Politics: J'accuse!

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
Or a solution to the too many people, too little food thing.

He's an egomaniac. His solutions are conscious things. He would not, I think, accomplish aims and goals through means that make him, or his administration of his country, appear to be inefficient, careless, or inept, as a large train accident does.

If he wanted them dead, he wouldn't hesiate to kill them directly.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
Or a solution to the too many people, too little food thing.

That was solving the problem all by itself, though.

[Say_hello_for_me]

Originally posted by Not Me
For option (b), are you saying that China bombed NK?

Or hijacked a train and crashed it into another.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Say_hello_for_me
Or hijacked a train and crashed it into another.

The Chinese don't strike me as the type to engage in suicide missions. What would be the purpose again? Just to intimidate NK by flexing muscle?

I just think that the most likely thing that happened is a fuck up by someone leading to a misrouting, although I do find it incredible that there could be 3000 people injured/dead.

[Say_hello_for_me]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)

[ETA:] Apparently NKorea has cut phone lines to limit dissemination of information about the explosion. That's hardly part of a statement-making strategy.

You don't seem like a strawman beater to me, but him targeting his own people was supposed to be to shut them up if they saw something, not to get them to make phone calls to everyone they could. So, if you are saying it seems like a statement-stopping strategy, then we are squarely aligned.

Hell(if not, I figure Route 7 to Leesburg, route 15 to Harpers Ferry, and Kentucky by nightfall)o

[Say_hello_for_me]

Originally posted by Not Me
The Chinese don't strike me as the type to engage in suicide missions.

I'm off to FLA. for the weekend Someone else care to provide a brief synopsis of Chinese involvement in the Korean war to Not_Me?

[bilmore]

Originally posted by leagleaze
Look at the two statements:

How do you defend the terrorist religion of Islam, it is violent and intolerant of women?

Versus

I am concerned about the impact of Islam on women, do you think we could talk about the history there so I can obtain a better understanding of what is really going on.

A lot of the people crying PC PC are the ones who start the conversation the first way. And all they are really doing is hiding the fact that they are bigots behind those two letters.

I am concerned about the impact of Hitler on Jews. Could we speak of his history so that I can understand what was driving him?

v.

How can you defend the murderous and racist Hitler?

Am I bigoted because I would use the second phrase? Intolerant of Hitler? It still comes down to personal context in your example. Obviously, no one would call me bigoted for ripping into Adolph. No one seems to call the person ripping into the uncommon Mormon practice of the one old fart taking seven teenage wives "intolerant". That's because the bulk of the people are viewing it as indefensible. I view the role of women in several religions similarly, but expressions of that are "intolerant"? No way. You seem to be succumbing to the myth that it's not PC if it upholds the pop morality. I can't accept the view that "they beat their wives, but it's okay, because their culture is different" is a morally supportable thesis, but that's what your "tolerance" seems to demand.

[Did you just call me Coltrane?]

Libertarian Reluctantly Calls Fire Department

CHEYENNE, WY—After attempting to contain a living-room blaze started by a cigarette, card-carrying Libertarian Trent Jacobs reluctantly called the Cheyenne Fire Department Monday. "Although the community would do better to rely on an efficient, free-market fire-fighting service, the fact is that expensive, unnecessary public fire departments do exist," Jacobs said. "Also, my house was burning down." Jacobs did not offer to pay firefighters for their service.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by leagleaze
I'm not known for being PC, despite the occasional comment to the contrary here. That is because I rarely focus on the surface and I recognize that sometimes a joke is just a joke and a fag is just a cigarette. If more people did this, we would be better off.

As far as talking about religion, race, sexual orientation without getting in trouble, sometimes you cannot. Sometimes someone in the room will have a knee jerk reaction and you will spend more time trying to prove you aren't a bigot then you can spend on a useful conversation on the subject. That is truly unfortunate, we'd be much better off if we could have an honest discussion about Islam and its impact on women, never mind Christianity and its impact on women. We would be better off if we could have an honest conversation about HIV in the gay community. We would be better off if we could have an honest conversation about domestic abuse amongst lesbians.

Sometimes what happens is if you discuss the former you are being intolerant of religion. What happens if you discuss the latter is that people who are anti-gay scream see, that is why it is wrong to be homosexual, or they do something similar to what happened on the last board and make up statistics about women beating up women (rampaging democratic lesbians as I recall.)

In all cases the point is being missed. But then again, sometimes people bring up Islam and women or HIV and gay people simply because they want to attack Islam or gay people. Which returns us again to context.

Look at the two statements:

How do you defend the terrorist religion of Islam, it is violent and intolerant of women?

Versus

I am concerned about the impact of Islam on women, do you think we could talk about the history there so I can obtain a better understanding of what is really going on.

A lot of the people crying PC PC are the ones who start the conversation the first way. And all they are really doing is hiding the fact that they are bigots behind those two letters.

