Moron owned

[Specforces]

People like that exist. They hate America and everything that has to do with it. But not just America, but anything that has to do with structure or form.
They are perversions to society and don't belong in America, or any nation that has ever held up arms to protect their countries and the rights of their people.
If I ever saw him I would beat him to death.

[QreepyBORIS]

Originally Posted by GuidoHunter

Well, it WOULD be kind of hard to have Hannity & Colmes without the Hannity.

Hey, Roeper and Ebert made it without Siskel.

Originally Posted by Kilgamayan

Then the producers needs to stop inviting him onto their show. He is absolute garbage, and I would not shed a tear if he never gets invited back.

And anyone who changes their stance based on this nitwit going "You're an idiot" need to have a hole put in their head. Maybe if he produces facts instead of blindly insulting the guy he wouldn't be worthless.

The fact that you don't understand that Hannity is the co-host of this show (which could be easily inferred by the fact that he does the story lead-in, even if you don't know his name or the name of the show) seems to illustrate a disconnection between you and the program you are viewing. This doesn't really make me too eager to subscribe to your opinions about the show's content.

Remember what the man did:
-said wounded soldiers are "leeches"
-celebrates when American soldiers are killed
-said "9 more marines bite the big one in combat, stupid is as stupid does"
-calls troops "these scumbags who probably couldn't hack it in the workforce"
-said "the U.S. soldier is the poster child for retroactive abortion" (in other words, supports the killing of our troops)

Yet you (and others in this topic) accuse Hannity of being too harsh on this person. Hannity's point was that people with opinions like this are beyond reason. I think it came across very well.

[talisman]

A)the guest was an idiot to the far left of the political spectrum
B)hannity is an idiot to the far right of the political spectrum

Hannity falls into the same category to me as Tucker Carlson... he talks fast, acts self-assured, and has problems with high blood pressure. conservatives love to watch him because he stokes their ego by so dominantly stating common opinions and liberals hate him because he's so outspoken and, to them, oblivious to the truth. Either way, the tv ratings go up, and he keeps his show.

Originally Posted by talisman

B)hannity is an idiot to the far right of the political spectrum

Please give me a "far right" quote that classifies Hannity as an "idiot".

[talisman]

But I'm a lazy liberal! I don't support my arguments: I just make broad overgeneralizations and hug trees.

But seriously though, me saying that had greater effect (parallel structure and whatnot) and I generally just dislike these shows that just spew political invective and whatnot for entertainment instead of education. The public isn't enriched by these so-called debate programs at all.. it's purely theater, and an excuse for cable news networks to try to boost ratings.

Chardish please tell me you aren't a fan of tucker carlson or rush limbaugh, though.

[Kilgamayan]

Originally Posted by chardish

The fact that you don't understand that Hannity is the co-host of this show (which could be easily inferred by the fact that he does the story lead-in, even if you don't know his name or the name of the show) seems to illustrate a disconnection between you and the program you are viewing. This doesn't really make me too eager to subscribe to your opinions about the show's content.

Sorry, I saw the video say "Fox News" and you say he was simply a member of a panel and I concluded that he was a guest on some talk segment on a news show and that he wasn't that important.

If he really is the co-host of this show, then my original point about him being completely unprofessional still stands. Make up your mind.

Originally Posted by chardish

Yet you (and others in this topic) accuse Hannity of being too harsh on this person. Hannity's point was that people with opinions like this are beyond reason. I think it came across very well.

I didn't accuse Hannity of being "too harsh", I accused him of being completely unprofessional. I certainly don't agree with this guy's views, but they're his opinions and he's entitled to them.

And I'm sure this isn't the only guy on the planet that shares these same general views. There were Iraqis and Afghans fighting us that believed themselves to be in the right and us to be in the wrong that likely also held these opinions (or at least similar ones). And who knows what the rest of the world thinks.

If Hannity's point really was that people with opinions that disagree with his are beyond reason, then he needs to knock his ego down a couple rungs.

Originally Posted by Specforces

They are perversions to society

Originally Posted by Specforces

If I ever saw him I would beat him to death.

I'm lovin' it.

[Mindfields]

http://www.putfile.com/media.php?
If you got a car video from that link, thsi is what I have to say:
I hate how you northerners get all excited cause, ZOMG! WE CAN DRIFT IN ICE!
Almost
Anyone
CAN
May it be intentional or not.
Now time to see the intended video and make a real reply...
GG Pwnage

[SMGod]

"You are ignorant"

"I'm not ignoring anything"

lol

[GuidoHunter]

Originally Posted by talisman

Hannity falls into the same category to me as Tucker Carlson... he talks fast, acts self-assured, and has problems with high blood pressure. conservatives love to watch him because he stokes their ego by so dominantly stating common opinions and liberals hate him because he's so outspoken and, to them, oblivious to the truth. Either way, the tv ratings go up, and he keeps his show.

Very true.

Originally Posted by talisman

hannity is an idiot

No. I will agree that he's a horrible debater, but he's not stupid. His books speak more about him than what he says.

Originally Posted by talisman

to the far right of the political spectrum

Yes, but there's nothing wrong with that. And c'mon, chardish, if Hannity's not far right I don't know what is.

