Page 180 of 288 FirstFirst ... 80130170178179180181182190230280 ... LastLast
Results 1,791 to 1,800 of 2873

Thread: Brett Kavanaugh

  1. #1791

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Taernath View Post
    Do you understand the difference between a news article and an editorial/opinion piece? News articles are expected to be written from a neutral POV with no or little author voice.
    Have you seen 90% of the stuff he links? He links almost nothing but opinion pieces from shit like Vox and Vanityfair and other bullshit like that and then responds to them as if it's a factual news story and is usually like "Can we all at least agree that Trump is the worst person to ever walk the earth and I hate him I hate him I HATE HIM and anyone who doesn't is un-American!!!!!!!!?"
    Last edited by Methais; 09-28-2018 at 10:48 AM.
    www.twitch.tv/3piecesofbread
    Quote Originally Posted by Back
    I am a retard. I'm disabled. I'm poor. I'm black. I'm gay. I'm transgender. I'm a woman.



    Quote Originally Posted by Androidpk View Post
    And feel free to get me banned, not going to stop my lawyer from sending Kranar a subpoena for IP information on a couple of people.

  2. #1792

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cwolff View Post
    A technicality which removes the responsibility to ponder the message and look at a situation through a different lens.
    I'm not attempting to disqualify the article as a source of news. I'm giving my opinion on it.

  3. #1793

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Taernath View Post
    Do you understand the difference between a news article and an editorial/opinion piece? News articles are expected to be written from a neutral POV with no or little author voice.
    Are you shitting me? I can't believe that's a real question from you and there's no way you can read the four sentences to which you responded and not see that yes, I understand the difference.

  4. #1794

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Astray View Post
    I'm not attempting to disqualify the article as a source of news. I'm giving my opinion on it.
    It happens all the time. Often enough to be remarked on, which I've done before and am doing again today. It's a deflection or a defense mechanism that we see here. Like I said, it's used as a technicality to avoid the subject matter being discussed. I don't get it. That makes no sense. If you dismiss the reasoning then do so. If you refute the argument then do so but do it based on the material presented.

    I'm also not saying you have to respond. Of course you don't have to. You can ignore it, but to point out "hey, that's opinion" is either retarded (which I don't believe for real that any of you are) or an excuse to avoid the subject matter discussed in the quoted article. Either way, it's not good.

  5. #1795
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    The Danger Zone
    Posts
    11,714
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cwolff View Post
    Are you shitting me? I can't believe that's a real question from you and there's no way you can read the four sentences to which you responded and not see that yes, I understand the difference.
    You really didn't catch the connection? You've never done 'detect the bias' exercises in your high school English class? You have no idea why someone might reject an inherently biased source out of hand?
    You had better pay your guild dues before you forget. You are 113 months behind.

  6. #1796

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cwolff View Post
    I'm also not saying you have to respond. Of course you don't have to. You can ignore it, but to point out "hey, that's opinion" is either retarded or an excuse to avoid the subject matter discussed in the quoted article. Either way, it's not good.
    You're strawmanning. The unspoken reason you're not giving is because pointing out that an article is news or opinion is key to finding valid information and not walking away with a predisposed position instilled on you via opinion. Finding the factual, unbiased information is important.

  7. #1797

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Taernath View Post
    You really didn't catch the connection? You've never done 'detect the bias' exercises in your high school English class? You have no idea why someone might reject an inherently biased source out of hand?

    No one did that did they? The response is "That's opinion" with no comment other than that. Don't twist this. I asked a fair question

    Quote Originally Posted by Astray View Post
    You're strawmanning. The unspoken reason you're not giving is because pointing out that an article is news or opinion is key to finding valid information and not walking away with a predisposed position instilled on you via opinion. Finding the factual, unbiased information is important.
    It's not a strawman because a strawman is used to defeat an opponents real argument which you're making when you dismiss an article by saying, "that's an opinion piece". By doing that you're avoiding making an argument. It'd be best to just ignore it if you don't wish to comment.

    Don't be so worried about getting a predisposed position instilled in you. This isn't Invasion of the Body Snatchers. It's just an article.

  8. #1798

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cwolff View Post
    Don't be so worried about getting a predisposed position instilled in you. I certainly don't, and look how retarded I turned out.
    This is correct.
    www.twitch.tv/3piecesofbread
    Quote Originally Posted by Back
    I am a retard. I'm disabled. I'm poor. I'm black. I'm gay. I'm transgender. I'm a woman.



    Quote Originally Posted by Androidpk View Post
    And feel free to get me banned, not going to stop my lawyer from sending Kranar a subpoena for IP information on a couple of people.

  9. #1799
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Mars
    Posts
    28,730
    Blog Entries
    17

    Default

    Two hours until the committee vote.
    Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam

  10. #1800

    Default

    Wait what?

    WSJ: Mitchell advised Republicans that to continue questioning Kavanaugh she was required by her oath in Arizona to inform Kavanaugh of his rights after he lied to her about July 1, 1982 entry on his calender. Maryland statutes was last question she asked, then break was called..

    https://twitter.com/Alan_Covington/s...37533378514944

    Looking for a link that would corroborate this tweet

    EDIT: I can't find corroboration and the people who were tweeting it are now deleting/editing so this appears to be B.S.
    Last edited by cwolff; 09-28-2018 at 11:50 AM.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •