Randi Rhodes: Al Franken Will Not Be An 'Honest' Senator

Discussion in 'Media' started by PoliticalChic, Jul 11, 2009.

  1. PoliticalChic
    Offline

    PoliticalChic Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    Messages:
    55,763
    Thanks Received:
    15,627
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Ratings:
    +24,920
    [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjYm75sRV1k]YouTube - Randi Rhodes: Al Franken Will Not Be An 'Honest' Senator[/ame]

    Now what is the evidence that Randi Rhodes has that can prove that Al Franken is dishonest? She says it can be found on the internet.
     
  2. Midnight Marauder
    Offline

    Midnight Marauder BANNED

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2009
    Messages:
    12,404
    Thanks Received:
    1,876
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +1,876
    How dare she? First criticizing The Obama over the ongoing wars, the detainees who he now says still will be held without trial, and now this.
     
  3. Political Junky
    Offline

    Political Junky Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2009
    Messages:
    19,549
    Thanks Received:
    2,948
    Trophy Points:
    260
    Ratings:
    +5,536
    Randi has been jealous of Al Franken for years ... she railed against him when they were both on Air America.
     
  4. Oddball
    Offline

    Oddball BANNED Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2009
    Messages:
    41,428
    Thanks Received:
    8,397
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Drinking wine, eating cheese, catching rays
    Ratings:
    +8,409
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  5. Modbert
    Offline

    Modbert Daydream Believer Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2008
    Messages:
    33,178
    Thanks Received:
    2,957
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +2,962
    Sorry about any site that links to Michelle Malkin and World Net Daily is bullshit. :lol:
     
  6. Oddball
    Offline

    Oddball BANNED Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2009
    Messages:
    41,428
    Thanks Received:
    8,397
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Drinking wine, eating cheese, catching rays
    Ratings:
    +8,409
    Argumentum ad hominem (argument directed at the person). This is the error of attacking the character or motives of a person who has stated an idea, rather than the idea itself. The most obvious example of this fallacy is when one debater maligns the character of another debater (e.g, "The members of the opposition are a couple of fascists!"), but this is actually not that common. A more typical manifestation of argumentum ad hominem is attacking a source of information -- for example, responding to a quotation from Richard Nixon on the subject of free trade with China by saying, "We all know Nixon was a liar and a cheat, so why should we believe anything he says?" Argumentum ad hominem also occurs when someone's arguments are discounted merely because they stand to benefit from the policy they advocate -- such as Bill Gates arguing against antitrust, rich people arguing for lower taxes, white people arguing against affirmative action, minorities arguing for affirmative action, etc. In all of these cases, the relevant question is not who makes the argument, but whether the argument is valid.

    It is always bad form to use the fallacy of argumentum ad hominem. But there are some cases when it is not really a fallacy, such as when one needs to evaluate the truth of factual statements (as opposed to lines of argument or statements of value) made by interested parties. If someone has an incentive to lie about something, then it would be naive to accept his statements about that subject without question. It is also possible to restate many ad hominem arguments so as to redirect them toward ideas rather than people, such as by replacing "My opponents are fascists" with "My opponents' arguments are fascist."
     
  7. Modbert
    Offline

    Modbert Daydream Believer Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2008
    Messages:
    33,178
    Thanks Received:
    2,957
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +2,962
    It's not an argument against the person. Notice what I bolded. All of those websites have incentive to lie about Al Franken and most if not all of them have proven to be dishonest in the past.

    It would be like me linking news from Michaelmoore.com or the Huffington Post while saying it's 100% fair.

    Sorry if it offends you, but I call bullshit when I see it.
     
  8. Oddball
    Offline

    Oddball BANNED Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2009
    Messages:
    41,428
    Thanks Received:
    8,397
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Drinking wine, eating cheese, catching rays
    Ratings:
    +8,409
    It's ad hominem because you're poisoning the well via association.

    Either debunk the content or STFU.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  9. Oddball
    Offline

    Oddball BANNED Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2009
    Messages:
    41,428
    Thanks Received:
    8,397
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Drinking wine, eating cheese, catching rays
    Ratings:
    +8,409
    You want to start playing the association game, here's where I got the link from: Index Page: The Backlash!

    Any objection to a site that takes shots at virtually everyone??
     
  10. Modbert
    Offline

    Modbert Daydream Believer Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2008
    Messages:
    33,178
    Thanks Received:
    2,957
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +2,962
    I'm not saying Al Franken is a perfect person. However, you should have more honest links.

    I'm looking at this site currently, all I see is the index page with a bunch of links on the right that include Michaelmoore.com, Drudge, etc.

    Edit: Oh I see, right on the top.

    View attachment $Epic Fail.bmp
     
    Last edited: Jul 11, 2009

Share This Page