Fear Wins - Depressing

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
161

[quote]lixy wrote:
thunderbolt23 wrote:
If you want, I can PM you the details of what it is like to have one - just say the word.

I’m always amazed at people who confuse “to have” and “to be”.[/quote]

You have first hand experience of knowing whether he is confused or not? Do tell.

Is vroom confused as well? I find it almost impossible for him to get “to have” confused with “to be”. One would have “to have” before they could get it confused with anything.

I hear that you swede’s dig that sort of thing.

Not that there’s anything wrong with that.

162

[quote]lixy wrote:

I’m always amazed at people who confuse “to have” and “to be”.[/quote]

Isn’t that sweet - Lixy is coming to Vroom’s rescue.

Does this mean that you and Vroom have a homoerotic relationship? According to Vroom, it must.

Again, not that there is anything wrong with that.

163

Well, I was trying to leave this thread alone, but man, look at these fucking tools go!

As far as I could tell Lixy made a funny at your expense Thunder, he didn’t agree with me or support my stance on anything.

I don’t suppose you can tell the difference?

Anyway, knock yourselves out if it makes you feel better. Clowns.

164

[quote]vroom wrote:
Well, I was trying to leave this thread alone, but man, look at these fucking tools go!

As far as I could tell Lixy made a funny at your expense Thunder, he didn’t agree with me or support my stance on anything.

I don’t suppose you can tell the difference?

Anyway, knock yourselves out if it makes you feel better. Clowns.[/quote]

Vroom stars crying and then quits - but only after posting the following cerebral gems:

[b][i]LOL. I see Thunderdolt finally found someone to hold his dick for him. Maybe now the tears will stop?

Rainjack said he wants you to let go of his dick now.

You jump in to hold Rainjack’s dick, and then the two of you offer tag team support to each other.

Oh look, it’s a tag team. You guys holding hands?[/b][/i]

Maybe there is a good reason you stand on the shore amazed at the ripples: You can’t fucking swim.

165

[quote]rainjack wrote:
Maybe there is a good reason you stand on the shore amazed at the ripples: You can’t fucking swim.
[/quote]

Zzzzz.

I think we’ve fought the battles associated with this thread… but hey, carry on without me if it makes you happy.

166

This thread has been misnamed.

I hereby dub it “Adolescent Vituperativeness wins - Discouraging”.

Shame on you all.

167

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
This thread has been misnamed.

I hereby dub it “Adolescent Vituperativeness wins - Discouraging”.

Shame on you all.[/quote]

Ease up there, my squid ink loving friend. It might not be filled with as many “words of the day” - but I have seen you go off similarly in your own multi-syllabic way.

168

[quote]rainjack wrote:
Ease up there, my squid ink loving friend. It might not be filled with as many “words of the day” - but I have seen you go off similarly in your own multi-syllabic way.

[/quote]

Squid ink? Nah. Spaghetti al nero di seppia is okay once in a while, but otherwise squid ink just ain’t my thing.

The difference, Rainjack, is that I usually try to attack the argument rather than the man.

I’ve lost it on a few occasions, I admit, such as when I traded insults with Headhunter and Lorisco on the “Young People” and “Kwanzaa” threads, but we have settled our differences since then. I was also pretty brutal with Nominal Prospect in another thread, when he implied that the natural and proper role of women was that of a slave to men.

But since then, I think I’ve engaged in very few ad hominem assaults, if any at all.

Turning a perfectly good thread into a volleyball game of “you’re stupid!” “no, you are!” “well, you’re a fag!” “no, you are!” is not, in my estimation, something that four intelligent grown men should be proud of.

That is all.

169

I’ve been gone for a while. I get a few adjustment days.

Besides - the brew-ha-ha began when a reasonable request for clarification was ignored. Not just ignored - but those asking were basically called idiots for not figuring it out on their own. Pardon me if that pegs my frustrate-o-meter.

I guess it was a matter of rising - or sinking - to the level of my opponent.

And who even mentioned being proud of it? I have been through all the suspect posts, and never once was it even alluded to.

But if it makes you feel like a biggun’ to tsk your finger at the same behavior you have freely admitted to…well…knock yourself out.

170

[quote]rainjack wrote:
I’ve been gone for a while. I get a few adjustment days.

Besides - the brew-ha-ha began when a reasonable request for clarification was ignored. Not just ignored - but those asking were basically called idiots for not figuring it out on their own. Pardon me if that pegs my frustrate-o-meter.

I guess it was a matter of rising - or sinking - to the level of my opponent.

And who even mentioned being proud of it? I have been through all the suspect posts, and never once was it even alluded to.

But if it makes you feel like a biggun’ to tsk your finger at the same behavior you have freely admitted to…well…knock yourself out.

[/quote]

I’m done tsking. I like a good debate thread, and I’m always a little disappointed when it devolves into an exchange of insults. It certainly doesn’t make me feel any bigger to tell people that I like and respect (and I do respect all four of you), that they are acting childish. Quite the opposite, in fact.

As for Vroom’s initial ejaculation that sparked the whole thing, I thought it was pretty clear. He was criticizing people (specifically you and Thunder) for taking what he considered to be cheap shots at their “political enemies” (which I took to mean Lixy and perhaps himself).

Of course, I could be wrong. We’ll never know, nor does it matter at this point. I think this thread is pretty much dead.

171

Dead like a zombie. It just keeps coming, no matter how many bullets are expended. It drags it’s sorry ass carcass inexorably down the road.

and I just helped it along. damn.

172

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
rainjack wrote:
Ease up there, my squid ink loving friend. It might not be filled with as many “words of the day” - but I have seen you go off similarly in your own multi-syllabic way.

Squid ink? Nah. Spaghetti al nero di seppia is okay once in a while, but otherwise squid ink just ain’t my thing.

The difference, Rainjack, is that I usually try to attack the argument rather than the man.

I’ve lost it on a few occasions, I admit, such as when I traded insults with Headhunter and Lorisco on the “Young People” and “Kwanzaa” threads, but we have settled our differences since then. I was also pretty brutal with Nominal Prospect in another thread, when he implied that the natural and proper role of women was that of a slave to men.

But since then, I think I’ve engaged in very few ad hominem assaults, if any at all.

Turning a perfectly good thread into a volleyball game of “you’re stupid!” “no, you are!” “well, you’re a fag!” “no, you are!” is not, in my estimation, something that four intelligent grown men should be proud of.

That is all.

[/quote]

Seconded. That’s the real problem with the politics thread, not anti-Americanism, or conservatism, or even trolls (some of whom are pretty damn funny). It all degenerates into little personal squabbles and attacks after maybe 100 or so good posts. Pity.

173

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

As for Vroom’s initial ejaculation that sparked the whole thing, I thought it was pretty clear. He was criticizing people (specifically you and Thunder) for taking what he considered to be cheap shots at their “political enemies” (which I took to mean Lixy and perhaps himself). [/quote]

Varq, I don’t necessarily disagree with your point. This thread did degenerate, and it is a shame.

That said, there were no “cheap shots” at Lixy - for example, my past point to him was a substantive discussion about the difference between airport security and trainstop security.

I will only add that many of us have reached a zero-tolerance threshold for the kinds of nonsense that have driven these forums down and won’t idly whistle past when someone is screwing it up further.

My commitment is to a good, robust debate with many viewpoints represented focused on the issues - and if I get testy because someone wants to drive the debate into something else, it is because I want to preserve what is left of a decent political forum (which isn’t much).

174

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
That said, there were no “cheap shots” at Lixy - for example, my past point to him was a substantive discussion about the difference between airport security and trainstop security. [/quote]

You have a habit of appending insults to all your replies. That’s what drives a perfectly good discussion into kindergarten drivel.

I believe that you’re a rational person. However, I can’t understand why you would attempt to label that which you disagree with as “nonsense”. I mean, it’s not like anyone is trolling around here (though Rainjack comes awfully close). People on my side of the spectrum, do give sound arguments. Better yet, they almost never resort to ad hominems which proliferates on your side.

I can’t judge the level of intellect 'cause I haven’t been around here for long. But let’s assume that the quality of the Politics forum has deteriorated. Do you think insulting others will make it any better? You try to fit as many derogatory comments as possible in your posts. That’s not magically going to bring it the level up. The people of T-Nation are not the best subjects to intimidate. Such tactics might work on the dorky neighbor to make him move, but that ain’t gonna achieve squat on an Internet forum - let alone T-Nation.

You claim to be seeking a “robust” exchange of ideas, and yet, never fail to throw in hate language that achieves nothing even remotely constructive.

Now, why are you saying that the debate was driven into something else? Did my question about the double-standard plane/train security sound as out of context? Was it an illegitimate inquiry?

You’re not preserving anything by this childish behavior. You’re actually actively driving it into the ground.

175

[quote]lixy wrote:
thunderbolt23 wrote:
That said, there were no “cheap shots” at Lixy - for example, my past point to him was a substantive discussion about the difference between airport security and trainstop security.

You have a habit of appending insults to all your replies. That’s what drives a perfectly good discussion into kindergarten drivel.

I will only add that many of us have reached a zero-tolerance threshold for the kinds of nonsense that have driven these forums down and won’t idly whistle past when someone is screwing it up further.

I believe that you’re a rational person. However, I can’t understand why you would attempt to label that which you disagree with as “nonsense”. I mean, it’s not like anyone is trolling around here (though Rainjack comes awfully close). People on my side of the spectrum, do give sound arguments. Better yet, they almost never resort to ad hominems which proliferates on your side.

I can’t judge the level of intellect 'cause I haven’t been around here for long. But let’s assume that the quality of the Politics forum has deteriorated. Do you think insulting others will make it any better? You try to fit as many derogatory comments as possible in your posts. That’s not magically going to bring it the level up. The people of T-Nation are not the best subjects to intimidate. Such tactics might work on the dorky neighbor to make him move, but that ain’t gonna achieve squat on an Internet forum - let alone T-Nation.

My commitment is to a good, robust debate with many viewpoints represented focused on the issues - and if I get testy because someone wants to drive the debate into something else

You claim to be seeking a “robust” exchange of ideas, and yet, never fail to throw in hate language that achieves nothing even remotely constructive.

Now, why are you saying that the debate was driven into something else? Did my question about the double-standard plane/train security sound as out of context? Was it an illegitimate inquiry?

it is because I want to preserve what is left of a decent political forum (which isn’t much).

You’re not preserving anything by this childish behavior. You’re actually actively driving it into the ground. [/quote]

You have no room to be acting like the school marm.

I hardly am a troll. I don’t like you, or your murderous beliefs, and I will make sure that you know that every time I reply to your posts.

176

[quote]lixy wrote:

I believe that you’re a rational person. However, I can’t understand why you would attempt to label that which you disagree with as “nonsense”. I mean, it’s not like anyone is trolling around here (though Rainjack comes awfully close). [/quote]

That doesn’t stand up to any kind of scrutiny. There most certainly is trolling around here. And RJ is far from a troll.

By and large, your “side of the argument” is what has brought the quality of this forum down. And, to put it bluntly, you don’t impress many with “sound arguments” yourself - and don’t read that as an ad hominem.

You have proven to be practically incapable of reasonable debate - you conveniently ignore information that doesn’t comport with your radical agenda and you use shaky claims. You aren’t part of “the solution”. Don’t go patting yourself on the back - once you get cornered with information that contradicts your ideological conclusions, you change the subject.

“Sound”? There are sound arguments made around here, right and left. Just not from you or your radical colleagues.

Actually, I don’t.

I don’t worry about a “magical solution” - I am concerned with making sure that silly and unsubstantiated radical opinions are not legitimized as respectable ideas when they deserve no such status. I have repeatedly explained what I think to be the glaring failure in your limited view - that may cut close to the quick, but it isn’t an insult for the sake of an insult, and if you can’t handle such pointed criticism of your ideas, find another hobby.

“Hate language”? Let me guess - you are a “victim”, yet again.

See above. While I fully admit to peppering some of my replies with insults, you think that every criticism I level at you is an ad hominem - it’s not, so you should consider thicker skin. If think your ideas are bad, silly, or I think you are uninformed, I may tell you so. That isn’t an insult or “hate language”.

No, and you read it precisely wrong - our exchange about the security arrangements was exactly the kind of exchange of opinions that is beneficial, even if we differed. That was not the source of the derailment, and I have never suggested so.

So what is your suggestion to purge the forums of the silly and useless radical garbage that does nothing to enhance the exchange of worthwhile ideas around here?

I am all ears.

177

[quote]rainjack wrote:

You have no room to be acting like the school marm.

I hardly am a troll. I don’t like you, or your murderous beliefs, and I will make sure that you know that every time I reply to your posts.[/quote]

Right.

Here is an example:

Someone says “I think we should raise taxes so we can nationalize health care insurance.”

I disagree with them and would argue the other way as forcefully as I could. But I don’t think the person is raising an issue I disagree with in bad faith.

Conversely, someone says “I think Bush, an evil neocon controlled by the Jews, invaded Iraq as an imperialist move, despite evidence to the contrary…oh, and he did it for racist reasons.”

I am not inclined to pull my chin and say “interesting - that is a legitimate point of view worthy of consideration. Tell me more.” in a fit of relatavistic tolerance. In the marketplace of ideas, stupid ideas need to be called out and branded as such, political correctness aside.

Why allow such ridiculous opinions a fair seat at the table with other ideas? Not all ideas are of equal value - and as long as we adhere to the shibboleth that they are, we waste our time on frivolity when our minds should be trained on legitimate questions.

178

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Why allow such ridiculous opinions a fair seat at the table with other ideas? Not all ideas are of equal value - and as long as we adhere to the shibboleth that they are, we waste our time on frivolity when our minds should be trained on legitimate questions.[/quote]

Bingo.

179

[quote]rainjack wrote:
I hardly am a troll. I don’t like you, or your murderous beliefs, and I will make sure that you know that every time I reply to your posts. [/quote]

Well, you sometimes sound like one. You know, the kind that loves to throw stereotypes at people. If there was a French guy that hangs out around here, you’ll be tagging him as a “cheese-eating surrender monkey”. Anyway, just a head’s up…

Now, please explain why you’re using such terms as “murderous beliefs”. What makes you say that?

180

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
I don’t worry about a “magical solution” - I am concerned with making sure that silly and unsubstantiated radical opinions are not legitimized as respectable ideas when they deserve no such status. I have repeatedly explained what I think to be the glaring failure in your limited view - that may cut close to the quick, but it isn’t an insult for the sake of an insult, and if you can’t handle such pointed criticism of your ideas, find another hobby. [/quote]

It goes far beyond “pointed criticism of […] ideas”. You never miss an opportunity to use expressions such as “trustfund radical”, “wanabee”, “stupid” and other terms that only poisons the debate.

Open a dicionary. Insults are a form of hateful communication.

By all means. I often point out that some ideas are bad or silly. However, I don’t make that a central point of my posts.

The majority of your posts (whether addressed to me or to someone else) have insults so intertwined with the arguments that it’s hard to separate them.

Bottomline, please vent your rage in the gym where it belongs. Let’s keep this board civilized.

My bad.

[quote]So what is your suggestion to purge the forums of the silly and useless radical garbage that does nothing to enhance the exchange of worthwhile ideas around here?

I am all ears.[/quote]

It might help to identify the kind of “useless radical garbage” you want to keep out. Do provide examples if you are really interested in hearing suggestions.

In general, trolls feed on name-calling, but there might be exceptions.