
The 56-year-old registered Republican has a sign at his office that reads: "If you voted for Obama … seek urologic care elsewhere. Changes to your healthcare begin right now, not in four years."
(Orlando Sentinel) || Jump to
the second page of comments
Actually, Emperor Norton, if you really think I used a straw man argument, which would be to misrepresent Buddy's position and then form a cogent attack of that misrepresented position, please quote it here.
One straw man argument seen today is RockMtnMac turning this argument into a discussion of "Meat Tax." That is not part of the healthcare bill so arguing against it is arguing against a straw man. That is the definition of Straw Man Argument: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
You are not using the term correctly.
Posted by: DCer | Friday, April 02, 2010 at 01:17 PM
the preamble is not about the power of congress. even if the preamble was about congress' power, amendments certainly do trump anything else written in the body of the constitution.
i'm not an expert on the new deal but a simple google search didnt turn up any cases where it was challenged.
over 100 comments on this one today. yea!
Posted by: buddy | Friday, April 02, 2010 at 01:20 PM
For instance, the rhetorically correct use of the ad hominen argument would go like this:
I'm from DC right, so Mayor Barry argues against gay marriage because it goes against biblical morals. To argue against that point using an ad hominen attack correctly I would say, "what the hell are you talking about, you're a divorced man who publicly cheated on all his wives! All your commentary in this discussion is tainted by reactions to your past." Such an argument IS a personal attack but rhetorically it is completely valid.
Posted by: DCer | Friday, April 02, 2010 at 01:21 PM
dcer - your dc education is showing.
Posted by: buddy | Friday, April 02, 2010 at 01:25 PM
What I'm saying is that Congress has been given that power through historical legal precedent. They have the legal and constitutional power to enact this bill. I'm being entirely serious here.
Posted by: DCer | Friday, April 02, 2010 at 01:25 PM
Wait a second.
The doctor's name is Jack Cassel.
Say it out loud: Jackass.
Are we sure this isn't an April Fools Day prank?
Posted by: DCer | Friday, April 02, 2010 at 01:27 PM
one thing is fact here. you had to click "next" at least four times to read this comment.
Posted by: buddy | Friday, April 02, 2010 at 01:40 PM
Take it further, DCer.
Jackasshole.
Y'all amuse me, though.
Posted by: LimeGreenLizard | Friday, April 02, 2010 at 02:49 PM
I can't believe how everyone is so bored with this subject that they leave only a couple of comments.
Posted by: American Veteran | Friday, April 02, 2010 at 02:53 PM
Now he's just being pissy. Way to lose patients, doc.
Posted by: RUSTY | Friday, April 02, 2010 at 03:19 PM
DCer- I beg to differ, you refuse to recognize the strawman because of cognitive dissonance.
I accept your usage of Ad Hominems if you 'fess to it.
GENERAL WELFARE...Healthcare is quite specific. Any bill that has over a thousand pages of circular rhetoric is certainly not concerned with generalities, but with very specific forms of welfare. Namely, socialized.
Posted by: Emperor Norton the 1st | Friday, April 02, 2010 at 03:27 PM
In a way, the 'strawman' we are speaking of fits into multiple categories of logical fallacies (false analogy) including this very substream of arguing about the merit of our arguements based on methods.
Just a few more inches and I think we can swallow our tail.
Posted by: Emperor Norton the 1st | Friday, April 02, 2010 at 03:52 PM
Should have his license suspended indefinitely.
Posted by: Notch Johnson | Friday, April 02, 2010 at 04:16 PM
Reno; you never fail to illuminate.
All; pretty hard to be clear on a concept that is based on abstraction.
Vote accordingly.
Posted by: thomas | Friday, April 02, 2010 at 04:24 PM
Hey, whatever happened to the Right to choice...as I choose NOT to treat with you, engage in business with you or otherwise occupy any space in close proximity to you.
Yeah, it is STUPID, but when the hell are the OTHER Stupid people, the whiny Limousine Liberals and their flaky nutcase "Rose Lenses" buddies gonna wise up and let people be stupid as they wanna be????
