COMMON 98ER FALLACIES : LUSENET : 1998 Guam Elections : One Thread


Day after day on this forum, we hear the same inane comments by 98ers who refuse to add anything intelligent to our discussion. The comments are redundant, but worse, they are illogical.

For easy reference, I've attempted to list the most common fallacies put forth by the 98ers, and show why they are illogical (I stole this idea from an internet newsgroup). Now, whenever the 98ers post the same nonsensical comments, we can refer to them by their number and not waste as much time as we have. (ex: Oh, there's 98er fallacy #3 again. We all know the answer to that fallacy!)

If you have any to add, please let me know and I'll revise the list.


Common statement: "x (fill in the name of a Karl opponent here) is only spreading hate and contempt with his allegations against Karl."

Illogical because: There is no evidence to support this statement. This is the problem with just about every single 98er comment on this forum and in the public -- they have no proof or logical reasons to support their statements. The "Hate and Contempt" argument is not even an argument -- it is a broad dismissal of all the charges without addressing any of them. It makes a vague, general reference to "hate and contempt" without proving any of the allegations wrong or proving that any hate or contempt has been spread in the first place.

Appropriate reply: The only hate and contempt being spread is the hate and contempt that people have for corruption in Karl's administration. It is completely appropriate to hate corruption. Now tell us which specific charges are false and prove it.


Common statement: "Allegations that x makes are only lies and slanderous statements."

Illogical because: Again, no proof. This is a variation of 98er Fallacy #1, dismissing all the charges at once by calling them lies (instead of hate). But 98ers never offer evidence that the allegations are lies, and they don't even say specifically which allegations are lies.

Appropriate reply: Every allegation made is backed up with documented evidence. You must now tell us specifically what the lies are, and give us documented proof that they are lies.


Common statement: "All the wrongdoing doesn't matter because ... we're still having fun, and we're still the one!"

Illogical because: This is an attempt to distract us from the issues with catchy slogans and jingles. But again, it makes no specific rebuttal of the charges made against Karl nor does it offer any evidence that Karl is still the one. Look, kiddies, look at the pretty bird so you won't notice me stealing the money from your pockets!

Appropriate reply: Tell us why Karl being "still the one" has any relevance to why I should vote for him, and give me some real reasons to vote for him. Oh, and while you're at it, is Karl still the one who has let crime rise to an all-time high, won't give children textbooks, has let unemployment rise to an all-time high, sued the board of education, lets prosecutors drop criminal cases by the thousands, and wants to build a deadly incinerator?


Common statement: "The only reason the FBI is investigating the governor is because Angel Santos and Mark Charfauros made allegations of corruption and the FBI has an obligation to investigate whether or not those allegations are true."

Illogical because: There is documented evidence that there is korruption in Karl's administration, and FBI investigations only confirm that. There are too many FBI investigations going on right now (about 20) for it to be only "routine" checking out by the bureau. This is a clever spin by Karl, but the evidence shows otherwise.

Appropriate reply: We can all stop speculating when the indictments come.


Common statement: "People are impugning the integrity of all the hard-working GovGuam employees with their allegations of corruption."

Illogical because: No one is accusing all GovGuam employees of corruption. Everyone is accusing Karl of corruption. He's trying to convince GovGuam employees that they're being attacked, when they actually aren't. Karl is, and for good reason. It's a clever spin, but only a distraction. Again, he hasn't addressed any of the specific charges and provides no evidence that the charges are false.

Appropriate reply: Karl, you are the one impugning the integrity of GovGuam employees by running a korrupt administration and making everyone look bad. When are you going to answer the specific charges and clear everyone's name?


Common statement: "Joe Ada you are the reason that the President is not coming to Guam (or some other problem that Karl doesn't want to take the credit for)."

Illogical because: There is no tie between Joe Ada and Clinton not coming. Clinton isn't coming because there is a need for a runoff election (in the words of Washington officials) and he doesn't want to interfere with politics. And Karl is blaming the election commission as well -- but would Karl rather that people ignore the non-U.S. citizens who votes, the major discrepancies in the ballots, 170 people using the same social secutiry number? Apparently. Karl blames everyone else for every problem, including load shedding, the economy, the Ordot dump, etc.

Appropriate reply: There you go again, Karl, blaming everyone else. Where does the buck stop?

