Waiting for Fitzgerald - Page 114

sebastian_dangerfield · 10-05-2005, 01:37 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
I thought A Handmaid's Tale was supposed to be fiction.

ETA: summary of objectional parts of the law if you don't want to wade through the bill

These "bills" are the Right setting up liberals and moderates. They hope to pass this and then cry when a Court chucks it as unconstitutional following a challenge from some Democratic group. This kind of cheap nonsense will be ending very shortly, as the nation's tolerance for the Right is getting awfully short. Bush is sinking like a stone, and the Right is equated with him. As he goes, they go.

Cheney talked about "death throes of an insurgency in Iraq." He was looking in the wrong direction. I'd say the Religious Right's high water mark has passed. In the coming decades, people disgusted with the nonsense they've seen perpetrated by the few who sseek to rule everyone under their idiot religious rules are going tio start whacking the right with their votes rather than court challenges to absurd bills.

I wonder what the Right will do then? Shit, I know what it will do - it will petition the Courts, and scream about how it needs an activist judiciary to save the nation from moral relativists working at the legislative level. It'll just be a shifting of instrumentality - the Rights using the Courts, the Left/Middle using the legislature. What a comic dance of idiots. Intelligent design? Yeh...

taxwonk · 10-05-2005, 01:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
If you are going to internalise criticism of philosophy or Party Platforms or governance in a political discussion then there is no way to avoid being offended. It's an immature outlook, imnsho. You aren't a party leader and unless I am missing something the heirarchy of the DNC couldn't give a rat's arse as to what you or Wonk think. So what grandiose delusion makes you think that when I criticise them it somehow includes you? Schizophrenics internalise comments directed at others in this way. Perhaps you guys need meds. Maybe fringey can share?

Perhaps we personalize it because you make the comments to us. You were responding to my post when you characterized "us Demos" as being blah, blah, blah. When you make a comment including me in a group, then you disparage that group, it doesn't really mean much when you then say that you weren't talking about us.

How is what you do qualitatively different that making a disparaging remark about Jews, but then saying, "Not you, Wonk, you're one of the good ones?"

Penske_Account · 10-05-2005, 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
I would think you would be frightened to realize that Hilary has already figured out that, yes, 4M are hiding in NYC, and a bunch elsewhere as well.

The R's have been lucky that the D's candidates since 2000 have been so utterly unconvincing that they, like Bill Clinton, "get it" and that the moderates matter and will be better served by D's than R's.

I don't get this, you think that there are 4M republicans living in NYC but not voting? Or voting D? I am unconvinced, but perhaps some day I will be proven wrong. I still don't see the last time moderates won an election. Maybe Carter, but that's factoring the Watergate backlash. Clinton didn't win because of moderates, he won because of a third party candidate. He didn't get a majority of the vote, either time, not really even close (as say Bush was in 2000). If he relied on moderates, that shows moderates can't carry the day.

taxwonk · 10-05-2005, 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
Exactly.

That's moral relativism at the highest level. Which kind of makes your argument full of shit.

sebastian_dangerfield · 10-05-2005, 01:43 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by taxwonk
That involves a choice. It requires you to view the Judeo-Christian God as relatively superior to other Gods.

Debating supremacy of competing Gods is like debating whether Spiderman would kick Batman's ass. That a large swath of this or any other country still engages in such debate disproves Evolution pretty soundly. No ape is that dumb.

sebastian_dangerfield · 10-05-2005, 01:45 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by taxwonk
Perhaps we personalize it because you make the comments to us. You were responding to my post when you characterized "us Demos" as being blah, blah, blah. When you make a comment including me in a group, then you disparage that group, it doesn't really mean much when you then say that you weren't talking about us.

How is what you do qualitatively different that making a disparaging remark about Jews, but then saying, "Not you, Wonk, you're one of the good ones?"

I will take issue with your lox. You've screwed up that franchise royally. The Scottish cured stuff is kicking your ass. For shame... you sat on your laurels and look what happened.

Penske_Account · 10-05-2005, 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by taxwonk
Perhaps we personalize it because you make the comments to us. You were responding to my post when you characterized "us Demos" as being blah, blah, blah. When you make a comment including me in a group, then you disparage that group, it doesn't really mean much when you then say that you weren't talking about us.

How is what you do qualitatively different that making a disparaging remark about Jews, but then saying, "Not you, Wonk, you're one of the good ones?"

I made the comment about the demo party or dems in general, but it obviously, in context, goes to the leadership or philosophical leaders of the group. You are a member a neither, to the best of my knowledge. When you get into the DNC party leadership then you can take the criticism personally because it may then be directed at you. For now, its directed at the party leaders, the PAC groups that front them and the outward unofficial spokespeople that consult with them, eg Michael Moore. I don't understand how people can defend some of the egregious abuses of these people or vote them and I think its a sad abdication of the power of your vote, but it doesn't make you a murderer or rapist, and I still fail to see, other than via grandiose delusion, how you internalise such comments.

