In order to enrich the political discussion on this forum, I am going to paste my notes from American Govt. course I took in college.
Some expressions might be useful, esp. equivocation- which applies to republicans. They use it to justify the notion that money is better than truth.

Enjoy.


Logical fallacies: non-sequiter=doesn’t follow-the conclusion doesn’t follow from the reason given (most poor people don’t commit crimes, some rich people do-therefore poverty has nothing to do with crime; most bullet wounded people don’t die, so bullets have nothing to do with death)
A) Ad-hominem= name calling- attacking the person, not the argument (Clinton is a Philanderer); the characteristic of the person should be relevant to the conclusion you draw in order to avoid ad hominem
=using the name as the basis to draw a conclusion
B) POST-HOC –wrong conclusions: x-****o underwent legal developments on 1965; y-soon after crime went up- therefore y was caused by x
EQUIVOACATION- using a word in 2 different ways (x-$>nothing: money is better than nothing, y- nothing> truth: nothing is better than truth =concl. money is better than truth
STRAW MANNING- restating your opponents view in such a way that it sounds dumb- a misstatement or misrepresentation of another’s view in order to defeat the argument of another.
EITHER-OR- multi-variable: for every important effect there is one cause.
(THE TRUTH- there is always many causes)
TRUE BELIEVERS- don’t think, don’t let others think, absolution-taking away responsibility(immersion in a group-to find an identity)
DESPERATE CONFORMERS- club members- don’t think, let others think, fear ostracism
APATHETICS- don’t participate in politics, don’t think for themselves, lot others think
EGOCENTRICS-think by themselves, don’t listen
STRONG INDIVIDUALS-cherish diversity, listen and think; love to argue and are able to argue, rules of logic, knowledgeable, vocabulary
KINDS OF SOCIETIES:
True believers- NASTY MELTING POT (hierarchical to totalitarianism)-masses cause melting pot; compulsion –by government; the little is assimilated
Desperate conformers- GENIAL MELTING POT (friendly- melt because they want to)
Egocentrics- ORGANIC TOSSED SALAD- no community, no dressing to combine ingredients
CIVIL WAR-they fight each other
Strong individuals- BEEF STEW- integrated people, individuality

RAIDING- in open primaries it makes easier to nominated a weaker candidate from opp. party
NAD-(Q)-WOD- not a dime worth difference: overlap- parties are similar on a lot of issues
INOCULATION- occurs in moderate land of nad-q-wod- denial or moderation in a way of their views for an advantage in elections etc.
SPAGHETISM-disagreement within a party (wedge issues)
Political culture- fundamental widely supported values that hold Am. Society together and give legitimacy to its political institutions. It is democratic- goals of equality, individual freedom and due process of law, etc.
Political socialization-the process a society’s political culture is transmitted from one generation to another(thru family, school, peer group, media, etc)
Public opinion- range of opinions expressed by citizens on any subject
Political opinion- the set of opinions expressed by the members of a community on political issues (intensity-how strongly it is held, concentration-how widely its held, stability-over what span of time, distribution-how many supporters, salience-how important and relevant it is).
Scientific polling- the use of scientific methodology and mathematical probability to analyze public attitudes towards issues or candidates.
Sampling-choosing a small number of cases to be studied for information
Survey research- the actual study-method of data collection in which info is obtained directly from individuals who have been selected as a basis to make inferences from a larger population.
Telephone poll- telephone numbers are randomly selected thru random-digit dialing.
Tracking poll- may include up to 1000 interviews in a single day and will indicated changes in voter preferences from day to day during the week or so preceding election.
Exit poll- voters are interviewed on the day of election
Yellow journalism- newspapers which focus attention on scandals and sensational stories.(tabloids)
ROLES OF THE MEDIA: REPORTER, AGENDA-SETTER (what govt should be doing), INVESTIGATOR
Muckrakers- journalists during 19th c who exposed the corrupt workings of govt. and industry.
NEW MEDIA- CABLE +INTERNET
Sound bite- the punchy, short messages-key feature of TV advertisement.

