First off, I never get pissed about someone disagreeing with me on politics. I will never take that personaly. I unlike liberals am open-minded and believe that people are aloud to be wrong in this country. The majority of your response is directed at christianity. Making fun of christians is incredibly popular right now and i find it very offensive most of the time. what I find offensive is that if I were mocking jewish people and calling them idiots for beliving in their "false gods" people on the left would treat me as though I was Hitler. Somehow Christians are fair game to be assulted though. Once again it is selective in who is aloud to be smeared. If you want to make fun of religions I would recommend one of the ones that doesnt teach "love thy neighbor" as one of only two rules you need to follow. The church and christians are not the same thing so do not even enter that arena. I found the cartoon funny at first and then it became simply a "your a fucking idiot if your a conservitive". I find that not really offensive but kinda shallow thinking and simplistic conclusions from a group of people who call themselves "open-minded". Liberals can understand anything, no matter how fucked up it may be, except for people who don't understand them
Liberals seem to truly believe that all conservatives fit in a nice pre-set mold but they are all original and free of those boundries.
Re: pot and kettlefitzthetoadOctober 16 2005, 00:32:56 UTC
You know your right. That was pretty generalized and quite a bit hypocritical. I am not free of bias opinions either. Shows what I know. Maybe someday I will meet someone who could change that predjudice that I have.
Re: pot and kettlefitzthetoadOctober 16 2005, 00:51:30 UTC
Holy crap man. I read your blog a bit and feel I need to read it more. It will be a great insight into how the other side thinks.
I thought about what you wrote before and realized something. You didnt argue any points that I made, but you did find a way to go after me personaly. I guess if thats your your idea of debate....ummmm...Your mothers so fat her blood type is rocky road.
SUV problem? Interesting choice of words. I guess in a free country you would like to be able to tell people what they can and cannot do and if you cannot do that you would like the goverment to over-regulate whatever you don't like out of existance. Freedom comes with problems. You don't like SUV's, don't drive one. Just don't try to shove your "opinions" down other peoples throats by means of the goverment.
Re: pot and kettlegalactic_devOctober 16 2005, 01:53:39 UTC
Dude, I wasn't "going after you personally." I was just pointing out the inconsistency of your own reasoning. (I was worried that you'd be too biased to consider anything I would say politically, so I was trying some abstract logic to jar your fixed opinions.)
I don't know you from Adam, and so I would never make any personal judgments about you. I would not have even responded if Eric hadn't told me you were a good guy, because if you were someone I came to really dislike, I would just ignore you.
Re: pot and kettlefitzthetoadOctober 16 2005, 04:19:09 UTC
Eric said I was a good guy. Boy is he confused. Never be worried that someone is to biased to consider anything you say politically. The only way people change or grow is by hearing differing opinions. Maybe you could convince me that you are correct about something we disagree upon. Not likely, but stranger things have happened.
Heres a question for you though. Are you to biased to consider anything I would say?
Re: pot and kettlesguireknightOctober 17 2005, 00:48:40 UTC
It will be a great insight into how the other side thinks.
If you read things from a variety of viewpoints on a regular basis, not just in response to a thread on LJ, you'll find out that both sides have more than their share of knee-jerk, wacko nut jobs. And both sides have plenty of serious, thoughtful people who want to do right.
And both sides also engage in plenty of stereotyping of the other side. You previously said, "I found it funny that the cartoon talked about how hate filled republicans are yet I havent seen something like that done about liberals by anyone." Here you go: Help! Mom! There Are Liberals Under My Bed! Not just somebody's half-assed flash animation attempt at humor, either, but an honest-to-goodness, published children's book demonizing people who happen to have a different political viewpoint.
SUV problem? Interesting choice of words.
SUV's are a problem. Check out Andrew Sullivan, a conservative commentator who makes the pretty unassailable point that, if you're driving an SUV that you don't really need, just because you can afford it and it's a status symbol and oil is (was) cheap, you're unpatriotically participating in increasing our national dependence on foreign sources of oil and basically funding terrorism by sending money to the Saudis. (The link is to a bunch of daily items in his archive, search for "SUV" to find the relevant entries.)
I guess in a free country you would like to be able to tell people what they can and cannot do and if you cannot do that you would like the goverment to over-regulate whatever you don't like out of existance.