Originally Posted by Kilgamayan

If Hannity's point really was that people with opinions that disagree with his are beyond reason, then he needs to knock his ego down a couple rungs.

That obviously wasn't his point. His point was that anyone with an opinion as stupid as that one isn't worth arguing with.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

[Kilgamayan]

The stupidity of an opinion on an issue where there is no factual "right" (or at least no discernable one) is relative.

Originally Posted by Guido

And c'mon, chardish, if Hannity's not far right I don't know what is.

Hannity's right, no doubt, but not far right. Far right-wingers are people who think we should carpet-bomb Iraq or mandate school prayer or stuff like that. Trust me, as a right-winger, I know what's right and what's far right, and Hannity's definitely not far right.

You want to hear far right on your radio dial? Turn on the Michael Savage show sometime. He makes Rush Limbaugh look like Howard Dean.

On that note...

Originally Posted by talisman

Chardish please tell me you aren't a fan of rush limbaugh

I like Rush Limbaugh. As a conservative, it's entertaining to me to hear an outspoken conservative explain why liberals are wrong. I don't agree with everything Rush says (most recent example is the John Bolton affair), but that doesn't mean he's not entertaining to listen to. Rush has said hundreds of times on his program that he is an entertainer first and an informer second.

Originally Posted by Kilgamayan

There were Iraqis and Afghans fighting us that believed themselves to be in the right and us to be in the wrong that likely also held these opinions (or at least similar ones).

Yes, but those are radical terrorists in countries where schoolchildren are taught to hate America. They are not American citizens in a public forum exercising their Constitutional right to free speech.

Originally Posted by Kilgamayan

The stupidity of an opinion on an issue where there is no factual "right" (or at least no discernable one) is relative.

Straw man argument, as the assertion that there is no factual right on this issue is incorrect.

If the ideas of "right" and "wrong" are imposed on the universe by the individual, rather than on the individual by the universe, then all judgments of character, including your characterization of Mr. Hannity as "unprofessional," are utterly without meaning or significance.

[Kilgamayan]

Then what is the factual right on this issue?

[01:44] Evan: THE DEBATE RAGES
[01:44] Kilgamayan: Lovely.
[01:44] Kilgamayan: Can't wait to see Specforces response to my post.
[01:45] Evan: Ha
[01:45] Evan: I like this line. It's golden.
[01:45] Evan: "If the ideas of "right" and "wrong" are imposed on the universe by the individual, rather than on the individual by the universe, then all judgments of character, including your characterization of Mr. Hannity as "unprofessional," are utterly without meaning or significance."
[01:45] Kilgamayan: What the hell is the "straw man argument" anyway?
[01:46] Evan: It's a rhetorical fallacy. Arguing against a point that wasn't raised, in this case whether morality is relative or absolute.
[01:47] Kilgamayan: Sounds like a cop-out to me.
[01:47] Evan: The straw-man rhetorical technique is the practice of refuting weaker arguments than one's opponents actually offer. To "set up a straw man" or "set up a straw-man argument" is to create a position that is easy to refute, then attribute that position to your opponent.

One can set up a straw man in several different ways:

1. Present only a portion of the opponent's arguments (often a weak one), refute it, and pretend that all of their arguments have been refuted.
2. Present the opponent's argument in weakened form, refute it, and pretend that the original has been refuted.
3. Present a misrepresentation of the opponent's position, refute it, and pretend that the opponent's actual position has been refuted.
4. Present someone who defends a position poorly as the defender, refute their arguments, and pretend that every argument for that position has been refuted.
5. Invent a fictitious persona with actions or beliefs that are criticised, and pretend that the person represents a group that the speaker is critical of.

Some logic textbooks define the straw-man fallacy only as a misrepresented argument. It is now common, however, to use the term to refer to all of these tactics. The straw-man technique is also used as a form of media manipulation.
[01:48] Evan: And the straw man isn't a cop-out?
[01:48] Kilgamayan: If you're saying my statement is a straw-man argument, then not at all.
[01:49] Kilgamayan: Guido called an opinion stupid.
[01:49] Kilgamayan: I told him that the stupidity on an opinion is relative.
[01:49] Kilgamayan: I fail to see how that's a cop-out.
[01:50] Kilgamayan: And the only reason I included that line about the issue not having a factual "right" was because I knew one of you was going to pull the bullshit "I think the sky is yellow" counter.
[01:50] Evan: # Person A has position X.
# Person B presents position Y (which is a distorted version of X).
# Person B attacks position Y.
# Therefore X is false/incorrect/flawed.