* First edition, posted on Nov. 10, 1998

-- Lighthouse Keeper (, November 10, 1998


Yes, Yes again I have heard this introduction of providing factual and resolutions to matters that involve the current administration. However I, like Lighthouse, would like to see a development in this course. I also applaud the Governor for keeping so quiet now, yes the passive role our Govenor has accepted has made things much more dormant. I also applaud his speech of quickly certifying the matter of making him the Governor. I could see how he wants so justly to be appointed Governor again, even though the duplications of Social Security numbers have been announced and already a confirm 14 ineligible voters (from the top), 5 announced publicly, have been checked as positive in voting. Already again facts dictate that absentee ballots have not been counted, and some were not accounted for and applied to the election. Though majority of the descrepencies in all the precincts have been rectified, there are a few they have no answer for. This however is how he choses to win, by pleading to the people to accept the current problems in the election process and appoint him Fuhrer of Guam. This is his angle, "...bring the President here because that is what is important, not that our democratic process we hold civil too, has been breached." Yes the insert prior to my statement is my opinion, but its content no farther from his speech. Now we have confirmed that the FBI is investigating the Election, and still our Governor insist in accepting the ballots. Now INS will get involve, still he would insist in certifying the votes. How unfortunate that Joey Duenas had to tell everyone on T.V that the Organic says 50 plus one vote determines the winner, and at that point in time Carl had received that number. Now he proposes otherwise. The Governor says "take out the partisan politics" but again his supporters still believe that his democratic team in there is not the parent source of "partisan polotics." Its interesting though because now you here people saying otherwise, they yell "I'm still the one" but in the end of their sentence they say "We'll win again." What does this constitute, "That the 98ers want another election, or supporting it." In many of your messages (98ers) you in one way or another concede, or foreshadow another victory of ANOTHER election.

Yesterday KUAM did a question on do you want a run off election? Amazingly everyone they interviewed said "NO". Now in todays interview, "Everyone is saying yes."

Here's a qoute for some of you from the KUAM offices about yesterdays interviews ."....after I read the PDN's pole on a run-off then watched ours I never felt so stupid,and low at that..."

Carl doesn't look the same anymore, quiet-reserve and now pleading to the people to accept the election as it is? Doesn't this strike any of you 98ers a bit strangely? Don't answer that, I think the question itself is deeper than the answer.

-- Third Party (, November 10, 1998.

On 98er F#3 "We're still having fun" point: Why are the 98'ers crying about a possible run-off election? Wouldn't it be just a way to continue all the "Fun"? You know Dancing in the streets; playing that special song over and over; rallies; barbecues; drive-by beer bottle throwing; etc.. Who would ever want any of this to end?

If it takes long enough everyone will have a new driveway, personal power pole (with street light) & one of those cool yellow vests. Lets not spoil the "fun" by ending the election.

-- just me (, November 10, 1998.

Mr Keeper,

Could you please debunk the argument that "we should make Karl the winner becuz Guam's looks bad and the Americans are laughing at us becuz we can't even handle our own election."?

Gettin sick and tired of hearing this baloney about Mark Charfauros "smearing Guam's good name in Washington."

Thank You.

-- (debunk@98fallacy.crook), November 15, 1998.


Easy. The argument that "we should make Karl the winner becuz Guam's looks bad and the Americans are laughing at us becuz we can't even handle our own election" is extremely weak.

Guam's good name in Washington would be smeared much worse by sweeping these obvious problems with our democratic process under the rug. The way to clear our name is to undergo some serious, earnest election reform, not by quickly certifying very dubious election results.

It's easy for people who want the so-called "governor" Karl to win to say "hurry up and certify the results" because they want the controversies to go away, and for Clinton to come in and save the day. Clinton's visit is nothing but a PR ploy, and while it would definitely be cool to meet the object of Monica's affections in person, what possible benefit could come from a 3-hour tour of our island? Is Clinton going to suddenly realize the error of his ways, and give us commonwealth after we've been lobbying for 11 years, and after Karl donated $600K-plus to Clinton (and Clinton said no, no, no to our key commonwealth provisions in Congress as a result). Is Clinton going to say, "Hey, how stupid we've been all along! Let's give them back all this land, and millions more in federal funding, and solve all of Guam's long-standing problems, all because they gave me a fiesta and cleaned up the island for me!"

Maybe in an alternate universe.

