Re: Hey, Suja

On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 20:44:03 -0600, FurPaw <furrealpawdog@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

[...]
I see. Hatred and venom is just fine, so long as it's directed at
people you don't like, or anyone other than yourself?

I have a big problem with that.

"You don't get to make the rules here."

But I'm not trying to tell you which rules you must operate under.

Just don't try to tell me what my rules should be.

[...]
If my making a broad generalization about something irritates someone,
tough shit.

And yet you complain about the absence of reasonable discourse.

Where exactly did I complain about that?

This newsgroup isn't exactly known for "reasonable discourse", is it?

I make my own rules.

Clearly. But you don't get to make the rules for anyone else.

And I'm not trying to, either.

But you, on the other hand...

Notice that I don't
generalize that generalizing is typical of either Lefties or
Righties, because I know folks of both persuasion for whom it's
not true, and others for whom it is painfully characteristic.

That's the first honest thing you've said in this thread.

No, it's not.

Yes, it is.

It's the first thing that I said that confirmed
one of your beliefs.

It's not my beliefs, it's just the obvious.

But note that it applies to both ends of
the political spectrum. About equally, I'd say.

And I think that you're wrong about that.

Each group has its "True Believers," those who are dead certain
that the other side is not only wrong, but somehow evil and
destructive and a lower life-form than "my group" (whichever that
might be).

You bet. And it's nice to see you acknowledge it.

A _reasonable_ person who isn't bent on hammering on the
wrongness of "the other guy's" point of view will acknowledge
that members represent a whole spectrum of reasonableness and
strength of conviction in just about any political (or religious
or sports fan) group.

Have you ever given any thought to practicing what you preach?

On the other hand, I'm not one of them. I can be persuaded, my mind
can be changed, provided someone tries doing it by using sound reason
and logic.

Perhaps your definition of "sound reason and logic" is a bit
tainted by your political beliefs?

Reason and logic should have nothing to do with one's political
beliefs, and they don't in my case.

But do you think Al Gore's political beliefs have anything to do with
his "global warming" crusade?

If your answer to that question is no, and that's it's all about
reason and logic, you rally do need to have your head examined.

But using bullshit, pseudoscience, and psychobabble?

Not so much.

The odd thing is, most of the progressives and conservatives whom
I know didn't start out to be extreme in their views, and they do
have some common talking points, if only they would listen to
each other.
Oh, I listen to progressives, it's just that I reject most of what
they have to say.

Which is my prerogative as a free man.
It's the _way_ that you frame the rejection that gets in the way
of discourse.

You mean my tendency to call a spade a spade?

No, your tendency to insult, name-call, stereotype, and ridicule
anything that you disagree with.

But that makes you wrong. Again!

I don't insult, name-call, stereotype, or ridicule anything that I
disagree with. I insult, name-call, stereotype, and ridicule people
who insult, name-call, stereotype, and ridicule people for sport.

If you weren't so biased, you see that, too.

"I disagree, because..."
sometimes works wonders, if mutual communication is your objective.

But "mutual communication" is not my goal with the likes of Melinda
Shore and Shelly Couvrette, plus a few others.

They are not capable of "mutual communication".

My only goal, if you will, is to give them (and their ilk) a taste of
their own medicine.

I've just never been a big fan of spin, double-talk, psychobabble, or
political correctness.

In fact, I detest political correctness with every fiber of my being,
just like I detest any form of fascism.

But in so much discourse, whether in person or in
writing, as soon as one party discerns that the other has a
different 'label,' that becomes an excuse to start hurling
epithets and insults and doing everything possible to shout down
and shut up the "opposition."
Now that would be the Left.
No one on the Right has ever done this?

No, not to the extent that the Left does it.

Funny how some people on the Right can't see their own distortions.

I see it the other way around.

Seems to me that both
ends of the spectrum have some extremists who are guilty of
attempting to shout down and shut up any dissent.

I don't see it that way. There are, of course, some on the Right who
are extremists, but I don't see them trying to quash dissent, which is
a totally politically correct and therefore Leftist notion.

You really do have a monolithic, distorted view of the Left,
don't you?

There are exceptions to every rule, but I'm speaking generally.