Guido has position X: "Opinion is stupid."
Kilga presents position Y: "Stupidity is absolute."
Kilga attacks position Y.
Therefore X is flawed.
[01:51] Evan: That's essentially what happened, only in a condensed form. You didn't defend against Guido's attack, you just declared his attack to be null and void, as if that makes it null and void.
[01:51] Kilgamayan: So how else would you like me to refute the idea that an opinion being stupid is incorrect?
[01:51] Kilgamayan: I mean.
[01:52] Kilgamayan: How else would you like me to refute the idea that an opinion is stupid?
[01:52] Evan: Your only real option would be to defend the opinion itself by showing that it is based in reason and intelligence.
[01:52] Evan: In other words, Guido has made it harder for you to get much farther into this without making it appear like you agree with Mr. Crook.
[01:53] Kilgamayan: Lovely.
[01:53] Kilgamayan: What a ***.
[01:53] Evan: Hahahahaha
[01:54] Kilgamayan: Actually, why am I debating that point at all?
[01:54] Kilgamayan: It's irrelevant to the idea that whatshisface conducted himself unprofessionally.
[01:54] Kilgamayan: Screw it then.
[01:55] Evan: *light bulb illuminates*
[01:55] Evan: Good job. : )
[01:55] Kilgamayan: God, I hate you CT types.
[01:55] Kilgamayan: You all make me so fucking sick.
[01:55] Kilgamayan: -_-
[01:56] Kilgamayan: I'm outta this until Specforces responds because I KNOW I caught him.
[01:56] Evan: Mind if I post this log?
[01:56] Kilgamayan: Go right ahead.
[01:56] Kilgamayan: Up to this line, even.

[Kilgamayan]

Also relevant:

bjstrattonIM: And to think I was once actually good at debating.
bjstrattonIM: Incidentally, that was back when I was pretty new at the internet.
bjstrattonIM: How times change.
This Is Chardish: I believe it. Especially based on reading your TWG posts.
This Is Chardish: I sucked at debating when I first got on the Internet, when I was about 10. (This was before COPPA.)
bjstrattonIM: TWG is special, because I think I've simply stopped caring about it.
bjstrattonIM: Not just FFR, but as a whole.
bjstrattonIM: Which makes me sad.
bjstrattonIM: So I play on.
This Is Chardish: I still care about the game. I've just stopped caring about the outcome.
bjstrattonIM: It's a death spiral.
bjstrattonIM: I'm too competitive to not care about the outcome.
bjstrattonIM: This is a really aggravating position to be in.
This Is Chardish: So in other words, you're fiercely competitive about a game you don't really care about but aren't in any position to stop playing.
bjstrattonIM: Smart enough to understand a CTer's arguments but not quite smart enough to refute them while being a competitive ass.
bjstrattonIM: It's a deadly combination.
bjstrattonIM: Yeah, pretty much.

In summary, *angst*

ps <3 u andy

[Specforces]

I love Micheal Savage, Mike Reagan, Rush Limbaugh, and Glen Beck.

[jewpinthethird]

Michael Crook is a terrible person. He is ignorant, and stupid. But for Hannity to say that is very unprofessional. Come on, what is this? The 8th grade? Name calling isnt even tolerated in High School debates.

Obviously Hannity was upset, and righty so, but to stoop to name-calling? Seriously, Michael Crook, being the terrible person he is, never once personally attacked Hannity...at least he has that going for him.

Aside from that, DID ANYONE ELSE NOTICE THE SIZE OF HIS FOREHEAD? JESUS CHRIST! YOU COULD LAND A 747 ON THAT THING.

[Cenright]

This video wasn't about a Right Wing or Left Wing issue. We all saw that the guy has a problem with the pay structure. OK. That is his opinion, let us just take that for a second.

He says that they are stupid to go into the army, and should pay their own injury stuff, and that if they die, their family should have to pay for their body to be returned. Did he ever think, that maybe those benefits are a few reasons why some people will volunteer? If those things didn't exist, do you think that that many people would still volunteer? I don't. All jobs get health benefits. The military is no different. In hazardous jobs, the company also has to have death compensation.


That aside, what do the troops have to do with the pay system? The pay system is made in the government. The troops did not set that policy, the employer (the government) set up that policy. Troops know what benefits there are, and what hazards there are when they sign their contract. So they aren't actually stupid. That man is just selfish and egotistical. He sees things his way, and feels that everyone around him should have the EXACT SAME OPINION.


The guy mixes his arguments, and it ruins his debate. He is egotistical. He thinks he knows everything, and has seen all he needs to see. Anyone else just doesn't have his superior insight on the matter, and so they all are there to screw him up. Nothing will change him, nothing will teach him otherwise. Even if someone sat down and tried to show him other insights, without trying to debate it, he would try to shut you down, because he feels he already has the superior information, and you just don't understand it. This is the problem with morons who think they know everything.

I'm tired and I don't have time to address all Cenright's points.

P.S. Jewpin, I love your post. Your flair for subtle, comedic irony is unsurpassed by any on these forums.

[GuidoHunter]

[01:52] Evan: In other words, Guido has made it harder for you to get much farther into this without making it appear like you agree with Mr. Crook.
[01:53] Kilgamayan: Lovely.
[01:53] Kilgamayan: What a ***.

I'm still LOLing about this.

And okay, yes, I admit that Hannity isn't that far right, but whatever.

I like to listen to Rush because he is an entertainer. I think he does spin issues at times, so I don't take his word as truth all the time, but he's still cool. My mom says I should listen to Savage more, but I have a hard enough time listening to Mark Davis as is.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com