MooPig Site Reviews :: "Today's Lesson in Logic"

At "Bloodthirsty Liberal," January 2006 - present
Retrieved by Pat Darnell

WHY “BLOODTHIRSTY”, WHY “LIBERAL”?
"Bloodthirsty is easy to explain—especially if you’re Thomas Jefferson:

• "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

"That’s a sentiment any liberal can get behind—or so I had thought. Aunt Agatha and I (the eponymous Bloodthirsty Liberal), the two voices heard here, are recovering liberals
..."
"It was lonely out there at first, but there are enough us around in public and private to make for pleasant company. It was bloodthirsty liberals, after all, who helped Bush beat Kerry. Despite an unpopular war, a disputed election, and an opponent unencumbered by an impeached predecessor, Bush increased his vote total over 2000. Where do you think those votes came from? You’re right, and you’re welcome.

"Read the blog to learn what we think on individual topics. God knows we’re not slaves to Bush, and this blog ain’t about him. He just happens to “get it” more than most. (HERE)"

________________________________
Bloodthirsty Liberal  |  February 25, 2009
Do condom ads reflect the mind-sets of nations? In the U.S., we get faux-patriotism and soft-core porn, while the French have safe sex on the beach. Now, from Germany, comes a dour dose of angst via Grey in a campaign for Doc Morris Pharmacies. The message: Use a condom, and be sure you’re not bringing the next Osama bin Laden, Adolf Hitler or Mao Zedong into the world.

All entirely reasonable.

But why not a spermatozoon with this familiar coif on its crown?

Ladies, don’t get into the back seat of a car—or front, for that matter—with anyone carrying this seed.
PHOTO: Source Unknown.
________________________________
Bloodthirsty Liberal  |  February 26, 2009
"One of the traps of formal logic is the false syllogism: an incorrect or misleading conclusion from two premises. My favorite example is Woody Allen’s:

• 'All men are mortal. Socrates was a man. Therefore, all men are Socrates.'"

So, when I come across two distinct stories, and find some disturbing conclusions, let’s understand up front that I could be wrong. (Read entire article HERE...)

But I don’t think so.

Story ... (from MyPetJawa. Rusty at February 25, 2009):

"A new poll from World Public Opinion pretty much confirms everything we thought we knew about the Muslim world: that while not directly supporting al Qaeda, large majorities of Muslims around the world support many of al Qaeda’s goals, hate the US, are clamoring to replace secular repression with religious repression, are paranoid conspiracy theorists, and have no problem with killing US soldiers."
…
The good news, of course is that large majorities in Muslim countries reject killing American civilians. But that’s about where the good news begins and ends.
The worst news? Support by Muslims for attacks against American civilians has actually increased over the past two years."

There follow gallons and hogsheads of data. Go there to read. [more article from the Bloodthirsty Liberal HERE] ...