or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Why are liberals so condescending?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Why are liberals so condescending? - Page 6

post #201 of 334
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoahJ View Post

Questionable, grotesque and Extreme? So you do not approve of praying for people. or laying hands on them while doing so? What part was grotesque or extreme, let alone questionable?

All of it.

I am not sure theologically that one can 'petition the Lord with prayer' (brownie points for who gets the reference) as it seems highly problematic that an omnipotent creator would change HIs mind at the behest of some of these less than desirable characters.

In any case, I do not believe in an interventionist God (more points for that one) so I find such actions as we are discussing futile and hence indicative of a certain lack of intellectual and philosophical rigour.

That is not my objection though - all that is just stupidity that I have described and God knows there is enough of that going round...no, my objection is that this is a means of control.

'Laying on hands' is itself a very interesting turn of phrase. It does of course denote some degree of violence ('don't lay your hands on me!' or 'He laid hand on her brutally') and it is no coincidence that some form of psychological violence is often the leitmotif of fundie sects.

Also of course there is - in the Lacanian/Freudian sense - the hint of sublimation of sex. 'Submission' or forcing a woman into submission.

By 'sublimation of sex' I mean diverted or displaced sex such as can happen when a traumatic experience makes someone incapable of the sexual act but still turned on by other means such as rubber or foot fetishism.

I think it is clear that fundie Xians have diverted sex in this way also - they are notoriously anti-sex and seem to hate the body - but they cannot become fetishists or perverts because they operate in a moralistic restrictive context but it seems likely that this sublimated sex impulse is manifested in such activities as this 'laying on of hands' and other rituals (I once witnessed a preacher foaming at the mouth shouting "Come Jesus Come!!! Come inside us now!!!" which I think needs no further elaboration).

There is also of course the masturbatory aspect to the phrase too..."to lay hands on xxxxx". I think this is also a phrase from the Old Testament story of the citizens of Sodom who wanted to 'lay hands on' the visitors.

Leaving sex aside there are other -perhaps more concerning - very sinister aspects. I believe that this is a practice overwhelmingly conducted BY men and practiced ON women. The woman must be 'in her place'.....laid hands on...branded...owned.

From a socio-political perspective this is undeniably a patriarchal anachronism that has no place in the 21st century and may well in any Feminist critique be a psychological equivalent of rape.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #202 of 334
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

All of it.

I am not sure theologically that one can 'petition the Lord with prayer' (brownie points for who gets the reference) as it seems highly problematic that an omnipotent creator would change HIs mind at the behest of some of these less than desirable characters.

In any case, I do not believe in an interventionist God (more points for that one) so I find such actions as we are discussing futile and hence indicative of a certain lack of intellectual and philosophical rigour.

That is not my objection though - all that is just stupidity that I have described and God knows there is enough of that going round...no, my objection is that this is a means of control.

'Laying on hands' is itself a very interesting turn of phrase. It does of course denote some degree of violence ('don't lay your hands on me!' or 'He laid hand on her brutally') and it is no coincidence that some form of psychological violence is often the leitmotif of fundie sects.

Also of course there is - in the Lacanian/Freudian sense - the hint of sublimation of sex. 'Submission' or forcing a woman into submission.

By 'sublimation of sex' I mean diverted or displaced sex such as can happen when a traumatic experience makes someone incapable of the sexual act but still turned on by other means such as rubber or foot fetishism.

I think it is clear that fundie Xians have diverted sex in this way also - they are notoriously anti-sex and seem to hate the body - but they cannot become fetishists or perverts because they operate in a moralistic restrictive context but it seems likely that this sublimated sex impulse is manifested in such activities as this 'laying on of hands' and other rituals (I once witnessed a preacher foaming at the mouth shouting "Come Jesus Come!!! Come inside us now!!!" which I think needs no further elaboration).

There is also of course the masturbatory aspect to the phrase too..."to lay hands on xxxxx". I think this is also a phrase from the Old Testament story of the citizens of Sodom who wanted to 'lay hands on' the visitors.

Leaving sex aside there are other -perhaps more concerning - very sinister aspects. I believe that this is a practice overwhelmingly conducted BY men and practiced ON women. The woman must be 'in her place'.....laid hands on...branded...owned.

From a socio-political perspective this is undeniably a patriarchal anachronism that has no place in the 21st century and may well in any Feminist critique be a psychological equivalent of rape.

You are one disturbed person...

How about this position instead:
http://ag.org/top/Beliefs/gendoct_12_sick.cfm

Quote:
Laying hands on the sick was a common practice in the Early Church. Jesus often laid hands on people before healing them (Mark 6:5; Luke 4:40; 13:13). Paul laid hands on a sick person and he was healed (Acts 28:8). Jesus said concerning His followers, "they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well" (Mark 16:18).

Anointing with oil for many different purposes was commonly practiced throughout the Scriptures. The New Testament mentions it specifically in connection with praying for the sick. On one occasion Jesus sent out the twelve disciples on a mission; they "anointed many sick people with oil and healed them" (Mark 6:13). In a congregational situation, the usual procedure is for a sick Christian to call for the elders of the church to pray over him and to anoint him with oil (James 5:14-16).

