The Devil made him do it

[Amianthus]

I would assume in the absence of evidence of alternative means of acquiring knowledge of tabloid headlines and photos that one acquires this knowledge in the simplest way possible, by reading the tabs, in line at the supermarket or staring at them on the washroom floor in a toilet stall or taking them home to read at bed-time, it does not matter.  I would venture that 99% of the people who claim to know about the contents of tabloid headlines acquired that knowledge by reading the headline on the tab.

I saw the cover of Canadian Federal and Provincial Case Law once.

Guess that means I read Canadian law books, huh?

I must be an expert on the subject?

Glancing at the cover of a tabloid and reading the headline above is not something that requires any concentration on my part - indeed it's pretty much automatic and I cannot even control it. Perhaps my reading skills are so much above yours - I didn't realize that it took so much concentration on your part to read.

Do you need to stop on the road to concentrate and read each road sign as well?

[Michael Tee]

<<Actually, your piece was pretty much a strawman argument - insert into his words stuff he never said, then shoot down what you inserted.>>

Actually I don't recall cutting out a single word of what the guy wrote before I rebutted it.  That's why MY piece was so long.  That kept whatever I inserted in context.  Whatever I inserted was meant to extend the buffoon's argument to show where it would lead to if taken seriously, the classic reductio ad absurdum, which is nothing at all like a strawman argument.

<<Your claim that he reads supermarket tabloids was but an example of your attempts to sway arguments with propaganda.>>

The guy was actually quoting what he read in supermarket tabs as part of his argument against Chavez.  I stand in line all the time at supermarkets (IF that's where he acquired his familiarity with the headline and picture, and we don't realy know that) and I tell ya, I can't think of one headline to quote.  Maybe a word or two at most.  "Brad" "Angelina."  But a photo?  With a whole headline?  This guy sounds like an aficionado to me.  Some writers choose to quote Socrates in their writings. Aeschylus.   Nietzsche. Winston Churchill.  Tom Clancy.  Seinfeld.  This guy chooses to quote from supermarket tabloids.  Hey, it's a free country.  Why should I deny him his right to quote freely from any source?

<<And I'm confident there were some members of this group who were able to get it.>>

Undoubtedly

[Amianthus]

The guy was actually quoting what he read in supermarket tabs as part of his argument against Chavez.  I stand in line all the time at supermarkets (IF that's where he acquired his familiarity with the headline and picture, and we don't realy know that) and I tell ya, I can't think of one headline to quote.  Maybe a word or two at most.  "Brad" "Angelina."  But a photo?  With a whole headline?  This guy sounds like an aficionado to me.  Some writers choose to quote Socrates in their writings. Aeschylus.   Nietzsche. Winston Churchill.  Tom Clancy.  Seinfeld.  This guy chooses to quote from supermarket tabloids.  Hey, it's a free country.  Why should I deny him his right to quote freely from any source?

That one was so funny, it had me practically rolling in the aisle.

But then maybe it's not my reading skills that are better than yours. Maybe it's just my memory. I remember what I read and see.

And besides - he quoted it wrong anyway, so he must not be such an aficionado.

[Michael Tee]

<<I saw the cover of Canadian Federal and Provincial Case Law once.

<<Guess that means I read Canadian law books, huh?

<<I must be an expert on the subject?>>

Let me know when you start quoting from them to buttress your arguments

<<Glancing at the cover of a tabloid and reading the headline above is not something that requires any concentration on my part - indeed it's pretty much automatic and I cannot even control it. Perhaps my reading skills are so much above yours - I didn't realize that it took so much concentration on your part to read.>>

Alternatively, perhaps I find more interesting things to glance at when standing in line at the supermarket.  But hey!  don't let me stop you from looking over whatever catches your fancy.  It's a free world.

[Amianthus]

Let me know when you start quoting from them to buttress your arguments

I just did. The title from the cover. Equivalent to a headline from a tabloid. That makes me an expert, doesn't it? Or at least an aficionado?

Alternatively, perhaps I find more interesting things to glance at when standing in line at the supermarket.  But hey!  don't let me stop you from looking over whatever catches your fancy.  It's a free world.

Gum and candy wrappers? Sorry, I look around me and notice everything. So sorry that you're too slow to notice things immediately in front of you.

[Michael Tee]

<<And besides - he quoted it wrong anyway, so he must not be such an aficionado.>>

Jesus.  My faith in the media is shaken to the roots.  The guy couldn't even quote straight from a tabloid headline??  Maybe that's not ALL he got wrong.  He could've fucked up on the picture too.  How do we know it was really a smoking hole in the ground?  What if it was a bombed-out building?  I think you should enter into a serious intellectual debate with him at once, which could be expanded as needed to include other tabloid headlines as well.  How else can the integrity of tabloid headlines be preserved?

[Michael Tee]

<<Gum and candy wrappers? Sorry, I look around me and notice everything. So sorry that you're too slow to notice things immediately in front of you.>>

Some things a little more intently than others, apparently.  And remembered longer.  No matter how trivial.   Must be nice to have so little on your mind.

[Amianthus]

Must be nice to have so little on your mind.

Must be nice to easily forget things.

ADD or Alzheimers?

[Amianthus]

Jesus.  My faith in the media is shaken to the roots.  The guy couldn't even quote straight from a tabloid headline??  Maybe that's not ALL he got wrong.  He could've fucked up on the picture too.  How do we know it was really a smoking hole in the ground?  What if it was a bombed-out building?  I think you should enter into a serious intellectual debate with him at once, which could be expanded as needed to include other tabloid headlines as well.  How else can the integrity of tabloid headlines be preserved?

If it's the tabloid headline I remember seeing, the smoke was rising from a factory's smokestacks (not a hole in the ground) and the headline was in the form of a question ("Has the Devil escaped from Hell?").

However, there are so many "Devil" tabloid headlines, it's entirely possible he saw a different one.

Of course, I don't take someone's factual errors and use that to make fun of them. If I did, I would be a liberal. And I'd be making fun of their dress and physical features as well.

And I don't want to get a lobotomy just to become liberal.

[Michael Tee]

<<ADD or Alzheimers?>>

Prioritizing is closer.  So is focusing.

[Amianthus]

Prioritizing is closer.  So is focusing.

Focusing to point of ignoring your surroundings is obsessive behaviour. And not normal.

[Plane]

Is Hugo Chavez fair to reduce the political diffrences of his country and our to an ad hominum attack on our president?