Mostly they just want to be heard. The Left dominates the media

I find this hilarious every time I hear it.

That can only be because you're not paying attention.

Or you're biased.

Ever look at the big
corporations that own most of the media outlets in the US?

Have you?

Rupert Murdoch is a Liberal?

BFD. One guy. The people who produce the shows, the people who choose
the material, the people who sit in those anchor chairs, the people
who publish newspapers, the people who write the editorials, the
people who write the plays, produce the movies, etc., are all Lefties.

Everyone thinks Fox is a conservative channel. Well, it ain't. It's
simply less Leftist than CNN, NBC, ABC, CBS, MSNBC, etc.

The further one is to the Left, the more conservative even the
moderate middle appears to be.

E.g., Bill O'Reilly isn't a conservative, he's a populist (and mostly
a buffoon). He has a government solution for just about anything.

and
our schools and our entertainment industry (e.g. Hollywood), and
that's not by accident.

No? Who In Charge is conspiring to make this happen?

Lefties. They meet on the second Wednesday night of every month, at
Applebee's, I think. You can tell them by their pointy heads.

If our universities were really interested in diversity (and they're
not, of course), they might want to do more to encourage a diversity
of *ideas* and *opinions*, and stop trying to force Leftist propaganda
down the throats of its often gullible students.

I have no doubt that much of the right-wing media that you read
would have you believe this.

Are you really from this planet?

Conservative speakers can't even give speeches on campuses today
without being shouted down, or have pies thrown in their faces, and
conservative students get failing grades simply for disagreeing with
some commie pinko professor's propaganda. Professors today don't teach
students how to think, they teach them what to think.

You can read a little about it here:
http://www.studentsforacademicfreedom.org/

How much direct, recent experience
do you have in university settings?

I put seven kids through college. Is that recent enough for you?

I also pay attention, do my own due diligence, etc.

[...]
The Right are virtually amateurs compared to the Left when it comes to
epithets and insults. In fact, I learned my techniques from Lefties.
You've never listened to Rush Limbaugh? Truly?

Have you ever listened to Air America?

Frequently.

You don't become nauseous?

Like when Randi Rhoades called for President Bush's death?

Rush Limbaugh is like Little Bo Peep compared to the racists, sexists,
bigots, hate-mongers, and generally unhinged Leftist moonbats who
"talk" on Air America.

I don't agree with everything I hear on Air America, and I don't
always like the way it's stated. But I don't lump all of the
commentators or callers into one mold, either. Rush Limbaugh is
a master of racist, sexist, bigoted, hate-mongering innuendo.

Oh, please. He's nothing of the sort. He's an entertainer, and he
doesn't say anything that a Dennis Miller, an Al Franken, a Jay Leno,
a Dana Carvey, etc. don't say.

If
you haven't noticed it, you haven't listened to him with an
unbiased attitude of questioning, "what is he _really_ saying or
implying?" and not just, "Do I agree with this guy?"

Please, spare me the evangelizing. I don't need any instruction from
you on how to listen to Rush Limbaugh.

"If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result
of a hundred battles." Sun Tzu

I heartily encourage and welcome reasoned discussion, debate, etc.,
but Lefties have no appetite for that.
There you go again with the broad generalizations.

Broad generalizations aren't always wrong. Political correctness is
intended to stifle debate and discussion, not to encourage it.

Avoiding broad generalizations is your definition of "political
correctness?"

Telling me what I can say, or how I should say it, etc. is political
correctness run amok.

I speak directly, I speak bluntly, just like most Americans did just a
couple of decades ago.

Oh, my. Avoiding broad generalizations is one
fundamental element of clear, critical thinking.

Who says?

That sounds just like the mumbo jumbo, Hall Monitor crap that does
more to stifle speech that just about anything else I can think of.

(Oh, dear,
there goes one of those leftist-political-university-based
statements sneaking in.)

Exactly!

Instead of trying to make your own points, it seems that you're
generally content to badmouth or criticize mine.

I dislike broad generalizations, name calling, stereotypes and
epithets.

So what?

I think I've been pretty clear about that. Once those
are removed from discourse, it's possible to discuss ideas and
concepts.

But that would mean that I could only debate you if I followed your
rules.

Well, that ain't gonna happen.

