Hey Guest? Is that you Bill?
Right from the start it is obvious that you do not understand too well what you read. Perhaps you are a product of those old secular schools that wasted time praying each morning instead of starting in on your reading lesson.
First you repeatedly refer to me as Anonymous as if you had no idea what my name was. If you look at the bottom of my post you will see I signed it Ray. I was on a host computer and did not log in so my name did not appear in the posted by box. If you look on the list for the forum you will find me and if you read in any of the other discussions you will find me. So it’s Ray ok?
“Wrong he said it in his prepared remarks before the question and answer period. Boy you really are prepared to rationalize anything this guy says to back up your position. Kool Aid for sale in aisle 7”.
If you look again at my post you will see that I said “To my knowledge he did this only while speaking in answer to a question sort of off the top of his head.” By using the words “to my knowledge” I was indicating that as far as I knew and had information this is what happened. I only saw part of Sam’s prepared remarks on c-span, mostly the last half and the question and answer period at the end, and I thought I recalled him saying something about Watt in response to a question. So I might have got it wrong. So what’s the big deal? I can tell you this. If I did get it wrong I’ll be happy to retract it. It has little to do with the point I was trying to make anyway. Anyway it’s not as if I was trying to make an unequivocal factual statement. “To my knowledge” would indicate to most readers that there might be some chance that the statement to follow was incorrect due to imperfect knowledge. Jumping to the conclusion that this statement indicates that I am “prepared to rationalize anything this guy says” is just the old feeble trick of setting up a straw man argument so you can then knock it down. It just shows how desperate you are to find something to attack. If you look at the previous sentence you will see I say “Let’s assume for the sake of argument that Sam, without checking, repeated an uncorroborated myth.” See I already granted you the assumption that Sam repeated a myth without checking. “To my knowledge” is just an equivocation from perhaps faulty knowledge not a rationalization. Now I ask you what would have been your response if I had written, “It is my best recollection he did this only while speaking in answer to a question….” I think that you would probably have responded in the same way. What does “Kool Aid for sale in aisle 7” mean? Sorry, I don’t get it.
“You quote a source that starts their article with “Those famous lists of school troubles may not exactly be a hoax. But they sure have been stretched by people eager to decry America’s ills”. Nice try.”
What has this got to do with what I said in the quote you highlighted? I guess you missed it so I will spell it out for you. In his original post Bill said ”Well good ol’ Sam repeats the lie about James Watt and destroying trees to enable the return of Christ. Repeat a big lie over and over so the people will believe it and the surrounding crud that you spew.”
What I was trying to point out was that repeating lies is something that Conservatives seem to do at least as well or better than Liberals. The fact is that there is a conservative moral hypocrite named Bill Bennet that has been going around citing a made up scientific study in speeches, editorials and televised talks. He even put it in his book “The Index of Leading Indicators”. He used this made up “scientific survey” without checking because it confirmed his bias and was useful to his purpose. The fact that T. Cullen Davis was not trying to hoax anyone and freely admitted that he put the lists together for the purpose of attacking the public schools is irrelevant. The fact is that Davis’s lists were turned into a “Scientific Survey” (a lie that became a big lie by being repeated over and over) by anti-education conservatives like Bill Bennet not as a conscious hoax but as a consequence of the fact that it suited their purposes to do so. It confirmed their bias and helped to advance their cause, the destruction of the secular public school system in the U.S., so they went with it and kept repeating it without ever checking their facts. I say that Bill was even a bigger liar than Sam because even after he was informed as to the facts he continued to cite this “scientific survey” in speeches and talks. I have never heard of him retracting or apologizing for this in any way. I haven’t heard of him using this lie of the fictitious scientific survey lately so maybe he has finally stopped. I have however heard this fictitious survey still being used by others. I can only assume they haven’t got the word.
By the way when writing on the internet if someone uses all capital letters they are considered yelling. I would like you to note in the quote I copied and pasted from your response you have enlarged lower case letters in bold print. Does this mean you are screaming? If so please stop it you might cause yourself to have a heart attack.
“Yes, call in Franken and Moore, the leaders of the left/Democrats.
They are experts on lying!!”
