Nice Straw Man

[Bret Callentine]

Wow, great article by Gordon Brumm in the latest LO issue. I had no idea that the Tea Party was merely a thinly veiled collection of anarchists promoting a self serving chaos.

You'd think that someone with his educational background would have been familiar with the logical fallacy commonly called a Straw Man argument.

The real question is, Gordon, et al, are you really that scared of people who merely want the government to cut spending and return this country to a state of fiscal responsibility?

Why can't you address the ACTUAL arguments they make instead of making up your own, that you (or any eight year old for that matter) can easily dismiss?

[ryan costa]

there are other screwballs and doofuses in the Tea Parties.
not just anarchists.

[Roy Pitchford]

there are other screwballs and doofuses in the Tea Parties.
not just anarchists.

Do you know that for a fact? I challenge you to actually visit a rally and tell me if you find any anarchists.
April 15th, from 4-6:30PM downtown.


Let me know if you decide go, I'll seek you out and we can video record your entire time there. You can tell me who the "dangerous" people are. I've got a fairly new digital camcorder and an empty 8GB SD card.

Why can't you address the ACTUAL arguments they make instead of making up your own, that you (or any eight year old for that matter) can easily dismiss?

If I may offer an opinion, I don't believe that he...they...can't. There are no logical and reasonable explanations for why the US government must to take over 1/6th of the US economy. If there were, more people would have supported the effort.

If you have an unbalanced scale, there are two ways to make it balanced. Add weight to one side or remove it from the other.

Since he/they are unable to add weight to their side with logic, they must find a way to diminish their opponent, by attacking them.

[Gary Rice]

Bret:

In all sincerity here...

Comparing WHOM, to an 8-year old?

I just finished reading the Observer's page this week having yours, and Gordon's columns on the same page.

You had your opinion. He had his... To me, that made for a nicely balanced page.

I'm not sure whether you've ever met Gordon or not. To me, his is one of the most brilliant minds that Lakewood has ever known. I would suspect that he knows more about politics than any ten people, whom you or I might care to assemble.

I can certainly understand having a difference of opinion, and having discussions and debates over important issues like national medical care.

What I do NOT understand is the manner in which so many choose to frame their points, these days.

I, for one, do not approve of the manner in which this thread was framed, at all.

Whatever point that was supposed to have been made here was, I believe, lost in the delivery.

You asked, for example, whether those "et al" people might be "scared" of other people...well...

We're all supposed to be Americans here, so we're not "scared" of anyone's opinion...

...I think?

Should we be?

Has it REALLY come to that, now?

Back to the banjo...

[Bret Callentine]

Gary,

with all due respect. I did not compare ANYONE to an eight year old, I merely suggested that the entire essence of creating a straw man argument is to bring it to terms (albeit false terms) that even an eight year old would have no trouble discerning as either right or wrong.

In his article, Gordon create a slippery slope list of beliefs that he would have a hard time finding ANYONE at a Tea Party supporting, but then went so far as to imply that they were the very thoughts and strategies that pervade the movement.

I have only met Gordon Brumm once, and only just in passing really, but if he is as brilliant as you suggest then he would have known exactly what he was doing and be very aware of the logical fallacy of his argument. And if that is the case, then what he did comes very close to crossing the line from opinion to slander.

To imply that the Tea Party movement is, indeed, interested in such a radical departure from the role of government in our current society does not match with ANYTHING I personally have witnessed at ANY of the Tea Party events I have been to.

If Gordon would like to address any of the ACTUAL arguments being put forth by the Tea Party I would welcome it whole heartedly, but I stand by my initial comments... knowing what I know about the educational background of Gordon Brumm, I found his article to be intellectually lazy and logically lacking.

He knows better, and we all deserve better.

[Jim O'Bryan]

Bret/Roy

If I may speak for my flaming liberal buddies.

I think the one thing that has us most confused was where were you 8 years ago, when
the hemorrhaging really took off at record rates for a war that was not needed and was built
solely on lies and untruths.

It just seems so odd to me, that all of a sudden you become worried about the debt.

When you throw in survey numbers that show 70% or more of tea partyers are Republicans,
or were Republicans/Independents it even becomes more troubling.