I think I've said that before.

Oh, but of course, I don't get to make the rules, do
I? Well, there you have it.

Yup, there you have it.

You want to make the rules, or no debate.

How egalitarian of you.

[...]
If you truly encourage and welcome reasoned discussion, debate,
etc., you'll stifle the generalizations. They just get in the
way of understanding.

That's your problem, not mine.

You don't get to make the rules here.

Q.E.D.
I take it that you mean that metaphorically. You don't really
mistake your opinions for proof, do you?

No, the proof is in the words, posts, and actions of people like
Melinda Shore, Shelly Couvrette., and a few others.

I thought I was pretty clear about that.

And if you hadn't cut that part out of my post, it may have even been
more clear.

You have a very sneaky way of trimming your posts.

?? Besides your ever-growing sig file, what did I trim out of
you previous post?

The sentence right before the "Q.E.D.", and which put the Q.E.D into
its proper context."

Why would you do that?

If you're referring to an earlier post, and
you were once again shrieking about Melinda and Shelly, well,
Jack, everyone here knows what you think. Did I delete anything new?

Ibid.

You aren't really this stupid, are you?

Anyhow, this whole thing started when I commented on a post by
Lia, and you've managed to make it all about you.

I didn't do that at all.

You did.

Go back and look.

I'm done.

Promises, promises.

--
Handsome "Jack" Morrison

Hate paying $5 for a gallon of gas? You can thank Al "The Goracle" Gore. <spit>
http://www.kusi.com/weather/colemanscorner/19842304.html

At the Official Obama Site: 'How the Jewish Lobby Works'
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/30241_At_the_Official_Obama_Site-_How_the_Jewish_Lobby_Works

"Global warming", solved!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/2076607/Sheep-flatulence-inoculation-developed.html

So-called "green" taxes are a con. They have absolutely nothing to do with
saving the planet, or changing people's behaviour. It is all about raising
revenue. Governments around the world have realised that environmentalism
gives them an easy way of squeezing yet more tax out of hard-working people.
And if you object, you are supposed to feel guilty about drowning polar bears.
"Green" taxes also impact most heavily on the poor. This isn't an accident,
it is a deliberate policy.--Bill Carmichael, Yorkshire Post, 31 May 2008

Saudi Montana.
http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/2008/06/02/saudi-montana/

Skipping science class.
http://chicagoboyz.net/archives/5820.html

So much for "settled science".
http://www.nationalpost.com/news/world/environment/story.html?id=525590

The top ten list of things environmentalists need to learn.
http://depletedcranium.com/?p=368

New Jason Satellite Indicates 23-Year Global Cooling.
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/2871

Sorry to ruin the fun, but an ice age cometh.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23583376-7583,00.html

A book that every American should read (and NYT #1 bestseller): Liberal Fascism, by Jonah Goldberg
http://www.amazon.com/Liberal-Fascism-American-Mussolini-Politics/dp/0385511841
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: New version of HLA Adventure has been released! :)
    ... As usual, Annie, you're replying for no useful reason other than to ... The word "bug", for instance, is certainly far, far older than computers, ... guessing here but "dingbat" has the sound of being something "distorted", ... kind of general "dung-person" insult? ...
    (alt.lang.asm)
  • Re: Now this is funny
    ... enough reason to not charge him with assault. ... Political Correctness, like so many other things, has been redefined ... You have turned it into a thread that is not funny. ... intelligence to avoid offending others by using terms like you mentioned ...
    (alt.vacation.las-vegas)
  • Re: Now this is funny
    ... Political Correctness, like so many other things, has been redefined ... Did the police officer refuse to arrest the assailant, ... I was doing work for the local gas company at the time. ... time but no reason for me to make a copy. ...
    (alt.vacation.las-vegas)
  • Im Gone
    ... Readers of this newsgroup have noted, and asked about, the reason why ... constant note of insult. ... I have discussed this previously with the moderators, ... mainly stopped reading and posting, and the members of this group, who ...
    (rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated)
  • Re: In support of Sylvester McCoy.
    ... more insults and derision but no reasoning behing those ... Finally a reason why you don't like ... It's another insult. ... It is a measure of the McCoy era therefore, ...
    (rec.arts.drwho)