Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ubertuber
If that's the case, then why did you ask these questions?
They don't really have too much to do with whether Edwards will follow through with this focus on poverty, or whether he'd be any good at addressing those issues.
|
I really only brought the issue up to use as an example. An objective reader of this thread would find it pretty interesting in relation to the point in the OP.
Here is an analogy to help clarify my view of Edwards. When Apple markets itself as the alternative to windows based PC's, that is honest. When tobacco companies do anti-smoking ads, that is dishonest. Edwards can claim to be the "poverty candidate", that doesn't mean that I will buy it. If you buy it hook-line and sinker without question, thats fine with me. on the otherhand I don't buy it and I ask questions to give people an opportunity to convince me that I am wrong. I have had several on this issue, and no answers.
What exactly is the point of responding to my outlandish views, if your intent is not to help me see the light. I would think that if I am so wrong and so unreasonable, that you folks would just ignore my silly views. To the contrary saying things like my views are baseless or b.s., just brings out the dog (my pit-bull nature) in me. Now, I am more entrenched than ever.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by willravel
Can you prove that? No? Sounds like an unfounded accusation from the right.
|
Can I prove that tabacco companies don't really want to prevent teenagers from smoking? Can you?
Didn't think so. Hey, perhaps I based my view on the prima facia evidence that is clear for all to see. Or at least those of use who can actually see 800 pound gorillas.