06-30-2009, 04:09 PM
|
#1 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 216
|  I'm Good Enough, I'm Strong Enough, and gosh darnit the people of MN like me
The Minnesota supreme court has ended the recount and declared Al Franken as the winner of the senate campaign.
So if you are following Norm Coleman's career, he has now lost elections to Al Franken AND Jesse "The Body" Ventura. Maybe he should stop running for office. 
Dave | 
| | | And now for this message... |
| |
06-30-2009, 04:23 PM
|
#2 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Fresno, California
Posts: 3,198
| Rep for thread title!
__________________
"I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall defend, to the death, your right to say it."
| 
| | |
06-30-2009, 10:22 PM
|
#3 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Philly
Posts: 379
| And it only took seven months. Awesome. | |
| | |
07-01-2009, 01:23 AM
|
#4 | | Just Joined
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 16
| I am thanking The Universe for allowing us a majority sufficient enough for us to go forth unchecked and pass legislation that will save Mother Earth and all her children!
__________________
"Cast out all who did not vote for the magical negro, for they are all fascists and want to destroy our trees" -The Bible (if I read it..)
| |
| | |
07-01-2009, 10:19 AM
|
#5 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 563
| http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124640687950076679.html
How Franken steals the election by changing the rules. Typical democrat policy!
__________________
Obamacare: If at first you don't succeed, lie, lie, lie again!
| |
| | |
07-01-2009, 10:50 AM
|
#6 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 1,928
| Quote:
Originally Posted by Bayou Bum  {snip} Typical democrat policy! | Interesting. Here the democrat policy was carried out by a unanimous Minnesota Supreme Court, made up of a majority of Republican appointees.
Damn those Democrats!
Here's the actual Decision, which was clearly dictated by the DNC....
--Philistine | |
| | |
07-01-2009, 11:01 AM
|
#7 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,906
| Quote:
Originally Posted by Philistine ....unanimous Minnesota Supreme Court.... | Mind control. How else can you explain the unanimity of the decision. This is America dammit 
__________________
.....
| |
| | |
07-01-2009, 03:54 PM
|
#8 | | Possibly a haberdasher?
Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 6,031
| Quote:
Originally Posted by bayou bum | "more in opinion"
Try the "News" section next time.
__________________
lol wut?
| |
| | |
07-02-2009, 05:35 PM
|
#9 | | Curmudgeon Emeritus
Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Somewhere in your nightmares!
Posts: 25,961
| Quote:
Originally Posted by Philistine Interesting. Here the democrat policy was carried out by a unanimous Minnesota Supreme Court, made up of a majority of Republican appointees.
| Hmm. So...if a right-leaning court acts "for" a Democrat, they are being fair; but if they act "for" a Republican, they are "stealing the election"...
Shall we play Name the Fallacy? 
__________________
Use the Shift key, people! Keyboard manufacturers everywhere are ineffably saddened when you ignore what they made just for you!
| |
| | |
07-02-2009, 09:49 PM
|
#10 | | Possibly a haberdasher?
Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 6,031
| Would only be true if they were the exact same court and the situation was exactly the same.
Nice try, though.
__________________
lol wut?
| |
| | |
07-02-2009, 09:59 PM
|
#11 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Way Out West
Posts: 5,669
| I read the WSJ editorial in question, and can only smirk at them - considering how they robustly supported the Supreme Court decision in 2000, and rejected claims of election stealing in 2004 (Ohio had disputes that got little air).
So, if we want to play the "it all depends on whose ox is Gored"  game, we can look at the WSJ's position on the rule of law based solely on whether it helps or hinders their candidate.
__________________
"In theory, theory and practice are the same, but in practice, theory and practice are different."
| |
| | |
07-03-2009, 05:01 PM
|
#12 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Northern California
Posts: 973
| Quote:
Originally Posted by Inquartata Hmm. So...if a right-leaning court acts "for" a Democrat, they are being fair; but if they act "for" a Republican, they are "stealing the election"...
Shall we play Name the Fallacy? | So which fallacy are you committing by taking his quote entirely out of context?
Unless, of course, you feel it logical that "typical Democrat policy" is being implemented by the unanimous vote of a group of Republican appointees.
__________________
- Wisdom is the knowledge of how much you don't know.
| |
| | |
07-03-2009, 05:23 PM
|
#13 | | Curmudgeon Emeritus
Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Somewhere in your nightmares!
