[AndyJackson]

I will not apologise for the length of this. The author's writing is really that bad,(even worse, in fact). Some have attacked me because this man is apparently conservative (though he argues like a liberal) and is anti-abortion. The problem is that in all of this gassing there is nothing of substance. I would rather the folks on my side of the table shoot straighter. Then the enemy is at risk and not me.

[drstevej]

Many of the kinds of errors that are committed are well known examples here on Free Republic...

What in the hell does this mean? Is this English? What is the purpose of your [comment ommited] analysis and why do we care?

[Illbay]

You hit the nail right on the head. This has been an increasing problem since people "found" FR when it came out of obscurity a couple of years ago.

The quality of the rhetoric is appalling now, and we have to sift through much chaff to find the wheat.

It used to be that Vanity posts were MERCILESSLY pilloried, and there was about one article from the powers-that-be per week admonishing against worthless Vanities (yours is NOT one of those, BTW).

In fact, people were regularly run off just for posting stupid nonsense, and it was so strictly enforced that many dealt with thusly would log on one last time under a pseudonym, and announce an "alternative" website had been set up. (The ONLY one of these that was in any way successful, BTW, was Lucianne.Com, and I think even it has fallen on hard times).

I consider, with all due respect, that this dates from the time when FR first began accepting regular donations. The Management felt--understandably--that people who "pay" for access ought to be given the benefit of the doubt. And later that seemed to extend to most of FReeperdom in general, even some who were rather outrageous (the idiotic Libertines being a great example of that, lately taking over the "Most Obnoxious" Award from the Buchananites.

[mrsmith]

IMHO a post containing a false dichotomy should be automatically deleted from Free Republic.
If someone wants to make a point, let them work at it.

[meyer]

The post is too long. :^)

[LJLucido]

Could you elaborate a bit on the Polynesian girls?

[LJLucido]

You make some excellent points, BTW. Any writer that had you as his editor would really have to keep on his toes.

[No!]

Having BEEN to Tahiti, you caught my attention, then...

wasted it away...

Your undertaking is a WASTE of time!

[Rudder]

I've seen worse, and your effort to make your point is diluted by being too long-winded. An apology to yourself is in order for that error.

[MinuteGal]

Andy, this is a brilliant and meaty essay. It should be required reading. I took a specialty education course years ago in the basics and essence of propaganda. There are about 10 really simple, basic techniques employed by expert propagandists, i.e., the use of "Glittering Generalities", the "Bandwagon Ploy", the Self-Effacement Technique", etc. The author you are quoting here employs each one of these tools skillfully, but not skillfully enough to fool readers trained in the art of detecting hidden propaganda, including yourself.......This post is a refreshing change from a lot of the fluff and one-liners we constantly read on the internet. It should be read, re-read and studied. All FR readers must arm themselves against the liberal and traitorous media NOW and educate others. As many Americans as possible must be able to detect the most carefully-hidden propaganda nuances spouting forth on TV and in the writing media. Why? Because we haven't seen anything yet!....We're all soldiers now and must arm ourselves with more intense knowledge that amusing fluff pieces don't provide. Posts like this give us the necessary implements....Andy, this was the right post for the right time. It must have taken a lot of work, but it's invaluable. Thank you for your energy and perception.

Leni

[billhilly]

Mizz Juanita, is this really you? Did you come back so soon? After all, you were only in your early nineties when you passed. I know, I know, "There are things to be learned, and we only have a little time."

[Enlightiator]

ROFLMAO, Andy. Your intellectual banter was witty, pointed, and plain ol' funny. Together with the original author, I consider this a classic case of intellectual penis wars...;)

[Architect]

Why is this vanity post in News/Current events? Why isn't it posted in response to the original article, in accordance with the rules?

[sheltonmac]

I haven't seen a dissection this messy since Seventh Grade Biology class. It's flattering to know I hit a nerve. When you get around to actually adressing the question posed in the essay, let me know. I'd be interested to hear your answer.

As for some of your arguments, try reading up on history before launching into a tirade. During WWII, the practice of firebombing had one purpose, and that was to strike terror in the hearts of the population in an attempt to weaken their resolve.

As far as the abortion argument goes, you seem to be of the opinion that fetus is not a person and can therefore not be compared to the killing of people in the post-fetal stage of life. I stand by my assertion that this falls in line with the prevailing distorted view of individual liberty and personal choice. We have accepted the killing of the unborn. Why stop there? Shouldn't a mother then have the right to kill her two-month-old because she chooses to do so?

It is perplexing that you found the essay so difficult to follow. The question asked was a rhetorical one, addressing the moral bankruptcy of our nation. This is a question that many in this forum have avoided, sporting an attitude of "We are 'at war' so we can't be bothered by the treasonous rantings of the 'Blame America First' crowd."

Perhaps the next essay on Friday will clear up some of the confusion.

[Demidog]

Lee writes circles around you. Perhaps your anger is due to the fact that your intellectual discomfort has made you extremely tired and grumpy. When that happens to my three-year-old, I put her to bed. Why don't you take a nap and try again.

[jackbill]

I will not apologise for the length of this.

No need to apologize. I had better things to do than read it.

[general_re]

Ya know, the original Andy Jackson would have just f***ing shot the guy and been done with it ;)

[x]

David Hackett Fischer's book Historians' Fallacies is certainly a very good book. People may disagree with Fischer but he exposes a variety of historical fallacies from across the spectrum.

These "interlineal" dissections, really don't work, though. Nobody has the patience to follow them. Better to try to summarize an argument and give a few choice quotes than to reproduce the whole thing with you comments interspersed. Also, people are allowed some emotionality and poetic licence in making their points. If you find the wind or the stuffing in the argument, it counts for little. If you find some logical fallacy at the heart of your adversary's argument, that counts for much more. Right now, though, arguments about how things are count for less than arguments about what we should do now -- though philosophically these two kinds of questions are harder to separate than many believe.

[Dawntreader]

Wow AJ...thanks so much. I'm still laughing! It's just what I needed to start off my morning.

Oh....wait a second....your post was actually serious? My bad...

[IronJack]

While I strive for logical purity, I confess that occasionally I let emotion or presumption enter my discourse. Crucify me. You'll find that often the most moving arguments are those that appeal to NOT ONLY the head but the heart. For those who consider such a claim the province of liberals, let me point out that this is not a court of law, but a forum for opinion as well. Perhaps not every post is framed as air-tightly as a Supreme Court opinion -- which is itself arguable -- but then not all posts are intended to persuade as much as to express.

Where flaws in logic arise, feel free to point them out. But it might behoove you to live and let live as well. Unless you are capable of concocting a discourse on pure reason.

[mlo]

Yeah, but what did he say about cheese?