Concerning the so-called "Reverend" Al Sharpton

[TemplarKormac]

The need to delegitimize all perceived enemies is the mark of someone more interested in feeling good about themselves than understanding a situation.

Thing is, we do. We have dead black kids and dead cops. There is a war going on that you don't wish see. It doesn't make any of us feel good, it makes us fearful.

No, you're seeing a war that a part of you really wants to see, because it'll justify and legitimize all these opinions and theories that you've put together to explain black people to yourself.

The rest of us don't see it because it's not real.

That is pretty much an excuse. And ad hominem, with a bit of denial sprinkled on top.

 

[reconmark]

The need to delegitimize all perceived enemies is the mark of someone more interested in feeling good about themselves than understanding a situation.

Thing is, we do. We have dead black kids and dead cops. There is a war going on that you don't wish see. It doesn't make any of us feel good, it makes us fearful.

No, you're seeing a war that a part of you really wants to see, because it'll justify and legitimize all these opinions and theories that you've put together to explain black people to yourself.

The rest of us don't see it because it's not real.

That is pretty much an excuse. And ad hominem, with a bit of denial sprinkled on top.

Yes, your last five posts were...

 

[TemplarKormac]

You can blame the Rev. Al all you want, but that won't change anything.

I'd like you to prove how he isn't responsible for this.

That's not how it works. The onus of proof is on the positive claim.

It's not up to me to "refute" your wild claims. Prove that he is responsible - that's how it works in this country.

Out of context soundbites - seriously, you think 5 seconds of audio from 20 years ago is a valid point? - isn't "proof" of anything. Perhaps the word "escalate" is super-scary to you.

You keep saying 'there is no war' but do absolutely nothing to prove why not. If we are to prove our claim, you must also work to disprove it. Debates work both ways.

"wild claims" is not an argument.

 

[TemplarKormac]

The need to delegitimize all perceived enemies is the mark of someone more interested in feeling good about themselves than understanding a situation.

Thing is, we do. We have dead black kids and dead cops. There is a war going on that you don't wish see. It doesn't make any of us feel good, it makes us fearful.

No, you're seeing a war that a part of you really wants to see, because it'll justify and legitimize all these opinions and theories that you've put together to explain black people to yourself.

The rest of us don't see it because it's not real.

That is pretty much an excuse. And ad hominem, with a bit of denial sprinkled on top.

Yes, your last five posts were...

Oh?

 

[TemplarKormac]

Doc, as far as my proof goes:

 

[theDoctorisIn]

You can blame the Rev. Al all you want, but that won't change anything.

I'd like you to prove how he isn't responsible for this.

That's not how it works. The onus of proof is on the positive claim.

It's not up to me to "refute" your wild claims. Prove that he is responsible - that's how it works in this country.

Out of context soundbites - seriously, you think 5 seconds of audio from 20 years ago is a valid point? - isn't "proof" of anything. Perhaps the word "escalate" is super-scary to you.

You keep saying 'there is no war' but do absolutely nothing to prove why not. If we are to prove our claim, you must also work to disprove it. Debates work both ways.

"wild claims" is not an argument.

Again, that's just not how it works.

I do not accept the legitimacy of your claim. Until you make an actual argument in support of your claim, we're not having a "debate". You have to defend your claim. The ball is in your court.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Doc, as far as my proof goes:

Out of context quotes and video/soundbites are not an "argument".

 

[theDoctorisIn]

The need to delegitimize all perceived enemies is the mark of someone more interested in feeling good about themselves than understanding a situation.

Thing is, we do. We have dead black kids and dead cops. There is a war going on that you don't wish see. It doesn't make any of us feel good, it makes us fearful.

No, it doesn't "make" you fearful, it legitimizes the fear you already have.

 

[Vigilante]

KRAUTHAMMER: ASSOCIATION WITH SHARPTON IS ‘THE WRONG MESSAGE’ FROM OBAMA

Breibart ^

On Tuesday’s broadcast of “The O’Reilly Factor,” Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer weighed in Al Sharpton and his association with President Barack Obama. Fill-in host Eric Bolling noted that Sharpton has made 81 apparent visits to the White House, which conveys a relationship that which Krauthammer indicated was not appropriate.

 

[TemplarKormac]

The need to delegitimize all perceived enemies is the mark of someone more interested in feeling good about themselves than understanding a situation.

Thing is, we do. We have dead black kids and dead cops. There is a war going on that you don't wish see. It doesn't make any of us feel good, it makes us fearful.

No, it doesn't "make" you fearful, it legitimizes the fear you already have.

