This Civility Thing…

 

One more observation regarding this civility thing that seems to be the Democrats latest attempt at painting ordinary people as sinister Timothy McVeigh types, intent on violently bringing down our representative form of government simply by lawfully and peacefully exercising their 1st amendment right to voice their opinions.

One of the first rules of a chair throwing bar room brawl, which our culture wars have essentially become, is that once the chairs start flying, it is too late to stand on a table and plead for calm and reasoned debate. Particularly if the party calling for this cease of hostilities started the fight and has repeatedly sucker punched you after previous truces. To watch the Dems wring their collective hands (pun intended) over this supposed danger is to stand slack jawed in wonder that they think anyone is going to buy this load of horse shit. 

I try to be civil here in my own little corner of the interwebs when talking politics, particularly to any family members that wonder by to comment, so please understand that if you should get hit with a stray barstool or bottle, it’s nothing personal. Just the nature of a brawl. When it is all over after the November elections, I’ll even buy you a drink to celebrate our victory! Until then, keep your head on a swivel and I’ll try to pull my punches if I think you are a friend.

Advertisements

36 responses to “This Civility Thing…

  1. Since I’m the object of hatred, let me just say I’ll respect an enemy a thousand times more if he comes after me with five different weapons, than with the same ol’ weapon five times in a row.

    That’s advice; it’s meant to help those who need it, not insult them.

    To our host: We are in a conflict, are we not? The first impulse is to live-and-let-live, to allow these strange slimy beings to view the world in whatever way they shall, and seek moral support from each other in their numbers as they do so. Well, we tried that, now we have Jimmy Carter’s second term. And it hurts when someone you care about starts spreading rumors like “Sarah Palin is burning books” and “Palin is making rape victims pay for their own rape kits” and what-not. You want to step in as a friend, stop your friends & family from making asses of themselves…next thing you know, you’re being accused of being an agitator.

    Like I said at my place, it’s our leftists who are making political discourse so contentious. And dangerous. I say we call it the “Michelle Obama Syndrome”: Certain people are supposed to be off-limits, certain people are supposed to be the attack-pit-bulls. Lately, it’s the same people. We’re supposed to grant immunity to those who are on the attack.

    Anyway. It’s Saturday night in a wonderful spring with perfect weather, it’s a gorgeous twilight, global warming is a fraud, California girls are still curvy and beautiful, Palin’s our next President and I’ve got some cold beer and hot wings waiting for me. Here’s to you pal. Cheers!

  2. Right back at ya Morgan.

    It’s the unsolvable equation among those of us who wish government would leave us be. We just want to live our lives, the do-gooders finally go too far and force us to slap them down, then we go back to living our lives while they gather steam for their next attempt.

    It seems those most fit to govern just aren’t that interested in the job discription.

  3. “Like I said at my place, it’s our leftists who are making political discourse so contentious.”

    “…To our host: We are in a conflict, are we not? The first impulse is to live-and-let-live, to allow these strange slimy beings to view the world in whatever way they shall,…”

    Clearly bad manners and overheated, insulting rhetoric are, at the very least, bipartisan.
    But frankly I put my money on ‘real Americans’ as tossing the chairs most enthusiastically.

  4. No doubt that’s because you’re overlooking half the equation, Arthur, which is hardly out of character for you.

    The race card is being played against Americans who simply disagree with the direction their President is taking the country. And it’s happening pretty often. You lack the perceptive powers to notice that, is that what you’re telling us all here today?

    Slimy beings, viewing the world in whatever way they shall, does seem to fit for a number of reasons.

  5. I’m all for civility.

    In a perfect world you would sit down with your opponent, look honestly at the situation and just reason things out. Unfortunately for the majority of Americans, there is a small, and very vocal, group of religious nuts, sociopaths and science deniers that seem to have no shortage of like minded listeners. How do you rationaly argue with someone that thinks that dinosaurs walked with men (god created fossels too?) or thinks that the holy land must come into full conflict in order to bring on the rapture so they can move on to a “better place”? How do you argue with people that, deep down, you consider insane?

    Or, thinks it is their capitolistic “right” to exercise some larcenistic get rich quick scheme; only to have the taxpayers bail them (ie: us) out of their greed and corruption, yet again. If you try to regulate and limit greed and corruption, the “free market” types rabidly accuse you of being anti-business – and therefore, anti-American.

