You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Reply #86: the utter vacuousness of your argument is made plain by the use of the word "scum" [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
bread_and_roses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-24-09 02:39 PM
Response to Original message
86. the utter vacuousness of your argument is made plain by the use of the word "scum"
The need to dehumanize is not a characteristic of reasoned argument. It is a characteristic of demagoguery. As for the rest, it's hollowness has been well illustrated by mythsage and others above.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
  -All this outrage over the "prolonged detention" policy is premature and ignores what HAS changed. phleshdef  May-23-09 03:57 PM   #0 
  - Rec'd...thanks for your post. It's a mess and I'm glad he's working  firedupdem   May-23-09 04:06 PM   #1 
  - I agree with the primise of you OP, I wish I had a solution to this problem.  ZombieHorde   May-23-09 04:07 PM   #2 
  - Get your outrage in early  Uzybone   May-23-09 04:12 PM   #3 
  - You first. n/t  5X   May-23-09 04:13 PM   #4 
  - Adults Only!  NYC_SKP   May-23-09 04:27 PM   #5 
  - Well said. nt  quiet.american   May-23-09 05:25 PM   #6 
  - The outrage proves the adage that nothing is impossible to those who do not have to do it.  ClarkUSA   May-23-09 05:28 PM   #7 
  - Rubbish. Please find a human rights or constitutional scholar  EFerrari   May-24-09 01:14 AM   #22 
     - Constitutional scholar: John Yoo  Autonomy   May-24-09 02:19 PM   #84 
        - LOL! You're right about Yoo. But the specious privileging of  EFerrari   May-24-09 02:31 PM   #85 
  - "These people would kill you and your entire family just because you are American"  rug   May-23-09 05:47 PM   #8 
  - Thanks for thinking this  Cha   May-23-09 05:54 PM   #9 
  - "no one knows the details of how this is going to be carried out"  mzmolly   May-23-09 08:17 PM   #10 
  - oh stop it!  EquallyExhausted   May-23-09 09:18 PM   #11 
  - that's supposed to include snark tags  EquallyExhausted   May-23-09 09:20 PM   #12 
  - That's what I've been thinking......  FrenchieCat   May-23-09 11:23 PM   #13 
  - Too bad Rachel Maddow can't see it that way...  jenmito   May-23-09 11:39 PM   #15 
  - The mess that Bush left is horrible but Obama is responsible for his own positions.  EFerrari   May-24-09 12:37 AM   #19 
     - The other Dems need to have the light shown on them for their NIMBY bullshit also.  SemiCharmedQuark   May-24-09 01:33 AM   #24 
     - Absolutely. Our crazy uncles in the Senate and the weenies in the House  EFerrari   May-24-09 01:41 AM   #25 
     - God, I am so sick of the total turn around.......  springhill   May-24-09 02:33 AM   #26 
  - I always wanted to be the 24th person to recommend a thread!  jenmito   May-23-09 11:36 PM   #14 
  - We Should Call This What It Really Is -- Paranoid Detention  Senator   May-23-09 11:40 PM   #16 
  - How do you know for sure what the threat is?  creeksneakers2   May-24-09 03:02 PM   #87 
     - No one knows "for sure" ...  Senator   May-24-09 09:38 PM   #110 
  - Thank you for your thoughtful OP.  Brigid   May-24-09 12:11 AM   #17 
  - The administration presented an idea that is incompatible with the rule of law  EFerrari   May-24-09 12:36 AM   #18 
  - Bingo what EFerrari said  Vincardog   May-24-09 12:42 AM   #20 
  - You have no idea how this would be put into practice so you have no idea what its in line with.  phleshdef   May-24-09 06:03 AM   #27 
  - What difference does it make?  Raineyb   May-24-09 10:58 AM   #38 
  - Nope, the other guy's assumptions are better  DireStrike   May-24-09 11:12 AM   #47 
  - Why would you need details to know that holding someone without charging them  EFerrari   May-24-09 01:25 PM   #74 
  - Habeas corpus was so last century. Only the choir sings this is ok. nt  Mithreal   May-24-09 10:36 AM   #35 
     - The house band is a little off key  Moochy   May-24-09 12:14 PM   #58 
  - "To some degree it matters who's in office".........  flyarm   May-24-09 12:50 AM   #21 
  - I don't see what's so complicated here.  Usrename   May-24-09 01:30 AM   #23 
  - Here here!  grahamhgreen   May-24-09 09:30 AM   #30 
