1. OK, I can pick on the WSJ too, if you want, but the Federalist Society member is the primary author. I also "pick on" the author of the Opinion Monthly article. Why don't you read what people say fully and THEN react?
2. I discredit because the survey is being used to make an ideological point, and I have yet to find the actual report that also contains the method of selection and "balancing" of respondents' rankings.
3. Holy crap, for the last time, EIGHTY-FIVE people actually responded to the survey! Can you not get that through your head? 85 people (that is about 65% of the people asked) actually gave their opinions. 85 people who are anonymous, pre-selected without details about the process of selection (besides an invocation of party loyalty), and whose responses are adjusted by the author contributed their OPINION. Now, unless they have more than 3 degrees, they are not more educated than me, and without knowing who they are I refuse to say that they are smarter than I am. If they turn out to be 85 crackjack intellectuals, then they get some respect. We all have the capability to be critical thinkers, and we need to exercise that.
And I did not say that the report was "wrong," I said it is being used to make ideological hay. In point of fact, most of the survey agrees with previous surveys, like the one I cited. But it differs in a few important ways, and is then used by the author of the accompanying article to suggest that there is some hidden greatness in Bush's rule. I disagree with that, and given the flurry of problems the administration currently has (some of which it did not have in 2005 when the survey was conducted), I think I have some basis for my disagreement.
And that's ARE wrong, by the way.
4. I think you need to look in a mirror, my friend. The only one engaging in childish behavior here is you, You only EMBARRASS yourself by not engaging my points and by harping on this idea that we should not critique things ourselves, but leave such things to an elite. Think for yourself, for the love of Zeus, and contribute more than cheap shots without substance and a slavish devotion to what some experts said. I have given you several questions, assertions, and sources as a basis for discussion. If you can point to one thing you have said in your comments that is actually debate (that is, to have an argument or discussion wherein you articulate and elaborate a viewpoint and then substantively defend it), please let the rest of us know so that we can actually have a debate, and not an exchange where one person does nothing but invoke the source of the debate as not debatable over and over again and then insults someone else for responding critically. -30-
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2007-05-29 04:12 am (UTC)2. I discredit because the survey is being used to make an ideological point, and I have yet to find the actual report that also contains the method of selection and "balancing" of respondents' rankings.
3. Holy crap, for the last time, EIGHTY-FIVE people actually responded to the survey! Can you not get that through your head? 85 people (that is about 65% of the people asked) actually gave their opinions. 85 people who are anonymous, pre-selected without details about the process of selection (besides an invocation of party loyalty), and whose responses are adjusted by the author contributed their OPINION. Now, unless they have more than 3 degrees, they are not more educated than me, and without knowing who they are I refuse to say that they are smarter than I am. If they turn out to be 85 crackjack intellectuals, then they get some respect. We all have the capability to be critical thinkers, and we need to exercise that.
And I did not say that the report was "wrong," I said it is being used to make ideological hay. In point of fact, most of the survey agrees with previous surveys, like the one I cited. But it differs in a few important ways, and is then used by the author of the accompanying article to suggest that there is some hidden greatness in Bush's rule. I disagree with that, and given the flurry of problems the administration currently has (some of which it did not have in 2005 when the survey was conducted), I think I have some basis for my disagreement.
And that's ARE wrong, by the way.
4. I think you need to look in a mirror, my friend. The only one engaging in childish behavior here is you, You only EMBARRASS yourself by not engaging my points and by harping on this idea that we should not critique things ourselves, but leave such things to an elite. Think for yourself, for the love of Zeus, and contribute more than cheap shots without substance and a slavish devotion to what some experts said. I have given you several questions, assertions, and sources as a basis for discussion. If you can point to one thing you have said in your comments that is actually debate (that is, to have an argument or discussion wherein you articulate and elaborate a viewpoint and then substantively defend it), please let the rest of us know so that we can actually have a debate, and not an exchange where one person does nothing but invoke the source of the debate as not debatable over and over again and then insults someone else for responding critically. -30-