Guilt by Association
One poster tried to minimize Hillary Clinton's statements that are clearly communist. So, let me "come clean."
I am Guilty of being:
1. A Boy Scout because I took the Scout Oath and Law and was an Eagle Scout.
2. A patriot because I took the oath to defend the US Constitution from all enemies, both foreign and domestic.
3. A Husband and heterosexual, because I was married in a Church and remain married.
4. A Republican because I believe that government closest to the people is best and more representative of those governed.
5. A College graduate because I attended and was graduated (yes, Dr. Savage, I remembered the proper term) three times.
6. A citizen because I pay taxes, vote, and have served on nine jury pools and answered my country in 1969.
7. A member and deacon of Saint Andrews Presbyterian Church because I profess Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior.
8. An honest person because I tell The Truth to those who understand that language.
9. An American because I not only believe in our Republic based on democratic ideals, but exercise them.
10. An educator because I taught for twenty-nine years during which I encouraged all students to learn and participate.
Guilty is a misnomer unless one believes that the above associations carry a bad connotation. I believe in freedom of association. Being a communist is not illegal in the USA. One can register as a communist, campaign on that ticket (there was one in New York City during the 1960s I think, but you can call me on this), and vote for a communist. That was not my point. My point remains to all who campaign----tell The Truth so we can vote accordingly. Stop trying to mis-lead voters and lie about your true convictions and agendas.
Tell The Truth !
posted by Chief RZ @ 11.6.07
11 Comments:
It's true....but ya know, even if they told the truth - the media would still screw it up
Thanks, Kelly. Have you read Slander or Arrogance? It seems that the AP/UPI/ABC/CBS/NBC control the news. That is what happened in 1968 and 2004 with Walter and Dan.
Have you ever heard about the Hungarian Revolution?
I have some interesting, personal pictures of my travels and visit to Andau from the Hungarian side on my blog.
Great site, keep up the good word!
Please consider adding a link to the Internet Radio Network. At the IRN you can listen for free to over 25 of America's top Talks Show for free via Streaming Audio (including yours). Thanks!
http://netradionetwork.com
It doesn't surprise me that the concept of "Guilt by Association" has been completely misunderstood by you. There are several meanings to "association" and it seems you have chosen the meaning that best "supports" your "argument." Did you even read the link on my previous post? All signs point to a resounding NO.
You chose to believe that the meaning of the word "association" in this context is:
"an organization of people with a common purpose and having a formal structure."
Unfortunately you chose incorrectly.
The correct meaning(s) of association in this context is:
"connection or combination."
or
"the connection or relation of ideas, feelings, sensations, etc.; correlation of elements of perception, reasoning, or the like."
or
"an idea, image, feeling, etc., suggested by or connected with something other than itself; an accompanying thought, emotion, or the like; an overtone or connotation"
Examples of the "Guilt by Association" fallacy:
"Plants have feelings. You have feelings therefore you are a plant."
"Conspiracy Theorists don't believe in Evolution. Chief RZ doesn't believe in Evolution therefor he is a Conspiracy Theorist."
"Nazi-Germany was against abortion. Fundamentalist Christians are against abortion and are therefor Nazis."
What did you teach and where did you teach? You obviously didn't teach English or Logic... And by golly, which college(s) did you graduate from? They have some serious explaining to do...
Liam. No, not completely misunderstood, completely understood. What you have done is engage in personal attacks (the Chief RZ Christian - evolution)
What you seem to be doing is sidestepping "Truth in labeling".
Yes, there are several meanings of association as well as most English words.
I was graduated with three degrees (if you read my profile) when and where one had to apply oneself--study, pass tests, attend classes, complete assignments--and during a time when people were actually failed for failing to complete course assignments.
Now: I see that you have one degree--BSC. (Hons) in Computer Science, University of Warwick, 1984.
That was a time when not many people were failed, but I will allow you to explain if you wish.
The best way to determine The Truth is simply to ask a question, not ASSUME things not in evidence. Yes, I read the link, and noted the bias, but got a chuckle at what was revealed.
I could make some similar silly associations, but don't have the time now.
It appears that you missed the point I made. Hillary is not guilty by association because being of the communist party is not illegal in the USA.
I do reject the proposed definition that runs through many "modern" intellectuals: Perception is reality. No. Perception is merely one's distorted view. One needs to realize that others may have 20/20 vision or better. Just because one person is unable to see clearly does not mean that we all must see the world from their distorted view.
I see that you teach XML/HTML/W3C computer languages. I taught in the public schools for 28+ years. The Truth. Several disciplines, but primarily Health and Physical Education including but not limited to kinesiology, research, practical applications of human physiology.
I did complete philosophy courses along the way at the graduate level.
You live in Canada. How do you like the present conservative government? Did you see this post?
http://magyartruth.blogspot.com/2006/01/conservatives.html
By the way, I did teach some Language Arts (English) as well as logic along the way. My students left with a more logical view of the world, some even passed Maths who were previously 4-6 grade levels below.
