in your "humor."

Quote:
I.e., you're stating an opinion as fact and using it to smear Bush.... again.
Even if only 20,000 people died in Iraq, Mike: that, in my book, is "dangerous." A pity you feel differently.

This discussion is getting tiresome, and rehashing old debates. I am not really interested in debating the nature of ad hominems with someone who just used them so effectively to shut down my last thread.

If you have something of value to add here (relevant to the discussion), please feel free to post. Otherwise, I think I'll pass on further discussion attempts to re-invent the wheel.

Last edited by Neil Mick : 09-19-2007 at 04:23 PM.