    How do you argue with people that aren’t being honest, or rational ?

    If your like my mother, you try to refrain from calling them stupid, or a-holes, or just tell them to shut up. However, sometimes that’s just not possible.

    People have a right to be sexist, or racist, or bigoted, or driven solely by greed and selfishness; but we also owe it to society, to ourselves, to call out people like that act like that and at least attempt to shame them into looking at their actions and how they affect society as a whole; or at the very least how their actions incourage others to act in the same ways.

    I know it doesn’t work on some people, but I still think one of the most effective (and hard to argue against) statements is: Shame on you, shame on you for even thinking that way.

    Unfortunately, it seems that we as a society have lost at least some of that sense of shame.

    But the least we can do is call people on it when we see it. In a civil way – or not….

    Regards,

    Joe

  6. And if you read my comments behind the link, you’ll notice there’s ample reason to think that’s the point where it all went south.

    First, you broaden the definition. Can you be a racist simply by disagreeing with Obama? No one would put a name worth defending under a statement that says so…and yet, look at the propaganda drive against the Tea Parties, Joe. Take a good long look. Presto! You have to be all for expanding the government, at a time the economy is anemic, or else you’re a racist.

    And then you say it’s incumbent on the rest of us to call these racists out. Question: What, then, does that say about people who don’t call them out? Silence is consent, right? Okay, so now we have to embarrass Tea Party protesters — and sympathizers — into silence, or else we’re all proxy racists.

    Remember the olden days? When Bush and Cheney were trying to “drown out dissent” with a “chill wind” by “questioning the patriotism” of anyone who wouldn’t go along? Gee, now it’s really happening. But it’s the good guys who are gaining a monopoly on free speech from it, so that makes it all okay right?

    Hey, side question: When’s the last time you argued “with someone that thinks that dinosaurs walked with men (god created fossels [sic] too?) “?

  7. Morgan,

    I agree, if people are calling tea-baggers racest without cause, they are being racist. My comment was directed more at Westsound’s blatant sexism and belittling of any woman who thinks she can get by on her talent and brains alone. Maybe someone like Helen Thomas doesn’t give a crap whether someone like you find her attractive or not. I guess if you’re paying for fashion advice, you go to the woman at the Macy’s make-up counter; if you’re paying for some sort of specific expertise, one that requires education and knowledge, I personally don’t care what they look like; Results are what matter – Substance.

    I think a lot of people look at the photos of the tea-party protests and wonder: where are all the non-white people? Maybe only white people are rational and dislike being taxed in to the ground? I don’t know… But as far as I can tell, they don’t seem to have any real solutions, just complaints about being taxed too much. Well, me too. I just get tired of whiners and complainers that have no viable solutions. They’re just wasting everyone’s time – in my opinion.

    Questioning the patriotism of someone that balks at invading another country is a far cry from telling someone to get out of the way if they don’t have any solutions to the mess we’re in. A monopoly on free speech? Oh yeah, those damned minorities keeping the white man down again…..

    I don’t know where you live, but around here there are plenty of literal creationists and born again nut-jobs. I’m not calling them crazy, I’m just saying that anyone that believes that god created the world in seven days is a nut-job. I don’t car how long days were back then – It’s flat out crazy-talk, and goes against all scientific thought.

    Sarah Palin says she believes in creation. The only difference is that she uses the old “days were way longer back then” explanation. It’s all just degrees of mental illness to me. If I told you I believe that God came down and punished half the people in the world by making them have dark skin, and I’m descended from the white (good) people, so I’m never supposed to breed or worship with all the dark skinned people (like the Mormons believe: http://www.mormoncurtain.com/topic_racism.html) you would call me crazy, intolerant, or racist – maybe even against Mormons? – Unless of course you were a Scientologist, then the Mormons would side with me in calling you crazy. It’s all relative I guess. People can believe anything they want; and I have the right to deem them total nut-jobs. It’s a free country after all.

    And no thanks, to what I consider a “crazy person” running the free world. I don’t care if you get your ideas from the Koran, the Bible, the Torah, or a book brought down by an Alien Angel, it’s all the same to me. It’s not what I believe in, and you can keep it to yourself, thank you very much.