I don't disparage Jews.

Hank Chinaski · 10-05-2005, 01:48 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
If you are going to internalise criticism of philosophy or Party Platforms or governance in a political discussion then there is no way to avoid being offended. It's an immature outlook, imnsho. You aren't a party leader and unless I am missing something the heirarchy of the DNC couldn't give a rat's arse as to what you or Wonk think. So what grandiose delusion makes you think that when I criticise them it somehow includes you? Schizophrenics internalise comments directed at others in this way. Perhaps you guys need meds. Maybe fringey can share?

you forgot to say "no offense."

Penske_Account · 10-05-2005, 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by taxwonk
That's moral relativism at the highest level. Which kind of makes your argument full of shit.

Dissent. Its divinity.

Shape Shifter · 10-05-2005, 01:50 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
I made the comment about the demo party or dems in general, but it obviously, in context, goes to the leadership or philosophical leaders of the group. You are a member a neither, to the best of my knowledge. When you get into the DNC party leadership then you can take the criticism personally because it may then be directed at you. For now, its directed at the party leaders, the PAC groups that front them and the outward unofficial spokespeople that consult with them, eg Michael Moore. I don't understand how people can defend some of the egregious abuses of these people or vote them and I think its a sad abdication of the power of your vote, but it doesn't make you a murderer or rapist, and I still fail to see, other than via grandiose delusion, how you internalise such comments.

I don't disparage Jews.

I think lawtalkers needs to revisit the issue of your socking. For some reason, you are much less offensive when you post this sort of thing using a sock. Is Juan the Marine still available?

sgtclub · 10-05-2005, 01:57 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
Assuming that is true, and I am a little skeptical, where are the 4M hiding, NYC?

They didn't hide when Arnold ran.

Penske_Account · 10-05-2005, 02:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
you forgot to say "no offense."

Their tender souls will take offence no matter Hank. The demo party leadership has softened their rank and file lemmings up to the point of hyper-sensitivity. If I internalised criticism of BUsh like this, I would have to kill myself in despondency. "Oh I must be stupid, I'm a dummy, I'm a racist, I'm a facist, I'm a liar, I'm a killer, my syntax is garbled, I'm an imperialist, I'm arrogant, I choke on pretzels, I'm a crazy christian, oh woe is me, I'm wounded!!!"

sebastian_dangerfield · 10-05-2005, 02:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
If the party wants to remake itself and shoot for the WH in 2020, jettisoning the religious right makes sense, but if they want to contest in this decade again, they gotta dance with she who brung em.

Ah, but dancing, even with your sister, is forbidden by the Southern Baptist Convention.

Don't despair - you can still rape her, beat her and keep her trapped in a loveless marriage. Shit, you can even force her to risk her health with countless pregnancies. Thats a good way to get rid of her if you don't want her around any more or she gets uppity. And if she calls you on having a small cock, or makes fun of your impotence, you can slap her silly. She won't say shit - your pastor won't hear any woman sassing back her man - the bible forbids it.

I've really denigrated Jesus by calling these people Jesus Freaks. These sanctimonious, insecure, scared gutless abusive fucks don't deserve to prance around under that name.

Hank Chinaski · 10-05-2005, 02:06 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
I think lawtalkers needs to revisit the issue of your socking. For some reason, you are much less offensive when you post this sort of thing using a sock. Is Juan the Marine still available?

The real juan or the sock? the real juan who met with Mr. Thottam in his pre-convict days is probably occupied being an imperialist occupier, no? Juan the Marine the sock was recently re-discovered as an Infirm login and would be available for sale on Infirm. I fear the geographic limitation against it being used here might limit its sale value

I can offer Ty@50 for sale on both boards. I would offer my Notbob sock for sale, but that's the only way I can get any Convo from the jeune filles, s'il vous plea.

Penske_Account · 10-05-2005, 02:08 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
I think lawtalkers needs to revisit the issue of your socking. For some reason, you are much less offensive when you post this sort of thing using a sock. Is Juan the Marine still available?

What part do you take offence at? The shot at Michael Moore, the implicit shots at Admiral Sean Pean and the Hollyweirdos, the Moveon.org crowd, the Cindy Sheehan crowd? Does it bother you that I don't disparage Jews? Perhaps when I have the cultural and historical maturity of my amis in France and Germany, I will to be anti-semitic, for now I am immature and naive in my outlook, as my Euro pals have told me.