But I digress. What we need is solid election reform -- model our election code after California, with serious checks and balances and a very unblemished system of counting ballots. Sure, every election has problems, but how many are as bad as this one, and how many do people call out "Let's just forget about it all and certify Karl as governor!" Well, it would be a coincidence if that has happened elsewhere -- how many Karls have there been to run for governor in other states?

At any rate, it's a weak variation of 98er fallacy #6. Appropriate reply: "Yeah, let's elect our top official based on non-citizens votes, people voting 150 times, discrepancies in most precincts, and an unclear interpretation of the Organic Act. Then Americans will think highly of us!"

-- Lighthouse (, November 16, 1998.


Common statement: "Joe Ada (or someone else) is a crybaby (or a loser, fool, idiot, or other insult)."

Illogical because: This is an ad hominem (spelling?) argument, which means it attacks the person without addressing any of the issues. It's easy to call people names. I can call certain 98 directors idiots, but what intelligent argument have I put forth? What issue have I debated? What misconceptions have I refuted? None. I have just resorted to 3rd grade tactics. This is probably the weakest type of statement put forth on this forum.

Appropriate reply: "Come back when you find a grown up to hold your hand. This is an adult forum."

-- Lighthouse (, November 17, 1998.

How about adding this to the list:

The lighthouse keeper(s) is/are Tony Sanchez, Chris Barnett, or anyone else against the current administration.

-- (, November 17, 1998.

Tony Lighthouse the truth is that it was 3rd grade logic to defeat Joe Ada and Felix Camacho. Do something good for the island Tony lighthouse and resign from the Courts, we heard about the kind of corruption you are responsible for such as frequent and expensive off- island trips and salary increases for the friends and relatives of Mark Charfarous former senator and now just a angry street fighter.

-- (, November 18, 1998.

mr Keeper

Please debunk the 98 lie that Karl and ronald McMadeliene are "Still Helping the People of Guam".

I know corruption is bad, but the lights are on and the water is running right?

-- (debunk@77.jill), November 18, 1998.

Thank you all for the suggestions. I'd be glad to comply:


Common statement: "Do something good for the island Tony lighthouse and resign from the Courts." (also accuse me of being Chris Barnett or a number of other people)

Illogical because: There is absolutely no support for the belief that I'm Tony Sanchez or anyone else they name. It's like saying you believe in the Tooth Fairy -- it's nice to believe in that, but there is no evidence to support it.

Their ONLY evidence that I was Tony was that I skipped the forum for a couple of days because I was busy, and they said Tony was off-island. I asked about this, and it turns out Tony was never off-island -- he was helping out with campaigns all the time. And in any case, I proved that I could still post and edit the forum even if I was off-island, which I wasn't. So their theory was full of holes, and I refuted it soundly, and yet they continued to call me Tony. If I were Tony or Chris, I'm already publicly against Karl, so why would I hide my name on this forum? Chris Barnett posts with his real name. I hide my name because I'm an executive branch employee, and Karl would fire me instantly if he found out.

But I let them continue believing I was Tony because at least then they stopped searching for who I really am. And that's fine with me.

Appropriate reply: "Yeah, and you're the Tooth Fairy. Provide proof that Lighthouse is Tony and then we'll talk."


Common statement: "I know corruption is bad, but the lights are on and the water is running right?"

Illogical because: There is no evidence that everything is running well, and lots of evidence that it is not running well. But it's also the same argument that Mussolini, the original Fascist, used to defend his form of government: "The trains all run on time." Sure, but people have lost all liberties, they are severely punished for speaking out against or opposing the dictator in any way, the dictator has the absolute power to favor those he likes and kill those he doesn't, and no one has a say in how their government or lives are run but the dictator and his cronies. Karl reminds a lot of people of a dictator nowadays (and just watch now that he doesn't have to worry about re- election!).

But what evidence is there that everything is running well? My power goes out all the time. My power rates are higher. Karl gives out free power hookups for votes, and our power rates are going up again next year. Water problems are all over the island, and not just because of the drought. Water rates have gone up. Karl paved driveways for votes with DPW money, and as a result GPD had to transfer $700K to DPW to bail them out of payless paydays, resulting in less money for law enforcement. Karl hired people by the hundreds before the election, and as a result government services will have to be cut back next year to meet the plummetting revenues. Karl's korruption led to his family and friends getting high paying jobs and government contracts, and as a result Guam is embarrassed by FBI and federal grand jury investigations into the government. Karl interfered with the AG's office and as a result criminals are being dismissed by the thousands and the AG is selling 98 fundraiser tickets and getting away with it. Karl battled with the board of education for power and as a result education has suffered and DOD pulled out its money from the local schools. Karl used GPD officers as personal bodyguards for himself and his children, used GPD funds for luxury vehicles for himself, and as a result the crime rate has skyrocketed during his term and ice use is rampant.