Have you read Al Franken’s book “Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them”? If you haven’t I recommend that you do. Go slow you might have a better chance of understanding it. I must admit that Al only picks on Conservative liars in this book but you seem to think that only Liberals lie so even though it is sort of a one sided attack it might help you attain “A Fair and Balanced” view. As for Mr. Moore I have not seen his film but have heard much both denigrating it and praising it. I am skeptical of any politically motivated film because I think that it is too often the case that the truth ends up on the cutting room floor.
I do not consider either Mr. Franken or Mr. Moore leaders of the left/Democrats. I am fairly sure (more equivocation) that left/Democrats also would not consider them leaders. Maybe they would be considered allies, but not leaders. Also, I don’t know if Mr. Moore is an expert liar but I do know the evidence seems to indicate that Mr. Franken is not. I have not heard of one of the liars that Mr. Franken has exposed in his book that has been successful in responding to his challenge that they demonstrate he has lied about their lying in any way. Have you? If so please cite your source.
“Your problem is you can’t call a spade, a spade. You call an undeniable fact and situation “the big lie.” Are you nuts? Well, liberalism has been called a “Mental Disorder”, so you are fitting the bill!!”
Oh sure I can. A spade is a spade. See, that was easy. I think your problem is you can’t tell fact from fiction. You can’t tell a lie from the truth. You seem to think your belief’s are undeniable. No, I am not nuts. What’s nuts is to accept things without evidence and act as if unsubstantiated belief was fact. What’s nuts is to fail to realize that there is another side and another view. I will quote you from Bill’s original post “Repeat a big lie over and over so the people will believe it and the surrounding crud that you spew.” There is no way this could be what the anti-education conservatives could be doing over the issue of public education. They couldn’t possibly have an agenda could they Guest? I suppose you have already forgotten about Bill Bennet and his repeated spewing of a made up “scientific survey”? Here are a few web sites I recommend that you might find interesting. If you read these carefully you may find that all is not as you have been told and have come to believe after being told so many times.
http//educationright.tripod.com/id252.htm
http//www.socialistappeal.org/usa/bushs_education_agenda.html
http//www.weac.org/resource/primer/evidenc.htm
http//www.schoolchoices.org/roo/sted1.htm
If you do carefully read and try to understand what you find at these sites you will see that I am not at all nuts. A nut would be someone who makes pronouncements without any attempt to give evidentiary support for those pronouncements. Someone who repeats without thought what those who share his bias spew forth.
I don’t know anything about liberalism being a mental disorder but I do know I am not a liberal so I don’t see how I could fit any bill. Actually I try not to conform to any label. I find labels confining, polarizing and counter productive. My method is to take in as much information on an issue and then try to arrive at the most sensible workable conclusions I can. I recommend this method to everyone, especially people like you.
“Oh yes, all Corporations are evil entities hell bent on destroying the world.”
Are you nuts? What has this to do with what I said? More straw men to knock down? You don’t think there are businesses run by business men that wouldn’t like to see part of the billions spent on education in this country every year be part of their revenue stream? No, that couldn’t possibly be a possible motivation to support vouchers could it?
”Oh yes, all Conservatives are evil Nazis who wish to kill all minoroties and burn them in death camps. I forgot!!”
Let me get this straight. You are saying that I am saying that the attempt by some to use vouchers to dismantle the secular public school system and thereby bring back segregated schools along economic lines (and therefore racial) means that I think all Conservatives are evil Nazis who whish to kill all minorities and burn them in death camps? Huh?
“Check up on your history. The secular public schools used to start each morning with a prayer. There are plenty of secular people who grew up under this scheme who do not have any regrets or complaints. I guess when you are willing to rationalize lies from your side it does become mind numbing, it is so hard to keep track of which lie you are willing to admit and which one must be supported.”
Yes Guest, I’ll check history if you check yours. I’ll bet there are plenty of secular people who grew up under this scheme who do have regrets so now what? I recommend a PBS special that traced the history of education in the U.S. from the days of the little one room school house to the present. You won’t have to read, just watch. I think you will find it enlightening. I bet you won’t consider this will you? Is it possible that you consider PBS a liberal propaganda machine that uses your tax dollars to spout commie socialism and anti-Christian humanism along with homosexual lifestyles? Boy, it’s a tough world isn’t it.
Can’t wait to see your response to this,
Ray (not Anonymous) Ray Got it?