You denying its existence reveals your own fear. Not mine.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Doc, as far as my proof goes:

Out of context quotes and video/soundbites are not an "argument".

And can you prove they are 'out of context'?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

The need to delegitimize all perceived enemies is the mark of someone more interested in feeling good about themselves than understanding a situation.

Thing is, we do. We have dead black kids and dead cops. There is a war going on that you don't wish see. It doesn't make any of us feel good, it makes us fearful.

No, it doesn't "make" you fearful, it legitimizes the fear you already have.

You denying its existence reveals your own fear. Not mine.

I deny the existence of Bigfoot and little gray men in flying saucers, too.

Does that mean I "fear" them?

 

[TemplarKormac]

The need to delegitimize all perceived enemies is the mark of someone more interested in feeling good about themselves than understanding a situation.

Thing is, we do. We have dead black kids and dead cops. There is a war going on that you don't wish see. It doesn't make any of us feel good, it makes us fearful.

No, it doesn't "make" you fearful, it legitimizes the fear you already have.

You denying its existence reveals your own fear. Not mine.

I deny the existence of Bigfoot and little gray men in flying saucers, too.

Does that mean I "fear" them?

Sarcasm isn't an argument either.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Doc, as far as my proof goes:

Out of context quotes and video/soundbites are not an "argument".

And can you prove they are 'out of context'?

Do you understand what "out of context" means?

The fact that your videos are just soundbites edited out of longer interviews is the dictionary defintion of "out of context".

 

[theDoctorisIn]

The need to delegitimize all perceived enemies is the mark of someone more interested in feeling good about themselves than understanding a situation.

Thing is, we do. We have dead black kids and dead cops. There is a war going on that you don't wish see. It doesn't make any of us feel good, it makes us fearful.

No, it doesn't "make" you fearful, it legitimizes the fear you already have.

You denying its existence reveals your own fear. Not mine.

I deny the existence of Bigfoot and little gray men in flying saucers, too.

Does that mean I "fear" them?

Sarcasm isn't an argument either.

Actually, I've found that sarcasm can function as a very effective argument.

In this case, rebutting your syllogism with a counter-factual.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Doc, as far as my proof goes:

Out of context quotes and video/soundbites are not an "argument".

And can you prove they are 'out of context'?

Do you understand what "out of context" means?

The fact that your videos are just soundbites edited out of longer interviews is the dictionary defintion of "out of context".

Sigh, you are dodging.

"Out of context" here usually means "its out of context because I disagree, not because I can prove it is out of context."

 

[TemplarKormac]

Thing is, we do. We have dead black kids and dead cops. There is a war going on that you don't wish see. It doesn't make any of us feel good, it makes us fearful.

No, it doesn't "make" you fearful, it legitimizes the fear you already have.

You denying its existence reveals your own fear. Not mine.

I deny the existence of Bigfoot and little gray men in flying saucers, too.

Does that mean I "fear" them?

Sarcasm isn't an argument either.

Actually, I've found that sarcasm can function as a very effective argument.

In this case, rebutting your syllogism with a counter-factual.

No, you chose to deflect with a sarcastic question, not a rebuttal.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Doc, as far as my proof goes:

Out of context quotes and video/soundbites are not an "argument".

And can you prove they are 'out of context'?

Do you understand what "out of context" means?

The fact that your videos are just soundbites edited out of longer interviews is the dictionary defintion of "out of context".

Sigh, you are dodging.

"Out of context" here usually means "its out of context because I disagree, not because I can prove it is out of context."

No, "out of context" means the same thing everywhere.

It means "not in its original context" - like a 5 second clip of audio, or one minute cut out of an hour long interview.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Doc, as far as my proof goes:

Out of context quotes and video/soundbites are not an "argument".

And can you prove they are 'out of context'?

Do you understand what "out of context" means?

The fact that your videos are just soundbites edited out of longer interviews is the dictionary defintion of "out of context".

Sigh, you are dodging.

"Out of context" here usually means "its out of context because I disagree, not because I can prove it is out of context."

No, "out of context" means the same thing everywhere.

It means "not in its original context" - like a 5 second clip of audio, or one minute cut out of an hour long interview.

In what other context would she have said it in? Is it because the video is from Mediaite?

 

[Derideo_Te]

Are you familiar with the term "concern troll"?

Nope. Are you familiar with the term war monger?

You should look it up.

I know what a war monger is.

Ok. I'll humor you.

Define "war monger", and let us know how you think Al Sharpton fits it.

Be specific.

Warmonger
/ˈwɔːˌmʌŋɡə/

noun
1. a person who fosters warlike ideas

Fits Al Sharpton to a T.

Name a white American who fits your definition.