Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

aceventura3 · 07-19-2007, 09:21 AM

You say you want to discuss facts with citations and links and when that starts to happen, you seem to want to avoid it. I find this pattern with many people holding liberal and anti-Bush views. it seems your goal is to make general accusations, supported by those who support your general accusations by making more general accusations. When we start to look at the general accusations in detail, you avoid it. This has happened with you and others in many threads. You folks often turn the table attacking me or my style yet pretend that you are victims of my lack of ...whatever. I am not phased by it and continue.

So, I'll revert back to my old ways with my opinions and here is an analogy illustrating a logical flaw in the premise of this thread:

I eat beef, always have always will.

There is scientific evidence that supports the fact that not eating beef is good for our health and would be good for the environment.

If I were President, I would not support a ban on beef. I would have no problem appointing vegetarians to various posts in my administration. However, as policy in my administration .I would not in anyway shape or form support banning beef. I would make that clear to everyone, prior to becoming President and after becoming President.

Vegetarian groups then make the claim that I am misusing and manipulating scientific data saying the ban of beef is good for the health of Americans and good for the environment.

I basically say screw these vegetarian groups. Then they get pissed off, and start a PR campaign attempting to mislead the public on my track record on this issue. Everyone who hates me for what ever reason buys it without any thought or analysis. After all these are vegetarians and they have the support of scientific data. And I am not a scientist and not a vegetarian, so what the hell would I know.

The truth is - the vegetarians have a political agenda and I don't support that agenda. Then based on that they make wild claims about how I manipulate, don't understand, ignore, etc, etc, scientific data. Yet, I stand firm. And a few here and there see the attacks for what they really are.

And that's the truth.

07-19-2007, 09:21 AM	#75 (permalink)
aceventura3 Junkie Location: Ventura County	You say you want to discuss facts with citations and links and when that starts to happen, you seem to want to avoid it. I find this pattern with many people holding liberal and anti-Bush views. it seems your goal is to make general accusations, supported by those who support your general accusations by making more general accusations. When we start to look at the general accusations in detail, you avoid it. This has happened with you and others in many threads. You folks often turn the table attacking me or my style yet pretend that you are victims of my lack of ...whatever. I am not phased by it and continue. So, I'll revert back to my old ways with my opinions and here is an analogy illustrating a logical flaw in the premise of this thread: I eat beef, always have always will. There is scientific evidence that supports the fact that not eating beef is good for our health and would be good for the environment. If I were President, I would not support a ban on beef. I would have no problem appointing vegetarians to various posts in my administration. However, as policy in my administration .I would not in anyway shape or form support banning beef. I would make that clear to everyone, prior to becoming President and after becoming President. Vegetarian groups then make the claim that I am misusing and manipulating scientific data saying the ban of beef is good for the health of Americans and good for the environment. I basically say screw these vegetarian groups. Then they get pissed off, and start a PR campaign attempting to mislead the public on my track record on this issue. Everyone who hates me for what ever reason buys it without any thought or analysis. After all these are vegetarians and they have the support of scientific data. And I am not a scientist and not a vegetarian, so what the hell would I know. The truth is - the vegetarians have a political agenda and I don't support that agenda. Then based on that they make wild claims about how I manipulate, don't understand, ignore, etc, etc, scientific data. Yet, I stand firm. And a few here and there see the attacks for what they really are. And that's the truth. __________________ "Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch." "It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion." "If you live among wolves you have to act like one." "A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."