All is not well, but money talks and jingles lull people into compliance.

Appropriate reply: "Take a look at the facts: the government is in shambles, despite Karl's dictator-like rule. Take a look at utility rates, crime, drug use, education, the incinerator, corruption and federal investigations, and then tell me everything is going well."

-- Lighthouse (, November 19, 1998.

Tony Lighthouse

You are nothing but a cry baby mauleg mohon loser. All you do is cry and preach doom and corruption as if your were the judge of things to come. Find the courage to post your name so we may examine your record more closely. Don't have to worry the election is over and Joe Ada will not get angry. You are like your buddy the loud mouth wire tapping good for nothing but hate ex-senator If you post your name I will post yours truely and if you refuse then take your forum out of the internet system you cry baby loser. Joy to the Joe Ada team for being sour grapes.

-- (, November 19, 1998.

Tony Sanchez it was found that your mind finds it difficult to suspend judgement until all evidence is in. Even after the political evidence is gathered your prejudices made it difficult to draw accurate conclusions. You have ignored some evidence and overestimated other parts of it.

-- (, November 20, 1998.


First, you haven't posted your name either. This is an anonymous forum, and you know it. You can't dare me into doing anything stupid.

Second, if you have specific issues you'd like to argue about, and specific evidence you'd like to debate, please post them. But don't post generalities like your last post and expect me to answer. I posted specific criticisms of Karl, and you've failed to rebut them.

-- Lighthouse (, November 21, 1998.


I guess we are not stupid so we need not post our names. Your dedication to Joe Ada must be based on emotional grounds and with his comfort, pride and self interests. When Bob Kelly confronted you about your prejudice you tried to rationalized and find clever reasons or arguments for continuing to believe as you wished. Many Hita supports welcomed this because they have little confidence in themselves or are intellectually lazy and prefered to accept the word of someone else as a way of gaining comfort and assurances. The end was quick and easy as the 98 foxes and wolves slued the real leader of the Mualegs, the Angel Stormtropper Santos and the sheep cult. Maulegs media campaign efforts reflects a lack of understanding of how to best counter the 98 forces. The biggest loser is Joe Ada a man that never had and does not know how to handle a defeat. Felix Camcaho's problems were also exposed to the public. I think it is time that you look for new guard or you will be faced with another terrible defeat in the next four years.

-- (name@smart.lie), November 21, 1998.

Dear Mr Keeper,

Could you please debunk the 98 spin that Pres. Clinton "has done so much for Guam, he's the only one fighting for us in Washington."

Also, if you have time ...

"Congressman" (I use the quotes because he is little more than a person in Congress who can't vote and instead must grovel and beg white folks to help us) Underwood praised Gutierrez so much I thought he was introducing Jesus Christ. But that's not the point.

Underwood says "The People of Guam care about elections, we take our rights very seriously."

But no one's complaining about the rigged election, Clinton didnt even say anything.

-- (, November 23, 1998.

Since Lighthouse Keeper seems to be AWOL, I'll give it a try.

Fallacy: Clinton is working for Guam, fighting for us in Washington.

Fact: Clinton took at least $600K of our money, and then gave us some favorable answers on the three commonwealth provisions -- Control of immigration? "No!" Mutual consent? "No!" Chamorro self-determination? "No!" And Clinton has done nothing since then to negotiate commonwealth or other political status options.

Fact: Clinton just told us he'd double our compact impact aid, but he owes us millions more than double. Too little ...

Fact: Clinton cares nothing about Guam and only promised to come here to boost Carl's campaign.

Mr. Gutierrez, consider yourself through.

-- Nicholai Hel (, December 09, 1998.

dont forget about this fallacy: joe ada cant talk correct english! thats a perfect example of the kind of campaign we are having: personal attacks and silly schoolyard taunts. why dont we all grow up? english is only one of two official languages on guam.

-- me (, December 11, 1998.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