In biblical times oil was commonly used as a healing agent (Luke 10:34). But when used by the early Christians for anointing purposes it was merely a symbolic reminder to God’s healing power. Today as then, the anointing oil itself has no healing power. Healing takes place by the power of the Holy Spirit (Acts 10:38), of whom oil is a symbol (Zechariah 4:4-6).

In the Assemblies of God we believe neither the laying on of hands nor anointing with oil is indispensable for healing, for often in Scripture healing takes place without either. But at times the touch of a praying person and the application of oil are an encouragement to faith, and such a practice is enjoined by Scripture (James 5:14-16).

That is similar to my position on the issue. Quoted from the A.O.G. website so that I can show this is not my interpretation of what other think. Not sure what denomination Palin is, but I am sure the thoughts are similar there as well.
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #203 of 334
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoahJ View Post

You are one disturbed person...

It was disturbing gathering the research I admit...I did witness some very shocking and upsetting things.

But I realized something: that the disturbing aspects were exaggerated because of the context. Or, put another way, one expects people who talk about love and forgiveness and spiritual things to actually be nice people and not do bad things.

But then I had a road to Damascus moment (I actually WAS on the Road to Damascus literally at the time too which I think is significant but I digress) and I realized something that made it all alright:

These people have nothing to do with God, religion, faith, love, Jesus Christ or spirituality.

It was an epiphany.

Since then I've always had this deep insight to see right through the fundie cultishness...it's like God-given somehow...it can be frightening and sometimes I wish I could just turn it off but I try to use it to help those still caught in the web..
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #204 of 334
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

It was disturbing gathering the research I admit...I did witness some very shocking and upsetting things.

But I realized something: that the disturbing aspects were exaggerated because of the context. Or, put another way, one expects people who talk about love and forgiveness and spiritual things to actually be nice people and not do bad things.

But then I had a road to Damascus moment (I actually WAS on the Road to Damascus literally at the time too which I think is significant but I digress) and I realized something that made it all alright:

These people have nothing to do with God, religion, faith, love, Jesus Christ or spirituality.

It was an epiphany.

Since then I've always had this deep insight to see right through the fundie cultishness...it's like God-given somehow...it can be frightening and sometimes I wish I could just turn it off but I try to use it to help those still caught in the web..

Wow, God granted you an epiphany on the Road to Damascus... Did you go blind as well?
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #205 of 334
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoahJ View Post

Wow, God granted you an epiphany on the Road to Damascus... Did you go blind as well?

It was an epiphany in reverse...I gained my sight.

You want to know something else funny...after that I met some REAL Christians.

Just outside Damascus is a village called Ma'lu'la - it is a large Christian community but the interesting thing is that it stretches back to more or less the time of St Paul. They still speak Aramaic there, probably the only place that does.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #206 of 334
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

It was an epiphany in reverse...I gained my sight.

You want to know something else funny...after that I met some REAL Christians.

Just outside Damascus is a village called Ma'lu'la - it is a large Christian community but the interesting thing is that it stretches back to more or less the time of St Paul. They still speak Aramaic there, probably the only place that does.

So let me understand. You were granted an epiphany and were able to meet "real" Christians that speak actual Aramaic. And they can trace their lineage from the time of St Paul.

Congratulations?
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #207 of 334
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoahJ View Post

So let me understand. You were granted an epiphany and were able to meet "real" Christians that speak actual Aramaic. And they can trace their lineage from the time of St Paul.

Congratulations?

Well...'epiphany' has Christian overtones which are distasteful...perhaps numinous experience might be more appropriate. Or 'seeing through the bullshit' yes...I think that is the most fitting.

There's nothing special about it...all it takes is to renounce slavery and stupidity and to start to use your reason...many, many millions of people do it.

Unfortunately very few of them are religious and far less of them call themselves Christians,
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #208 of 334
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Why are liberals so condescending?



The examples are clear and the M.O well understood. Worst still, such thought increasingly lends itself to authoritarianism. If the other side is actually evil, deluded, harmful, what have you, then you don't have policy disagreements, you have good versus evil with no possible compromise being available.

Why is it so hard to rid liberal thoughts of such patterns? The caricatures, ad-homs, intent game, and -ist and -ism labels allow a person to disengage mentally from any real discussion. It allows them to ignore real concerns and we have seen this over and over. The tea parties for example aren't real. They are "astro-turfing, tea baggers who are closet racists, homophobes, ignorant, stupid" and of course "dangerous."

Who could compromise with such labels? If someone is engaging in them, can they really said to be attempting honest discussion or to be legitimately considering such parties and their concerns in legislation or policy?

When I find such examples of condescending behavior be they in other places or here, I'm going to post them as examples. Likewise feel free to share your own examples or thoughts relate to the article. If we can stop a group from demonizing and disqualifying valid views, then perhaps real solutions can be arrived at and help the United States as a whole.

Replace liberals with conservatives
Replace Obama with Bush/Cheney/Linbaugh/Beck/Palin/BOE-ner/FoxNews...