  - Basic human rights aren't in style when the President says so. nt  Mithreal   May-24-09 10:38 AM   #36 
  - Presumption of innocence doesn't apply to external threats  geek tragedy   May-24-09 11:01 AM   #41 
  - Considering he is a human being, the Constitution does  Mithreal   May-24-09 11:21 AM   #50 
  - If he is considered a person...  Usrename   May-25-09 09:57 AM   #117 
  - It's not that clear because this resembles a war  creeksneakers2   May-24-09 03:06 PM   #88 
     - I guess they are a separate sub-species of non-humans.  Usrename   May-25-09 09:52 AM   #116 
  - Thank you for the thoughtful OP nt  Adelante   May-24-09 07:51 AM   #28 
  - Most of the people detained have been innocent. Your logic is tortured.  grahamhgreen   May-24-09 09:27 AM   #29 
  - He's attacking habeus corpus and our constitution - you know, the costitution he swore to defend,  grahamhgreen   May-24-09 09:40 AM   #31 
  - Right on, and I am sure he can find some lawyers to defend his position  Mithreal   May-24-09 10:44 AM   #37 
  - First you have to have EVIDENCE, most of these people are guilty because?  HillbillyBob   May-24-09 09:57 AM   #32 
  - If there were real evidence they could be tried.  Mithreal   May-24-09 01:32 PM   #75 
  - Don't pretend to know us.  mmonk   May-24-09 10:06 AM   #33 
  - Deleted message  Name removed   May-24-09 11:01 AM   #42 
     - It's unconstitutional pure and simple.  mmonk   May-24-09 11:13 AM   #48 
     - Geek hasn't read the Constitution. nt  Mithreal   May-24-09 11:22 AM   #51 
     - I'm all for people reading it and highly recommend it.  mmonk   May-24-09 11:41 AM   #53 
        - The problem is you only think you understand  geek tragedy   May-24-09 12:18 PM   #62 
           - The problem is without evidence, one tends to play god.  mmonk   May-24-09 01:43 PM   #78 
           - I apologize for my directness.  mmonk   May-24-09 02:12 PM   #83 
           - We all know what the Constitution doesn't say.  Mithreal   May-24-09 04:32 PM   #102 
           - It entitles them to a fair trial and theright to challenge their detention in court, this is what  grahamhgreen   May-24-09 07:24 PM   #107 
              - The right to challenge their detention, yes.  geek tragedy   May-25-09 09:29 AM   #112 
     - Congress has the power to declare war  creeksneakers2   May-24-09 03:12 PM   #89 
        - I see no reason to abandon our laws because a war is declared.  mmonk   May-24-09 03:28 PM   #94 
           - The SCOTUS has ruled that the government has to provide  geek tragedy   May-25-09 09:35 AM   #115 
     - Yes, you are.  Forkboy   May-24-09 11:43 AM   #54 
  - The outrage is not "premature."  noamnety   May-24-09 10:26 AM   #34 
  - MOST detainees will in fact be tried so the ones that are innocent will likely be let go.  phleshdef   May-24-09 10:59 AM   #39 
     - "known terrorists" can't be tried like anybody else?  ima_sinnic   May-24-09 11:18 AM   #49 
     - It's possible to be certain and unable to hold a trial  creeksneakers2   May-24-09 03:17 PM   #91 
        - how convenient, that the informant "can't be revealed"  ima_sinnic   May-24-09 03:29 PM   #95 
           - I also said confirmed by a listening device  creeksneakers2   May-24-09 03:49 PM   #97 
              - gee, how do people ever get busted for conspiracy and brought to trial?  ima_sinnic   May-24-09 05:34 PM   #104 
                 - The stakes  creeksneakers2   May-24-09 07:39 PM   #108 
     - you mean like the 10 year old and 14 & 15 year old boys sent to Gitmo by Bush??????  flyarm   May-24-09 12:23 PM   #65 
        - Excessive overreacting, throwing out silly scenarious and using a billion ??? characters...  phleshdef   May-26-09 09:07 AM   #121 
  - I can't believe so many people support this.  DireStrike   May-24-09 11:00 AM   #40 
  - Belonging to an organization dedicated to killing Americans  geek tragedy   May-24-09 11:02 AM   #43 
  - Do they actually get little Al Qaeda membership cards now?  noamnety   May-24-09 11:04 AM   #44 
  - They train at AQ camps, they swear allegiance, same  geek tragedy   May-24-09 12:15 PM   #60 
     - How do you know they trained at AQ camps or swore allegiance?  Bjorn Against   May-24-09 12:38 PM   #70 