Two party system-party functions: keep the public informed about current political issues, help tp form opinions, minor party serves as a check on the major party, examines, criticizes the proposals and suugests alternatives; recruit and select leaders, represent and integrate groups of interests, control and direct government; bring a degree of order and predictability to the political processs. They obtain power and other advantages ***. with public office. Provide services to the public: educate voters, simplify choices on Election Day. They represent and integrate group interests in the processes of bargaining and compromising. They recruit candidates and organize campaigns to gain public office and control government.
National convention- the political party’s top national authority; meets every 4 years to nominate presidential and vice presidential candidates, adopts party rules and a party platform.
National committee –the executive organ of the party during the time between meetings of the national convention.- national chair presides over national committee.
Precinct/ward committee- below county and city or township committees- deal with fund raising and campaigning.- cf. decentralization- of power on different levels (local etc)
Party identification- the loyalty to the particular party by certain nr of voters.
Independents- who don’t identify with any party.
Interest group- assemblage of people who share common attitudes and interests and who try to influence political system by shaping public opinion, opposing or supporting candidates for public office and influencing decisions of govt officials.
Trade associations- business interest groups, represented in nation’s capital, speak for companies in a particular sector of economy.
Professional associations- concerned with licensing requirements in their states, influenctial because of their wealth and status of the members.
Single Issue Groups- focus entirely on a single issue(abortion, gun control)
Political action committees – created to fund campaigns from corporate sources that wouldn’t be able to support candidates to further their business interests
Lobbying- the main method to influence public policy used by interest groups, trying to persuade legislators to vote for or against a particular bill, etc.
Amicus curiae briefs- cases filed in courts by interest groups to defend their interests- they present their views without being a party in the conflict, try to convince the court to the merits of its arguments.
Grassroots lobbying- using group members or general public to pressure policymakers to support the group’s agenda. (takes form of letters, faxes, phone calls, to senators and representatives or personal visits, also tv advertising, etc, or public demonstrations.
1946- congress passed the Federal Regulation of Lobbying Act which required lobbyists to register with the govt, list employers and salaries, etc
1995- the Lobbying Disclosure Act- new rules governing lobbying
caucus- meeting of party members at the local or precinct level to select delegates to district or state conventions which selects to the national convention.
convention system- decisions are made by delegates who attend conventions
primary- candidates and officials are elected by voters in a primary election.
Runoff primary- held between two candidates who received the most votes and the victor becomes the party’s nominee in the general election.
Closed primary- voters who have registered with a particular party may vote. (vs. open primary)
Party platform- a series of statements of general policy (called plank) on major political issues.
The federal election campaign act (FECA)of 1974- est. a system of federal financing of presidential campaigns and set limits on the amount of money that could be raised from other sources. A cand. Seeking nomination in primary is eligible to get federal funds if they are able to raise a min. of $5000 in each of 20 states.
Soft money- loophole in the laws governing the financing of am. Elections- based on amendment of 1979 to the FECA that was designed to encourage voluntary involvement in presidential campaigns. The amendment allows national party organizations (but not candidates) to receive unlimited amounts of money from private groups to be used on party-building activities.
Hard money- is subjected to individual and group limits; can promote presidential candidates by names.
Registration- procedure in which a person who wants to vote presents an election official with proof that they meet all requirements for voting.

Electoral college- voters cast their votes for the presidential and vice presidential nominees not themselves but for slates of electors chosen by the state political parties.
Incumbency- incumbent – official in office running in the upcoming election
Term limitation- number of years/sessions officials can serve in the House and Senate (2 terms senators, 6 for representatives)
Coattail effect- in congressional districts and states that are competitive, the presence of a popular president or presidential candidates on the ballot may influence the outcome of legislative elections. House and Senate candidates who are running on the same party ballot get elected.
Voter turnout- the percentage of eligible voters who actually vote.

Can I ask you something Jasmin?
What drives you and your decision making process in this election?

It seems to me you know very little or care very little about issues, and are more a candidate driven voter. Are presidential elections for you a contest like American Idol?

If you were Republican, you'd never vote for HRC. If you were a Democrat, you'd never vote for McCain. So which one are you? Have you thought about the consequences of your vote at all? Are you aware that by casting a vote for McCain you are actually giving consent to kill innocent people?
How does it feel to be an accomplice in mass murder?

Do you use your brain a little at least, maybe five minutes a day?
You obviously belong to the Desperate Conformer group of people.