Same thing.
post #209 of 334
Quote:
Originally Posted by O-Mac View Post

Replace liberals with conservatives
Replace Obama with Bush/Cheney/Linbaugh/Beck/Palin/BOE-ner/FoxNews...

Same thing.

What we need to understand about the Right in order to attempt a sane discourse is that they see things in opposite terms to what they really are....it's a kind of disease a bit like Alice through the Looking Glass.

Actually I think Lewis Carroll may even have written this as an allegory and a warning to history of the dangers of this type of 'non-thought' - sadly though he has not been heeded.

One example will suffice: Right-wingers who have no knowledge of a specific culture and do not speak any language other than English (and that quite badly) are often empowered to comment dogmatically on arcane philosophical minutiae quoted from Non-European language which relate to centuries old cultural references.

This is called 'FACT'.

On the other hand; academics who have studied these regions all their lives, are fluent in the languages - possibly even speaking them as a native tongue - and have lived in the cultures under discussion are not really enfranchised to voice an opinion.

Should they dare to do so this is called "LYIING"

Similarly, should it be necessary to bomb a culture to the stone age, rape the citizens, loot the museums and generally spread demonic chaos this is called :WINNING HEARTS AND MINDS" or possibly "REBUILDING".

Where the violence is excessive this is called "THE BASTARDS DID IT TO THEMSELVES"

Anyone questioning any of this and trying to work to make it better is a "SCUM-SUCKING BASTARD VIOLENT WHACKO"

Hope this clears things up...basically we need to speak in opposites or they won't understand.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #210 of 334
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

What we need to understand about the Right in order to attempt a sane discourse is that they see things in opposite terms to what they really are....it's a kind of disease a bit like Alice through the Looking Glass.

Actually I think Lewis Carroll may even have written this as an allegory and a warning to history of the dangers of this type of 'non-thought' - sadly though he has not been heeded.

One example will suffice: Right-wingers who have no knowledge of a specific culture and do not speak any language other than English (and that quite badly) are often empowered to comment dogmatically on arcane philosophical minutiae quoted from Non-European language which relate to centuries old cultural references.

This is called 'FACT'.

On the other hand; academics who have studied these regions all their lives, are fluent in the languages - possibly even speaking them as a native tongue - and have lived in the cultures under discussion are not really enfranchised to voice an opinion.

Should they dare to do so this is called "LYIING"

Similarly, should it be necessary to bomb a culture to the stone age, rape the citizens, loot the museums and generally spread demonic chaos this is called :WINNING HEARTS AND MINDS" or possibly "REBUILDING".

Where the violence is excessive this is called "THE BASTARDS DID IT TO THEMSELVES"

Anyone questioning any of this and trying to work to make it better is a "SCUM-SUCKING BASTARD VIOLENT WHACKO"

Hope this clears things up...basically we need to speak in opposites or they won't understand.

Your projection and condescension is growing. \
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #211 of 334
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoahJ View Post

Your projection and condescension is growing. \

Just telling it like it is, just telling it like it is....
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #212 of 334
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoahJ View Post

Your projection and condescension is growing. \

He's going late stage. Soon after this the foaming of the mouth the bans usually begin but not until they demand they happen first thinking the target will hit someone else.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #213 of 334
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

He's going late stage. Soon after this the foaming of the mouth the bans usually begin but not until they demand they happen first thinking the target will hit someone else.

This is incomprehensible gibberish Trumpt....can you fix the grammar?
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #214 of 334
Thread Starter 
All correction of grammar requests and desires to probe my brain or the origins of words I use can be done via PM.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #215 of 334
And don't forget to use PM for sexy times, too.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #216 of 334
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

And don't forget to use PM for sexy times, too.

I wasn't going to bring it up but it's become a nuisance now..I've told Trumpt I don't think we'd really gel because of his extreme views but he won't take no for an answer......it's 10 or 20 PMs a day now...

I wouldn't mind but the phone calls...the weeping, the pleading....

And the flowers....
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #217 of 334
Thread Starter 
No one gives reach arounds while whispering sweet nothings in the original Aramaic like Sego.

Everything else just places second.

Post du jour for the thread as well, the winner of a chicken dinner is BR.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #218 of 334
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

Just telling it like it is, just telling it like it is....

Like you see it, I am sure.
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #219 of 334
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

All correction of grammar requests and desires to probe my brain or the origins of words I use can be done via PM.

But trumpy why then do you stoop to off topic things in the open like correcting other people's spelling?

And before you start " yes! " it's exactly the same thing.

What do you know? Another double standard.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #220 of 334
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

He's going late stage. Soon after this the foaming of the mouth the bans usually begin but not until they demand they happen first thinking the target will hit someone else.

Do you mean like the " Ted Kennedy " comment?
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #221 of 334
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Do you mean like the " Ted Kennedy " comment?

As I might have mentioned, you have to realise that Trumpy lives in a looking-glass world where everything is it's opposite...I've never been banned as it happens - because all my posts are models of reason and balanced consideration and, above all, indisputably true - so to Trumpy this means I am censured all the time...