In this case, Hillary has quite a bit of explaining to do, but in my opinion, decided many years ago to stop telling The Truth.
After I read a bit more about your University of Warwick, I may exchange the values of my alma matter. Glad to have a commenter from up north.
Next, I will discriminate between association and correlation. For a simple understanding:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation
I have completed three graduate courses in scientific analysis research and design.
A look at Thomas Sowell's economic research on race and economics dismisses race as a factor (correlation) and correctly identifies age as the independent causal relationship.
The reader may be interested in a statistical proof here:
http://magyartruth.blogspot.com/2006/05/republican-states-are-safer.html
I will be glad to supply more documentation on the above to the serious reader.
And now for a real dis-association story. "Shoeless" Joseph Jefferson Jackson.
As a result of Jackson's association with the 1919 Black Sox scandal, Kenesaw Mountain Landis, Major League Baseball's first commissioner banned Jackson from playing after the 1920 season.
I have the newspaper article published a few years ago exonerating him and dis-associating him from the "eight men out" who conspired to gamble on their game of baseball without Joe Jackson's knowledge or cooperation. Thus, they used his good name in order to hide their CRIME. They were Guilty of forced association.
For his understanding: Eight men gambled on baseball on the Black Sox team. Joe Jackson was on the team. He gambled. NOT.
Personal attacks? Quite the contrary.
I made these examples personal in in context with the hopes to encourage you to understand what false assumptions really look like. They ARE false assumptions as you and I both know. There is no need to take it as personal a personal affront. They represent hypothetical statements (NOTE: they are encapsulated in quotation marks) for which I know are fallacious. You cannot seem to differentiate between hypothetical and actual and with that handicap you have, again, inadvertently proved to me your complete misunderstanding of the subject.
Whether the statements are true or not cannot be determined with the limited amount of information stated by the fallacious claims. They are nothing but vague associations. That is the point I was trying to portray with my original post. You were implying that Hilary Clinton has goals to Communize The United States because she made a statement that *vaguely* resembles one made by a leader of Communist Russia 51 years ago. This "information" is far from being "proof" of her intentions let alone the meaning or context of what was being said.
Re: "The Truth" & 20/20 vision
It is my Opinion that people see what they want to see and interpret reality with their own set of scapegoats, biases, assumptions, fears and beliefs. There is no such thing as "Truth" or "The Truth."
Example: Try to explain your world view to any aboriginal tribesman who's tribe has been continuously isolated from wester civilization and has survived and thrived for thousands of years. He or she would assume that your "20/20 vision" of reality is completely bonkers and would probably label you as a crazy man or worse. It doesn't mean you are wrong per se, it just means that your set of scapegoats, biases, assumptions, fear and beliefs do not closely match their own set. This subject is obviously not my expertise but I have read of enough documented occurrences to base an Opinion.
With the above said, I believe (again, Opinion) that this blog you have set yourself up with is nothing more that a tiny soapbox from which you preach to the choir for the sake of your own vanity and need of acceptance (as with most blogs). You are not changing minds or influencing opinions. No. You are only minimally enforcing the scapegoats, biases, assumptions, fears and beliefs of your own tribesmen. You said it yourself:
"An honest person because I tell The Truth to those who understand that language."
This implies that you are part of an exclusionary club (tribe). Not only that but it exposes your arrogance and cynicism towards other people who are not part of your tribe. With the assumption that only you and your tribesmen can converse in the language of "The Truth" you label the perception of reality of others (those who are not part of your tribe) as invalid, even within the context of their own cultural preferences.
I originally posted here in attempt to avert you from continuing to make logical oversights but now I can see that any attempt is futile at best. As similar as our tribes might seem externally our tribes are much too different to converse rationally. Or is it that you are so set in your ways that you will not tolerate constructive criticism? Either way, good luck with your "Truth."
BTW: If The United States ever erupts into revolution due to cultural differences again Canada will gladly take any refugees. The occurrence seems inevitable if it's true that nearly %50 of Americans share views similar to yours and/or if election theft becomes standard issue.
Iiam. The Truth. If you the introduction, those words are precious. They were earned with blood and fighting. They were the name of a newspaper published by the Hungarians in 1956 after a group of citizens fought off the Communists. To help you understand, I will be glad to mail you a copy of The Bridge at Andau . You can also read excerpts online. Some of my posts contain the links.
Yes. Natives would and could easily understand The Truth. They live it every day. No propaganda. Similar to the Mid-Western farmers of the USA.
Now. You have made quite a few false assumptions. To be simplistic, you have elevated my accurate quotes and made a jump to conclusion(s); then knocked down your own argument. Some call this the "strawman" argument, but I believe that you already know this.
Your comments about "tiny soapbox" is indeed a personal attack, but not to worry, I will continue in an attempt at adult (PAC) conversations.