I told you many times I respect the right to making your own choice, that's given.
I am warning you to learn more about the consequences of your decision making.
I am not telling you to not to vote for McCain because I hate Republicans. I don't hate them. I think they are just stupid.
I am telling you not to vote for McCain because this vote means you are voting for:
- the war and killing of innocent people
- collapse of economy (followed by severe depression)
- torture and disregard for US Constitution
- end of the planet earth as we know it

There are more reasons but isn't the above enough?
Do you have a mind of your own at all?
Do you believe in everything the candidates are saying?
DO you think that McCain is truthful?

I can prove it to you that McCain just like Bush are liars. Nothing that comes out of their mouth is truth.

People like you deserve everything that is coming to them, if they elect McBush.

I will tell you something else- what I really think, and what I suspected all along.

I will go out and say it straight: I think you are simply a racist who can't stand to have a black president.

YOu're right, there's no reason to try to explain the truth to you, like the difference between just and unjust war, that this war was manufactured by neocon fascists to satisfy their quest against Islam, that it had nothing to do with 9/11, that it was waged while ignoring and covering Al Quida and Bin Laden.
Of course you won't believe any of this since people like you and millions of people in this country believe in what the media is saying, they don't think for themselves, because they don't have minds of their own. Because they are poor and uneducated, living in rural parts of the country far from cultural and social centers, and who cling to their guns and religion, and who are bitter. That's you Jasmin.
You show a complete lack of information on reality. You repeat what you hear on tv, and that's as far as your knowledge goes.
And yes, COngress and millions of people in this country were fooled by Bush and Co.
Did you read the book by Naomi Klein The Shock Doctrine? It explains the reasons why the people were fooled.
But I opposed this war from day one I heard about it. I wasn't fooled by the emergency levels flashing on tv. And so did Obama, and he spoke against it. YOu see, he's more intelligent than you and millions of foolish sheep in this country.
A result of shoddy education system in this country, with a majority of underpriviliged, uneducated, and stupid people. Whatever comes, a depression, economic turmoil and misery, are the consequences of your stupidity. Blame yourself.

And the comment that this country is safe because there was no terrorist attack is thanks to Bush? Lol. SOmehow thousands of years didn't happen to have terrorist attacks without Bush in the world.

quote:

Originally posted by iperson:
YOu're right, there's no reason to try to explain the truth to you, like the difference between just and unjust war, that this war was manufactured by neocon fascists to satisfy their quest against Islam, that it had nothing to do with 9/11, that it was waged while ignoring and covering Al Quida and Bin Laden.
Of course you won't believe any of this since people like you and millions of people in this country believe in what the media is saying, they don't think for themselves, because they don't have minds of their own. Because they are poor and uneducated, living in rural parts of the country far from cultural and social centers, and who cling to their guns and religion, and who are bitter. That's you Jasmin.
You show a complete lack of information on reality. You repeat what you hear on tv, and that's as far as your knowledge goes.
And yes, COngress and millions of people in this country were fooled by Bush and Co.
Did you read the book by Naomi Klein The Shock Doctrine? It explains the reasons why the people were fooled.
But I opposed this war from day one I heard about it. I wasn't fooled by the emergency levels flashing on tv. And so did Obama, and he spoke against it. YOu see, he's more intelligent than you and millions of foolish sheep in this country.
A result of shoddy education system in this country, with a majority of underpriviliged, uneducated, and stupid people. Whatever comes, a depression, economic turmoil and misery, are the consequences of your stupidity. Blame yourself.

And the comment that this country is safe because there was no terrorist attack is thanks to Bush? Lol. SOmehow thousands of years didn't happen to have terrorist attacks without Bush in the world.