.

[Bret Callentine]

Jim,

Where were we 8 years ago? The same place a lot of the Tea Party people were... in their homes, hoping that they could just depend on their elected representation to do the right thing. They didn't, so WE ALL voted most of them out. however, from our point of view, things did not CHANGE for the better, therefor, finally with our backs against the wall, we could no longer sit by and be the silent majority, so the people got up and became vocal. Something that is entirely against their very nature. Liberals protest if the traffic lights turn green, but conservatives rarely speak out. They've always chosen to just let their vote do the talking. No more.

And actually, I believe the Rassmussen poll came out to suggest that there are at least a good percentage (15-20%) of the tea partiers that are Democrats as well.

As for all your standard call to arms about the lies of the previous administration... check the deck history, I've said from day one: If you, or anyone, think there is evidence to support legal action against Bush/Cheney/etc. then by all means, take them to task!!!

Prosecute them, and if they indeed lied, then that should be called what it is... treason. and they should be punished accordingly. I seem to recall just about every Democratic nominee in the previous election running on a platform that included the call to prosecute. So where are they now? Kucinich is the only one who had the balls big enough to actually bring it to the floor, but all of the sudden the rest of the party seemed to clam up.

well, put up or shut up in that regard.

same thing goes for all the programs the liberals protested agressively back in the Bush days... Two Wars? Okay, then end them. Patriot Act? repeal it. Guantanamo Bay? Close it.

Seems to me, you should be more upset than even the Tea Party. This President and Congress has squandered the only chance it may ever get to put through the agenda it was elected to enact. Even the healthcare bill was a washed down/crappy version of what the left was really calling for.

Most of the conservatives I know made the decision after 9/11 that it was okay to set aside certain liberties in order to gain some security. It took them a while, but they're finally figuring out that that was a bad decision.

Are you really going to sit there and say that their argument isn't valid because it took them too long to arrive at the conclusion?

[Jim O'Bryan]

Bret

Agree with much of what you say, and the 15-20% would go with what I posted.

I am not a huge fan of this administration as you well know, I think there is one party
with different faces, nothing more.

I would say this goes to the T Partyers as well.

I see no real difference just a bunch of yelling about this administration not ALL
administration. The point I was getting at is that if 75% of Partyers are Rs, a simple
change of leadership back to the Bush spending days will settle 75% down overnight.

To me that is a very hollow group then.


.

[Bret Callentine]

agree with your assesment, but from what I've seen, the Tea Party is more about voting out ALL incumbants, not just the ones with a (D) next to their names. However, if that does not turn out to be the case, then I'll be right there with you calling them out for it.

in fact, I already have a title picked out for the article... "Tea Partiers left holding the Bag".

However, my original post stands, if someone like Gordon Brumm is going to offer an opinion on the matter, I would much rather he write about actual policy concerns than fictional political banter. (after all, empty headed rhetoric and delusional ranting is my job )

[Jim O'Bryan]

agree with your assesment, but from what I've seen, the Tea Party is more about voting out ALL incumbants, not just the ones with a (D) next to their names. However, if that does not turn out to be the case, then I'll be right there with you calling them out for it.

in fact, I already have a title picked out for the article... "Tea Partiers left holding the Bag".

However, my original post stands, if someone like Gordon Brumm is going to offer an opinion on the matter, I would much rather he write about actual policy concerns than fictional political banter. (after all, empty headed rhetoric and delusional ranting is my job )

Bret

What are the policies they offer?

I watch the news every night. What am I missing. Less government intrusion(now that it
is a democrat), Less government spending (now that the programs benefit America instead
of 1% of America), Government out of our lives (but only because it is a democrat) and
smaller government.

Nothing more than a bunch of slogans, posters and buzz words.

Where is the platform? Where is the substance?

To me the entire movement is very misplaced, and like so many things today seems to
almost border on another Donner Party.

As for the lies about the War. Nothing is more disappointing to me then another miltary
nightmare being swept under the rug. "Move on, nothing to see here." I have recently
spoken to a politician in Washington about this his comment. "Yes we now know there were
lies and misrepresentation." When asked about trials, I hear the Nixon, Regan BS "The
country has no stomach for this right now, we have bigger fish to fry..."

