Little Green Footballs

Sunday, August 07, 2005

He likes big buts

Charles is fond of pointing out inappropriate uses of the word "but."

Like this:

Unless you have walked in my boots, seen what I have seen, put your life and the lives of your men on the line for the freedom of others and seen your men killed and wounded, keep your opinions to yourself. Yes, you have the freedom of speech, BUT I earned your freedom and fought for it, and so has everyone who wears the uniform now, or wore it before me, and those who have paid the ultimate price.

In other words, "agree with me, or shut up."

CAIR couldn't have said it any better.

18 comments:

Chester said...

In other words, "agree with me, or shut up."

He is also quite fond of shoving words in ones mouth. One thing he accuses the MSM of daily.

The news isn't the news unless its our news, as it were.

According to Charles your credibility is measured by your disdain for Islam.

No more no less.

Chester said...

With these clowns, I might add, that no news is good news.

Never the other way around, it would appear.

Pablo said...

Charles is fond of pointing out inappropriate uses of the word "but."

Like this:


Most people would follow a line like that with something Charles actually said.

You see, if your point is "Charles always says..." you should prove it by quoting Charles, not by referencing a Letter to the Editor at the Pittsburgh Tribune.

It's as if I said, "Winston is an asshole. Here's an example."

That said, it seems to me that Sgt Maj. Wagner is making the "Chickenhawk" argument that you clowns are so fond of. But, since he's flipped it on it's head, and he's put his boots on Iraqi ground, NOW it's an infringement on free speech.

Don't you think an actual soldier has more right to be expressing an opinion on who should be expressing an opinion than you do?

FGL said...

That said, it seems to me that Sgt Maj. Wagner is making the "Chickenhawk" argument that you clowns are so fond of.

No he's not.

The "ChickenHawk" argument does not imply that people should not be allowed to express an opinon.

Its a reference to the fact that despite Bush enjoying a high level of support over the Iraq war, there is a recruitment crisis in the US army.

If there are a majority of people who support the Iraq war, then logically, there should be no shortage of them willing to fight it. Yes?

The chickenhawk argument accuses the pro-Iraq war people of being willing to talk the talk, but of being unwilling to walk the walk.

If you reversed the "Chickenhawk" argument, you would be arguing that people who do not support the war should not fight in it.

However, short of deserting their posts in Iraq, anyone who finds themselves in this unfortunate position does not have the same luxury of choice that the prowar Chickenhawks do.

Don't you think an actual soldier has more right to be expressing an opinion on who should be expressing an opinion than you do?

No.

This "point" of yours is based on your incorrect analysis of the chickenhawk argument.

Everyone has "a right" to express an opinion. But if there are a large number of people supporting the Iraq war whilst there is a serious shortage of people willing to fight it, then it is quite proper to question the integrity of the pro-war camp.

Most people would follow a line like that with something Charles actually said.

Like a link to this story posted on the same day perhaps?

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=16963_CAIRs_Jihad_Against_Criticism_of_Islam_Continues&only

Perhaps you could explain the fundamentals of proof/evidence to your friend EO. Going by his posts over the last few days, I don't think he understands the concept at all.

Pablo said...

The "ChickenHawk" argument does not imply that people should not be allowed to express an opinon.

No, it implies that you shouldn't hold the opinion, let alone express it. It boils down to "If you support the war so much, then you should go fight it. Since you're not doing that, you have no business wanting other people to do it for you."

It's short, it's simple, it's stupid.

Pablo said...


Like a link to this story posted on the same day perhaps?


Right, just like that, FGL! Maybe Winston will let you help him with his paper next time. That way, instead of him trying to tell some horribly disconnected story, with your help the two of you could just lead us over to LGF where Charles has posted a great big BUT! Yay!

Big Gold Star for FGL!

Fonts are fun. :-)

FGL said...

Lol, its great when Pablo ignores the entire post, takes one line and then bases his whole reply on that. Its enough to make you think that he isn't interested in an honest debate. Imagine that....

No, it implies that you shouldn't hold the opinion, let alone express it.

No it doesn't. Its about group behaviour, not that of the individual. Of course there will be some individuals who support the war but are unable to fight.

But with the level of support the Iraq war has from the wingnuts, there is no reason why there should be a recruitment crisis.

If there are a majority of people who support the Iraq war, then logically, there should be no shortage of them willing to fight it. Yes?

