Trump's ethanol waivers are sparking rebellion in farm country

[Dill]

(09-02-2019, 12:12 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Quote:Yes, the "weakness" of democracy is that voters can be fickle, and voters determine leaders and influence policy. Very different from authoritarian countries like China. But some think that "weakness" is part of the reason democracies are generally better places to live, and "strength" is why authoritarian systems are generally not.

Ahh, I see your dislike of me caused you to draw conclusions about my argument that simply don't exist.  I'll be sure to keep this in mind as I read the rest of this inanity.

Hmm. My first statement here appears to agree with your claim that China relies "on the weaknesses of a democratic system, e.g. being subject to the fickle whim of the voters, to prevail." Did I get that wrong? Did you mean to say something else?

The rest is a general comment about why some prefer democratic "weakness" to authoritarian "strength." 

Rather than arguing that I am right or wrong about that preference, you call my statement a "conclusion about your argument" which you will be sure to "keep in mind as [you] read the rest of this inanity." 

Could you perhaps state in your own words what you take my "conclusion about your argument" to be?  It would go a long ways towards showing you did understand the points in my post and your response was not a lot of scattershot wild swinging.

(09-02-2019, 12:12 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Quote: Not quite enough said.  You've had a deal of difficulty specifying dill's Muslim bias, while continuing to call it "obvious." 
That's ok if "truthiness" is your standard, but you ought to acknowledge that is your standard.

I don't have any difficulty describing that, I simply quote your posts.

Quote:Looks like the choice here is between ignoring Israeli atrocities or "enhancing" them by mere factual recall, which no doubt "mitigates" the extremism of Muslims defending their homes.  Unbiased friend of Israel or "Muslim bias"?  Simple choices. Black and white.

Not the topic of the thread, please do stay on topic.

Dino noted something comparable in the form of your judgments, when you cast him as someone who  "supports China" or me as an "apologist for Muslim extremism."  So I am not "off topic" when I expand on your response, as that affects the quality and credibility of the posts you address to us about China and Trump tariffs.

The point both Dino and I are making is that you convert ordinary, neutral arguments about political issues into an opposition between US and THEM, such that people who disagree with you are on THEIR side, defending them.  You don't disagree you are saying we are on THEIR side, do you?

That is why your claims that it is "obvious" I apologize for "Muslim extremism" cannot be supported by "simply quoting my posts."  The claim is based upon an inference, and at least one unstated premise, that you won't or can't articulate.  

That you employ a mode of fallacious argument "only" with Dino and me is hardly a cogent defense of this tactic, regardless of thread or topic.