A Quote by Michael Schur

Topical-sketch writing were incredibly rational and well reasoned: don't do a joke if the subject doesn't deserve it. An ad hominem attack on someone might get you a cheap laugh, but it doesn't earn you any long-term trust. The biggest rule was: you attack whoever's in power. Don't bring your personal bias to the table.
I'm a fan of robust debate, and I'm not averse to engaging in the odd ad hominem attack myself.
An ad hominem attack against an individual, not against an idea, is highly flattering. It indicates that the person does not have anything intelligent to say about your message.
History shows that attacks on general freedoms often begin with an attack on the freedom of a minority. It teaches us that we should never allow a government to divide and rule. An attack on one is an attack on all.
May we now all rise and sing the eternal school hymn: "Attack. Attack. Attack Attack Attack!"
So when you tell a joke, you want to make someone laugh, or if you tell a story about someone who had a heart attack, it may be because you want the listener to exercise. Stories are tools to create social cohesion and to get humans to strategize together.
80 percent of any gang is not there to attack someone. They're there so no one will attack them.
Carrying a knife has come from my fear of what ­someone might do to me. So I'll do ­something to them first. All you have to do is get a hint of danger and I'll all-out attack. There won't be waiting about to see if this person will attack me first.
We do have to take the long-term view. And long term, the question to ask ourselves is whether America should attack others pre-emptively, whether she should embroil herself in wars far away from our soil, and try to bring democracy by force to the rest of the world.
My rule is: If you meet the weakest vessel, attack. If it is a vessel equal to yours, attack. And if it is stronger than yours, also attack.
The Court explained the problem with his writings (People v. Ruggles. 1811.): an attack on Jesus Christ was an attack on Christianity; and an attack on Christianity was an attack on the foundation of the country; therefore, an attack on Jesus Christ was equivalent to an attack on the country!
IN THE ART OF PEACE we never attack. An attack is proof that one is out of control. Never run away from any challenge, but do not try to suppress or control an opponent unnaturally.. Let attackers come any way they like, and then blend with them. Never chase after opponents. Redirect each attack and get firmly behind it.
We all resort to the ad hominem from time to time: in human affairs, it is difficult to avoid it, and probably not desirable. After all, our opponents are human. The proper use of an ad hominem argument, however, still requires evidence to back it up.
Those who call me an opportunist are following the old rule: If you can't attack the data, attack the person.
The man who carried out the attack is still in power and still insane, so we shall expect another attack any minute.
I gave my father a heart attack. It was a practical joke. Come on, you push a guy's face in a cake he's got to clean it off. You hit a guy with a water balloon, he's got to dry off. Guy's in the hospital, you get his testicles shaved, he scratches and bleeds for a week... it's funny... you're not supposed to have a heart attack, it kills the joke.
If a big number of young pupils felt secularism was an attack on them, it was because the term had been misused and deformed in the public debate for years by the extreme-right and the right as an attack on Islam. The term had often been misused to point out how Muslims were different to others, and that is clearly problematic.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!