Okay rainman, I will try to stretch a little and believe your a normal family guy and not some madman planning the demise of liberal minded peoples the world over.
I have said it before and I will say it again, I think you are a very cool dude and one thing I would never call you is a liar. The absolute worst thing a person could be.
I have a lot of respect for you, but when I read some of your stuff it fires me up and brings out the worst in me. As I am sure some of my viewpoints do with you.
Also, if you can jokingly refer to shooting liberals then surely, I can jokingly refer to you as the taliban. I admit, I have that argumentative streak in me as well. Not as much as I used to, but enough to get me arguing with you at times.
“The Taliban and extremist Muslims are very conservative in their thinking and like rainman want to destroy anyone that doesn’t think like them.”
Nonsense - equating Islamofascists to Western conservatives is dishonest and ignorant.
Muslims extremists don’t want to conserve anything - they want a radical revolution to a mythical utopia of the past. They are fascists.
Western conservatives want to conserve liberal Western institutions - which promote diversity, pluralism, and exchange of ideas - subject to some level of taste, virtue, and morality.
And Rainjack can speak for himself, but since when did he want to destroy people who think differently than himself?
[quote]Elkhntr1 wrote:
Okay rainman, I will try to stretch a little and believe your a normal family guy and not some madman planning the demise of liberal minded peoples the world over.
I have said it before and I will say it again, I think you are a very cool dude and one thing I would never call you is a liar. The absolute worst thing a person could be.
I have a lot of respect for you, but when I read some of your stuff it fires me up and brings out the worst in me. As I am sure some of my viewpoints do with you.
Also, if you can jokingly refer to shooting liberals then surely, I can jokingly refer to you as the taliban. I admit, I have that argumentative streak in me as well. Not as much as I used to, but enough to get me arguing with you at times. [/quote]
You can paint your definition of conservatism under any brush you want to. From the angle I view it, and that is really the only view that is important to me, in some extreme examples it does remind me of the close minded thinking of extremist islam.
A desire to control the thinking and beliefs of other people and to use religion to as the tool to do it with. Just look at Pat Roberts or James Dobson to them Gov. and religion go hand in hand and everything is cool as long as you think like them.
You are even trying to tell me how to think with your here is the correct definition of your point of view. Well you can keep it, I don’t want your viewpoint, I have my own.
You can paint your definition of conservatism under any brush you want to. From the angle I view it, and that is really the only view that is important to me, in some extreme examples it does remind me of the close minded thinking of extremist islam.
A desire to control the thinking and beliefs of other people and to use religion to as the tool to do it with. Just look at Pat Roberts or James Dobson to them Gov. and religion go hand in hand and everything is cool as long as you think like them.
You are even trying to tell me how to think with your here is the correct definition of your point of view. Well you can keep it, I don’t want your viewpoint, I have my own.[/quote]
Admirable of course. However, and I’m not trying to single you or anyone else out, but it would be good if we all played a fair game of ball, wouldn’t it?
From time to time we see some pretty awful rule voilations around these parts.
I’m not sure there are any alliances except invented ones.
Do you have alliances here? I know you often have a similar group of people arguing similar viewpoints to yours, but alliances?
I think that is unfair. Unless of course you are allied with Jerffy maybe? Because, you know, he is always on your side.
It’s bad enough the government is all divided up by alliances. Why can’t we just discuss issues and learn from it, it’s not like anybody is making rules based on our bullshit arguing.
[quote]vroom wrote:
Your rhetoric and your alliances prove you wrong at every turn.
Rainjack,
I’m not sure there are any alliances except invented ones.
Do you have alliances here? I know you often have a similar group of people arguing similar viewpoints to yours, but alliances?
I think that is unfair. Unless of course you are allied with Jerffy maybe? Because, you know, he is always on your side.
It’s bad enough the government is all divided up by alliances. Why can’t we just discuss issues and learn from it, it’s not like anybody is making rules based on our bullshit arguing.[/quote]
I like to think of myself as allied with RainJack.
He’s the kind of guy I’d like to have spot me on a hard set, the kind of guy I’d like to have a beer with, and the kind of guy I like to watch argue politics.
[quote]vroom wrote:
I want my side to win everytime we take the field. I won’t apologize for that. But that is a looooong way from extremist.
Rainjack,
Admirable of course. However, and I’m not trying to single you or anyone else out, but it would be good if we all played a fair game of ball, wouldn’t it?
From time to time we see some pretty awful rule voilations around these parts.[/quote]
We see “rules violations” on both sides. The cool thing about this forum is everyone has a bullshit flag and none of the regulars are afraid to throw it. Whether or not the offensive player believes he has committed a foul, most of the readers down here are more than smart enough to know bullshit when they see it.
As for playing nice and sharing toys - well that’s just gay.
[quote]vroom wrote:
Your rhetoric and your alliances prove you wrong at every turn.
Rainjack,
I’m not sure there are any alliances except invented ones.
Do you have alliances here? I know you often have a similar group of people arguing similar viewpoints to yours, but alliances?
I think that is unfair. Unless of course you are allied with Jerffy maybe? Because, you know, he is always on your side.
It’s bad enough the government is all divided up by alliances. Why can’t we just discuss issues and learn from it, it’s not like anybody is making rules based on our bullshit arguing.[/quote]
We only have one fence on any given subject down here: My side and the losing side. By alliances, I mean which side of the fence, relative to me, you are standing on.
ProfessorX is on the wrong side of the fence most every time he argues. Ergo, he has liberal alliances. Honestly - me on the liberal end of an argument? May your camels have eternal mange if this is true.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
We only have one fence on any given subject down here: My side and the losing side. By alliances, I mean which side of the fence, relative to me, you are standing on.[/quote]
Someone who truly believes this, could never learn anything new in life. You justify the old saying, “you can’t teach an old dog new tricks”. I personally would hate to be that way. You seem to wrap yourself all up in it. There are thousands of people the world over like that. Congratulations on fitting in.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Someone who truly believes this, could never learn anything new in life. You justify the old saying, “you can’t teach an old dog new tricks”. I personally would hate to be that way. You seem to wrap yourself all up in it. There are thousands of people the world over like that. Congratulations on fitting in.[/quote]
I’ve learned plenty - probably forgot more shit than you will ever learn, prof.
Who’s saying that I refuse to learn? You might want to brush up on your reading comprehension skills again. I think you’re having trouble with the chapter on recognizing sarcasm. But that’s okay - you’re a young ignorant kid that thinks he has a handle on the human condition. You’ll figure out how damn dumb you are soon enough.
How do you know there are “thousands” of people like me? Last I counted 55% of the House and Senate, and at least 51% of the American people - But I guess in your world that is pretty damn close to “thousands”, isn’t it? Go to public schools much? It shows.
For being one of the “Labels are Bad” crybabies - you are either the biggest fucking hypocrite on T-Nation, or you have changed your mind about it. Which is it, Prof? are you a hypocrite, or did you change your mind?
If it is a group you’re not in, Prof - It’s probably the right group to be in.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
How do you know there are “thousands” of people like me? Last I counted 55% of the House and Senate, and at least 51% of the American people - But I guess in your world that is pretty damn close to “thousands”, isn’t it? Go to public schools much? It shows.[/quote]
Did I restrict that statement to the US? I didn’t think so. In an entire world of people stuck in old ways for the sake of being that way, you don’t think there are thousands? What exactly is the point of any of this discussion if your apparent goal is to just school everyone who doesn’t agree with you on how wrong they are? Do you truly believe you are that right on all issues? I don’t consider myself a master of the human condition, however, I am learning more by the day. You have apparently already gotten to that point…and this is the result? Maybe I should change my goals.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Did I restrict that statement to the US? I didn’t think so. In an entire world of people stuck in old ways for the sake of being that way, you don’t think there are thousands? [/quote]
You’re about a thick headed sumbitch - ain’t you? Once again - reading comprehension. READING COMPREHENSION. The point was there are a shitload more people “like me” than just thousands. I swear, you take all the fun out of being sarcastic.
When have I stated any “apparent goal”? When have I ever even used the term “school somebody”? Wait - this wouldn’t be you attempting to think for me again, would it? To tell me how to behave? To judge me? You wouldn’t make dumbass assumptions, would you? You have proof of me displaying these personality traits right? I thought you would - because short of that you are just talking baseless bullshit. And everyone knows how perfect the professor is.
Never said I was a master of anything. You are the one spouting off about “thousands just like me” or some horseshit. You are the one that purports to know me. You seem to know how I’ve turned out. You wouldn’t know me from Adam. All you know of me is what I let you see. Don’t like what you see? TOugh shit. But if you think your little sophmoric digs such as, " you have apparently already gotten to that point…and this is the result? Maybe I should change my goals" does anything, you have to remember - I’m not a member of your fan club. I won’t lick your balls because you are a big scary black man (your words - not mine). In fact, your bully tactics are the exact thing you are pissin’ down my leg about.
So - answer my question, Prof. Are you a hypocrite, or did you change your mind? Has labeling people now become okay with you? Or are you a hypocrite? Or is it only okay when you are doing the labeling?
[quote]vroom wrote:
Rainjack, you are just spoiling for a fight. While I like 'em as much as the next guy… this seems a bit pointless.[/quote]
They’re all pointless, vroom. I’m not spoiling for anything except maybe, just maybe, some folks around here understanding what is written before they start hemorrhaging bullshit from their keyboards.
If you have trouble understanding the point of what I wrote, prof - feel free to PM me and I will explain to you what I am saying.
Yeah, especially since I’m not a liberal. That IS odd.
Interesting.
If this is true, then what conservative positions do you support?[/quote]
First let’s define “conservative ideals”. Everyone seems to have a different take on these ideals as long as it supports what they want to believe. If there are any I miss, then add them;
-pro-life ideals with regards to abortions
-pro-traditional family values (whatever that means because that would completely depend on what the individual was exposed to in his/her own family)
-deep spiritual convictions
-the role of the government (the largest major public flaw as of late because I thought conservatives wanted limited government but many keep granting them more and more power)
I personally am the son of a preacher. I have deep spritual values based on that. The difference is, I have no desire to inflict my will on others as the current “conservatives” seem to have as their goal in life. Therefore, while I personally would not take part in having an abortion for a child I helped create, I would never make a law that would make it against the law for a woman to have control of her body. Now, was there something I missed? My line of thinking is very related to promoting the “family”. I think it is the core of creating great human beings. However, I also don’t feel it is my right to force a state of censorship on every possible form of media to reach that goal in MY family. I will add more later if I have to.