=========================================


Right, just like that, FGL! Maybe Winston will let you help him with his paper next time. That way, instead of him trying to tell some horribly disconnected story, with your help the two of you could just lead us over to LGF where Charles has posted a great big BUT! Yay!

Big Gold Star for FGL!

Fonts are fun. :-)


Right. So Winston should have included a link. Break out the champagne!!WOOHOO! Lets have a party!

After months of effort Pablo has finally managed to make one decent point! Its a shame its over something so inconsequential as a missing weblink but by Pablos standards this is real progress!

Pablo said...

In other words, "agree with me, or shut up."

CAIR couldn't have said it any better.


You're entirely missing both my point and Winston's.

I really don't have the energy for you today, FHater. Maybe another time.

FGL said...

You're entirely missing both my point and Winston's.

LOL!!

Pablo is SO easily confused.

Yes he is saying "agree with me, or shut up.", but its not the reverse of the Chickenhawk argument, as you stated.

Next!

Pablo said...

You are the intellectual star of LGF Watch, FGL.

Congratulations.

THIS is LGF Watch!

FGL said...

You are the intellectual star of LGF Watch, FGL.

Congratulations.

THIS is LGF Watch!


Interesting. In another thread I pointed out that Pablo had missed the point completely (like I did in this thread) and he posted the same thing there as well....

Pablo said...

Yes he is saying "agree with me, or shut up.", but its not the reverse of the Chickenhawk argument, as you stated.

He's making the exact same argument, but he's a soldier, so he's making it from the opposite position you morons make it from. And when he says it, it works against you.

But it's the very same argument, just turned around.

Sloppy Joe said...

Pablo, for some who claims to have scored very high marks on some IQ test, you come across as very dim sometimes. You've completely missed the point in this thread.
Oh, and by the way, you're a scumbag.

Pablo said...

Well, I like big butts and I cannot lie!

You other brothers can't deny
That when a girl walks in with an itty bitty waist
And a round thing in your face
You get sprung
Wanna pull up front
Cuz you notice that butt was stuffed
Deep in the jeans she's wearing
I'm hooked and I can't stop staring
Oh, baby I wanna get with ya
And take your picture
My homeboys tried to warn me
But with that butt you got
Me so horny
Ooh, rub all of that smooth skin
You say you wanna get in my Benz
Well use me, use me cuz you ain't that average groupy

I've seen them dancin'
The hell with romancin'
She sweat, wet, got it goin' like a turbo 'Vette

I'm tired of magazines
saying flat butt's the only thing
Take the average black man and ask him that
She gotta pack much back, so

Fellas (yeah), fellas (yeah)
Has your girlfriend got the butt (hell yeah)
Well shake it, shake it, shake it, shake it, shake that healthy butt
Baby got back

Peace out.

FGL said...

He's making the exact same argument, but he's a soldier, so he's making it from the opposite position

No he's not making the same argument from the opposite position. I've explained this to you already.

The chickenhawk argument accuses the pro-Iraq war people of being willing to talk the talk, but of being unwilling to walk the walk.

If you reversed the "Chickenhawk" argument, you would be arguing that people who do not support the war should not fight in it.

Pablo said...


No he's not making the same argument from the opposite position.


Which....REVERSES IT! You moron! Point A to point B is the REVERSE of point B to point A.

Dear God, you are so hopelessly stupid.

FGL said...

Which....REVERSES IT! You moron! Point A to point B is the REVERSE of point B to point A.

ROFLMAO!

Read my post again cretin. Properly this time.

I've capitalised the word you obviously didn't see.

No he's NOT making the same argument from the opposite position.

And now I've highlighted the word you obviously didn't see.

No he's not making the same argument from the opposite position.

Now I've done both, just for you Pablo!

No he's NOT making the same argument from the opposite position.

Now, just to make sure Pleblo gets it...

HE IS NOT, I REPEAT NOT making the same argument from the opposite position.

Now a recap of Pablos position.

He's making the exact same argument, but he's a soldier, so he's making it from the opposite position


And my response...

No he's not making the same argument from the opposite position. I've explained this to you already.

And my justification for that response.

If you reversed the "Chickenhawk" argument, you would be arguing that people who do not support the war should not fight in it.

Bloody hell, you are hard work Pleblo. Now read, comprehend, THEN reply. Try again!

NEXT!

Pablo said...

Wow.

And the wise men don't know how it feels to be thick as a brick.......