    Now, if deeply religious people could be elected to public office and be expected to govern with a secular hand, that might be different. But I have yet to see that happen in real life. And it only seems to be getting worse…..

    And, you try writing writing more than a few sentences on your Iphone. Fosell, fossell, fawcell. oh well….

    Regards,

    Joe

  8. Remind me again Joe where I belittled any women who can get by on talent and brains alone. I’ve gone over the previous threads with a fine toothed comb and I’m just not seeing it.

    The only observation I made was that there is such a thing as physical beauty and that conservative women of consequence; politicians, pundits, ceo’s, (we’ll nix actresses as progressivism is a job requirement) etc… seem to possess it in greater quantity than progressive women of consequence. Generally speaking of course. There seems to be a bias on the left regarding beautiful women and their brain power, or lack there of. An attitude of not being taken very seriously if they happen to spend more than five minutes in front of the mirror in the morning making themselves look a little more feminine.

    I’m not sure I would call this minor observation “blatantly sexist” but your call I guess.

  9. Westsound,

    Oh yeah, I guess it wasn’t sexist at all. Are you kidding? “I’ve chopped your arm off – No you haven’t….” If you say it’s not sexist, I guess it’s not.

    And the examples you provided; It’s like saying Bill O’Reilly is better looking in an Armani suit http://www.slashfilm.com/wp/wp-content/images/billorielly.jpg You can put a prom dress (or make-up) on a Pig and it’s still a Pig.

    I can’t believe you even sucked me into responding. What a dumb topic. Ow, my head hurts!

    Joe

  10. Pingback: House of Eratosthenes

  11. If you swim in a cesspool, you can’t expect to keep good friends.

    Keep it up you guys, you make a better case for my side than I ever could.

    Joe

  12. Well done Joe.

    Well done.

  13. I agree Arthur. Very well done. Singed, charred, and crispy in fact.

  14. Nope.

    Morgan’s self-congratulations suggest Joe was flayed alive. Which is equally untrue.

    Be that as it may I love seeing Morgan in full flight.

    It’s awesome.

    And I have Joe to thank.

    And thank you for this chuckle:

    The only observation I made was that there is such a thing as physical beauty and that conservative women of consequence; politicians, pundits, ceo’s, (we’ll nix actresses as progressivism is a job requirement) etc… seem to possess it in greater quantity than progressive women of consequence. Generally speaking of course. There seems to be a bias on the left regarding beautiful women and their brain power, or lack there of. An attitude of not being taken very seriously if they happen to spend more than five minutes in front of the mirror in the morning making themselves look a little more feminine.’

    No need to rationalize, the video says it all.

    MILF in 2012?

  15. Arthur,

    Let’s cut to the chase. Why are you so threatened by gorgeous women?

  16. Maybe he was attacked by a 50ft Woman during his “Hollywood Period”.

    He’s also afraid of giant killer Tomatoes.

  17. I’m not Morgan.

    I’m married to one.

    The real question is ‘why are looks so important to you’?

    Are you a homely gentleman?

  18. The real question Arthur is ‘why are opposing viewpoints so threatening to you’?

    Are you a closed minded gentleman?

    Not to speak for Morgan, but I don’t believe he ever said that looks were important to him. Only that there was such a thing as looks and that in his opinion conservative women have it in greater quantity than progressive women.

  19. You can’t know anything if you don’t notice anything, and you can’t notice anything if you make a point of closing your eyes to whatever is available to be noticed.

    Sadly, sometime in the last fifty years, it has become very popular to show how “enlightened” we are by not-noticing things and by bullying those around us into also not-noticing them. This is a politically motivated effort. That is easily proven, because the same people who say it is “sexist” to notice liberal women are ugly, by & large are the same people who are eager to notice Sarah Palin looks like a beauty queen…and therefore must be stupid.

    Of course, Arthur is way more sophisticated than that and isn’t threatened by gorgeous women. So tell me, please. Who’s the last woman serving in an office of significant power and influence, who in your opinion did so competently, and was also a dish? Most of the folks on your side of the aisle won’t allow it to happen. Above a certain level, they have to look like Madeleine Albright, Donna Shalala or Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

    You’re already on record as saying you don’t want to be a part of a world in which such a thing is even noticed. You know, I find that to be discriminatory against the ugly women. Here they are, working so hard to keep themselves ugly so people will notice they’ll not be winning any beauty contests. And you’re just ignoring it. It must frustrate them terribly.