Uh... Right. That certainly follows from having characterized SUV's as a "problem." *Sigh* More liberal stereotyping and an ad hominem attack... Weren't you claiming to be the "open-minded" one a few replies earlier?
Look, people on both sides genuinely believe that they're the ones who are open minded and that it's the other guys who are the close-minded, stereotyping jerks. The acid test is whether or not you can actually claim to have some real understanding and knowledge about the other guy's substantive points, and not just dismiss whatever they say because you assume it's a stereotyped response.
Re: pot and kettlesguireknightOctober 17 2005, 01:27:12 UTC
I just realized (after I hit "submit") that my first paragraph above could have read like I was implying that galactic_dev was one of the "knee-jerk, wacko nut jobs." That's not the case.
Re: pot and kettlefitzthetoadOctober 17 2005, 05:41:47 UTC
"If you read things from a variety of viewpoints on a regular basis, not just in response to a thread on LJ, you'll find out that both sides have more than their share of knee-jerk, wacko nut jobs. And both sides have plenty of serious, thoughtful people who want to do right."
I do listen to other peoples view points on quite a regular basis, but I found it interesting that you assumed that I didnt. Wanting to do right is NEVER a reason alone to do something.
" You previously said, "I found it funny that the cartoon talked about how hate filled republicans are yet I havent seen something like that done about liberals by anyone." Here you go: Help! Mom! There Are Liberals Under My Bed! Not just somebody's half-assed flash animation attempt at humor, either, but an honest-to-goodness, published children's book demonizing people who happen to have a different political viewpoint."
Not having read that book or even heard of it I cannot comment on what it contains inside. I thank you for bringing it to my attention. If it is what you say it is, it also is worthless trash. Some books I have heard of though are "Rush Limbaugh is a big fat jerk" and "Lies and the Liars who tell them. A fair and balanced look at the right." These are books that regular people HAVE heard of and I have actually read. Have you read the Liberals under the bed book?
"Uh... Right. That certainly follows from having characterized SUV's as a "problem." *Sigh* More liberal stereotyping and an ad hominem attack... Weren't you claiming to be the "open-minded" one a few replies earlier?"
I am still claiming to be open minded. The SUV comment came from a post on his blog page where he praises France. Right from his blog-"Vive la France! I don't know why Americans are so anti-French. The French do so many things so well. See how they deal with the problems of SUVs in Paris " He openly praise France for placing huge taxes on SUV drivers there by limiting who can drive a SUV on the basis of income. This is not how our country has been drawn up. Placing taxes on luxuries prevents many from having them. The filthy rich can still afford them.
My comments were directed DIRECTLY at his praise of French and their tax plan. My comment was not stereotyping at all as it came directly from his blog page and how he felt about SUV's. Your use of the phrase "ad hominem" was also used incorrectly as the phrase refers to a personal attack on a person instead of the idea a person has spoken. I didnt attack him personaly. I attacked the idea he put forth on his blog page.
I'm guessing that jumping in the middle of this debate is why you do not know what is going on.
Re: pot and kettletheseamsterOctober 17 2005, 06:32:32 UTC
"I'm guessing that jumping in the middle of this debate is why you do not know what is going on."
Dude! Were you being intentionally ironic here? You just got done with a paragraph about personal attacks and then you closed with this sentence, which can only be read as just such an attack.
Also, he didn't just walk into the middle of a verbal debate and start spouting without knowing what's been said. He undoubtedly read all the comments and discussion before responding to you, which makes the logic of your last line pretty thin.
Re: pot and kettlefitzthetoadOctober 17 2005, 15:00:11 UTC
Yes but he had know idea where the SUV comment had come from. He assumed I was just pulling it out of my ass by his comments. Yes it was an attack but not an attack on his beliefs. It was an attack on his jumping in without knowing what was going on. Now go get that X-ray eyeball put in.
Yes, the left does the same thing; I never said that they don't. But you were implying that conservatives are somehow above this sort of behavior. They're not. Both sides do it. The simple fact that we can have this sort of tit-for-tat trading of book titles is evidence of that.
Your use of the phrase "ad hominem" was also used incorrectly as the phrase refers to a personal attack on a person instead of the idea a person has spoken.
Quote: I guess in a free country you would like to be able to tell people what they can and cannot do and if you cannot do that you would like the goverment to over-regulate whatever you don't like out of existance. Reality check: tax incentives, positive or negative, are not the same as regulation. Our government uses tax structures all the time to encourage and discourage behaviors on the part of both corporations and individuals, all the way from corporate tax breaks to encourage development in specific areas to sin taxes to discourage things like cigarette smoking.