I was not going to reply until I read this. IP, you have no idea what the frak you are talking about. You are making such gross generalizations that it mystifies the mind. The Iraq situation was a quagmire long before Bush Jr came into office. You had France, Germany, Russia, and China all groping the hands of Saddam Hussein trough the oil for food scandal, which also proved that their motives for not going to war was based more on the bribes than honesty. You had the leader of Iraq continuously attempt to dictate to the UNSC and inspection teams, but you also had the failure of the IAEA placing its the Iraqi government equal to the inspection team. With seven failed inspections and an eighth that will more than likely ended in the same result, you cannot place all the blame on Bush Sr or Jr. And then you had Iraq conterminously make the statements no more WMD but in reality, each inspection team from 1992-1998 found new evidence of WMD. Bush acted too hastily going to war but the cost of having 60,000 troops in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, and Qatar would also have cost more than just dollars. It was those US forces that assisted the inspections and enforce the UNSC, but it was about time to act upon the 17 violations by Iraq.

As for the economy, recessions come in cycles and it is not based on the actions of the government. In 2000, the leading economic indicators, like now, were pointing to a possible recession. Then 9/11 happened, but the resilience of the US economy prevented the recesison being too harsh. Today, we are in this because consumers have spent more than they earn. Some blame are to the regulatory agencies who were asleep in auduing those thousands of reports the mortgage companies have to submit,. Some blame are to the mortgage lenders who used predatory practices. And some blame has to go to the consumers who thought it was a right to have countour counters and a two story grand living room as part of the house.

As for the educaitonal system, the federal government has very little to do with the day to day operations or the strategic operations in the school system. This duty falls solely on state and local governments. Bush tried to place more accountability on teachers, whose job it is to teach, but in reality, Congress made it into an unfunded mandate. If you want to blame anyone on the failure of the schools, blame the school administrators and the teacher unions. It is their responsobility to teach and educate the young people, not play party politics of blame game.

As for the book, you have a journalist with no background in economics. Tyler Cowen said the book was an economic disaster. Her logic blaming Milton Friedman Monetary economics policy on the current condititons in the United States, Russia, and Chile are so completely ridiculous that it proves Lenin was right about journalists. You are in the same boat.

But the saddest fact about you IP is that you say you respect other people's opinions, but when you state this:

quote:

I think you are simply a racist who can't stand to have a black president.

or you state this:

quote:

I am telling you not to vote for McCain because this vote means you are voting for...

shows you do not respect other people's opinions. If people hold a different opinion than you do, then that means, by your logic, they are racist, arrogant, stupid, ignorant, etc. But when you make those types of statements, you are the one that is stupid, arrogant, racist, etc.

Even though Jeanine and I will disagree on things, I give her the respect of who she votes for is what she things will be best for president. But in the end, both Jeanine and I will recognize the person who wins the general election is the one who will be President. But you will dishonor and defame someone merely by the guilt of association in a political party. That is a completely moronic position and shows your true colors and your complete ignorance of our political system.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Hudson,

HUdson, I am not even going to respond to this load of ****. How do you argue with a person who doesn't know the reality of global warming as scientifically proven.
You probably believe the earth was created like six thousand years ago.
You're such a closed minded person. All you do is repeat the repug line without doing thinking on your own. You're a desperate conformist.
You're trying to paint me as this irrespectful person, diminish my character, just like all republicans do to democrats in elections- your warfare is a character assassination.

I wouldn't be saying all this if I didn't truly care for this country. THere is nothing wrong with trying to enlighten people.
In the end, this is your country and whatever happens to it in the future is fully deserved. YOu will have only yourselves to blame.

So Jasmin, are you going to support and respect Barack Obama when he becomes the president?


(because there is no doubt in my mind that he going to get elected in November)

quote:

Originally posted by iperson:
HUdson, I am not even going to respond to this load of ****. How do you argue with a person who doesn't know the reality of global warming as scientifically proven.
You probably believe the earth was created like six thousand years ago.
You're such a closed minded person. All you do is repeat the repug line without doing thinking on your own. You're a desperate conformist.
You're trying to paint me as this irrespectful person, diminish my character, just like all republicans do to democrats in elections- your warfare is a character assassination.

I wouldn't be saying all this if I didn't truly care for this country. THere is nothing wrong with trying to enlighten people.
In the end, this is your country and whatever happens to it in the future is fully deserved. YOu will have only yourselves to blame.

YOu really need to stop generalizing about people whom you do not agree with.

For the record, I said, on more than one occasion, I do not believe in the politics on global warming, not global warming itself. If you cannot differentiate between the political side and not the scientific side, then you do need help.

