Friend posted this on their wall. Decided to throw in a comment of my own. Things went downhill from that point. I'll just leave the transcript of the conversation here.
ME: Considering how dissimilar they are, I look forward to this 'zombie socialism' we'll inevitably get.
18 hours ago • Like
HIM:: Republicans voting the same way in lockstep. What do you think?
18 hours ago • Like
ME: Republicans and Democrats you mean? I don't see the asses behaving too differently from the oliphants.
18 hours ago • Like
HIM: Republican intransigence makes compromise impossible. Therefore, gridlock.
18 hours ago • Like
ME: Obama's made records for amount of legislation passed, had two years of a filibuster-proof majority in the senate and majority in the house, still has a majority in the senate, and has only vetoed two bills. Yeah, that's a real story of a hijacked legislature there.
18 hours ago • Like
HIM: That's the conservative lie speaking. Obama only had a filibuster-proof majority for 133 days. George Bush never issued a veto when the Republicans controlled Congress. If Congress ever passed anything, Obama might have something to veto.
I have 13 years of Washington experience, including gathering and analyzing energy data for the Reagan and Bush I administrations. You apparently believe Fox News. That is ill advised.
17 hours ago • Like
ME: http://www.justpurefact.com/id10.html
Oh, really? Congress never passed anything?
Why don't you actually do research before beating your chest and trying to insult anyone who disagrees with you. And while you're at it, return the taxpayer money apparently wasted on your research career if the best you can do is say "You watch faux news! Trollolololol!"
Btw, I prefer the Daily Show.
JustPureFact
www.justpurefact.com
Unbiased voting records, just the facts period
17 hours ago • Like • Remove Preview
HIM: Fuck off. I know far more about this than you ever will.
17 hours ago • Like
ME: Then put your money where your mouth is. PROVE IT.
17 hours ago • Like
ME: And for the record, I probably hate Romney more than you do.
17 hours ago • Like
HIM: The fact that you post no information about yourself tells me a lot. I don't hate Romney, just the idea that he might be President. I do know he was so unpopular by the end of his single term as governor of Massachusetts, he didn't dare run for re-election.
My office was a block from the White House, and I used to socialize with people from the White House, Capitol Hill, and the bureaucracy. As a reporter, I have interviewed everyone from presidential candidates to selectmen. I wrote the nation's coal production report for several years. I have partied with U.S. Senators. I have even been a lobbyist on occasion.
So, yes, I know a whole lot more about this than you ever will. You could learn something, but I see from your timeline you fully buy into Obama hate, so that's not likely.
17 hours ago • Edited • Like
ME: "The fact that you post no information about yourself tells me a lot."
Actually, by definition, it tells you nothing. By the way, you might want to look up this fallacy -
http://philosophy.lander.edu/logic/person.html
" I don't hate Romney, just the idea that he might be President. "
Then I probably hate the possibility that he might be President more than you do.
"I do know he was so unpopular by the end of his single term as governor of Massachusetts, he didn't dare run for re-election."
Or maybe that he was more intent on getting a presidential nomination?
"My office was a block from the White House, and I used to socialize with people from the White House, Capitol Hill, and the bureaucracy. As a reporter, I have interviewed everyone from presidential candidates to selectmen. I wrote the nation's coal production report for several years. I have partied with U.S. Senators. I have even been a lobbyist on occasion."
And we meet logical fallacy number 2:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority#Fallacious_appeal_to_authority
I don't care if you hold meetings with god. Either you provide evidence for your claims (as I have done) or you don't. The fact that you haven't done so leaves me (and any logical individual) with no choice but to reject your claims.
"So, yes, I know a whole lot more about this than you ever will."
If that were true, you could prove it.
"You could learn something, but I see from your timeline you fully buy into Obama hate, so that's not likely."
It's a little unsettling when you keep committing the same logical fallacy over and over again. Are you sure you're in a position to be commenting on this topic?
Argumentum Ad Hominem
philosophy.lander.edu
The argument concerning the attack of a person's character or circumstances is...
See More
16 hours ago • Like • Remove Preview
HIM: Sorry, Marmaduke, I haven't attacked your character yet. But the fact that you post no personal information of any kind tells me you have a touch of paranoia and definitely something to hide. The hallmark, incidentally, of conservative thinking.
2 hours ago • Like
ME: Either your comments were meant as an insult (in which case, you were attacking my character) or you meant to imply that they had something to do with the validity of my argument. So which one is it? Did you insult me, or did you use bad logic? (You ARE aware of the difference, right?)
By the way, you have yet to cite anything in support of your argument. Your last several comments have consisted of little apart from insults and chest-beating. Do you have anything more to contribute, or are you just trying to save face?
(While you're at it,take a good look at my avatar and the entire contents of my page BEFORE you try to brand me as a conservative. Could you also do everyone a favor and post a peer-reviewed source for this claim: "(...) a touch of paranoia and definitely something to hide. The hallmark, incidentally, of conservative thinking"?)