Student who was visited by Homeland Security

[ACPlayer]

[ QUOTE ]
The fact we are having this discussion in a thread about a ficticious story is what really frightens me.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is just nuts. I had many a good discussion about many fictitious story - ever attend a book club meeting?. If it is fiction, then the discussion is meaningless. If it is true then the discussion is frightening.

[Exsubmariner]

Frighten is a bad word. I only used it because it was used before. The word is more aptly disturbed. I find it disturbing due to the fact that this ficticious story was picked up by an ever so eager political machine whose only obejective, it seems, is to discredit and disrupt the Executive Administration that is in place. The fact that this story originated with a professor taking the word of his student at face value is even more illustrative in my mind.

So what you have here is a professor who is eager to find evidence his student's rights are being violated calling up some journalist who is eager to publish a story about someones rights being violated which is picked up by the leftist internet propaganda squad who is oh so eager to pass it along so that it may be posted in politics forums like this one all over the place.

What's more, people bought it. What's more than that is that there are posts in this thread that say something to the effect that even though the kid changed his story and recanted tearfully saying he was sorry it still must be true and he must have changed his story because he got another visit.

Is this the future of American politics? One side in power is constantly derided by made up propaganda from the other sides media machine? It's true of both parties. It can only serve to paralyze the government and make it more ineffective and wasteful than it already is.

Non producers want to be owners. Non producers ends are served best when the government is ineffective and cannot protect the owners or producers.

Lenin was a law clerk. Stalin was a priest. Hitler was an artist. Goebbels was a journalist. So was Mussolini. Do the math.....That is, since we are talking fiction here.

[ACPlayer]

[ QUOTE ]
Is this the future of American politics?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is just politics. I refer you to:

Willie Horton, Daisy child from the past for derision of the other side based on innuendo, extensions, propaganda. I refer you to plenty on this forum who throw around liberal, america hater, fascist bushie's etc.

To cut through the propogand you look at the story -- that is your hand at the moment. Look at the game conditions, the political and legislative environment, and make a guess as to the value of the hand.

To assess the value of this story, without apriori knowledge of whether the student is lying or not, I refer you to Cyrus' excellent hand/table analysis of this story in this thread.

[Exsubmariner]

Well, AC, I see your point. There is no credibility to be lost with the opposition, since there was none to begin with and the true believers in the cause are going to beleive everything no matter what. Just more spinning wheels trying to desparately get tracktion whereever they can.

[ACPlayer]

When looking at the words of the politician it is always interesting to see whether the words are designed to create a gulf between people of differeing opinions. If they are designed to do so, IMO, the underlying argument is weak.

When someone says that a poster is a hater of America, his underlying argument is likely week. Or if he says that a poster is a heil bushing fascists the same is likely true.

I ofcourse am totally exempt from bias, inappropriate name calling etc. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[Exsubmariner]

"When looking at the words of the politician it is always interesting to see whether the words are designed to create a gulf between people of differeing opinions. If they are designed to do so, IMO, the underlying argument is weak."

That's why it's so important to have a uniter, not a divider. (shameless GWB campaign reference [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img])

BTW, I agree with you about the strength of arguments litmus test. I find, though, that really strong arguments are typically drowned out by a chacophony of everyone serving their own agendas. It is always easier to reinforce division than it is to unite. This is the achilles heal of Democracy, and always will be. I may live it before it is all over.