This country has survived a civil war, countless depressions and recessions, at least two disgraced presidents and possibly a third, and two terrorist attacks. This country will survive whether you are living in this country or not. It will also survive no matter who is elected President. Nor are you the only one who truly cares for this country IP. I do, So does Jeanine, Sprint, Proud, Mike, Cman, Speed, and others. We may not agree, but we do care for this country. And we do respect each other's opinions and values. But you do not. You talk that you care, but your actions, through your words, tell a very different, darker side, of you. And that is what has gotten most people boiled about. You need to chill with the politics, at least on this board.

I don't care if people get boiled about what I say. I want people to notice what I am saying.

Would you do me a favor Hudson, and read this site for a week, every day, just read:
http://thinkprogress.org

Just read it, and then after one week let's talk about what you've read, and what you've stated above, and what you believe now at this moment in time.
I am not a good writer, as english is my second language, and I am not good at expressing my thoughts, but others do it quite well, much better than I, so please READ. And please get informed, and after you do, you will see the dark side as clearly as I do.
THank you.

Do you Hudson (or Jasmin) feel like you would be ready to answer the following questions that should be posed to McCain at a debate but never will in mainstream media?:
(I assume you are voting for McCain)

1. Do you agree with Pastor John Hagee that war with Iran is the fulfillment of biblical prophecy?
In February, you shared a stage with Pastor John Hagee and said you were "very proud" to have his endorsement. You also called the Reverend Rod Parsley, a man who said of Islam "America was founded, in part, with the intention of seeing this false religion destroyed", your "spiritual guide." Do you believe America's mission is to destroy Islam? Do you join Pastor Hagee in believing the United States must attack Iran to fulfill the biblical prophecy of Armageddon in Israel in which 144,000 Jews will be converted to Christianity and the rest killed? Is that why you joked about "bomb bomb Iran?" If not, why will you not renounce the support of Hagee and Parsley?

2. Doesn't your legendary temper make you too dangerous to be trusted with the presidency of the United States?
Your anger, even toward friends and allies, is legendary. You purportedly dropped the F-Bomb on your own GOP colleagues John Cornyn and Chuck Grassley. In the book, The Real McCain, author Cliff Schechter claims you got into a fist-fight with your fellow Arizona Republican Rick Renzi. Allegedly, you even publicly used a crude term, one which decorum and the FCC prohibit us from even saying on the air, to describe your own wife. Which if any of these episodes is untrue? Don't your anger management problems make you too dangerously unstable to be president of the United States?

3. Doesn't your confusion regarding basic facts about the war in Iraq, including repeatedly citing a nonexistent Al Qaeda-Iran alliance, make you unfit for command?
On four occasions in one month, you confused friend and foe in Iraq by describing Sunni Al Qaeda as being backed by Shiite Iran. Then you showed a misunderstanding of the U.S. chain of command when you claimed you would not back shifting forces from Iraq to Afghanistan "unless Gen. [David] Petraeus said that he felt that the situation called for that," a decision which Petraeus himself told you and your Senate colleagues only the week before rests not with him but with his superiors. Doesn't your lack of understanding and judgment when it comes to basic facts of America's national security disqualify you as commander-in-chief?

4. Given your past adultery, should Americans consider you a moral exemplar of family values?
You are the nominee of a Republican Party which claims to support so-called "family values." Yet you commenced an adulterous relationship with your current wife Cindy months before the dissolution of your previous marriage to your first wife Carol. Should Americans consider you to be a moral exemplar of family values?

5. Doesn't your flip-flop on Jerry Falwell being an "agent of intolerance" show your opportunistic pandering to the religious right?
In 2000, you famously called the late Jerry Falwell "an agent of intolerance," a statement which may have cost you the decisive South Carolina primary. But as you ramped up your next presidential run in 2006, you embraced Falwell and gave the commencement address at his Liberty University. When Tim Russert asked that spring if you still considered him an agent of intolerance, you said, "'no, I don't." Why shouldn't the American people consider you a flip-flopping opportunist who cynically courted the religious right to further your 2008 presidential ambitions?