    I don’t know why this is such a hardened and permanently chiseled liberal trait lately, pretending things are one way when they’re so obviously really another. Global warming not a scam, Barack Obama qualified, Joe Biden smart, radical Islamic terrorists harmless, Arctic wilderness fragile, alternative fuel technology right around the corner, new government programs gonna drive down costs, ObamaCare gonna cure our nation’s budget deficits. I see a connection; I think it’s the way you people beat each other up for noticing things. Here’s a liberal woman, and she’s butt-ugly. Arthur says don’t notice it or he’ll sneer at you and call you all kinds of nasty names.

    And yes, frankly, a lot of you really are intimidated by pretty women. Hillary’s a brilliant Sec’y of State, huh. You’ve been asked to name some accomplishments. You can’t. Given that you can’t, what would you think of her if she was a Republican and looked like Angie Harmon? Would she still garner your praise as “working really hard” and “been through a lot,” without having accomplished anything?

  20. “You can’t know anything if you don’t notice anything, and you can’t notice anything if you make a point of closing your eyes to whatever is available to be noticed”

    Sage Morgan, excellent advice. But is it not also true that you should face down wind when peeing?

    Do you really expect a rebuttle to crazy talk like that? Honestly, where do you find the time….

    The horse is dead already.

    Joe

  21. Westsound,

    A thought experiment? Is that what you’re waiting for?

    The example you gave of your wife noting how progressive men having better haircuts than conservative men, that they indeed spend much more time than their conservative counterparts on their looks and in her opinion are more attractive for it, is not what you said. Not at all. You can’t re-write your words – or your actions. You clearly think women look better to you if they wear a certain amount of makeup, do their hair a certain way, wear clothes that you find attractive, blah, blah; That’s your opinion, who cares? And that ones that don’t are “dogs” (who let the dogs out?) It’s all just a joke; all in fun, right? And then your two dimwitted cheerleaders chimed in with the old “Liberal women are UGLY” mantra, and you quickly jump to their defense by saying that they are just pointing out a true fact. A simple honest observation.

    OK, so here is your thought experiment: So what if your wife posted a blog entry with the title: “Black people all look like Monkeys” then showed pictures of black people making faces that look just like monkeys. Then showed some white people that look like Swedes as a contrast. Is that racist? Or, is that just being an A-hole? (I say both)

    Or, is it just being honest; because you found some pictures on the internet that supported your little joke, your harmless”teasing”? You didn’t do anyone any harm: you didn’t deprive anyone of anything. “Come on, lighten up black people, I was just pointing out the obvious; black people look like monkeys” Maybe it’s not racist, in your book. Maybe it’s just being a Dick.

    What is sexism in your book? Is there any such thing in your world? Do you have to do physical or economic harm to someone to be a racist? Or to be sexist?

    Or, say a woman comes into your real estate office for an interview as an agent, then in the middle of the interview, you suddenly interrupt her and ask her to please stand up, turn around, and show you her ass. After looking at it for a few minutes you comment on how nice and shapely it is, then you tell her she can sit down and continue on with the interview. No harm done, right? You were just paying her a polite complement on her nice ass; you were just being nice; stating a simple fact. You can then tell her that for her to be a successful real estate agent it helps for her to have a nice ass. People like Morgan Freeberg like that sort of thing; and people like him buy lots of houses. Not sexist at all, right? Just helping her out and being honest, right?

    People that are sexist, or racist, or bigoted, are dicks. But not all dicks are racist, or sexist, or bigoted; They are just dicks. Which of the above are you?

    It seems that even your own Mother, and most of your extended family, is mystified by your politics and your apparent dick-ness.

    Even how you dismiss your own mother as some sort of simpleton, and somehow not understanding of the issues at hand: “Easy… like all former liberals who have been taken in by progressivism, she means well.” Does she just not get it? – because she doesn’t read the same self-supporting drivel that you read? Or, is she not smart enough to understand the true issues? Not open minded enough? Hasn’t worked hard her whole life – like you have? Please explain that one to me. I’m waiting for that one…. Be careful, even the most primitive animal doesn’t soil it’s own nest.

