The US Election 2016, Part VIII

[Wrath of Dagon]

OK, give me an example of lack of logic or reason in that article. Edit: Also I know who Scott Adams is, so there's no reason for me to check him for being a troll. So your argument is faulty.

Edited October 5, 2016 by Wrath of Dagon

[Gromnir]

OK, give me an example of lack of logic or reason in that article. Edit: Also I know who Scott Adams is, so there's no reason for me to check him for being a troll. So your argument is faulty.

in the joshua goldberg article? are you serious?  am sensing we are at the crux o' the problem.

[Malcador]

I'm not sure why, but a certain epic thread about the likelihood of a very improbable event ever happening just showed up among my memories.

Daikatana release?

[Wrath of Dagon]

 

OK, give me an example of lack of logic or reason in that article. Edit: Also I know who Scott Adams is, so there's no reason for me to check him for being a troll. So your argument is faulty.

in the joshua goldberg article? are you serious?  am sensing we are at the crux o' the problem.

 

Good way to avoid responding. Give me one or two examples, or stfu.

[Gromnir]

 

 

OK, give me an example of lack of logic or reason in that article. Edit: Also I know who Scott Adams is, so there's no reason for me to check him for being a troll. So your argument is faulty.

in the joshua goldberg article? are you serious?  am sensing we are at the crux o' the problem.

 

Good way to avoid responding. Give me one or two examples, or stfu.

 

*chuckle* we weren't avoiding, we were incredulous.

 

ad hominem is in abundance.  "I have been on the Internet since I was a small child and I have perused some of the most extreme and disturbing corners of the web. I have had personal encounters with every manner of vile cretin – the sorts of people who would make even Charles Manson himself blush."  even if some sjw folks has said mean things, how does that show that they is wrong? to dismiss 'cause folks says mean is ad hominem.  and suggestion that we take his word 'cause he is a self appointed expert on the intraweb is an appeal to authority. already a couple.

 

we can go on, but is pretty much every paragraph that includes examples o' logic challenged nonsense.  he confuses association with causation regularly. and like yourself, he fails to recognize the false continuum at every turn.  neo-nazis and sjw is lumped together 'cause they both have identifiable "bad guys" as targets? wahuh?

 

honest, review the following for a start:   http://www.theskepticsguide.org/resources/logical-fallacies

 

maybe pick up a copy o' copi.

 

if you really wish, we can start a new thread so you can dissect the article by joshua goldberg and further expose your ignorance.  am willing to oblige.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

edit:  apparent we thought it were too much fun as we added our catchphrase 2x. apologies.

Edited October 5, 2016 by Gromnir

[Wrath of Dagon]

You don't even know what ad hominem means. Here's the full quote

SJWs – almost all of whom are white, upper-middle-class college students – picture themselves as persecuted, oppressed crusaders for peace and equality. But, upon any level of inspection, this claim immediately falls apart. I have been on the Internet since I was a small child and I have perused some of the most extreme and disturbing corners of the web. I have had personal encounters with every manner of vile cretin – the sorts of people who would make even Charles Manson himself blush. With that said, never have I encountered anyone who was so giddy about their hatred than the people who make up the SJW community. These are people who, on a regular basis, call for violence and genocide against “oppressors”, whether it’s white people, heterosexual people, thin people, or just anyone who even slightly disagrees with them.

Where does he say they are "wrong" because they are "mean", the logical fallacy is in your head, not in the paragraph.

[Gromnir]

failed to read article keeps resulting in same fail

 

*Compared to the people who claim to be on “the right side of history” and crusaders for “social justice”, Stormfront is a bastion of kindness and civility. What does that say about you, SJWs, when you make neo-Nazis look positively civilized by comparison?*

 

what does it say? it says nothing as far as logic is concerned.  the question mark does not mean that joshua is actually asking a question btw. is an ad hominem. is untrue and ad hominem.

 

and ignore the appeal to authority, false continuum problems is not helping your Non-response.

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited October 5, 2016 by Gromnir

[Wrath of Dagon]

You're incoherent. Just admit you don't know what you're talking about and go cry home to your mommy.

