Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (614394)	6/2/2011 4:42:25 PM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1571591

"If you went to Webster's, that would would be the definition for Tim Fowler." Sadly, it isn't just him. Smirk, for example, had mastered this one. Argument by innuendo Argument by innuendo involves implicitly suggesting a conclusion without stating it outright. For example, a job reference that says a former employee "was never caught taking money from the cash box" In this example the overly specific nature of the innuendo implies that the employee was a thief, even though it does not make (or justify) a direct negative statement. So, no he never actually said that Saddam was behind 9/11. But unless you parsed his words very carefully, you certainly felt that was true. Even if you parsed his words carefully, at best he was ambiguous about it. And you keep running into this stuff over and over again with the Right. If you try to analyze most of the posts here of those on the Right, you wind up with an extensive list of fallacious arguments. It is like an art form for them...