So you mischaracterized his praise of a French tax structure as somehow meaning that he was in favor of big-government regulation of same. He may or may not be, neither one of us likely knows. But regardless, your characterization painted him with a stereotype, and then attacked what you assumed the stereotype implies about his motives, not the underlying idea in the discussion. Ad hominem.
Re: pot and kettlefitzthetoadOctober 17 2005, 16:19:54 UTC
Books books books. If you read back, I never stated that conservitives do not write attack books. I wrote that "I have not heard of any". Do not assume that you know what I am implying. The majority of the public still hasnt heard of the books you mention, but now I have. I also asked you if you read the liberals under the bed book. If you havent how can you possibly comment on it?
"Reality check: tax incentives, positive or negative, are not the same as regulation. Our government uses tax structures all the time to encourage and discourage behaviors on the part of both corporations and individuals, all the way from corporate tax breaks to encourage development in specific areas to sin taxes to discourage things like cigarette smoking"
Reality check? Are you kidding me. Tax incentives can not be negative. Economics 101. The word incentive means "A thing that urges a person foward". A tax incentive is put in place to encourage something. Sin taxes are put in place to discourage something. That by definition is regulation. Regulation: Control by rule, principle, or system. On principle I do not like tax breaks or penalties for anything. In a free country these manipulate peoples actions. The goverments job is not to control its people. It is to protect them. In a free country the market is what should be determining what goods and services are bought and sold.
"So you mischaracterized his praise of a French tax structure as somehow meaning that he was in favor of big-government regulation of same."
Praising something would mean that you like it or aprove of it. He refers to SUV's as a problem. He states "see how the French DEAL with the SUV problem". By that statement he is saying that SUV's are a problem and in need of fixing. He then posts and article describing people commiting acts of vandalism and a three hundred dollar fee for driving SUV's. He also has several other journal entries that attack SUV's. In one posting he is posting leaflets on SUV's in a parking lot talking about the evils of SUV's. Never mind the irony that the post after that is about wasting paper. It was not my characterzation that painted him. His own Blog attacks SUV's as being a problem. He is suggesting a solution. You are trying to paint his statements as very "oh look what I found". It is obvious to anyone who can read his blog site that he is quite in favor of that type of regulation. I am not stereotyping him, I am responding to his idea put forth. Your critisism is not only missing logic it is biased as you obviously agree with him.
Re: pot and kettlepetsnakereggieOctober 27 2005, 21:52:39 UTC
The majority of the public still hasnt heard of the books you mention, but now I have
I just read this for some reason but I gotta tell you that Anne Coulter is regularly on the best seller list. As is Rush Limbaugh. I would argue that in plain point of fact, the majority of the public is well aware of these books.
Re: pot and kettlefitzthetoadOctober 27 2005, 22:05:24 UTC
I think you are correct about Rush, but he hasnt written a book in 10 years. Anne I do not believe is commonly known at all though. Best seller lists are full of authors I have never heard of.
First off, I never get pissed about someone disagreeing with me on politics. I will never take that personaly. I unlike liberals am open-minded and believe that people are aloud to be wrong in this country.
The majority of your response is directed at christianity. Making fun of christians is incredibly popular right now and i find it very offensive most of the time. what I find offensive is that if I were mocking jewish people and calling them idiots for beliving in their "false gods" people on the left would treat me as though I was Hitler. Somehow Christians are fair game to be assulted though. Once again it is selective in who is aloud to be smeared. If you want to make fun of religions I would recommend one of the ones that doesnt teach "love thy neighbor" as one of only two rules you need to follow. The church and christians are not the same thing so do not even enter that arena.
I found the cartoon funny at first and then it became simply a "your a fucking idiot if your a conservitive". I find that not really offensive but kinda shallow thinking and simplistic conclusions from a group of people who call themselves "open-minded". Liberals can understand anything, no matter how fucked up it may be, except for people who don't understand them
Liberals seem to truly believe that all conservatives fit in a nice pre-set mold but they are all original and free of those boundries.
Reply
"Liberals can understand anything, no matter how fucked up it may be, except for people who don't understand them."
"Liberals seem to truly believe that all conservatives fit in a nice pre-set mold but they are all original and free of those boundries."