[Malcador]

Weird. SJWs are a joke because the W isn't serious, empty outrage and so on.

[Gromnir]

You're incoherent. Just admit you don't know what you're talking about and go cry home to your mommy.

...

 

"Good way to avoid responding."

 

again, you linked to an article that draws parallels 'tween sjw to fascists and stalinists based  on the author's personal experience viewing bad internet behavior o' sjw proponents? the article were incoherent. you didn't even realize that it were complete nonsense. you linked to an article that fails any number logical fallacies, an article written by joshua goldberg which you is still inexplicable trying to defend. 

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Wrath of Dagon]

African-American history museum snubs Clarence Thomas: http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/10/05/african-american-smithsonian-snubs-justice-clarence-thomas/

[Hurlshort]

African-American history museum snubs Clarence Thomas: http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/10/05/african-american-smithsonian-snubs-justice-clarence-thomas/

 

That would be pretty bizarre.  Although he is still serving, so he might not fit the criteria for an exhibit.  Is there an Obama exhibit?  It would be interesting if they managed to get a reason out of the museum, instead of just relying on conjecture.  There are also plenty of other conservatives in recent government posts, so if this really were a political issue, I'd imagine Condoleezza Rice and Colin Powell would also be snubbed.   

[aluminiumtrioxid]

African-American history museum snubs Clarence Thomas: http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/10/05/african-american-smithsonian-snubs-justice-clarence-thomas/

 

clear evidence of stalinist oppression

[Malcador]

Breitbart crowd caring about black people now.

[Pidesco]

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/10/libertarian-vp-candidate-just-wants-to-stop-trump-presidency.html

 

Weld to vote for Clinton? laff

[Meshugger]

Well, at least there seems to be an actual opposition in this election. Take it as you will.

[Amentep]

 

African-American history museum snubs Clarence Thomas: http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/10/05/african-american-smithsonian-snubs-justice-clarence-thomas/

 

That would be pretty bizarre.  Although he is still serving, so he might not fit the criteria for an exhibit.  Is there an Obama exhibit?  It would be interesting if they managed to get a reason out of the museum, instead of just relying on conjecture.  There are also plenty of other conservatives in recent government posts, so if this really were a political issue, I'd imagine Condoleezza Rice and Colin Powell would also be snubbed.   

 

 

They don't really have exhibits - as I understand it - on people.  The items related to Obama (First Lady's Dress worn to the commemoration of the 50th anniversary of the March on Washington, a "Librarians for Obama" pin, a portrait of Obama, etc) would be in the exhibition of post 1968 history, I believe.

 

A search of their holdings show nothing connected to "Clarence Thomas", "Condoleezza Rice" or "Colin Powell".  That said the only item associated with Anita Hill is a donated pin with "I belive Anita" on it.

 

When they create the exhibits, they can only do so with what they actually have in their holdings, so the obvious question I'd have about this potential snub is did anyone try to donate items related to Justice  Thomas and the museum refused the donation?  Or is this a case of not spending time on someone that they have nothing in the collection to relate his story to?

 

A lot of questions to ask on this one, I think, before leaping to "libruls".

Edited October 6, 2016 by Amentep

[Raithe]

[Meshugger]

criiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiinge

 

[Wrath of Dagon]

 

 

African-American history museum snubs Clarence Thomas: http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/10/05/african-american-smithsonian-snubs-justice-clarence-thomas/

 

That would be pretty bizarre.  Although he is still serving, so he might not fit the criteria for an exhibit.  Is there an Obama exhibit?  It would be interesting if they managed to get a reason out of the museum, instead of just relying on conjecture.  There are also plenty of other conservatives in recent government posts, so if this really were a political issue, I'd imagine Condoleezza Rice and Colin Powell would also be snubbed.

 

 

They don't really have exhibits - as I understand it - on people.  The items related to Obama (First Lady's Dress worn to the commemoration of the 50th anniversary of the March on Washington, a "Librarians for Obama" pin, a portrait of Obama, etc) would be in the exhibition of post 1968 history, I believe.