Pitiful


.

[Brian Pedaci]

While worry about government spending and debt is their rallying point, what really seems to motivate the majority of people in the movement is fear that their taxes are going to go up, right? 'Taxed Enough Already'.

That's why they're motivated and mobilized against a Democratic president and weren't against a Republican one. Nobody expected Bush to raise taxes. It was OK for him to spend, spend, spend and not worry about where the revenue was going to come from. At least this president, for all his spending initiatives, is paying lip service to finding revenue streams to match them.

The real question is why, if most people hate taxes so much, the IRS still enjoys a higher popularity rate than the Tea Party? (According to a Fox News Poll!)

[Bret Callentine]

like I said before, can't speak for everyone's feelings the last eight years, but it's my belief that the ONLY reason that you didn't hear more whining about the massive spending was because they generally thought they were getting safety and security out of the deal. As that became apparent to be yet another myth, people got upset, then as you may or may not want to recall, everything started to turn not with the election of Obama, but when Bush made his wonderfully idiotic policy to 'destroy the free market system in order to save the free market system'.

As for the current lip service. Congress recently passed "pay as you go" legislation in an effort to at least cap spending, yet, every thing they've passed since has been granted an exception to that law. Keep in mind that the bills are put through the wringer at the CBO ASSUMING the pay-go policy would stay in place. then the politicians take to the microphone pitching the plan, pronouncing debt neutrality or savings. then they pass a waiver, pass the bill and sweep the resulting increase in spending completely under the rug.

and as for taxes, I don't think most people HATE them, they simply accept them as necessary, what they hate is that as the reality of the recession started to hit home, government just kept printing and borrowing money, and handing it out like lollipops to thousands of pet projects and make-work proposals that they feel will do nothing to spur real economic growth.

as for "where is the platform, where is the substance?" keep in mind that the Tea Party isn't really a political party. If they want to be, they will definitely have to put everything into writing, until then the policy they want more than anything else is Fiscal Responsiblity.

[Will Brown]

[quote="Jim O'Bryan"]Bret/Roy

If I may speak for my flaming liberal buddies.

I think the one thing that has us most confused was where were you 8 years ago, when
the hemorrhaging really took off at record rates for a war that was not needed and was built
solely on lies and untruths.

It just seems so odd to me, that all of a sudden you become worried about the debt.

When you throw in survey numbers that show 70% or more of tea partyers are Republicans,
or were Republicans/Independents it even becomes more troubling..[/quote]

I keep hearing that the war was based on lies, but I can't recall just what those lies were. Perhaps you could cite one.

One of the weaknesses of human behavior is that a lie, repeated often enough, begins to be viewed as the truth, and I suspect this may be one of those situations. Most of us are not happy to be involved in the problems of the middle east, and find some comfort in believing that the reasons given for our involvement were lies. But again, I ask what exactly were those lies.

By contrast, your statement giving the impression that the people at Tea Party rallies are virtually all Republications is a clever lie. Well, maybe not clever, but a lie none the less. By the criteria you set, they could all be Democrats or independents, yet you paint them with the brush of Republicanism. I'm a Democrat, for example, but much of what the Tea Partiers argue for makes sense to me.

My concern is that calculated lying is becoming an accepted practice in our society. Our current President, for example, consistently says that his policies have created, or saved, a huge number of jobs. Now, its not hard to find out how many new jobs have been filled (but perhaps harder to discern why), but it is impossible to find out how many jobs were saved (do those few remaining jobs exist because of what he did, or do they exist in spite of what he did), and he is always careful to include jobs saved in his statements. I'd be happier with a President who said we tried this, but it didn't do as much as we hoped, so we are going to try something else. But I guess a universal truth about politicians is that they never will admit that something they tried didn't work.

I still await an explanation of what the specific lies were that got us into the war. But at the same time, I'm not convinced that we have been told the real reasons.

[Roy Pitchford]

If I may make an unrelated suggestion, Will, I hope you don't mind...
User Control Panel -> Board Preferences -> Enable BBCode by default:Yes

When you quote someone (or use bold or italics), it will show up better. I had a hard time picking out the end of what Jim wrote and the beginning of what you wrote.