We need to nominate, then elect Herman Cain!

Jarod said:
If thats what you call a direct comparison...ok. You are a bigger fool than I thought. Im glad this is here for all to see...

I dislike A, I also dislike B.

Basic logic, I am not comparing A and B, I simply dont like both A and B.

Take a basic logic class, PLEASE!!!
Click to expand...

When someone says... No, I don't like that, and I also don't like this... that IS a DIRECT COMPARISON! What the fuck is wrong with you? Can something BE more obvious? Throughout Islamic teaching, women are less than men, women have less value than men, and women are to be subservient to men, in any and ALL cases, no exceptions, no caveats, no ambiguity, no differing interpretation... it is clear, concise, and consistent throughout the Koran, throughout Sharia, and throughout Islam. Christianity teaches something completely and radically different. Women are NOT valued less than men, the Bible states in several places, they are EQUAL to men in the eyes of God, the Bible NEVER states women are to be subservient, or valued less than men... it's fucking NOT THERE! The OPPOSITE is stated numerous times, in several different books, by several different authors. Yet when it is pointed out that Islam teaches this, YOU MADE THE DIRECT COMPARISON to Christianity, and tried to claim it said the same thing, IT DOESN'T and you were totally schooled on it by a Buddhist.

Now if you just want to be a horses ass and keep arguing, that's fine... go for it Big Boy! I am done here.
 
Dixie said:
When someone says... No, I don't like that, and I also don't like this... that IS a DIRECT COMPARISON! What the fuck is wrong with you? Can something BE more obvious? Throughout Islamic teaching, women are less than men, women have less value than men, and women are to be subservient to men, in any and ALL cases, no exceptions, no caveats, no ambiguity, no differing interpretation... it is clear, concise, and consistent throughout the Koran, throughout Sharia, and throughout Islam. Christianity teaches something completely and radically different. Women are NOT valued less than men, the Bible states in several places, they are EQUAL to men in the eyes of God, the Bible NEVER states women are to be subservient, or valued less than men... it's fucking NOT THERE! The OPPOSITE is stated numerous times, in several different books, by several different authors. Yet when it is pointed out that Islam teaches this, YOU MADE THE DIRECT COMPARISON to Christianity, and tried to claim it said the same thing, IT DOESN'T and you were totally schooled on it by a Buddhist.

Now if you just want to be a horses ass and keep arguing, that's fine... go for it Big Boy! I am done here.
Click to expand...

It is just plain and simply not a direct comparison, in fact its not a comparison at all. You really should take a class in Rhetoric and basic logic.
 
Jarod said:
Seriously you call that a direct comparison?
Click to expand...

How could you not? You stated that you didn't like when Christians do "this" also...

Friend 1: I don't like it when apples roll off the table.
Friend 2: I don't like it when oranges do that also...


I don't like it when oranges roll off the table like apples... I don't like it when <insert something here> does something <also>... "Also" assumes knowledge of a subject gained through context of a conversation. That conversation was about Sharia law and you made a direct comparison.
 
Damocles said:
How could you not? You stated that you didn't like when Christians do "this" also...

Friend 1: I don't like it when apples roll off the table.
Friend 2: I don't like it when oranges do that also...


I don't like it when oranges roll off the table like apples... I don't like it when <insert something here> does something <also>... "Also" assumes knowledge of a subject gained through context of a conversation. That conversation was about Sharia law and you made a direct comparison.
Click to expand...

I dont like it when monkeys throw shit, I also dont like it when driving west at sunset and the sun gets into my eyes.

I also dont like it when I am cutting the grass and I run over a pile of shit. I also dont like it when my hair gets into my eyes.

I am not comparing these things, especally not directly.


I dont like it when Muslims treat women as second class citizens. That is a direct statement. I also dont like it when Christians do it. That is a direct statement. These are two independent direct statements that do not compare anything to anything.


A direct comparison would be something like this...

I dont like when Muslims treat women poorly, its just like when the Christians do it. OR I dont like when Muslims treat women poorly, its different than the way Christians do it. If it was a direct comparison the statement would have let you know how I felt the two were different or simular. Based on my statment all you know is that I dont like it when they do it. This is BASIC logic that they teach in High Schools all over the nation, other than Alabama and Colorado apperatntly!
 
Jarod said:
I dont like it when monkeys throw shit, I also dont like it when driving west at sunset and the sun gets into my eyes.

I also dont like it when I am cutting the grass and I run over a pile of shit. I also dont like it when my hair gets into my eyes.

I am not comparing these things, especally not directly.


I dont like it when Muslims treat women as second class citizens. That is a direct statement. I also dont like it when Christians do it. That is a direct statement. These are two independent direct statements that do not compare anything to anything.


A direct comparison would be something like this...

I dont like when Muslims treat women poorly, its just like when the Christians do it. OR I dont like when Muslims treat women poorly, its different than the way Christians do it. If it was a direct comparison the statement would have let you know how I felt the two were different or simular. Based on my statment all you know is that I dont like it when they do it. This is BASIC logic that they teach in High Schools all over the nation, other than Alabama and Colorado apperatntly!
Click to expand...
.

You ignore the "also" and the context to try to say it wasn't "direct"... That is weak. Any jury listening to that weak twist would dismiss half of what you said previous and you'd have a hard time winning any trial with that strategy.

You're holding a conversation about Muslims with somebody and say: I don't like it when Christians do that too!

You've made a direct comparison. Apparently lawyers have a hard time sticking to what they've said and believe that we are too stupid to remember context.
 
Damocles said:
.