    You seem like a smart guy; I can understand wanting to get a reaction out of someone you disagree with, just to get them going. I must admit, it’s a lot of fun. But when you post stuff like that ‘compare and contrast” garbage, it just makes people dismiss you as a bigoted (or maybe even sexist) Dolt. Is that really what you want?

    Stick to the issues; and leave the childish behavior to people like vanderleun; he does it so much better (a natural maybe?) And, it doesn’t help your argument at all.

    Regards,

    Joe

    • Your ability to erect strawmen and then tear them down is truly astonishing Joe. The obvious difference in your analogy is that makeup or clothes to improve ones appearance is totally voluntary and within one’s control, while one’s race is decidedly less so.
      Are you honestly making the argument that if a black man and a Swede are both acting like monkey’s, hooting, scratching their armpits, whatever, and if I make the observation that they both look like monkey’s, I am a racist in regards to the black man’s antics but not in regards to the Swede’s? Look in the mirror Joe. I am not the one inferring one’s race is “monkey like” merely by the color of their skin.

      My definition of sexism? To deny any woman equal opportunity under the law to pursue her dreams to the best of her ability. If I happen to observe that she has a nice ass, or smells good, or dresses well, I cop to being human. If I were to express these opinions in public, particularly in the company of the woman in question, then I would be a dick. If I were to believe that because of these attributes she was probably stupid, or shallow, or not to be taken seriously, then I would be a sexist.

      Like I said Joe, look in the mirror.

  22. I think what we got here is a great definition of a liberal. For a liberal, being a “dick” is a question that comes before the hard questions, “hard” meaning objective, undeniable. Two and two are four. The freezing temperature of water is thirty-two Fahrenheit. The volume of a cube is the measurement of each side to the power of three.

    So first you figure out the characteristics of the guy mentioning it. If he’s a dick, then the observation is to be discarded. That guy never had any marijuana, nevermind if you heard the toilet flushing just before you knocked the door down.

    Or as Arthurstone said at my place, and he said it very, very well…

    Speaking of ‘working with facts’, here’s a current favorite from Morgan K. Freeberg his ownself

    “Liberal women are UGLY. ”

    Count me among the millions who ignore such ‘facts’.

    That’s the definition. Ignoring plain facts. Human decency, or lack thereof, comes first. And of course there’s no God to judge human decency. We all vote on it, of course! How else could it be done? Also, it goes without saying some of us are extra-extra-decent, borderline divine. Like Barack Obama. By the time you get up to His level, you can say asinine absurd things like “those people in that part of the country just cling to their guns and their bibles”…or that a new extravagant entitlement program will eradicate our budget deficits forever. And it becomes true when it slides on past Your Holy Lips.

    Conservatives think two and two are four, it really doesn’t matter who’s saying so. The nerve of those conservatives!

    I think the guy on the radio said it best: “If in 2010 you can somehow find a real, live Nazi, and that Nazi happens to be opposed to Obama’s health care plan…I’d say that Nazi just might be right about that one, solitary thing.”

    The Nazis were actually national socialists, just like our democrats of today. But somehow our democrats miss out on this critical point: If it’s true, it doesn’t matter worth a hoot-in-hell who’s pointing it out. True is true. Bullshit is bullshit.

  23. Here is Morgan’s rebuttle:

    Like Barack Obama. By the time you get up to His level, you can say asinine absurd things like “those people in that part of the country just cling to their guns and their bibles” Is this not true? Do Americans not cling to guns or bibles? Last time I looked that was absolutely true. And again, the truth is that some people (like me) see gun toting bible packing people, as paranoid nut-jobs. And he has my vote just for noticing.

    “or that a new extravagant entitlement program will eradicate our budget deficits forever”. Please show me (in writing, not pulling opinion out of your butt) that anyone, anyone, ever said that. Statements like that are exactly why no one takes you seriously.

    And yes, if you are a dick nobody actually listens to what you have to say. Pick up a book on diplomacy sometime, you might just learn something. Hmm, maybe that’s why you’re writing a blog (that no one reads) and not doing something constructive with your life.

    Have a good evening,

    Joe

  24. “[T]hose people in that part of the country just cling to their guns and their bibles” Is this not true? Do Americans not cling to guns or bibles? Last time I looked that was absolutely true.