When the hell are the rest of you gonna wise up and stop insisting that the Political spectrum is like some kind of "punchbowl" with Left and right extremes at the top edges and "centrists / moderates" at the bottom???
Most any other "Spectrum Analysis" I can think of is linear and Politics is NO different!!!
As in The far left is complete and utter Anarchy and at the far right is Totalitarianism, complete and abject subservience to Authority.
That's it! That's your political spectrum and most of Great American leadership is really heavy on the Authority Crap.
Posted by: Krash | Friday, April 02, 2010 at 04:40 PM
I haven't read the five preceding pages of vitriol, just a small sampling. And I say from my position of ignorance about the content of the argument that you should all revolt and make me king. Things will be much better. Ice creams all around. Promise. :D Who's with me!
Posted by: John | Friday, April 02, 2010 at 04:51 PM
People who are against everyone having some sort of health coverage, regardless of any medical history, is a jerk. End of story.
Posted by: Somebody | Friday, April 02, 2010 at 05:18 PM
Actually... being required to buy health insurance is COMPLETELY different than being required to buy car insurance because you don't HAVE to HAVE a car. So if you don't believe in it you can simply ride a bike, walk, take the train, or take the bus to work. So in essence a requirement to buy health care is essentially a tax on living.
Posted by: Tyler | Friday, April 02, 2010 at 05:38 PM
Sure, you don't have to have a car, but you are, as an American citizen, required to subsidize car culture. Cars are socialism!
Posted by: Somebody | Friday, April 02, 2010 at 06:23 PM
For my ten cents, this guy has a right to declare he won't treat someone who self-identifies as an Obama supporter -- Obama supporting, I suppose, isn't a protected class. Glancing at the many posts, I haven't seen ANYONE make the claim that what he did was illegal or that he didn't have that right.
However, just as he has the right to put an irrelevent condition on who he will treat, I have the right to think he is an idiot for mixing business with politics. Yep, I said it, he is an IDIOT for throwing away earnings to prove that he lets politics affect who he will treat.
Here are some more irrelevent conditions he can use to throw away business:
I won't treat anyone who:
* belongs to the AARP.
* hates reality TV.
* likes Monty Python.
* was born in Michigan.
* has a pet cat.
Really, I don't want to go to a Doctor that is a fool. He has a right to be a fool. Thank God for his customers that he put out a sign declaring himself a fool. Most people have to go to a doctor for years to figure out whether or not he is one.
Posted by: Sigh | Saturday, April 03, 2010 at 05:44 AM
Oh, for all you Constitutional scholars out there, the Constitution requires an
"[An] Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years,"
And,
"in such Manner as they shall by Law direct."
The manner that they so directed is the manner that it is currently being done.
It is their Constitutional duty to conduct the enumeration and your Constitutional duty to be counted. It is a shame that Congress had to threaten people with fines and penalties for lying, interfering with, and avoiding a proper counting.
Posted by: Sigh | Saturday, April 03, 2010 at 05:58 AM
i can haz the ice cream?
Posted by: Emperor Norton the 1st | Saturday, April 03, 2010 at 12:53 PM
All right, all right, this has gone on long enough. I want you all to shut up, settle down, put your heads on your desks and think calm thoughts until the bell rings, okay?
(Psst. RMM. *Great* timing on the Leary speech!) No, I wasn't talking to the rest of you! Heads down! DOWN!
Posted by: NitroPress | Saturday, April 03, 2010 at 10:27 PM
Well hell.
Just don't cut for stones*
*'cause that's just wrong.
(Someone who's entire family is going for the religious exemption; hey! fundies have rights too!)
Posted by: icecycle | Wednesday, April 07, 2010 at 12:47 AM
Ever notice how saying something is a straw man argument is itself a straw man argument?
Posted by: Bob | Wednesday, April 07, 2010 at 07:16 AM
Which just made my last comment a straw man argument as well.... the cycle never ends!
Posted by: Bob | Wednesday, April 07, 2010 at 07:17 AM
What is the difference between Doctors of Dental Surgery Program and Dentistry Program? I searched everywhere but i couldn't find it anyone knows about it?
Posted by: gold | Friday, November 05, 2010 at 12:11 PM