It's like mirror chess - quite fun once you get the hang of the rules and it trains the brain quite well too...
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #222 of 334
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

As I might have mentioned, you have to realise that Trumpy lives in a looking-glass world where everything is it's opposite...I've never been banned as it happens - because all my posts are models of reason and balanced consideration and, above all, indisputably true - so to Trumpy this means I am censured all the time...

It's like mirror chess - quite fun once you get the hang of the rules and it trains the brain quite well too...

Excuse me Mr. Indisputably True. Would you care to support that bolded claim. I'll be happy to see any quotes where I claimed you've been censured.

Support the claim or withdraw it.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #223 of 334
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Excuse me Mr. Indisputably True. Would you care to support that bolded claim. I'll be happy to see any quotes where I claimed you've been censured.

Support the claim or withdraw it.

Well...actually being a radical and having a mind of my own, I object to be told what to do and have neither to withdraw or support particularly as supporting any fact is not ever really an issue in your case - but besides that I have problems with authority you see.....makes me want to do the opposite and tell the person exerting it to fuck off. That's what happens when you have a mind of your own I suppose..it's a curse sometimes.

But in your case, I make an exception because I think I can help. You said this:

Quote:
He's going late stage. Soon after this the foaming of the mouth the bans usually begin but not until they demand they happen first thinking the target will hit someone else

Now of course - this being the looking-glass world - this does not mean 'bans' in the sense of censure or indeed being banned. And I fully realize that 'begin' does not mean 'start' but rather probably 'ends' or even 'not happen at all because nothing exists'.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #224 of 334
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

Well...actually being a radical and having a mind of my own, I object to be told what to do and have neither to withdraw or support particularly as supporting any fact is not ever really an issue in your case - but besides that I have problems with authority you see.....makes me want to do the opposite and tell the person exerting it to fuck off. That's what happens when you have a mind of your own I suppose..it's a curse sometimes.

But in your case, I make an exception because I think I can help. You said this:



Now of course - this being the looking-glass world - this does not mean 'bans' in the sense of censure or indeed being banned. And I fully realize that 'begin' does not mean 'start' but rather probably 'ends' or even 'not happen at all because nothing exists'.

I've got to hand it to you you're a good poster!
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #225 of 334
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

What we need to understand about the Right in order to attempt a sane discourse is that they see things in opposite terms to what they really are....it's a kind of disease a bit like Alice through the Looking Glass....

One example will suffice: Right-wingers who have no knowledge of a specific culture and do not speak any language other than English (and that quite badly) are often empowered to comment dogmatically on arcane philosophical minutiae quoted from Non-European language which relate to centuries old cultural references.

On the other hand; academics who have studied these regions all their lives, are fluent in the languages - possibly even speaking them as a native tongue - and have lived in the cultures under discussion are not really enfranchised to voice an opinion.

Should they dare to do so this is called "LYIING"

Similarly, should it be necessary to bomb a culture to the stone age, rape the citizens, loot the museums and generally spread demonic chaos this is called :WINNING HEARTS AND MINDS" or possibly "REBUILDING"... "THE BASTARDS DID IT TO THEMSELVES"

Anyone questioning any of this and trying to work to make it better is a "SCUM-SUCKING BASTARD VIOLENT WHACKO"

Hope this clears things up...basically we need to speak in opposites or they won't understand.

Well then, what we need to understand about the Left before attempting a sane discourse is that they see things in opposite terms to reality....it's a kind of disease a bit like Alice through the Looking Glass....

One example will suffice: Left-wingers who believe they have superior knowledge of a specific culture because they speak foreign language (even if quite badly) often comment dogmatically, only informed by simple minded clichés derived from insular peers.

On the other hand; non-academics, those who have lived in these regions all their lives, are fluent in the languages - possibly even speaking them as a native tongue - and have lived in the cultures under discussion are not really enfranchised to voice an opinion if their opinion confirms right wing thinking.

Should they dare to do so this is called "selling out" or "puppets" or "lackeys" of globalists, capitalism, or right-wingers.

Similarly, should it be necessary to use force against left dictators to defend western interests, or democratic interests and values in their culture, is is called criminal and motivated by conspiratorial sinister forces.

Anyone questioning any of this and trying to work to make it better is a "working for the oil companies "rape(ing) the citizens, loot(ing) the museums and generally spread(ing) demonic chaos"

Hope this clears things up...basically we need to speak in opposites or they won't understand.
post #226 of 334
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxParrish View Post

Well then, what we need to understand about the Left before attempting a sane discourse is that they see things in opposite terms to reality....it's a kind of disease a bit like Alice through the Looking Glass....

One example will suffice: Left-wingers who believe they have superior knowledge of a specific culture because they speak foreign language (even if quite badly) often comment dogmatically, only informed by simple minded clichés derived from insular peers.

On the other hand; non-academics, those who have lived in these regions all their lives, are fluent in the languages - possibly even speaking them as a native tongue - and have lived in the cultures under discussion are not really enfranchised to voice an opinion if their opinion confirms right wing thinking.