    Yeah I forgot, you’re a smarmy jackass secularist. Everyone who ever doubted the existence of God must be right about everything, and everyone who has faith must be wrong about everything.

    Having you & your kind run everything for two years solid, is a small price to pay for making sure you’ll be out of power for twenty years afterward. Kinda kills me that your Replacement Jesus can pretend to be a good atheist and a good Protestant at the same time, though. Just goes to show, when you place your faith in mortal things, it all ends up skewed.

    “[O]r that a new extravagant entitlement program will eradicate our budget deficits forever”. Please show me (in writing, not pulling opinion out of your butt) that anyone, anyone, ever said that. Statements like that are exactly why no one takes you seriously.

    Link.

    Game. Set. Match.

    Thanks for playing.

  25. “Yeah I forgot, you’re a smarmy jackass secularist. Everyone who ever doubted the existence of God must be right about everything, and everyone who has faith must be wrong about everything”

    Again, Morgan makes my point for me: Religious fanatic = nut job. I don’t care what made up story you believe in, just keep it out of my government.

  26. In that case Joe, I’m sure we can count on you to vociferously oppose cap and trade to address AGW in the interests of keeping a “made up story you believe in” out of our government.

  27. Morgan,

    And as proof that someone claimed that “a new extravagant entitlement program will eradicate our budget deficits forever” you offered up one of your kooky ex Regan-era conspiracists? You mean the esteemed Peter Ferrara of the “Institute for Policy Innovation”? Oh yeah, him….

    “Kinda kills me that your Replacement Jesus can pretend to be a good atheist and a good Protestant at the same time, though” Morgan, you crack me up. But it’s not so funny when I realize you’re actually a member of the voting public. I’ll tell you one thing: I sure don’t place much faith in mortal things like you.

    Game, Set, Match – Thanks for playing? As Arthurstone once said: You just can’t make this stuff up.

    Keep it up, please,

    Joe

  28. Westsound,

    Why, do you have a backyard coal-fired power plant? Is that your angle?

    If I’m wrong we have cleaner air. If you’re wrong we fuck-up the only planet we have.

    Only someone that is counting on retiring to a “better place” wouldn’t worry about that. I have a feeling that Christains like Morgan are going to be in for a big surprise.

    Joe

  29. Hey Joe,

    The post is called “This Civility Thing.” How about, once in awhile, you start selling some ideas that aren’t quite so communist-y? Christians are nut-jobs who are in for a rude surprise, we’re gonna fuck up the only planet we have, not a single idea or proposal more friendly to free enterprise than the status quo. Everything is: Put the hippies in charge of government and then have government make decisions about everything. Maybe if you went off in some other direction, that by itself would pull you away from the Alinsky tactics and make you more civil.

    It might also help improve your short term memory. You said…

    Please show me (in writing, not pulling opinion out of your butt) that anyone, anyone, ever said …that a new extravagant entitlement program will eradicate our budget deficits forever.

    First paragraph from my story…

    President Obama has been barnstorming the country saying that CBO scores his health care takeover plan as reducing the deficit by over $100 billion in the first 10 years, and by almost a trillion dollars over the second 10 years.

    With an apparently non-photoshopped picture to go with it of our House Speaker posing by these bullet points.

    I answered your challenge. I thought you were going to start splitting meaningless hairs, like the overindulged college kids and stoners (but I repeat myself) on FARK. Instead you reached for Saul Alinsky’s maneuver of “nobody’s ever beaten you at anything if you don’t admit it”…which, in this situation, just makes you look like (more of) a jackass. “Aha, Morgan Freeberg! Shows what a weak position you’re in when you start citing articles written by…uh…what’s the name in the byline? Peter, uh, Ferrara, yeah him! Now we know I’ve really got you on the ropes!”

    Puh-leeze. We have a charlatan for a President, and this promise of saving truckloads of money by spending more of it is only emblematic of a long-wandering procession of ideas that should be refuted by any competent sixth-grader. Want another example? “Sitting down” to “talk out our differences” with “our enemies.” I would expect the sixth grader to ask about what would be talked about. Obama doesn’t. Raising taxes, but ninety-five percent of us won’t see our taxes go up “by one dime.” I would expect the sixth grader to immediately recognize this is a promise to rip off the other five percent…and I would expect the sixth grader to figure out this ultimately would affect the other ninety-five percent even if Obama kept His promise. But Obama doesn’t.