Leagl,

You're utterly correct, but if we force politeness rules on threads, these boards will get stale and dry up. Like it or not, what keeps these boards vibrant is people saying what they'd never say in polite society. If I'm debating Islam with a Wahhabist, I'm thinking "Fuck this idiot waterhead and his fear of women... we ought to take his kind and throw them in a prison camp run by half naked Amazons." But I ain't sayin' that. Instead, I'm probably going to politely say "Well, explain to me the problems women have in the Islamic faith so I can better understand your point." That kind of discourse is dishonest. If the dumb son of bitch would have a drink, I'd take him to a bar and after lubing him up a bit, tell him exactly why his piece of shit religion - like all others - is an intellectually dishonest circle jerk which is presently fucking up the global society. On these boards, I'll say exactly that, and if someone doesn't like it, skip my post.

If you don't care for people like me telling you exactly what I think, you're free to rip me a new ass about being insensitive. You've done it before. Its your position, and you can be as nasty in your commentary as you like. When others yell "PC PC" tell them to shit in their hats. You're entitled to your view.

I'm sick of having to bite my tongue for judges, opposing counsel, my broker, my mechanic, and every other person around who can't handle a direct comment. So many syllables, so much dancing, so much wasted time. If anything, we need to encourage people to be more direct in telling people what they think. I say fuck religion. Fuck them all. Its a money machine and a set of rules for scared men to subjugate women. You know what else? So is every problem in this world. Women drive me nuts with their stupid emotional shit and mood swings, but men's twisted desire to keep women down because of fear of their own inadequacies and fragile male egos has done 10000X the damages of all the PMS tantrums collective womenhood has brought us since time began. Radical Islam is another way for a group of men who fear they've got small dicks to assert themselves.

Its all fucking Freud. He was right. Get these waterheads laid, teach them to respect women and this shit will all end. Good luck with that.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

I'm not bold enough to propose a unified theory of what is and what is not PC, but I have a couple of observations. First, maybe the difference between hyperbolic statements about Christianity and Islam, at least in this culture, is that there is a presumed familiarity with the former and a presumed ignorance about the latter. (Present company excluded.)

Second, the way bilmore described PC a few posts ago, it just sounds like a shorthand that lefties use to dismiss substantive points of view that they have previously considered and rejected. If so -- and I'm not sure this does justice to the way the term is used -- but if so, is anyone really going to pretend that conservatives don't do the same thing?

[Not Me]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
why his piece of shit religion - like all others - is an intellectually dishonest circle jerk which is presently fucking up the global society.

Some religions are worse than others and some are actually a net positive. You aren't allowed to say that nowadays, either.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
If we force politeness rules on threads, these boards will get stale and dry up.

Fortunately, no one is contemplating that.

If you don't care for people like me telling you exactly what I think, you're free to rip me a new ass about being insensitive.

Yes, that's more like it.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Not Me
Some religions are worse than others and some are actually a net positive. You aren't allowed to say that nowadays, either.

But look -- you just did!

It's a stupid thing to say, but that didn't stop you. Tell me, how did you perform this cost-benefit analysis? And what's the baseline?

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Leagl,

You're utterly correct, but if we force politeness rules on threads, these boards will get stale and dry up. Like it or not, what keeps these boards vibrant is people saying what they'd never say in polite society. If I'm debating Islam with a Wahhabist, I'm thinking "Fuck this idiot waterhead and his fear of women... we ought to take his kind and throw them in a prison camp run by half naked Amazons." But I ain't sayin' that. Instead, I'm probably going to politely say "Well, explain to me the problems women have in the Islamic faith so I can better understand your point." That kind of discourse is dishonest. If the dumb son of bitch would have a drink, I'd take him to a bar and after lubing him up a bit, tell him exactly why his piece of shit religion - like all others - is an intellectually dishonest circle jerk which is presently fucking up the global society. On these boards, I'll say exactly that, and if someone doesn't like it, skip my post.

If you don't care for people like me telling you exactly what I think, you're free to rip me a new ass about being insensitive. You've done it before. Its your position, and you can be as nasty in your commentary as you like. When others yell "PC PC" tell them to shit in their hats. You're entitled to your view.

I'm sick of having to bite my tongue for judges, opposing counsel, my broker, my mechanic, and every other person around who can't handle a direct comment. So many syllables, so much dancing, so much wasted time. If anything, we need to encourage people to be more direct in telling people what they think. I say fuck religion. Fuck them all. Its a money machine and a set of rules for scared men to subjugate women. You know what else? So is every problem in this world. Women drive me nuts with their stupid emotional shit and mood swings, but men's twisted desire to keep women down because of fear of their own inadequacies and fragile male egos has done 10000X the damages of all the PMS tantrums collective womenhood has brought us since time began. Radical Islam is another way for a group of men who fear they've got small dicks to assert themselves.

Its all fucking Freud. He was right. Get these waterheads laid, teach them to respect women and this shit will all end. Good luck with that.

You shouldn't be so insensitive to the waterheads.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
Second, the way bilmore described PC a few posts ago, it just sounds like a shorthand that lefties use to dismiss substantive points of view that they have previously considered and rejected. If so -- and I'm not sure this does justice to the way the term is used -- but if so, is anyone really going to pretend that conservatives don't do the same thing?

Nope. PC comes from all sides. Different subjects at times, but same basic driver.