Posts: 25,961
| Quote:
Originally Posted by telkanuru Would only be true if they were the exact same court and the situation was exactly the same. | Why?
Nice try, yourself. Quote:
Originally Posted by Hauptman
Unless, of course, you feel it logical that "typical Democrat policy" is being implemented by the unanimous vote of a group of Republican appointees.
| No, I feel that in both cases the courts probably acted in good faith, in accordance with what they believed to be the law. All that differs is the inconsistent characterizations certain outside organizations and persons of a particular political persuasion choose to impose onto the decisions.
It's the inconsistency of the observers that causes me to look askance, not the decisions.
__________________
Use the Shift key, people! Keyboard manufacturers everywhere are ineffably saddened when you ignore what they made just for you!
Last edited by Inquartata; 07-03-2009 at 05:55 PM..
| |
| | |
07-03-2009, 06:51 PM
|
#14 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Northern California
Posts: 973
| Quote:
Originally Posted by Inquartata No, I feel that in both cases the courts probably acted in good faith, in accordance with what they believed to be the law. All that differs is the inconsistent characterizations certain outside organizations and persons of a particular political persuasion choose to impose onto the decisions.
| Exactly, there was no fallacy in the response to the "typical Democrat policy". It merely illuminated the illogic of that attempted smear.
__________________
- Wisdom is the knowledge of how much you don't know.
| |
| | |
07-03-2009, 07:23 PM
|
#15 | | Possibly a haberdasher?
Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 6,031
| Quote:
Originally Posted by Inquartata Why?
Nice try, yourself. | Well, if you take two different incidents and come to two different conclusions, that's not actually a double standard.
__________________
lol wut?
| |
| | |
07-03-2009, 08:32 PM
|
#16 | | Curmudgeon Emeritus
Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Somewhere in your nightmares!
Posts: 25,961
| Indeed?
So if I punch you in the nose, and call that assault...and then I punch Hauptman in the nose and claim that that's NOT assault...either (1) that's a double standard, or (2) those are not "two different incidents". I don't think I've missed a possibilty there, have I?
Which are you alleging?
__________________
Use the Shift key, people! Keyboard manufacturers everywhere are ineffably saddened when you ignore what they made just for you!
| |
| | |
07-03-2009, 08:43 PM
|
#17 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Northern California
Posts: 973
| Quote:
Originally Posted by Inquartata Indeed?
So if I punch you in the nose, and call that assault...and then I punch Hauptman in the nose and claim that that's NOT assault...either (1) that's a double standard, or (2) those are not "two different incidents". I don't think I've missed a possibilty there, have I?
Which are you alleging? | If you punch me in the nose, I call that battery.
But I never knew you had such a violent nature.
__________________
- Wisdom is the knowledge of how much you don't know.
| |
| | |
07-03-2009, 10:04 PM
|
#18 | | Possibly a haberdasher?
Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 6,031
| Quote:
Originally Posted by Inquartata Indeed?
So if I punch you in the nose, and call that assault...and then I punch Hauptman in the nose and claim that that's NOT assault...either (1) that's a double standard, or (2) those are not "two different incidents". I don't think I've missed a possibilty there, have I?
Which are you alleging? | Of course, since you have the exact same incident occurring twice. If, however, you look at me quizzically and call it assault and punch Hauptman and call it assault, you're just making **** up.
__________________
lol wut?
| |
| | |
07-05-2009, 01:39 AM
|
#19 | | Curmudgeon Emeritus
Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Somewhere in your nightmares!
Posts: 25,961
| And you're kindly providing me with a guide to making s*** up, apparently...
So, uh, thanks, but...I'll stick with my own examples, if you don't mind.
__________________
Use the Shift key, people! Keyboard manufacturers everywhere are ineffably saddened when you ignore what they made just for you!
| |
| | |
07-05-2009, 11:42 AM
|
#20 | | Possibly a haberdasher?
Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 6,031
| Quote:
Originally Posted by Inquartata So, uh, thanks, but...I'll stick with my own examples, if you don't mind. | Right, because we wouldn't want to be using an analogy that accurately portrayed events. That would just be wrong.
__________________
lol wut?
| |
| | | Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes |  Linear Mode | 
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
| | | All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:08 AM. |