You ignore the "also" and the context to try to say it wasn't "direct"... That is weak. Any jury listening to that weak twist would dismiss half of what you said previous and you'd have a hard time winning any trial with that strategy.

You're holding a conversation about Muslims with somebody and say: I don't like it when Christians do that too!


I dislike it also. I also dislike when Christians claim that women should be subservent to men also.


You've made a direct comparison. Apparently lawyers have a hard time sticking to what they've said and believe that we are too stupid to remember context.
Click to expand...


If I had said, "I dont like when Christians do that too", you would have a better point. I did not say that.

I said...

"I dislike it also. I also dislike when Christians claim that women should be subservent to men also."

Any linguist would tell you that these are two independent statements that do not compare what Christians do with what Muslims do, they simply tell you that the writer does not like what either of them do.

You might have an argument that this is an indirect comparison, (a weak argument), but you do not have an argument that it was a direct comparison. You are clearly incorrect. A direct comparison would require some information about a quality of the two things and how they are the same or different.
 
Jarod said:
If I had said, "I dont like when Christians do that too", you would have a better point. I did not say that.


I said...

"I dislike it also. I also dislike when Christians claim that women should be subservent to men also."
Click to expand...

LOL. No you used "also" rather than too. Gods...

Any linguist would tell you that these are two independent statements that do not compare what Christians do with what Muslims do, they simply tell you that the writer does not like what either of them do.
Click to expand...

Bull, this linguist tells you that also and too are synonymous in this context.

You might have an argument that this is an indirect comparison, (a weak argument), but you do not have an argument that it was a direct comparison. You are clearly incorrect. A direct comparison would require some information about a quality of the two things and how they are the same or different.
Click to expand...
Again, an attempt to twist. Seriously.

Your argument here is, "I didn't say too, I said also!"
 
Damocles said:
LOL. No you used "also" rather than too. Gods...



Bull, this linguist tells you that also and too are synonymous in this context.


Again, an attempt to twist. Seriously.

Your argument here is, "I didn't say too, I said also!"
Click to expand...

My argument is that I did not compare them, I said I did not like it when groups do the things they do.
You clearly do not understand the difference.

If your professor asked you to write an essay comparing President Clinton's style with that of President Bush.. and you wrote...

I do not like President Bush, I also do not like President Bush. You have not compared the two.

If you went on to say, the reason I do not like Bush ... and the reason I do not like Clinton...

You have still not compared them.

If you say....

President Bush used x style while President CLinton used Y style, then you have compared them.
 
Jarod said:
My argument is that I did not compare them, I said I did not like it when groups do the things they do.
You clearly do not understand the difference.

If your professor asked you to write an essay comparing President Clinton's style with that of President Bush.. and you wrote...

I do not like President Bush, I also do not like President Bush. You have not compared the two.

If you went on to say, the reason I do not like Bush ... and the reason I do not like Clinton...

You have still not compared them.

If you say....

President Bush used x style while President CLinton used Y style, then you have compared them.
Click to expand...

Right, the word "also" in a conversation about Sharia law couldn't possibly be the same thing as "too" and as such a comparison word...

:rolleyes:

I'm done. At this point the conversation is worthless. Words mean things, and in this case you made a direct comparison of Christians and Muslims and how you didn't like when Christians "do that also"...
 
Damocles said:
Right, the word "also" in a conversation about Sharia law couldn't possibly be the same thing as "too" and as such a comparison word...

:rolleyes:

I'm done. At this point the conversation is worthless. Words mean things, and in this case you made a direct comparison of Christians and Muslims and how you didn't like when Christians "do that also"...
Click to expand...

You keep trying to add words to what I said to make your point valid... I did not not say "that". Words mean things, so does the lack of a word!
 
So...SM, how's that Herman Cains thing working out for you now?

I imagine some know-nothing European, with only a passing interest in Republican Presidential nominees, having a superior understanding of your own electoral system must sting somewhat, no?

Luckily, i'm a classy kind of a chap and would never dream of pointing out your utter stupidity. :)
 
Personally, i'm looking forward to two chaps, with impossibly ridiculous names, spitting an increasing amount of venom and destroying each others reputations for the next few months.

Although, the Democrats will probably be responsible for it all.
 
(Excerpt) In suspending his candidacy, as opposed to saying that he was quitting the race or ending his bid, Mr. Cain maintained his ability to accept money to pay for his campaign so far and to finance the new venture that he called his Plan B: to travel the country promoting his tax and foreign policy plans. If Mr. Cain had decided to formally close his campaign organization, he would not be able to use donations that may come in.

Mr. Cain’s critics have long posited that he has been more interested in creating celebrity for himself — as a means to sell books and increase speaking fees — than in making a serious bid for the presidency. (End)
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/04/us/politics/herman-cain-suspends-his-presidential-campaign.html

I think his suspending the campaign had less to do with his wife and more to do with his backers/campaign people smelling a rat.
 
Actually, i'd like to know the answer to the question- "How many times can one man repeat the phrase '9-9-9' to any question, without him quitting a Republican Presidential nominee race"

I reckon 'suspending' his candidacy is merely a rouse to reinvigorate himself (possibly with the aid of some money or the promise of a job).

Why can't people just open their eyes and see the next President of the United States of America?
 
Jarod said:
If thats what you call a direct comparison...ok. You are a bigger fool than I thought. Im glad this is here for all to see...

I dislike A, I also dislike B.

Basic logic, I am not comparing A and B, I simply dont like both A and B.

Take a basic logic class, PLEASE!!!
Click to expand...

Absolutely right...you've simply created a list of two things you dislike.

It's no wonder you got the disingenuous douchebag Damocles standing up for Dix!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top