|
puella -> RE: What planet is Sen. James Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, who calls global warming the biggest hoax ever per (3/24/2007 11:04:31 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY
quote:
ORIGINAL: puella
I do not know why you continually and so very obviously go after the poster when you can not go after the actual content of the post, especially when given facts for its content.
A thread is a discussion about an issue, usually based on facts and opinions. You have an opinion. I just point out that your opinion doesn't match the facts, or that your rhetorical thinking is flawed. You take offense, and attempt to change the focus. I point it out to you again.
quote:
ORIGINAL: puella
This entire thread is about Inhofe and his motivations.
The thread is about Inhofe's belief that global warming isn't well founded in science. So why did you start talking about his "blood lines" and his views on same sex marriage?
quote:
ORIGINAL: puella
He, not I stated that his bloodline (geniology=bloodline... he is the one who brought the chart to the Senate and when about the recorded history of his family) is pure (pure-free from what he is saying are evils (given the following textual passages he quotes ... and he quotes the bible on the senate floor frequently) of divorce and homosexuality). He is a bigot, period. There are many who would praise him for his blatant words and policies regarding gays and the rights they are not allowed to have, but I am not one of them.
It has nothing at all to do with propaganda. I did not make up what the guy says or that he made a public statement backing up the fact that he refuses to hire homosexuals... he did.
It has everything to do with your attempt at propaganda. Your use of the term bloodlines was clearly an attempt to frame him as related to Nazi ideology. Your attempt to characterize his pride of family as "gloating" was clearly an attempt to cast him in the most unfavorable light.
And what does either have to do with his belief that global warming is a politically motivated movement?
Now, even further ... if you had said Inhofe is a homosexual bigot because he won't hire them - I would have agreed with you. That is likely a fact - but would have still asked you what that had to do with his stance on global warming?
quote:
ORIGINAL: puella
I just made a post in a thread asking about who this guy is (or rather, what planet he is from) further exploring the character of the man.
"Exploring the character of the man." is code for character assassination, since it doesn't relate to the topic at hand.
quote:
ORIGINAL: puella
Again, opinion on my part, and facts from the horse's (Inahofes') mouth to back up my position. Thats all it is.
Why don't you spend as much time on the topic at had as you do on me?
Clarifying and defending attacks on the man's character, unrelated to his position on global warming IS part of the topic at hand. You are attempting to discredit his stance based on issues that do not pertain to this issue. Calling you on it is therefore pertinent.
FirmKY
Whoah... you are spinning way way out of focus.
I prefaced my post about Inhofe and his bringing his family tree to congress as the most "important prop" by stating that it was completely tangential.
I also never ever insinuated or even think Inhofe is a Nazi. LOL, you are so out there!
I do not think he is a Nazi, I have never said he was a Nazi and never would... he isn't. I think he is a bigot who uses religion (in a house of Congress which is supposed to be separate entirely from religion) to attempt to legitimize that stance. There is a great difference. You would do a great deal better in dealing with the actual opinions I state, and the facts I have brought forth to illustrate why I have formed them than to make them up for me. I have asked you a few times to stop doing that... I guess you just can't resist thinking you know me better than I do...I won't peer into that weirdness too closely.
|
|
|
|