    I’m glad this thread is here. It shows what everyone knows deep down to be true: Our left-wingers are the ones endangering civility. It would be more precise to say you’re the ones holding it hostage; you’re selling ideas that won’t stand up to honest debate, and your deal is we can have civility if we stay away from honest debate and just do what you say without questioning it. If anyone calls you out on your crap, you’ll veer off into this bunny trail about how people like me aren’t good, and people like you are good. It goes back to that every single time, and away from discussion of the ideas every single time.

    This latest “Oh no you didn’t get me!” from you is just yet another lap on the same stupid merry-go-round. Show-me-where-anyone-said-that, I say alright here it is, and away you go on more distracting bullshit. Meanwhile, you’re still nailed. And we know why there’s incivility.

  30. So now I’m a communist?

    The (non-partison) CBO says that the healthcare reform will reduce the deficit by 100 billion in ten years; and you give me Peter Ferrara as someone who said “a new extravagant entitlement program will eradicate our budget deficits forever” Can you really not tell the difference between think-tank opinion and someone actually claiming something?

    A few of your opinions: “Put the hippies in charge of government and then have government make decisions about everything” which, in this situation, just makes you look like (more of) a jackass” – “Puh-leeze. We have a charlatan for a President, and this promise of saving truckloads of money by spending more of it is only emblematic of a long-wandering procession of ideas that should be refuted by any competent sixth-grader” – “Want another example? “Sitting down” to “talk out our differences” with “our enemies.” – “I would expect the sixth grader to ask about what would be talked about. Obama doesn’t” – “Raising taxes, but ninety-five percent of us won’t see our taxes go up “by one dime.” I would expect the sixth grader to immediately recognize this is a promise to rip off the other five percent…and I would expect the sixth grader to figure out this ultimately would affect the other ninety-five percent even if Obama kept His promise. But Obama doesn’t” – “Our left-wingers are the ones endangering civility. It would be more precise to say you’re the ones holding it hostage; you’re selling ideas that won’t stand up to honest debate” – “If anyone calls you out on your crap, you’ll veer off into this bunny trail about how people like me aren’t good, and people like you are good” – Those are opinions Morgan. If I quote them, do they then become fact?

    First off: Why are you even worried about taxes? You can’t possibly be a productive member of society with nut-job rants like these.

    Second: There is no “debating” with people like you. You have your story; your “everyone is trying to hold me down and control me” – your “help, help, I’m being oppressed. Come see the violence inherrent in the system” opinions. Then you quote someone else’s opinion to back up your opinion. I doubt anyone is ever going to convince you of anything. It’s all just a waste of both of our time.

    I’m tired of this merry-go-round. And don’t you have a cab to drive or something?

    Good luck Morgan.

    Again, next topic.

    • So…you appeal to science regarding AGW but when the scientific facts are not on your side, you pull out the old “why take chances when the stakes are so high”. By that logic a theocratic regime should be able to legislate your morality under the same premise. But logic is not really your strong suit is it Joe. Your idea of logical debate is to dismiss opposing views simply because they are opposing views, personally attack your opposition rather than engaging them on topic, and then declare yourself the winner when the other side, realizing that debating with an ideologue is a waste of time, throws their hands up in futility. You would have made a fine personal injury lawyer in another life.
      You’re foundering Joe and I think you know it. Best to give a guy room when he is thrashing in water over his head lest he pull you under as well I find.

      Next topic indeed. Congratulations on your “win”.

  31. Yeah, he was right on the verge of denouncing creationism, admitting global warming is all man made; and of convincing me that Sarah Palin is presidential material. That was close.

    I really planned on “winning” with someone that opens with calling me a smarmy jackass secularist…..

    Help I’m foundering!

    You two are funny.

    Joe

  32. Now now, no need to go insulting founderers like that.

    Your counterpoint, as I understand it, is this:

    “I comprehend all that you have said but I have sidestepped the tedious chore of determining whether to figure out if it has merit or not, after I fugred out I don’t like it.”

    Reasoning. It’s not for wimps.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s