NCclimber 0 #51 April 12, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteWhat are you talking about? Seems like Bush and Co. have been getting called on their actions, as well as mere claims, over the last few years. Isn't it the case that an individual can be imprisoned indefinitely if G.W. Bush declares him to be an enemy combatant, without any proof being required? Are you talking about the rare cases of innocent Americans being detained or the general claim of "The Bush administration has quite thoroughly done away with such legalistic archaisms"? Rare or commonplace is not relevant. Once is enough to prove the point. What exactly is the point? That the exception proves that the norm has been quite thoroughly done away with? "prove" in that context means "test", not "confirm". If someone finds a map that needs 5 colors, it won't confirm the validity of the 4-color theorem. Oh. Okay. QuoteBush HAS trampled on the Constitution, and one example is enough to demonstrate it. By that logic, one peer-reviewed study debunking anthropogenic global warming demonstrates it isn't occurring. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #52 April 12, 2007 Proving something is occuring and proving something doens't occur are too different things.... The latter is quite a bit more difficult. With the prior you only have to establigh it happened once, the latter requires many more data points. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
narcimund 0 #53 April 12, 2007 I'm quite confident ncclimber knows all about how the different types of proofs work and when they're called for. He's not ignorant. He's also knows how to slip from one type to another when it amuses him to upend the conversation and distract people. First Class Citizen Twice Over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #54 April 12, 2007 This whole tangential discussion came about from your assertion that "the Bush administration has quite thoroughly done away with such legalistic archaisms". IMO Examples of certain standards being ignored doesn't mean/prove they have been "quite thoroughly done away". And neither does one example of a President (arguable) violating the Constitution prove that he has trampled it. By that standard, Clinton trampled it quite soundly... but I don't agree with that standard. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
narcimund 0 #55 April 12, 2007 QuoteThis whole tangential discussion came about... Slippery fella, ain'tcha? First Class Citizen Twice Over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #56 April 12, 2007 QuoteQuoteThis whole tangential discussion came about... Slippery fella, ain'tcha? It was your generalization. Sorry you seem to have a problem with my bringing it back up. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
