View Single Post
Old 10-21-2004, 08:49 PM   #16 (permalink)
shakran
Tone.
 
shakran's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ustwo
I predict......

This will be the ONLY time a liberal would trust what Pat Robertson says.

If you could set your tedious liberal bashing aside for about three seconds to consider what we have here, I think you and I might just agree on something. Observe:

1) Pat Robertson is a major Bush supporter
2) Pat Robertson claimed Bush said there would be no casualties in the war.


OK, what's wrong with this picture? As you mentioned, if Bush DID say it, he's a flaming nutjob. I'll go farther and say that anyone stupid enough to believe that a war will have no casualties is too moronic to lead a boyscout troop, much less the country. It is difficult to believe that Forrest Gump, much less President Bush, would have said such an appallingly stupid thing.

So if we say Bush didn't say it, then we must conclude that Robertson is not telling the truth about Bush.

That's where it gets really tricky, because Robertson supports Bush. Why would you drop a huge and potentially damaging lie like this on the guy you want to win the election?

That also doesn't make sense. The only logical reason for Robertson to say something like this is that he IS being honest, because if Bush didn't say it, then lying and saying he did would hurt the man he supports. But if Bush DID say it, then telling the truth would, while hurting the man he supports, serve the higher cause of seeking the truth. In other words, it's much more logical to conclude that Robertson is telling the truth than it is to conclude that Robertson is telling a lie.

where you and I might agree is that it's easy to descend into circular logic a'la the Fezzini death scene in the Princess Bride

Where you and I will disagree is that I find more indicators to point to the idea that Bush said it than I find to point to the idea that he did not say it.

After all, the man has a history of making delusional comments. Telling us that major combat operations in Iraq had ended was asinine. They hadn't, and no one who knew anything about the status of the war believed they had.

And that's just one of the many.

So if he's made delusional comments in the past, it's not all that surpising if we find out he's gone and made another.
shakran is offline  
 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360