Should they dare to do so this is called "selling out" or "puppets" or "lackeys" of globalists, capitalism, or right-wingers.

Similarly, should it be necessary to use force against left dictators to defend western interests, or democratic interests and values in their culture, is is called criminal and motivated by conspiratorial sinister forces.

Anyone questioning any of this and trying to work to make it better is a "working for the oil companies "rape(ing) the citizens, loot(ing) the museums and generally spread(ing) demonic chaos"

Hope this clears things up...basically we need to speak in opposites or they won't understand.

Tsk..this is very poor.

Is that the best you can do? Plagiarize a post? What happened to original thought? Wait...your're a winger aren't you???
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #227 of 334
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

Tsk..this is very poor.

Is that the best you can do? Plagiarize a post? What happened to original thought? Wait...your're a winger aren't you???

Only a left-winger would complain that obvious parody is a form of plagerism. LOL..
post #228 of 334
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxParrish View Post

Only a left-winger would complain that obvious parody is a form of plagerism. LOL..

There's a lot of truth in it though isn't there? The inability of the political right to produce original thought. I mean right-wingers really aren't that creative or original are they?

Trumpt is right to have Ayn Rand in his sig - she is the only significant right-wing writer there has ever been and even then, she's really very bad...

If you think of all the great works of original art and literature, none are politically 'right' are they? I can't think of one...

There is no right-wing equivalent of 1984 or Animal Farm..not even a right wing 'Das Kapital' - I suppose Mein Kampf is the nearest but again, that is not any form of original thought is it?

Picasso's "Guernica"... Kandinsky...Dali..

You know the Nazis famously banned all left-wing art and burnt all such literature..the only culture allowed was that of Right-wing thinkers (I use the term loosely) and artists...And you know what? No-one can remember any of them....and no-one knew who they were...

I don't think much has changed since..
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #229 of 334
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

There's a lot of truth in it though isn't there? The inability of the political right to produce original thought. I mean right-wingers really aren't that creative or original are they?

Trumpt is right to have Ayn Rand in his sig - she is the only significant right-wing writer there has ever been and even then, she's really very bad...

If you think of all the great works of original art and literature, none are politically 'right' are they? I can't think of one...

There is no right-wing equivalent of 1984 or Animal Farm..not even a right wing 'Das Kapital' - I suppose Mein Kampf is the nearest but again, that is not any form of original thought is it?

"There's a lot of truth in it though, isn't there"? What, that only 'the right' can write parody and the left can write serious or original thought? Admittedly the committed left has a poor sense of humor (while we South Park conservatives do enjoy poking at idols) but what is called "right-wing" does have a large scope of original thought - unless a person slept through their history courses (of course, i think the left-right taxonomy is somewhat crude for in depth discussions).

Have you not read Adam Smith, John Stuart Mills, or Thomas Jefferson or Jame Madison? How about St. Augustine, Alexnder Solzhenitsyn, or Edmund Burke? Milton Friedman or Frank Knight? How about the novelist Tom Wolfe, or Jean Raspail, Allen Drury or Saul Bellow? Maybe Leo Strauss? F.A. Hayak?, James Burnham? C.S. Lewis? Ezra Pound? T.S. Elliot? H.L. Menchen?

How about the Agrarian Conservatives: Robert Penn Warren, Richard Weaver, or John Crowe Ransom?

And there are some that may (or may not) consider themselves right of center that carry a conservative-libertarian bundle of original thought: Jane Jacobs, Banfield, Gordon Woods, Bernard Bailyn, and Oscar Handlin.

Of course, when I speak of the right I mainly speak of conservatives, classical liberals, or libertarians of the right - the right of center alignment that has something in common - in contrast to left populism and leftist groups (National Socialism, Peronism, Communism, communalism, Socialism). There are few right-wing statists of note: Hegel comes to mind.

So yes, lots of original thought for those that are interested.

Quote:
Picasso's "Guernica"... Kandinsky...Dali..

Sorry, these are not thinkers, they are artists. In fact, they are "feelers", subjectivists who express political feelings through art.

Quote:
You know the Nazis famously banned all left-wing art and burnt all such literature..the only culture allowed was that of Right-wing thinkers (I use the term loosely) and artists...And you know what? No-one can remember any of them....and no-one knew who they were...

Excuse me? The Chinese Communists burned thousands of religious texts in Tibet (as well as over a thousand monasteries). Of course, burning is only one way of suppressing welcome texts and plenty of the left 'thinkers' justified their censoring or outright confiscation in a score of Communist regimes.

Frankly, your stereotype snideness towards "right wingers" is what is lacking in original thought, and its not even funny.
post #230 of 334
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxParrish View Post

"There's a lot of truth in it though, isn't there"? What, that only 'the right' can write parody and the left can write serious or original thought? Admittedly the committed left has a poor sense of humor (while we South Park conservatives do enjoy poking at idols) but what is called "right-wing" does have a large scope of original thought - unless a person slept through their history courses (of course, i think the left-right taxonomy is somewhat crude for in depth discussions).

