How to avoid meaningful dialog or "Why Obama is like Hitler" (vote, Reagan)

[jps-teacher]

1. Give your thread a title that assumes something
   • a) that is not already known and
   • b) has negative connotations.
2. Use an infamous person or event to make a spurious comparison.
3. Note that you've heard something or that 'it is commonly known,' while providing neither source nor link - this makes it much harder to disprove or discredit.
4. When no appropriate quote is available, make one up.
5. If challenged concerning the source of your quote, blame the main stream media or the right wing talk shows.
6. Use passages actually said by specific individuals, but remove them from the context in which they were said. This precludes deniability and reinforces the message you wish to get across.
7. Belittle those who disagree with you, rather than responding to their points. This avoids losing arguments unnecessarily.
8. Attack others for using the same techniques that you use. This is especially effective when they have not, in fact, been doing so and they think such techniques are reprehensible, as they will spend copious energy defending themselves from the attack itself rather than defending their points, because they do not wish to be painted with the same brush or besmirched in that way.

p.s. Obama is like Hitler because a) he is human, b) he speaks in a way that some people find easy to listen to.

[TnHilltopper]

While the above posted topic is a beautiful sight in my eyes, for pointing out what should be obvious, I have come to the conclusion that 98% of people will engage in such a way. I say this from experience of sifting through hundreds upon hundreds of threads in order to find one that has more of an academic basis.

There is an adage among those in the press, "If it bleeds it leads", and judging by the manner in which sensationalism is presented by the for profit marketers and consumed by the masses, I see attempts to change this a call to reason to be sadly futile.

One only has to look at which threads have vast numbers of responses, such as the next administrations dog, or what dress Michelle was wearing or whether Obama is the Antichrist, or whether Palin owns her clothes. Threads the appeal to a persons emotions will almost certainly be filled with noodle tossers as all that is required is an emotionally based reaction to illicit an equal response. Almost Pavlovian really.

I wish you the best of luck in your efforts and may you have more success than I ever did. BTW... Obama's secret Nubian armies await to land on the beaches of Florida any day now, I heard this from my neighbor!

[PG77]

As much as I agree with what you are saying, that is the nature of forums and people. Everyone has access to the internet and this is what happens. Just the nature of the beast.

[TnHilltopper]

Originally Posted by PG77

As much as I agree with what you are saying, that is the nature of forums and people. Everyone has access to the internet and this is what happens. Just the nature of the beast.

Reminds me of a quote, "I'm all in favor of keeping dangerous weapons out of the hands of fools, lets start with typewriters(computers)".

[meson]

OP your post reads like a guide from Hannity forums or freerepublic.com!

[TnHilltopper]

Originally Posted by meson

OP your post reads like a guide from Hannity forums or freerepublic.com!

While in defense of the "others", I have noticed that criticism, even warranted, of Obama is met with an almost same level of outlandish response at least in tone if not in word.

Some of the stuff I have seen posted at the Democratic Underground is pretty bizarre and far out there. I don't think the right has a lock on crazy.

[GAisGreat]

Wait a minute now, Obama is like Hitler. Why I heard on talk-radio the other day, Obama once has facial hair...JUST LIKE HITLER...and he even likes bratwursts...And you blind sheep think he's not Hitler! WOW is all I can say, the liberal media really pulled one over on us! Everybody start practing your 'Heil Obama' salute!

[momonkey]

Originally Posted by jps-teacher

1. Give your thread a title that assumes something
   • a) that is not already known and
   • b) has negative connotations.
2. Use an infamous person or event to make a spurious comparison.
3. Note that you've heard something or that 'it is commonly known,' while providing neither source nor link - this makes it much harder to disprove or discredit.
4. When no appropriate quote is available, make one up.
5. If challenged concerning the source of your quote, blame the main stream media or the right wing talk shows.
6. Use passages actually said by specific individuals, but remove them from the context in which they were said. This precludes deniability and reinforces the message you wish to get across.
7. Belittle those who disagree with you, rather than responding to their points. This avoids losing arguments unnecessarily.
8. Attack others for using the same techniques that you use. This is especially effective when they have not, in fact, been doing so and they think such techniques are reprehensible, as they will spend copious energy defending themselves from the attack itself rather than defending their points, because they do not wish to be painted with the same brush or besmirched in that way.

p.s. Obama is like Hitler because a) he is human, b) he speaks in a way that some people find easy to listen to.

I'm so glad you pointed all of this out because we wouldn't want to be stuck with McBush for another 4 yrs. You know he voted with the worst president in history 95% of the time and a McSame/Failin presidency would have been a disaster. Good thing we chose "change" instead!

CNN Ambushes Palin With Out-Of-Context Quote

[PG77]

Originally Posted by TnHilltopper

Reminds me of a quote, "I'm all in favor of keeping dangerous weapons out of the hands of fools, lets start with typewriters(computers)".

Lol

[Fred314X]

Originally Posted by jps-teacher

p.s. Obama is like Hitler because a) he is human, b) he speaks in a way that some people find easy to listen to.

The exact same thing is true of Ronald Reagan, you know.