 

A search of their holdings show nothing connected to "Clarence Thomas", "Condoleezza Rice" or "Colin Powell".  That said the only item associated with Anita Hill is a donated pin with "I belive Anita" on it.

 

When they create the exhibits, they can only do so with what they actually have in their holdings, so the obvious question I'd have about this potential snub is did anyone try to donate items related to Justice  Thomas and the museum refused the donation?  Or is this a case of not spending time on someone that they have nothing in the collection to relate his story to?

 

A lot of questions to ask on this one, I think, before leaping to "libruls".

 

Surely if they wanted to include him in the exhibit, they could've asked for a significant item. They didn't seem to have that problem in including BLM.

 

Edit: Apparently there's plenty on other people, including Anita Hill, but in fairness there isn't much on Thurgood Marshall either, but more than on Thomas: http://circa.com/politics/people/supreme-court-justice-clarence-thomas-ignored-by-national-museum-of-african-american-histo

Edited October 6, 2016 by Wrath of Dagon

[Hurlshort]

BLM is a movement, so it is no surprise that it would be covered in the museum.  As Amentep explained, they don't seem to be covering individuals, but rather events and artifacts. 

 

But hey, keep jumping to conclusions instead of doing actual research.  It makes you a qualified reporter in this day and age.  

[Wrath of Dagon]

If you read the link right above your post, you'll see that they do have a lot on people. It would be a very strange African-American history museum without any African-Americans.

[Amentep]

At that link, the first picture related to Anita Hill is in association to a donated pin; the second appears to be related to a photograph (that I should mention isn't listed on the website holdings) and trying to contextualize the event within a historical context.

 

So yes, they talk about people, but in a way that relates them to their history.  Right now - yes - it seems that they think that the Anita Hill-Clarence Thomas hearings are best contextualized in context of bringing social issues to the forefront of the conversation rather than in the context of the second African-American Supreme Court Justice.

But again I'd be interested in knowing - did they ask Thomas directly for a donation (and did he refuse) and, if not, why not and did anyone try to voluntarily donate anything related to him and was actually refused to have it accepted?  Because at the end of the day if all you have are items that represent Anita Hill, and your museum is designed to use those items to explain history, then Anita Hill is going to dominate the conversation.

Edited October 6, 2016 by Amentep

[BruceVC]

Have you guys in the USA ever heard of  a African American  women called Angela  Davis? She is famous in the civil rights movement...she came to SA  as a guest recently and really added to our social issues with a misplaced speech she made 

 

http://ewn.co.za/2016/09/09/US-political-activist-Angela-Davis-delivers-17th-annual-Steve-Biko-Lecture

[Wrath of Dagon]

At that link, the first picture related to Anita Hill is in association to a donated pin; the second appears to be related to a photograph (that I should mention isn't listed on the website holdings) and trying to contextualize the event within a historical context.

 

So yes, they talk about people, but in a way that relates them to their history.  Right now - yes - it seems that they think that the Anita Hill-Clarence Thomas hearings are best contextualized in context of bringing social issues to the forefront of the conversation rather than in the context of the second African-American Supreme Court Justice.

 

But again I'd be interested in knowing - did they ask Thomas directly for a donation (and did he refuse) and, if not, why not and did anyone try to voluntarily donate anything related to him and was actually refused to have it accepted?  Because at the end of the day if all you have are items that represent Anita Hill, and your museum is designed to use those items to explain history, then Anita Hill is going to dominate the conversation.

Do you understand how bizarre that argument is? A national museum does a major exhibition just because they happen to have a pin with a name on it. But they absolutely can not obtain any item of Thomas, or just put up a photo, and therefore have to skip over him entirely.

 

 

Have you guys in the USA ever heard of  a African American  women called Angela  Davis? She is famous in the civil rights movement...she came to SA  as a guest recently and really added to our social issues with a misplaced speech she made 

 

http://ewn.co.za/2016/09/09/US-political-activist-Angela-Davis-delivers-17th-annual-Steve-Biko-Lecture

lol