Posted on 05/10/2006 1:48:26 AM PDT by M. Thatcher
Pray tell, how does your wounding impact on this discussion? Being a former LEO is quite sufficient to make your point.
Like it or not, that's prima facie evidence you don't know the relevant from the that which isn't.
I mentioned my former LEO credentials once in another discussion, and got immediately splashed with childish insinuations about why I am a FORMER police officer.
And that was a different discussion, was it not? Why is it here? I didn't bring it.
So, I have to put that out there to preempt the inevitable personal attacks.
Inevitable? You've got my "detectors" doing backflips.
I've read your post, and while I will not dispute your experience, I have serious reservations with the quality of your analysis.
Good point. I meant openly so, and hostile to the US.
With all due respect, give me a break. Both sides in this debate have become equally childish and emotional. I myself am no exception. It's just the nature of human sociology.
It's being a cute Filipina. (/bemused cynicism)
I have searched both yesterday and today's articles by Sara Carter, and can find no line containg the phrase "whatever the Minutemen say is the actual fact, period, end of discussion." Please make your reference more specific. I, in no way, see either writer using any document as the sole basis of their articles.
Malkin's stock and trade is not analysis; it's punditry.
That's a mighty subtle distinction to hang your hat on.
Stormfront's adherents spend money that's as green as mine.
Not one of your more dignified rhetorical tactics, Sinkspur.
I'll leave it at that.
Believe it or not, Howlin...it is a bit of a comfort to know you can at least be consistently relied on to metaphorically assault the girl you caught your boyfriend kissing.
It's not subtle at all. Analysts actually analyze before they comment. Pundits need merely say what sounds good to those in the choir.
Wretchard, over at Belmont Club, qualifies as an analyst. Ms. Malkin doesn't make the grade.
Believe it or not, that's one of the ditziest responses I've ever seen on FR.
this is the ludicrousness of it all. precisely if the land were not our own, but that of one of our allies, we would have troops down there in no time flat, 'defending' democracy and freedom. as it is, since it is our own land being invaded, we are unable to get any kind of act into gear. how's that for idiocy??
I stand corrected.
Unmoved, but corrected.
Frankly, I think you and he are caviling.
As I said, you're at least consistent.
Of course, "consistent" is also a fine way to describe insipid, unimaginative, and banal.
I'll get back to you the second I care what somebody like you thinks about me.
Just like an old pair of slippers....
Strawmen often are facts. They are also irrelevant to the argument and only used to tar the opposing point of view.
"What is truly amazing is that the very people who claim to despise Mexico are now quoting heavily from a Mexican web site and taking it as absolute fact." <---- This however, is not a "fact"; it is an opinion bolstered by unsupported claims.
Maybe it is "amazing" that people construct arguments from odd sources. Maybe some people "despise Mexico". Maybe those are the same people quoting the website. Maybe they are taking the website as "absolute fact". However, all of those things are just your suppositions, some totally unprovable, juxtaposed by you to tar the opposition without addressing their argument.
Even your so-called "fact" does not hold up logically, because it is entirely possible for someone to "despise" something, but still believe it to be authoritative on a given subject. One could even turn your "fact" around and say, "Isn't it amazing that those who swallow governmental press releases whole are now dismissing official Mexican government websites?" I am sure you can see how this would be as stupidly illogical as your "fact".
Oh My Word! Why oh why didn't I find out what the meaning of paper tiger was over seven years ago when I chose it for a screen name! And to think, after all this time, no one but you has thought to bring it up!
Woe is me. I am undone!
Blast cruel fate! I knew I should have gone with "boy named Sue."
'Course, now that I think about it..."howlin" is usually done by hound-dogs, ain't it?
Aw, c'mon! You mean you've never read one of MurryMom's posts?
;o)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.