     - Federal courts will be the judge of that.  geek tragedy   May-25-09 09:34 AM   #114 
        - If they were all getting trials in federal court we wouldn't be debating this.  Bjorn Against   May-25-09 10:41 AM   #119 
           - AQ members aren't entitled to trials.  geek tragedy   May-25-09 11:45 AM   #120 
     - First, there isn't any evidence of that with the vast majority of these people.  noamnety   May-24-09 01:34 PM   #76 
        - excellent analogy! I will have to use that in these threads  ima_sinnic   May-24-09 06:32 PM   #106 
        - If they belong to an enemy organization like AQ, that  geek tragedy   May-25-09 09:32 AM   #113 
  - The Constitution is stronger than your demonstrated fears. nt  Mithreal   May-24-09 11:07 AM   #45 
  - And you don't see the potential for abuse made possible by that framework?  DireStrike   May-24-09 11:08 AM   #46 
  - Deleted message  Name removed   May-24-09 12:13 PM   #57 
     - Deleted message  Name removed   May-24-09 12:19 PM   #64 
     - That is not what the previous poster said.  Bjorn Against   May-24-09 12:39 PM   #71 
  - ooohhhh, hide under the bed!!! oh, I AM SO AFWAID!!!  ima_sinnic   May-24-09 11:23 AM   #52 
  - Deleted sub-thread  Name removed   May-24-09 11:44 AM   #55 
  - Deleted sub-thread  Name removed   May-24-09 11:59 AM   #56 
  - The far left like Pat Tillman?  EFerrari   May-24-09 01:55 PM   #80 
  - This is DU  Moochy   May-24-09 12:15 PM   #59 
     - Do you really think Obama is further from the American mainstream  geek tragedy   May-24-09 12:16 PM   #61 
     - I have NEVER seen a "free the terrorists" post from a non-low-post troll poster  LostinVA   May-24-09 12:19 PM   #63 
     - Nah...  Mythsaje   May-24-09 12:34 PM   #67 
     - LOL  EFerrari   May-24-09 01:52 PM   #79 
     - Yes, the opposition are Marxists.  Mythsaje   May-24-09 12:35 PM   #68 
  - Have to disagree strongly. No more indefinite detentions!  jonestonesusa   May-24-09 12:31 PM   #66 
  - "President Obama Announces Tribunal Changes That Bring Them In Line With The Rule Of Law"  ClarkUSA   May-24-09 03:35 PM   #96 
  - I totally disagree. Either we are a nation of laws or we are not. In the  MasonJar   May-24-09 12:36 PM   #69 
  - Bullshit......  Tangerine LaBamba   May-24-09 12:41 PM   #72 
  - CO-SIGN  DerekJ   May-24-09 03:55 PM   # 
  - Ah, the "These are evil bad terrible terrorist evil dudes" defense. Where have I heard that before?  dorkulon   May-24-09 12:57 PM   #73 
  - Unlimited imprisonment without due process is a violation of the Constitution. Period.  Better Believe It   May-24-09 01:39 PM   #77 
  - Who said "unlimited imprisonment" but you? Pres. Obama restored due process for detainees.  ClarkUSA   May-24-09 03:27 PM   #93 
     - With all due respect, Obama doesn't make law.  mmonk   May-24-09 03:55 PM   #98 
        - I never said he could "make law"; however these immediate rule changes were made by executive order.  ClarkUSA   May-24-09 04:08 PM   #101 
           - I have one big problem with giving the DOJ and Congress any more time.  mmonk   May-25-09 09:09 AM   #111 
  - lol "terrorist scum". Maybe most people who are arrested are criminal scum  LittleBlue   May-24-09 02:09 PM   #81 
  - How Long? How Long Has This Been Going On??? IT IS NOW TIME  ChiciB1   May-24-09 02:11 PM   #82 
  - the utter vacuousness of your argument is made plain by the use of the word "scum"  bread_and_roses   May-24-09 02:39 PM   #86 
  - I agree with you. Now, in the meantime,  Enthusiast   May-24-09 03:15 PM   #90 
  - K & R  creeksneakers2   May-24-09 03:22 PM   #92 
  - I asked my self, would a president voluntarily restrict his executive powers?!  DerekJ   May-24-09 03:59 PM   #99 
  - To make excuses to keep human beings locked up indefinitely is just wrong...  winyanstaz   May-24-09 04:07 PM   #100 
  - Let's Not Criticize Obama!  placton   May-24-09 05:20 PM   #103 
  - Ah, I was waiting for someone to trot out that ol' red herring again. Epic fail...  ClarkUSA   May-24-09 06:05 PM   #105 
  - Who said that?  creeksneakers2   May-24-09 07:53 PM   #109 
  - dangerous precedent  thread-bear   May-25-09 10:26 AM   #118 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC