1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

NEWS FLASH: South Oval "Debates" Based on Total Lack of Logic

Discussion in 'South Oval' started by TopDawg, Aug 26, 2009.

  1. TopDawg

    TopDawg SoonerFans.com Elite Member

    Just like the health care ones.


    Interesting story.
  2. LosAngelesSooner

    LosAngelesSooner SoonerFans.com Elite Member

  3. homerSimpsonsBrain

    homerSimpsonsBrain New Member

    I saw that article and the South Oval was the first thing that came to mind.
    TopDawg likes this.
  4. Octavian

    Octavian SoonerFans.com Elite Member

    so now YahooNews has concluded --based on 50-person study-- that the majority of the public that disagrees with the health care proposals (the same public that voted for Obama) are just illogical?

    I see. That is.....interesting.

    And the Administration needs to grapple more with symbolism and less about policy? That's odd...since their campaign last year was chalked full of visualized symbolism, emotionally charged rhetorical chants, and vague promises.

    The HC debate is the really the first major initiative launched that's been more policy-heavy. The proposals are on paper....people can read it. They have...and they've been weighing the potential outcomes....and most people aren't buying it.

    So now it must be because they're illogical? Sounds like one side is losing a pretty big argument and they're lashing out to place blame on any and every group or entity they can find...except themselves, for launching a bad plan.

    And...a 50-person academic study is needed to arrive at the conclusion that people aren't always logical? Any person off the street could have informed them of that and they could have saved some grant money.
  5. homerSimpsonsBrain

    homerSimpsonsBrain New Member

    I dont think health care in particular was the point. They were just using it as an example because its the hot political topic. I think its safe to say the war in Iraq would follow the same lines. But then again, they could have come and read 99% of the posts on here and come to the same conclusion.

  6. Octavian

    Octavian SoonerFans.com Elite Member

    in the middle of a health care debate, an article appears on a very POTUS-friendly site that's focused on the relationship between illogical people and politics and concludes with the ways in which these illogical people are influencing said health care debate....and what the POTUS can then do about it.

    and the health care debate isn't the particular point?

    with all due respect, that conclusion just might not be logical
  7. homerSimpsonsBrain

    homerSimpsonsBrain New Member

    So are you saying livescience.com or yahoo is "very POTUS-Friendly"?
  8. OUDoc

    OUDoc ..............

    Did this thread just make that article's point?
    49r and TopDawg like this.
  9. OklahomaTuba

    OklahomaTuba SoonerFans.com Elite Member

    So Obama shouldn't talk about the "nuts and bolts" of taking over 1/6 of this nations economy & spending trillions of dollars we don't have, but rather just try to get people to feel better about it?

    Might be one of the dumbest f'king things I've ever read. Ever.
  10. OKLA21FAN

    OKLA21FAN New Member


    what do we do now in the SO? :pop:
  11. Osce0la


  12. GrapevineSooner

    GrapevineSooner SoonerFans.com Elite Member

    The 2009 debate to reform Healthcare = The 2005 debate to reform Social Security.

    Only the political parties have changed sides.
  13. Fraggle145

    Fraggle145 Drunky Town Limnologist

    twisted out of logic by post #7, brilliant!
  14. homerSimpsonsBrain

    homerSimpsonsBrain New Member

    I think so. Its interesting that folks dont appear to be able to step back from an emotional issue and evaluate it based on the entire set of facts. They seize on one line that they think fits their argument. I've heard "biblical" debates that work the same way. One or two words in some obscure verse validates their entire world view. And anyone that disagrees with that view is "dumb". They cant see any merit in any other point of view.

    I've certainly caught myself filtering some issue that I felt strongly about that way. Its really pretty hard to force yourself to step back and consider the issue dispassionately. And I think message boards are probably not ideal for rational discussion. <stating the incredibly obvious>. Football, yes. Serious discussion, not so much.
    OUDoc likes this.
  15. yermom

    yermom Stayatworkdad

    rational football discussions? here?
    Fraggle145 likes this.
  16. homerSimpsonsBrain

    homerSimpsonsBrain New Member

    I never said the football discussions were rational. Anywhere.

  17. yermom

    yermom Stayatworkdad

    oh, ok :D
  18. tommieharris91

    tommieharris91 SoonerFans.com Elite Member

    The train derailed on post #4.
  19. NormanPride

    NormanPride SoonerFans.com Elite Member

    Why do you hate trains?
    tommieharris91 likes this.
  20. Fraggle145

    Fraggle145 Drunky Town Limnologist

    True... but I think post #7 sealed it in the time warp of us/them crazyland.

    Edit: To clarify... Post #6 is basically "Its biased for the president" post #7 "It is?"

    So we had someone say this article is crap because of politics and then someone asking about those politics, which is usually how the cycle starts.

    Ya its a little limp. So sue me. :D
    yermom likes this.

Share This Page