I would say that the main dynamic of 'the Right' is an ability to transmute malleable subjects/statements into use for their own purpose.... hence they have the capacity to co-opt aspects of undefined culture for their own use. True original thought is rare imo.

One other thing - when I say 'Right' I use the term in the current post-modern sense: ie the sort of people who now define themselves as 'Right'...often these are characterized by a certain lack of incisiveness and a reluctance to use argument and reason.

Many of the people you list below are not 'Right' in this sense...they may be 'conservative' but many of them were actually thinkers and could use reason. I am not so sure that many of them would ally themselves to the current crop but let's have a look...

Quote:
Have you not read Adam Smith, John Stuart Mills, or Thomas Jefferson or Jame Madison? How about St. Augustine, Alexnder Solzhenitsyn, or Edmund Burke? Milton Friedman or Frank Knight? How about the novelist Tom Wolfe, or Jean Raspail, Allen Drury or Saul Bellow? Maybe Leo Strauss? F.A. Hayak?, James Burnham? C.S. Lewis? Ezra Pound? T.S. Elliot? H.L. Menchen?

St Augustine was a moralist for sure...and quite insane in many respects. Maybe he was right-wing now I think of it...

Solzhenitsyn; might have a point, clearly he was a religious maniac. Was he an original thinker? I would say not...

In fact, surely the only significant original contributors in that list have to be Bellow, Strauss (surely not Right???), CS Lewis, Pound (a Nazi) and Eliot. Menchen was a laugh and for that we can forgive a lot but I see him more as an iconoclast.

Let's leave religious nutters out of it (Eliot my God, what happened??) as they are in a class of their own.

Quote:
How about the Agrarian Conservatives: Robert Penn Warren, Richard Weaver, or John Crowe Ransom?

And there are some that may (or may not) consider themselves right of center that carry a conservative-libertarian bundle of original thought: Jane Jacobs, Banfield, Gordon Woods, Bernard Bailyn, and Oscar Handlin.

Don't know anything about any of that...that's probably significant...

Quote:
Of course, when I speak of the right I mainly speak of conservatives, classical liberals, or libertarians of the right - the right of center alignment that has something in common - in contrast to left populism and leftist groups (National Socialism, Peronism, Communism, communalism, Socialism). There are few right-wing statists of note: Hegel comes to mind.

What was that???that loud bang??

It was you shooting yourself in the foot and destroying your credibility...NATIONAL SOCIALISM is Right..ok yeah...

Just when I was thinking maybe one had slipped through the looking-glass... lame

Quote:
So yes, lots of original thought for those that are interested.

Not really...and really no-one is interested...that in itself speaks volumes...as does the fact that there are quite a few REAL Right-wing contributors I never mentioned so as not to defeat my argument but you don't seem to know who they are...

Quote:
Sorry, these are not thinkers, they are artists. In fact, they are "feelers", subjectivists who express political feelings through art.

I would disagree but I don't think you'll understand the argument..

Quote:
Excuse me? The Chinese Communists burned thousands of religious texts in Tibet (as well as over a thousand monasteries). Of course, burning is only one way of suppressing welcome texts and plenty of the left 'thinkers' justified their censoring or outright confiscation in a score of Communist regimes.

Woosh.....

Quote:
Frankly, your stereotype snideness towards "right wingers" is what is lacking in original thought, and its not even funny.

No...it's definitely not funny...a little scary even...
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #231 of 334
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

Well...actually being a radical and having a mind of my own, I object to be told what to do and have neither to withdraw or support particularly as supporting any fact is not ever really an issue in your case - but besides that I have problems with authority you see.....makes me want to do the opposite and tell the person exerting it to fuck off. That's what happens when you have a mind of your own I suppose..it's a curse sometimes.

But in your case, I make an exception because I think I can help. You said this:

Now of course - this being the looking-glass world - this does not mean 'bans' in the sense of censure or indeed being banned. And I fully realize that 'begin' does not mean 'start' but rather probably 'ends' or even 'not happen at all because nothing exists'.

Apparently you unaware that in human experience, we have the concepts of past, present and future. You have now taken a prediction of the future and used it as proof of prior events. I find that very odd. Enjoy the looking glass world because apparently being a victim of it means the future is now the past.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

I've got to hand it to you you're a good poster!

Talk about adding insult to injury.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxParrish View Post

Well then, what we need to understand about the Left before attempting a sane discourse is that they see things in opposite terms to reality....it's a kind of disease a bit like Alice through the Looking Glass....

One example will suffice: Left-wingers who believe they have superior knowledge of a specific culture because they speak foreign language (even if quite badly) often comment dogmatically, only informed by simple minded clichés derived from insular peers.

On the other hand; non-academics, those who have lived in these regions all their lives, are fluent in the languages - possibly even speaking them as a native tongue - and have lived in the cultures under discussion are not really enfranchised to voice an opinion if their opinion confirms right wing thinking.

Should they dare to do so this is called "selling out" or "puppets" or "lackeys" of globalists, capitalism, or right-wingers.

Similarly, should it be necessary to use force against left dictators to defend western interests, or democratic interests and values in their culture, is is called criminal and motivated by conspiratorial sinister forces.

Anyone questioning any of this and trying to work to make it better is a "working for the oil companies "rape(ing) the citizens, loot(ing) the museums and generally spread(ing) demonic chaos"

Hope this clears things up...basically we need to speak in opposites or they won't understand.

Hilarious! Very nicely done.

Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

Tsk..this is very poor.

Is that the best you can do? Plagiarize a post? What happened to original thought? Wait...your're a winger aren't you???

Tsk, tsk, slippage is occurring. It's hard to keep on that mask of decorum. Don't let it slip off.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxParrish View Post

Only a left-winger would complain that obvious parody is a form of plagerism. LOL..

Max, this is some of the sharpest writing I have read in quite a while. It is very appreciated as are all of your posts. Nicely done!

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #232 of 334
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

I would say that the main dynamic of 'the Right' is an ability to transmute malleable subjects/statements into use for their own purpose.... hence they have the capacity to co-opt aspects of undefined culture for their own use. True original thought is rare imo. -I am a strawman

One other thing - when I say 'Right' I use the term in the current post-modern sense: ie the sort of people who now define themselves as 'Right'...often these are characterized by a certain lack of incisiveness and a reluctance to use argument and reason.-I am a caricature

Many of the people you list below are not 'Right' in this sense...they may be 'conservative' but many of them were actually thinkers and could use reason. I am not so sure that many of them would ally themselves to the current crop but let's have a look...- I am the content dismissed because I would rather discuss the first two items instead.

This boils down to, having one's own definition of right that is a caricature and strawman that is preferred to react to rather than actual people, ideas, policies etc. It saves so much effort and time since the comedy and fallacies allow one to feel both superior and mock rather than engage.

Quote:
What was that???that loud bang??

It was you shooting yourself in the foot and destroying your credibility...NATIONAL SOCIALISM is Right..ok yeah...

Just when I was thinking maybe one had slipped through the looking-glass... lame

Thanks for proving the point again.

Quote:
Not really...and really no-one is interested...that in itself speaks volumes...as does the fact that there are quite a few REAL Right-wing contributors I never mentioned so as not to defeat my argument but you don't seem to know who they are...

I would disagree but I don't think you'll understand the argument..

Woosh.....

No...it's definitely not funny...a little scary even...

Nicely done. You ignored the examples after dismissing them using the criteria of being in your own humble opinion and made up definition declared to be post-modern. Then the rest of the post was appropriately lined up for the mockery, eye-rolling, insults about intelligence, heck probably some interesting hand gestures were there video.

Jon Stewart would be so proud.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #233 of 334
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

I would say that the main dynamic of 'the Right' is an ability to transmute malleable subjects/statements into use for their own purpose.... hence they have the capacity to co-opt aspects of undefined culture for their own use. True original thought is rare imo.

One other thing - when I say 'Right' I use the term in the current post-modern sense: ie the sort of people who now define themselves as 'Right'...often these are characterized by a certain lack of incisiveness and a reluctance to use argument and reason.

Many of the people you list below are not 'Right' in this sense...they may be 'conservative' but many of them were actually thinkers and could use reason. I am not so sure that many of them would ally themselves to the current crop but let's have a look...

I have no idea what the "post-modern" sense is, and if it is of those that define themselves as rightists then that may be little use - most people define themselves by categories that have existed much longer than post-modernist fancies and few (if any) call themselves "rightists". So 'self-identity' of rightists is useless as a working definition.

The most common term is conservative, but also libertarian and classical liberal. Traditionally they are 'of the right'. And I doubt any would object to being categorized as such (even if they don't use the term as one of self-identity). And if you wish to exclude these categories as of the right, then I have no idea who you are speaking about "on the right'.

Perhaps you are thinking of some left-wing stereotype of populists and their extreme expression of it in National Socialism (the NAZI party)? (By the way, I am using Lipsets three categories of political affiliation and expression).

Quote:
St Augustine was a moralist for sure...and quite insane in many respects. Maybe he was right-wing now I think of it...

Solzhenitsyn; might have a point, clearly he was a religious maniac. Was he an original thinker? I would say not...

...fact, surely the only significant original contributors in that list have to be Bellow, Strauss (surely not Right???), CS Lewis, Pound (a Nazi) and Eliot. Menchen was a laugh and for that we can forgive a lot but I see him more as an iconoclast.

Then you're going to have to define the meaning of original thinking when you include Dada and abstract artists as 'thinkers' but leave out writers of the stature of Solzhenitsyn. It seems rather puzzeling...

And I noticed you didn't address Adam Smith (e.g. Wealth of Nations) or J.S. Mills (e.g. On Liberty), or the classic conservative Edmund Burke. All these were quite original, either by inventing new ways of thinking OR in creating the classic statements of political thought and reflection.

You can find modern right precursors in Hobbes and Montesquieu and Tocqueville, and advocates of liberty in William Graham Sumner, Bastat etc. And, of course, you have jurists such as Story.

In a wide variety of fields (except art) I can refer you to not only "right wing" original thinkers, but of their influence as large and small path breakers in political science, history, economics, literary criticism, and political philosophy.

Quote:
It was you shooting yourself in the foot and destroying your credibility...NATIONAL SOCIALISM is Right..ok yeah...

Not by my definition, but in the common use Nazi's are often called rightists (as you have).

Quote:
Not really...and really no-one is interested...that in itself speaks volumes...as does the fact that there are quite a few REAL Right-wing contributors I never mentioned so as not to defeat my argument but you don't seem to know who they are...

So you are interested in making claims, but not in finding out that they may be wrong.? Are you serious?

And now you confess that you know of 'right wing contributors' that would defeat your argument but kept them in your pocket so as not to lose?

Need I tell you that with those two admissions, you not only lost, but confirmed the OP assumptions?
post #234 of 334
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Max, this is some of the sharpest writing I have read in quite a while. It is very appreciated as are all of your posts. Nicely done!

Thanks, nice to know that us "unoriginal" 'rightists' are having an impact.
post #235 of 334
The OP asked "why liberals are so condescending", and some posters the left hurried to demonstrate that they are. One would have thought a wiser poster might reject this question as analogous to asking "why do you beat your wife", rather than promptly rushing to beat their wives.

Oh well.

I think we can expand the question and suggest a few answers.

As I noted in the Climategate thread, in left political dialog, there seems to be a visceral dependence on the nasty - the sort of uncivil, irrational, venomous, and shameless rhetorical style that finds ridicule and derision the best form of argument, and honoring the truth or another’s argument as some form of contemptible weakness and backsliding.

You can see the differences in many on-line examples. Paul Krugman (nasty and derisive) vs. Greg Mankiw (polite and generous). Mann (arrogant and angry) vs. McIntyre (usually much better mannered). Joe Romm (demented and shameless) and Roger Pielke Jr. (polite and sometimes gently satirical). Real Climate snarling and censoring vs. Climate Audit (which they call “Fraudit”, another bit of immature left/green derisive name calling).

The left "professional class" shows us unprofessional and uncivil conduct on the INTERNET and in politics which seems to have several imperatives in its form of “argument”…

- Censoring replies or comments in their blogs
- Gross misrepresentation of opposition arguments
- Bold lies
- Habitual character smears
- Ridicule combined with snide and snarling attacks
- Rage
- Irrationality
- A sense of humor only when enjoying the pain of others.

What they don’t share is civility, a sense of humor, sober analysis, balanced reflections, or good faith exchanges with their opposition.

Throughout left axe-grinder sources there is a psychological obtuseness, an inability to see (or perhaps care) that their narcissistic theatrics persuades no one not of their choir. Perhaps they think that raging bullying and intimidation is a secure form of control of the debate, and that protection of the threatened ego is the highest priority, but I wonder if they know it also suggests they are drifting to the edge of psychosis?

My suggestion is don’t let your political personae consume your intellect and reason. Contrary opinion may threaten the ego, but making a good faith effort to understand another point of view, and oppose it for logical reasons is a mark of maturity.

"Me hate right-wingers" does not suffice.
post #236 of 334
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxParrish View Post

Thanks, nice to know that us "unoriginal" 'rightists' are having an impact.

Is Trumpy working you with his foot?
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #237 of 334
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

Is Trumpy working you with his foot?

Excuse me Mr. Indisputably True. Would you care to support that bolded claim. I'll be happy to see any quotes where I claimed you've been censured.

Support the claim or withdraw it.


I'm still waiting.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

I've got to hand it to you you're a good poster!

Seg, is Jimmac being a proper bottom for you? When you make him scream your name does he do so in authentic Aramaic?

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #238 of 334
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Excuse me Mr. Indisputably True. Would you care to support that bolded claim. I'll be happy to see any quotes where I claimed you've been censured.

Support the claim or withdraw it.


I'm still waiting.



Seg, is Jimmac being a proper bottom for you? When you make him scream your name does he do so in authentic Aramaic?

Heheh....I love it when Trumpy tries to get all dominant...
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #239 of 334
Thread Starter 
It's fun to joke around about.

That said, since you cannot support the claim, I consider it withdrawn. Your credibility now reflects the fact that you'd rather laugh away your accusations rather support them.

I'll be laughing right along with everyone else.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #240 of 334
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

It's fun to joke around about.

That said, since you cannot support the claim, I consider it withdrawn. Your credibility now reflects the fact that you'd rather laugh away your accusations rather than support them.

I'll be laughing right along with everyone else.

I think I've made it quite clear but let me try again:

NO sane or rational person can EVER support any claim when you are on the other side of the equation.

There is just no possibility - so no sane or rational person would try. This is because you are colour-blind when it comes to facts - you just can't see them...

It's not your fault - from your pov they don't exist...but that does not mean that other people not so challenged can't see them.

So there is no point...it's a dialogue of the deaf - one might prod you once in a while as one hits an empty oil drum to demonstrate that it can make a loud noise - and this in itself is something and even sometimes useful - but we should leave all notions of 'facts' and 'support' out of it...
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Why are liberals so condescending?