Really? Let us examine a few Birther posts to me, in just the past week.
Brown Deer to Pilsner Q. Are you a moron?
itsahoot to Pilsner ... This post smacks of paid political advertizing.
DiogenesLamp to Pilsner ... You posting as someone who is missing a wick sounds about right to me.
Fantasywriter to Pilsner ... Pat yourself on the back. You and Soros are singing from the same page.
Insults, and unsubstantiated allegations that I am on the George Soros payroll. Which about all Birthers ever have.
You, on the other hand, having apparently stumbled upon an index of logical fallacies, bring a fresh, pseudo intellectual, take to Birther blather. Makes for a change. I'm interesting in seeing how you use allegations of logical fallacies to prove that BO can be removed from office by the courts.
Please explain why someone would have and use the social security number from a deceased person if identity fraud is not involved? Use of this number associated with the individual in question only begins appearing in 1986 (putting the forged and back dated Selective Service Registration aside). And identity fraud goes right back to the alleged Hawaiian birth certificate.
The obots claim a clerical error was committed. Really?However, SSN’s cannot be recycled.
Obot logic is failed.
Pilsner says: I’m interesting in seeing how you use allegations of logical fallacies to prove that BO can be removed from office by the courts.
Ahh, jeez ... boy that’s a tough one. What on Earth can I possibly say to that? Well, let’s try being analytical, Mr. Pilsner. Shall we?
Pointing out a logical fallacy doesn’t prove anything. It disproves an argument. So, pointing out logical fallacies isn’t going to prove that “BO can be removed from office by the courts.”
But here is the real surprise — for you, anyway. I never said that it could, never recommended it be tried. No, that was your comment. And, in case you are keeping track, that was a “Straw Dog” fallacy.
My original point (just trying to keep you on track, here) is that both the Birther issues and campaigning against BO can be pursued simultaneously. They are not mutually exclusive. (Special note to Mr. Pilsner: you have not addressed this point, sir.)
You anti-Birthers, in arguing that only campaigning against BO will be effective are guilty of the Fallacy of the False Alternative. Further, since you have nothing of merit to your argument, you typically resort to name calling (referring to me a “pseudo intellectual” leaps to mind). And this is the Ad Hominem fallacy. You cannot live without it, can you?
Yes, others have impugned your intellect and character. But this is not the typical Birther tactic. We have facts — hard, indisputable facts — that Mr. Obama’s birth certificate is a forgery, that he is using a fraudulent SSN, that he is not eligible for the Oval Office. And, whether you agree or not, Mr. Pilsner, we believe that a great crime has been committed; and if Mr. Obama cannot be removed from office for committing a great crime, then we are lost as a nation.
That’s it, Mr. Pilsner. Would you care to discuss facts, or would you rather call people “pseudo intellectuals” because they don’t agree with you?
And, about Birthers using your very own tactics against you: Mr. Pilsner, if you punch someone in the nose, wouldn’t they be entitled to punch you back — you moron. (Sorry, got a little carried away, there.)