6. Given your wealth and privileged upbringing, aren't you - and not Barack Obama - the elitist?
You have called Barack Obama an elitist. Yet you recently returned to your exclusive private high school, one which now costs over 38,000 dollars a year to attend. Your wife is the heiress to a beer distribution company, reputedly owns 8 homes and has a net worth well over $100 million. Your children all attended private schools, academies which also happened to be the primary beneficiaries of funds from your supposed charitable foundation. Shouldn't the American people in fact view you as the elitist, and a hypocritical one at that?

7. What is your religion, really? And has the answer in the past changed as the South Carolina primary approached?
I want to ask about your seemingly ever-changing religious beliefs. In June 2007, McClatchy reported, "McCain still calls himself an Episcopalian." In August 2007, as ABC reported, your campaign staff identified you as "Episcopalian" in a questionnaire prepared for ABC News' August 5 debate. But as the primary in evangelical-rich South Carolina neared, in September 2007 you said of your religious faith, "It plays a role in my life. By the way, I'm not Episcopalian. I'm Baptist." But in March 2008, Pastor Dan Yeary of your North Phoenix Baptist Church refused to comment on why you have refused to finally undergo a baptism ceremony. Congressional directories still list you as an Episcopalian. In the past, you've said, "When I'm asked about it, I'll be glad to discuss it." So what is your religion? And couldn't Americans be forgiven for assuming your changing faith is tied to your changing political needs?

8. Didn't President Bush betray you with his signing statement on the Detainee Treatment Act? You claim to be against torture, but aren't you a hypocrite for voting "no" on the Senate waterboaring ban?
You've said that "we can't torture or treat inhumanely suspected terrorists we have captured". And in December 2005, you famously reached a compromise with President Bush on the Detainee Torture Act banning cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment of detainees. But just two weeks later, President Bush issued a signing statement making it clear he would ignore the compromise you just reached. Then in February 2007, you voted "no" on a Senate bill banning waterboarding. Isn't it fair to say President Bush betrayed you with his December 30, 2005 signing statement? And isn't it fair to say you caved to the right-wing of your party on the issue in order to win the Republican nomination?

9. Why did you flip-flop on the Bush tax cuts you twice opposed? Why do you now support making them permanent for the wealthiest Americans who need them least?
You twice voted against the Bush tax cuts. Now you support making them permanent. In 2001, you said, "I cannot in good conscience support a tax cut in which so many of the benefits go to the most fortunate among us at the expense of middle-class Americans who need tax relief." Now, according to the Center for American Progress, your tax plan would cost more than $2 trillion over the next decade and "would predominantly benefit the most fortunate taxpayers, offering two new massive tax cuts for corporations and delivering 58 percent of its benefits to the top 1 percent of taxpayers." Isn't it true that you flip-flopped on the Bush tax cuts? Isn't it fair to say that you now favor a massive expansion of the federal budget deficit in order to fund a tax giveaway to the wealthiest Americans who need it least?

10. With the economy tanking, shouldn't Americans be concerned over your past statements that "the issue of economics is not something I've understood as well as I should?"
Americans consistently report that the economy is the issue that concerns them most. Yet more than once, you proclaimed your ignorance when it comes to the economy. In November 2005, you told the Wall Street Journal, "I'm going to be honest: I know a lot less about economics than I do about military and foreign policy issues. I still need to be educated." Then in December 2007, you admitted, "The issue of economics is not something I've understood as well as I should." Shouldn't the American be worried about President McCain's ability to lead the United States out of recession? Given your past statements, shouldn't the American reject out of hand your claim that "I know the economy better than Senator Clinton and Senator Obama do?"

BREAKING NEWS: HOW MEDIA BETRAYED THE AMERICAN PEOPLE

From New York Times

The Bush Administration propaganda machine begins to unravel and crumble to pieces.
The news that the top officials conspired to approve torture in the White House while American people were sleeping is already out there.
It is a shame this isn't talked about in mainstream media. Now we know why. The media are bought.

I am telling you, after this administration is over, there will come the time of reckoning.
Unless McCain is elected for Bush's third term.

Interactive features that explain the inner workings of the tight knit collaboration between Pentagon and the media:

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2008/04/20/washingto...080419_RUMSFELD.html

Hello?! Nobody interested in their own country?
I thought Americans were patriotic and were eager to know what is going on.

I am wondering when the S H I T will finally start hitting the fan.