My Thoughts on Comments

Credible comments

Screenshot taken from abcnews. 8/29/15

1. This commenter doesn't express fear, anxiety, or wishful thinking. They come off as a realist in this debate and take things exactly as they are, not blowing it out of proportion or try to make it into another debate between our political parties.
2. Tobias seems to hold basic human beliefs that war is bad. I don't know anyone who likes war. Democrats think Republicans like war but that's not true in my experience. Basic human beliefs are that war is bad but some aren't willing to let others step on their toes and get away with it.
3. This commenter seems reasonable to me because they are so moderate. I think they can speak to both sides of the political spectrum. They try to turn the attention toward the bigger picture, war, and get some cooperation out of people instead of pointing fingers at the other side of the argument.

Screenshot taken from abcnews. 8/29/15

1. This commenter does not express fear, anxiety, or wishful thinking. They do not think Chris Kyle was a perfect human being and they do not pretend that he is.
2. keeyoni may believe that the war in Iraq is "complete bull" but that is not certain. They  likely think that Chris Kyle is heroic, but this is not directly stated. They do believe that Kyle did what he believed in at his own expense, which would be a very difficult point to argue.
3. This commenter seems reasonable to me because they address the core of what makes Chris Kyle heroic. It's not because he killed 160+ people, but rather his personal sacrifice for what he believed in.

Comments that Lack Credibility

Screenshot taken from abcnews. 8/29/15



1. RealAmerican expresses a dislike for fat slobs and child molesters, which could possibly be considered some form of anxiety.
2. This commenter's beliefs are clearly stated in their comment: Seth Rogen reminds him/her of a fat slob and Mike Moore looks like a child molester.
3. RealAmerican lacks credibility for what I think are pretty obvious reasons. He/she attacks the people instead of the issue they are presenting. This is a logical fallacy known as ad-hominem. The opinions may have some credibility but the commenter does nothing to support their opinion.

Screenshot taken from abcnews. 8/29/15

1. Denize Murray expresses a dislike for hypocrites, I think. Her comment was not proof-read so it doesn't make total sense. But I think we can decode what she's trying to say.
2. She believes that Chris Kyle was a glorified killer and he was a hypocrite to fight other killers.
3. Denize lacks credibility because her argument is not structured or grammared very good. Maybe she has a point but it's almost totally lost by the lack of readability. She also does not give proper support to her point.
   
   
   
   
   Reflection: I read Trey and Mehruba's blogs. I forgot to write the reflection until today, 9/9, but I did write my comments before the due date. I could relate to parts of their blog posts like the scarcity of any sort of credible comments. I found that I can view both sides of an argument. Both sides have credibility but as with everything, it's up to the reader what they think is more credible than other things.