Yeah, you're in a great position to rail against making generalizations.
Reply
I am not free of bias opinions either.
Shows what I know.
Maybe someday I will meet someone who could change that predjudice that I have.
Reply
I thought about what you wrote before and realized something. You didnt argue any points that I made, but you did find a way to go after me personaly. I guess if thats your your idea of debate....ummmm...Your mothers so fat her blood type is rocky road.
SUV problem? Interesting choice of words. I guess in a free country you would like to be able to tell people what they can and cannot do and if you cannot do that you would like the goverment to over-regulate whatever you don't like out of existance. Freedom comes with problems. You don't like SUV's, don't drive one. Just don't try to shove your "opinions" down other peoples throats by means of the goverment.
Heres a couple of light reading pages for you to check out.
http://www.superkids.com/aweb/pages/features/netporn/amndmnts.htm
http://www.superkids.com/aweb/pages/features/impeach/us_cons.htm
Reply
I don't know you from Adam, and so I would never make any personal judgments about you. I would not have even responded if Eric hadn't told me you were a good guy, because if you were someone I came to really dislike, I would just ignore you.
Reply
Heres a question for you though. Are you to biased to consider anything I would say?
Reply
If you read things from a variety of viewpoints on a regular basis, not just in response to a thread on LJ, you'll find out that both sides have more than their share of knee-jerk, wacko nut jobs. And both sides have plenty of serious, thoughtful people who want to do right.
And both sides also engage in plenty of stereotyping of the other side. You previously said, "I found it funny that the cartoon talked about how hate filled republicans are yet I havent seen something like that done about liberals by anyone." Here you go: Help! Mom! There Are Liberals Under My Bed! Not just somebody's half-assed flash animation attempt at humor, either, but an honest-to-goodness, published children's book demonizing people who happen to have a different political viewpoint.
SUV problem? Interesting choice of words.
SUV's are a problem. Check out Andrew Sullivan, a conservative commentator who makes the pretty unassailable point that, if you're driving an SUV that you don't really need, just because you can afford it and it's a status symbol and oil is (was) cheap, you're unpatriotically participating in increasing our national dependence on foreign sources of oil and basically funding terrorism by sending money to the Saudis. (The link is to a bunch of daily items in his archive, search for "SUV" to find the relevant entries.)
I guess in a free country you would like to be able to tell people what they can and cannot do and if you cannot do that you would like the goverment to over-regulate whatever you don't like out of existance.
Uh... Right. That certainly follows from having characterized SUV's as a "problem." *Sigh* More liberal stereotyping and an ad hominem attack... Weren't you claiming to be the "open-minded" one a few replies earlier?
Look, people on both sides genuinely believe that they're the ones who are open minded and that it's the other guys who are the close-minded, stereotyping jerks. The acid test is whether or not you can actually claim to have some real understanding and knowledge about the other guy's substantive points, and not just dismiss whatever they say because you assume it's a stereotyped response.
Reply
Just want to be clear about these things... :-)
Reply
I do listen to other peoples view points on quite a regular basis, but I found it interesting that you assumed that I didnt. Wanting to do right is NEVER a reason alone to do something.
" You previously said, "I found it funny that the cartoon talked about how hate filled republicans are yet I havent seen something like that done about liberals by anyone." Here you go: Help! Mom! There Are Liberals Under My Bed! Not just somebody's half-assed flash animation attempt at humor, either, but an honest-to-goodness, published children's book demonizing people who happen to have a different political viewpoint."
Not having read that book or even heard of it I cannot comment on what it contains inside. I thank you for bringing it to my attention. If it is what you say it is, it also is worthless trash. Some books I have heard of though are "Rush Limbaugh is a big fat jerk" and "Lies and the Liars who tell them. A fair and balanced look at the right." These are books that regular people HAVE heard of and I have actually read. Have you read the Liberals under the bed book?
"Uh... Right. That certainly follows from having characterized SUV's as a "problem." *Sigh* More liberal stereotyping and an ad hominem attack... Weren't you claiming to be the "open-minded" one a few replies earlier?"
I am still claiming to be open minded. The SUV comment came from a post on his blog page where he praises France.
Right from his blog-"Vive la France!
I don't know why Americans are so anti-French. The French do so many things so well.