University of Warwick has a reputation as a politically radical institution? I will allow you to defend that comment from Wikipedia and not jump to any "false assumptions."
Yes, I tell and converse with those who understand The Truth as opposed to lies and propagands. I am sure that you have encountered persons who you have discovered have lied to you in your long life also. You may have even remembered those who continually lie. I have met about a dozen or more in my lifetime. One person even said, "I lie all the time so that it becomes natural and most people don't notice it."
Tribes? Well, that is an interesting comment.
Some here would confront you with the card: "racist", but not I.
The Truth is not my truth. It is as I have said, a hard earned right (First Amendment) in the USA and if I/we do not exercise it, we may lose it.
Yes, there has been some election fraud. Dead people voting, liars, felons, people voting twice and illegal aliens voting. If we do not secure the integrity of the ballot box, those honest individuals will have had the value of their votes deflated.
Yes, a few cowards ran away to Canada during the 60's and 70's. Carter gave them amnesty. Same argument is being discussed today in our own Senate and House. In Canada, can any person walk across the border and become a citizen?
I have worked in Michigan and noticed quite a few Canadians driving over the border daily to take jobs in Detroit. I have visited there on numerous occcasions, but probably would not live there because of the rationed health care and lack of basic human rights such as defending oneself from criminals by using a firearm.
In any case, I was glad to see Canada finally wake up to the abused, lies by the last liberal administration and finally turn to the right. Maybe in five or ten years, they will get back to The Truth.
"liam. The Truth. If you the introduction, those words are precious."
I'm sorry... You lost me there... I generally only respond to persons who can write using complete sentences and proper grammar, but here I go and violate my own policy...
I do get the "gist" that you want me to read The Bridge at Andau. I'll put it on my "to-read" list. Perhaps then you'll be able to explain how Hillary relates to Communist Russia? Or will all your reasons for your fifty plus years overdraft of the "Red Scare" miraculously become apparent upon my complete reading of this book? Also, will I be rendered unable to differentiate between a two-party Democracy and a single-party Totalitarian Tyranny if I read this book? I hope not, but I get the impression that that's your intended response considering your views of the world and how much you harp on about this book (not that that's "wrong" or anything). I'd like to believe that I am not quite as gullible as some.
RE: Racist
As I said, people interpret reality with preconceived cultural biases. Again, you choose to interpret meanings to fit your own "arguments." As with most words in the English language there are multiple meanings to any specific word. The word "Tribe" happens to be such a word as you might discover if you were inclined to crack open any English language dictionary. Albeit, I see no definition that would allow the user of said word to suggest a derogatory meaning whatsoever, especially when the user of said word includes themselves within the definition, i.e.:
"As similar as our tribes might seem externally..."
Apparently your culture has instructed you to interpret the word "Tribe" (don't let me put words in your mouth) as a kind of lower echelon within an arbitrary social/political framework and thusly believes it to be a derogatory, sub-civil, sub-human, term. I will keep this cultural bias of yours in mind next time I choose to respond.
Perhaps the solution to many of our misunderstandings would be an American-Conservative/Commie-Hunter to English phrase book (and vice-versa). There might actually be a market for something like that as you/we have provided copious amounts of evidence to need such a thing. I'll contact my publisher to figure out my prospects.
Iiam. I found the sentence you quoted. I left one word out: read. "If you read the introduction...."
Glad you asked and I hope that will help. Again, no need to get so personal. I am not thin skinned, but hope we may get past these minor points.
The major point is that Communism is Evil. This sentence will become crystal clear upon reading one book on the subject written by journalists waiting on the Austrian border in 1957. I visited Hungary several times and heard the same stories as well as this, unsolicited from a Hungarian: There was no counter-revolution
Hillary is speaking the same words, sentences and ideas that were forced upon the USSR as well as quite a few former "eastern block" countries.
I am not pronouncing her "guilty" by association, but merely comparing her ideas with those of communists in not only Russia, but China, N. Korea, Cuba and a few more communist countries.
You may be able to grasp the brutality of communism after reading of real tortures, murders, breaking up of families and taking away of basic, even trivial freedoms.
The democratic republic we enjoy here in the USA allows citizens (and a few dead as well as felons and illegal aliens) to vote for their leaders. The same can not be said for communist countries. Only those in the "party" can vote for leaders. The average is about 10% of the country controlling the other 90% by physical force.
The tribes comment. I mention this as an aside. I, personally use the term along with renege. Are you aware that several people have lost their jobs over the use of these terms? In no way was I saying that you were racist, or the term is; some people twist those words into their racist agenda like our own Jessie Jackson and Al Sharpton. The latter lied about Tawana Brawley's "experience" even as he knew The Truth. This is yet another example of truth being supressed and glossed over.
Any comments on my one scientific analysis of "red states vs blue states" and crime on my blog?
If you have some time, browse around and take a look at some real pictures like these of the AVH.
http://magyartruth.blogspot.com/2006/01/communism-is-evil.html
Post a Comment
<< Home