See how they deal with the problems of SUVs in Paris "
He openly praise France for placing huge taxes on SUV drivers there by limiting who can drive a SUV on the basis of income. This is not how our country has been drawn up. Placing taxes on luxuries prevents many from having them. The filthy rich can still afford them.
My comments were directed DIRECTLY at his praise of French and their tax plan. My comment was not stereotyping at all as it came directly from his blog page and how he felt about SUV's. Your use of the phrase "ad hominem" was also used incorrectly as the phrase refers to a personal attack on a person instead of the idea a person has spoken. I didnt attack him personaly. I attacked the idea he put forth on his blog page.
I'm guessing that jumping in the middle of this debate is why you do not know what is going on.
Reply
Dude! Were you being intentionally ironic here? You just got done with a paragraph about personal attacks and then you closed with this sentence, which can only be read as just such an attack.
Also, he didn't just walk into the middle of a verbal debate and start spouting without knowing what's been said. He undoubtedly read all the comments and discussion before responding to you, which makes the logic of your last line pretty thin.
Reply
Yes it was an attack but not an attack on his beliefs. It was an attack on his jumping in without knowing what was going on.
Now go get that X-ray eyeball put in.
Reply
Ann Coulter: Treason: Liberal Treachery from the Cold War to the War on Terrorism. Bernard Goldberg: 100 People Who Are Screwing Up America (And Al Franken is #37).
Yes, the left does the same thing; I never said that they don't. But you were implying that conservatives are somehow above this sort of behavior. They're not. Both sides do it. The simple fact that we can have this sort of tit-for-tat trading of book titles is evidence of that.
Your use of the phrase "ad hominem" was also used incorrectly as the phrase refers to a personal attack on a person instead of the idea a person has spoken.
Quote: I guess in a free country you would like to be able to tell people what they can and cannot do and if you cannot do that you would like the goverment to over-regulate whatever you don't like out of existance. Reality check: tax incentives, positive or negative, are not the same as regulation. Our government uses tax structures all the time to encourage and discourage behaviors on the part of both corporations and individuals, all the way from corporate tax breaks to encourage development in specific areas to sin taxes to discourage things like cigarette smoking.
So you mischaracterized his praise of a French tax structure as somehow meaning that he was in favor of big-government regulation of same. He may or may not be, neither one of us likely knows. But regardless, your characterization painted him with a stereotype, and then attacked what you assumed the stereotype implies about his motives, not the underlying idea in the discussion. Ad hominem.
Reply
"Reality check: tax incentives, positive or negative, are not the same as regulation. Our government uses tax structures all the time to encourage and discourage behaviors on the part of both corporations and individuals, all the way from corporate tax breaks to encourage development in specific areas to sin taxes to discourage things like cigarette smoking"
Reality check? Are you kidding me. Tax incentives can not be negative. Economics 101. The word incentive means "A thing that urges a person foward". A tax incentive is put in place to encourage something. Sin taxes are put in place to discourage something. That by definition is regulation. Regulation: Control by rule, principle, or system.
On principle I do not like tax breaks or penalties for anything. In a free country these manipulate peoples actions. The goverments job is not to control its people. It is to protect them. In a free country the market is what should be determining what goods and services are bought and sold.
"So you mischaracterized his praise of a French tax structure as somehow meaning that he was in favor of big-government regulation of same."
Praising something would mean that you like it or aprove of it. He refers to SUV's as a problem. He states "see how the French DEAL with the SUV problem". By that statement he is saying that SUV's are a problem and in need of fixing. He then posts and article describing people commiting acts of vandalism and a three hundred dollar fee for driving SUV's. He also has several other journal entries that attack SUV's. In one posting he is posting leaflets on SUV's in a parking lot talking about the evils of SUV's. Never mind the irony that the post after that is about wasting paper. It was not my characterzation that painted him. His own Blog attacks SUV's as being a problem. He is suggesting a solution. You are trying to paint his statements as very "oh look what I found". It is obvious to anyone who can read his blog site that he is quite in favor of that type of regulation. I am not stereotyping him, I am responding to his idea put forth. Your critisism is not only missing logic it is biased as you obviously agree with him.
Reply
Then my mom baked me a cake... The End
Then I humped your mom like a pot belly sow... In the End
He He He :)
Reply
I just read this for some reason but I gotta tell you that Anne Coulter is regularly on the best seller list. As is Rush Limbaugh. I would argue that in plain point of fact, the majority of the public is well aware of these books.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment