Both sides of the coin

[Quantum Windbag]

The Tavern does not forbid any mention of politics. It is discouraged to engage in drawn out debate, or to bring arguments from other threads in there, or to reference other threads/posters who are not in the tavern.

Again -- ask Libertarianman what kind of reaction he got when he kept inserting a political tag line in the Tavern. From multiple Taverners. Or go have a look -- it was only about a week ago.

Multiple taverners think they are in a position to dictate, and think they have better understanding than they actually do.

And as I said, it's not the place for straight up debate or dragging stuff from other threads.

But syrenn has clarified more than once on this topic. You should get your cues from her, rather than the self-proclaimed experts...most of whom have only started posting there recently.

You are talking to one of the self proclaimed experts, just ask him.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Some things make me seriously angry. Blood boiling, (virtual) wall punching angry. Sometimes I'm willing to express those feelings in an understated manner but sometimes I let loose. Then people say I've changed. But I haven't changed. I'm conscious of the dangers associated with hyperbole -- danger to the atmosphere, danger to the goals one ostensibly favors and danger to one's own cognitive processes -- so I take some care. And usually I enjoy calm discussions, often with an element of rigor. But sometimes I enjoy lobbing hand grenades. It's not a change. There's a time for every purpose.

That is one reason I express my emotions, it gives me more control over them. To the best of my knowledge I have never posted while angry on this board. Not that some people haven't gotten me angry, I just don't let them control me.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Politeness is not Political Correctness. Understand this and your posts will be worth reading. You appear to value reason over emotion. Good! Abuse is occasioned by emotion and will not be resorted to by the reasonable.

I have been posting on various boards since the 90's.......During that time I've played nice and Polite all the time.....................

However, when they call us Anarchists for our opinions, Nazi's and the like which is done all the time I have no REASON to PLAY NICE.................

I ditch PC...............To me it is utter BS..........I can be polite, and often I am just as I can throw mud with the best of them............

These LIBS always say WE NEED TO COMPROMISE WITH THEM..............aka Do as I say and OBEY.........Get to the back of the bus........ignore our facts and REASON all the time..........and when we refuse to OBEY they simply LIE and call us names..............

They have refused to cut ANYTHING EXCEPT Sequster which was an Obama plan.........and then cry like babies about a 1% cut as they increase the size of Gov't.

That isn't compromise...........It isn't compromise when they purposely ignore the Damage done by Obamacare, and the Debt problem..............

They can spare me the Faux Outrage on this issue...........When they finally come to the table with REASONABLE approaches to BIG GOV'T, then we can talk.......Until then THEY CAN GO TO HELL...........

That's the deal..............

Anyone who doesn't like it can iggy me, or simply choose not to engage..........But should they decide to engage, I will not back down on my principles..........And when they call me Anarchist and a Nazi..................they will get it back from me.

So your position about "BIG GOV'T" is 100% correct and everyone else can "CAN GO TO HELL" until they are willing to "compromise" by agreeing with you?

Do you have any idea how that sounds to normal, sane, reasonable people?

Blacksand is right that we cannot control how others will perceive what we post.

So the onus is on US to make sure that we express ourselves as clearly and concisely as possible. Something that is virtually impossible to do when the vocabulary range is restricted to vulgarities.

So let's try a little experiment here.

Your position is that "BIG GOV'T" is the problem. You want to downsize the government. Exactly how small do want to make it? Are you with Grover Norquist who wants to make it small enough to drown in a bathtub? Put something on the table and say exactly how small you want it to be by stipulating exactly what you will eliminate and justify how those services will be provided to We the People once they are no longer part of this "SMALL GOV'T" that you insist is the only alternative. But have you done that? Is there actually a feasible and viable "SMALL GOV'T" alternative that caters for all of the existing programs and services and ensures that We the People will not suffer any short or long term harm from your "SMALL GOV'T"? So far I have never seen any such proposal. All I have seen is a whole heap of blame piled upon "BIG GOV'T" opponents but nothing in the way of realistic alternatives.​

So what are the results of that little experiment?

1. There is no viable "SMALL GOV'T" alternative.
2. Since there is viable alternative there can never be a "SMALL GOV'T" solution.
3. The whole concept is nothing more than a way to rile people up and get them angry for partisan political purposes.
4. Your anger and rage is being used by the powers that be to turn you against your fellow Americans.​

To summarize, your excuse for using vulgarities is that you are standing on an untenable position and you blame everyone else for not drinking the same Koolaid.

So ask yourself if you continue to stick to your extreme position are you ever going to get what you want? Or would you be better off at least getting at least some of what you want if you cannot get all of it?

I love it when someone who is never wrong lectures someone else on arrogance.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Ahem.

An Asphedoras is a prehistoric creature, one of the ugliest that ever existed. It looked like an anatomical inversion, where it's ass what where it's face was supposed to be.

Word has it that Asphedorii stank so bad that even the biggest of Dinos gave them a wide berth.

Some claim that a couple of Asphedorii survived, as Neo-Asphorites, but this is not yet confirmed. Some sightings have been claimed to be made:

But as I said, this has not yet been confirmed.

Others claim that Asphedora is actually an herb that causes anal warts.

Take yer pick.

You argue that we should never attack people, then use a picture of a real person simply to make a stupid joke. Do uyou see why I refuse to let you dictate how I talk to the scumbags that demand something from me they don't give to others?

In case you missed it, I just called you a scumbag.

Actually, no you didn't. That was two different posters you lumped together.

No it isn't, asswipe. I did, however, lump two different posts from the same poster in the same thread. Feel free to go back and read the thread. if you know how to read.

 

[Derideo_Te]

That's a great question. What makes people take on such a persona and commit such energy to maintaining it? It would be interesting to hear from some of the people who do this, if they would be willing to break character long enough to explain honestly.

It is a lot easier to treat people with contempt than unfailing politeness. I guess that means I am lazy.

I stopped posting in the CDZ because it would have required too much work to figure out how to deal with people who deserve contempt when you know and they know that they've found a shelter from the kind of reaction they deserve.

The CDZ bans personal attacks, Amelia. It does not ban exposing contemptible positions. If a poster were to start a CDZ thread supporting animal abuse there would be nothing stopping you from pointing how contemptible such practices are as long as you did not attack the poster themselves.

My own rule is never to make personal attacks if at all possible in any of the threads. I admit that I break that rule but only under very limited conditions. In the conspiracy threads it is really hard not to at some of the nutters. The only other time is when I am under personal attack and the poster refuses to back off after being warned by me. Then I will do so in a creative manner because I refuse to lower myself to their level.

This is all about where you want to be as a person. I expect others to rise to my level if they want to debate with me. I refuse to get down in the gutter with them. That is their domain and they are welcome to it. If they want to take me on they do so on my terms and my terms only. I have nothing to prove to any of them and if they can't come up to meet me then they certainly aren't worth my time and effort going down to their level.

So perhaps it is the ultimate form of contempt to just ignore those who are beneath contempt. There is at least one such poster in this thread who fits into that category as far as I am concerned but he is not the only one.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I'm here for entertainment purposes only.

I don't take anyone here seriously.

I don't divulge to much information about myself as there are some real nut jobs with serious mental issues posting.

The racists on this board are just plain nuts. Those that believe in conspiracies, are also out of touch with reality. There are extremist left and right that are a little off.

Then you have people that post 40 plus posts a day...they got issues.

So I say my peace, stay away from personal stuff.

You aren't here for validation? How could you?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Politeness is not Political Correctness. Understand this and your posts will be worth reading. You appear to value reason over emotion. Good! Abuse is occasioned by emotion and will not be resorted to by the reasonable.

If you cannot express your emotions you will never be reasonable.

If you cannot express anything but, you'll be even worse.

You have denied everything you have expressed, what does that say about you?

Watch as he denies this.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

That's a great question. What makes people take on such a persona and commit such energy to maintaining it? It would be interesting to hear from some of the people who do this, if they would be willing to break character long enough to explain honestly.

It is a lot easier to treat people with contempt than unfailing politeness. I guess that means I am lazy.

I stopped posting in the CDZ because it would have required too much work to figure out how to deal with people who deserve contempt when you know and they know that they've found a shelter from the kind of reaction they deserve.

I know what you mean, though I did let loose in there recently. I expressed my contempt by talking about how stupid I was to disagree with the opinion. I never heard from the mods, so I guess I didn't actually break the rules.

 

[Statistikhengst]

Honestly ... No Offense Gracie ... You have a good heart, as well as Boop 85% of the time and almost always Cabbie.
It is just that somehow people think sugar-coating the ill things they say and feel towards others somehow makes it different than what they mean ... It doesn't.

If someone wants to be ugly ... It doesn't matter what their intentions are or how they say it ... They are still being ugly.
The only thing that is really different is that they are being ugly and self-righteous at the same time.

If you want to start a fight ... Expect to get hit ... And don't cry when you do.

.

Except real debate is not supposed to be about starting a fight, and it is not supposed to be about demonizing a person, it's supposed to be about vigorously defending your ideas/ideals by applying logic and at the same time, deconstructing the ideas/ ideals of your opponent by using logic as well.

Two great debators should be able to shake hands before and after a really rough and rugged debate and not think ill of each other.

An opponent is not an enemy.

Making someone else the "demon" just because he does not share your ideology or culture is the cheap way out, imo. It requires the least energy of all. So, essentially, trolls are lazy asses.

What makes you think that throwing around an insult, or even profanity, means you can't shake hands after the debate?

It is nice to pretend that people are actually Vulcans, and that they can approach a subject they care deeply about without getting passionate, but even Vulcans can't do that. Personally, I would much rather let my passion out to emphasize my point, even if that means throwing an insult or two when it is justified, and still being able to treat the person I am arguing about with respect when we aren't arguing. That is impossible, for me, when the other person insists that I cannot express my emotions.

If you need evidence of how that really works watch C-SPAN sometime. Every member of Congress that gets to a leadership position has training in debating tactics and they all insult each other. Up until recently, the leaders were willing to put aside the things they said when it came time to work together, until one side suddenly decided that being civil trumps passion. The result is a Congress that is hamstrung by one side demanding that the other side conform to their rules, yet allows their members to demonize the other side for not conforming.

If you really hate the concept of making someone the demon just because you don't agree with them, you will stop pretending that you have a right to demand that other people conform to your fake standards. If you seriously want to have real debate with the other side, stop pretending you are better than them. Let them see how you feel about whatever it is you are discussing, express the total contempt you feel when an idiot says something stupid, and live free.

Funny thing, when you start expressing contempt whenever it is deserved, even when it is toward people who are attempting to defend your position by making stupid arguments, you are better able to separate your feelings for the position from your feelings for the person. I have argued with almost everyone on this board at some point, quite vehemently in most cases, but am more than willing to defend any of them when I believe they are right. I am passionate about my opinions, and will not hide that passion simply because a few idiots take it personally.

The world does not work that way, live with it.

For instance, Tank wrote this:

You have reality on ignore

Instead of attacking the idea, he attacked the person. That is the cheap way out. And notice the Nazi who thanked him for his input. That speaks volumes.

Hey, @Tank, instead of attacking a person, why not bring some information to the table?

What makes you think he has information to bring?

Don't get me wrong, he occasionally says some very insightful things, and I have even pos repped him for something he said, but he is uninformed and one dimensional and is more than willing to go out of his way to avoid learning things. There are way too many people like that in the world, and you cannot change them simply by pretending that they aren't what they are.

Bolded no 1: I could not disagree with you more. The moment you start to attack the person instead of the idea, you have weakened your case immeasurably. Your call.

Bolded no 2: not true. As a matter of fact, most do NOT insult each other on CSPAN.

bolded no 3: I could understand that, were it true that I somehow expect others to live up to "my" standards. But I don't. I just expressed my opinion. What you do with it is your business. But I challenge you here in front of the readership to show the quote where I said that others should follow my example or hold themselves to any standard. Good luck with that one, for you will not find it. You made a statement that came, I assume, out of your anger, but not out of fact.

And all I did afterward was quote another member, to use his quote to illustrate exactly what I meant about personal attacks. Do you know what that is called? It is called skilled debating.

So, now you have some more information to chew on.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Some times I am embarrassed by people - not you as I recall - who are on the same side of an argument as me. On boards, as in personal contact, I find it necessary to distance myself from the abusive and the foul mouthed.

As your post above demonstrates you are perfectly able to express yourself intelligently and interestingly so why on earth would you deliberately descend from this high standard? Why emulate semi-literate oafs?

Does foul language ******* hurt your immature ego? Do you define yourself by how other assholes talk? Doesn't that indicate how stupid and dependent you are?

That proves that you have a problem, I suggest you find someone to slap your fact until you grow up.

******* does your own ******* language ******* not ******* bestow a ******* clue that ******* the immaturity and ******* anger is ******* on your own ******* end? Do ******* you define your ******* self by how many ******* times you can ******* insert the word ******* into a post? I ******* suggest you ******* find somefuckingone to ******* "slap your ******* fact" (whatever the **** that means) until you grow the **** up. Because all you do with this juvenile shit is look stupid. In a ******* kind of way.

More to the point of this thread -- why would any human being be the tiniest bit interested in what you "suggest", after the way you just berated them?

Never claimed it ******* did, did I? You are the one that claims that how you ******* say something is more important than what you say, so deal with your own hypocrisy.

More to the point, what makes you think I ******* care how people I berate think about what I ******* said?

 

[BDBoop]

But is there really a fight?

Who is it that wants a fight and what exactly are they fighting about?

The best way to win a fight is not to have one in the first place. If you can turn enemies into friends then you have already won the fight without anyone getting hurt.

​

Anger and rage are the emotions that drive people to fight.

Reason and logic are what enable us to live together in peace and harmony.

What emotion is driving We the People towards fighting one another?

What is the source of that emotion?

Who is behind it and what is their motivation towards feeding that rage and anger?

Those are the questions that reasonable and logical people should be asking ourselves.

The answers could easily result in uniting We the People instead of dividing us.

Excellent points!! What is to be gained by keeping us at each other's throats? Then we won't be looking at what is actually happening with the man behind the curtain. We won't be holding Washington responsible, and they can quite literally get away with murder while aiming us at each other.

polarization has set in. and is going to be something that is real hard to break. the real problem is politicians no longer have minds for themselves. in Washington, you either tow the party line or you are out. Not every democrat believes in gun control and not every republican believes in preventing gay marriage. but the problem is partisan politics force politicians to support the party line. and that is what leads to the public galvanizing to the right or left. as soon as an issue you are very passionate about becomes a topic of discussion you are pushed to either the right or left, because you know one part is going to fully support you or oppose you. There is no middle ground

Excellent post, and bears repeating. I think many on this board are "labeled onto a side, and treated accordingly." I rather hate that.

 

[Statistikhengst]

People post the stuff they do online because they cam hide behind a keyboard. If they said those things in real life they'd get their tickets punched.

Funny how many people tell me the same ******* thing in real life. One of these days I will figure out who it is that is going to punch me simply for caring about something.

It must suck to be that paranoid. But I respect your right to be so, if you so choose.

Besides, imo, how someone "cares" for something can be interepreted in a number of different ways. A matter of perspective.

I know a couple of people who are all mean and nasty online, but in the real world, they are just scared little kids. Whether or not they need the net to somehow vent is really not very interesting to me.

 

[Statistikhengst]

Politeness is not Political Correctness. Understand this and your posts will be worth reading. You appear to value reason over emotion. Good! Abuse is occasioned by emotion and will not be resorted to by the reasonable.

I have been posting on various boards since the 90's.......During that time I've played nice and Polite all the time.....................

However, when they call us Anarchists for our opinions, Nazi's and the like which is done all the time I have no REASON to PLAY NICE.................

I ditch PC...............To me it is utter BS..........I can be polite, and often I am just as I can throw mud with the best of them............

These LIBS always say WE NEED TO COMPROMISE WITH THEM..............aka Do as I say and OBEY.........Get to the back of the bus........ignore our facts and REASON all the time..........and when we refuse to OBEY they simply LIE and call us names..............

They have refused to cut ANYTHING EXCEPT Sequster which was an Obama plan.........and then cry like babies about a 1% cut as they increase the size of Gov't.

That isn't compromise...........It isn't compromise when they purposely ignore the Damage done by Obamacare, and the Debt problem..............

They can spare me the Faux Outrage on this issue...........When they finally come to the table with REASONABLE approaches to BIG GOV'T, then we can talk.......Until then THEY CAN GO TO HELL...........

That's the deal..............

Anyone who doesn't like it can iggy me, or simply choose not to engage..........But should they decide to engage, I will not back down on my principles..........And when they call me Anarchist and a Nazi..................they will get it back from me.

So your position about "BIG GOV'T" is 100% correct and everyone else can "CAN GO TO HELL" until they are willing to "compromise" by agreeing with you?

Do you have any idea how that sounds to normal, sane, reasonable people?

Blacksand is right that we cannot control how others will perceive what we post.

So the onus is on US to make sure that we express ourselves as clearly and concisely as possible. Something that is virtually impossible to do when the vocabulary range is restricted to vulgarities.

So let's try a little experiment here.

Your position is that "BIG GOV'T" is the problem. You want to downsize the government. Exactly how small do want to make it? Are you with Grover Norquist who wants to make it small enough to drown in a bathtub? Put something on the table and say exactly how small you want it to be by stipulating exactly what you will eliminate and justify how those services will be provided to We the People once they are no longer part of this "SMALL GOV'T" that you insist is the only alternative. But have you done that? Is there actually a feasible and viable "SMALL GOV'T" alternative that caters for all of the existing programs and services and ensures that We the People will not suffer any short or long term harm from your "SMALL GOV'T"? So far I have never seen any such proposal. All I have seen is a whole heap of blame piled upon "BIG GOV'T" opponents but nothing in the way of realistic alternatives.​

So what are the results of that little experiment?

1. There is no viable "SMALL GOV'T" alternative.
2. Since there is viable alternative there can never be a "SMALL GOV'T" solution.
3. The whole concept is nothing more than a way to rile people up and get them angry for partisan political purposes.
4. Your anger and rage is being used by the powers that be to turn you against your fellow Americans.​

To summarize, your excuse for using vulgarities is that you are standing on an untenable position and you blame everyone else for not drinking the same Koolaid.

So ask yourself if you continue to stick to your extreme position are you ever going to get what you want? Or would you be better off at least getting at least some of what you want if you cannot get all of it?

 

[Statistikhengst]

polarization has set in. and is going to be something that is real hard to break. the real problem is politicians no longer have minds for themselves. in Washington, you either tow the party line or you are out. Not every democrat believes in gun control and not every republican believes in preventing gay marriage. but the problem is partisan politics force politicians to support the party line. and that is what leads to the public galvanizing to the right or left. as soon as an issue you are very passionate about becomes a topic of discussion you are pushed to either the right or left, because you know one part is going to fully support you or oppose you. There is no middle ground

[MENTION=24208]Spoonman[/MENTION]

As very strongly evidenced by the disappearance of Blue Dog DEMS and Rockefeller Republicans. Another two more blue dogs announced their retirements in the last days.

And just to think: in 1976, Ronald Reagan, in a parliamentary trick at the GOP national convention, went out of his way to pick the man who would be his running-mate, were he to secure the nomination and take it away from incumbent Pres. Gerald R. Ford. That man's name: Richard Schweiker, a LIBERAL Republican from the state of Pennsylvania. Reagan went so far as to force a vote on the floor to force Ford to declare his running mate before the balloting for the Presidential nomination, a move that lost, but gave the convention the "look" of a 2nd ballot nomination. It also, of course, forced the nomination, which Ford won by around 100 delegates, to go way into the night.

I will say that again: just 38 years ago, the man whom many Conservatives consider the greatest Conservative icon of all time WENT OUT OF HIS WAY to select a decidedly liberal running mate at the Convention. Back then, Ronald Reagan calculated that this would be to his advantage, and not to his detriment.

Not only is that utter irony of history, but also shows how much we have changed as a nation in 2 generations.

there was a time when the top vote getter became the president and the 2nd became the vice president. maybe that wasn't such a bad idea.

It lasted, if I recall, only 8 years. Apparently, it was not such a hit.

But in Germany's parliamentary system, winning coalitions are what gets someone into the Chancellor's building. Angela Merkel, now that she is running with the Grand Coalition, because she had no choice in the matter, now has Frank-Walther Steinmeyer has her no. 2 (Foreign Secretary, Vice-Chancellor) and he is from the challenging party. There is no love lost between those two. Based on what I have seen from them, not so sure about that idea....

 

[BDBoop]

I'm not sure you're in the class of poster I'm thinking about. At least I don't remember you being that way.

Yeah, I freely admit to being obnoxious on a regular basis.

Hmmm, I should pay closer attention. However, I was referring to seriously hateful personas -- like the kinds of people who say they are against abortion unless the child in the womb is mixed race. Or to think of a non-nazi/KKK example: people who claim to be Muslim but who seem to be determined to increase tension between Muslims and non-Muslims just for grins.

Exactly. 'Ignore' is not one-size-fits-all, any more than the acts of flaming, baiting or trolling are interchangeable.

There are people I have on ignore who may not belong there. But there are others who I have taken off ignore, seen ONE POST and said "Oh, yeah. Now I remember."

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Bolded no 1: I could not disagree with you more. The moment you start to attack the person instead of the idea, you have weakened your case immeasurably. Your call.

OMG, you disagree with me.

Tell me something, since you just attacked me, and not my position, should I view this as evidence that I won the debate? Or should I just accept the fact that I am, once again, proven right by a self righteous twerp that can't live up to his own standards?

Bolded no 2: not true. As a matter of fact, most do NOT insult each other on CSPAN.

Damn, it happened again.

Feel free to point out where I said that most of them insult each other on C-SPAN. What I said is that they are trained in debating, and have no problem insulting each other and still working together.

Then again, my point is that you can't actually debate, so you throwing up a fallacy just reinforces my point.

bolded no 3: I could understand that, were it true that I somehow expect others to live up to "my" standards. But I don't. I just expressed my opinion. What you do with it is your business. But I challenge you here in front of the readership to show the quote where I said that others should follow my example or hold themselves to any standard. Good luck with that one, for you will not find it. You made a statement that came, I assume, out of your anger, but not out of fact.

Feel free to explain this post where you are berating me for not living up to your standards given the fact that you don't actually expect me to live up to your standards.

Oops, was that me using your tactics to score a point, or was it really you contradicting yourself?

And all I did afterward was quote another member, to use his quote to illustrate exactly what I meant about personal attacks. Do you know what that is called? It is called skilled debating.

If you are so skilled at debate why did you resort to two fallacies in this post?

So, now you have some more information to chew on.

Sorry, ny ability to chew pre digested drivel needs to be refined, what information did you think you provided?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Excellent points!! What is to be gained by keeping us at each other's throats? Then we won't be looking at what is actually happening with the man behind the curtain. We won't be holding Washington responsible, and they can quite literally get away with murder while aiming us at each other.

polarization has set in. and is going to be something that is real hard to break. the real problem is politicians no longer have minds for themselves. in Washington, you either tow the party line or you are out. Not every democrat believes in gun control and not every republican believes in preventing gay marriage. but the problem is partisan politics force politicians to support the party line. and that is what leads to the public galvanizing to the right or left. as soon as an issue you are very passionate about becomes a topic of discussion you are pushed to either the right or left, because you know one part is going to fully support you or oppose you. There is no middle ground

Excellent post, and bears repeating. I think many on this board are "labeled onto a side, and treated accordingly." I rather hate that.

Welcome to the club.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

People post the stuff they do online because they cam hide behind a keyboard. If they said those things in real life they'd get their tickets punched.

Funny how many people tell me the same ******* thing in real life. One of these days I will figure out who it is that is going to punch me simply for caring about something.

It must suck to be that paranoid. But I respect your right to be so, if you so choose.

Besides, imo, how someone "cares" for something can be interepreted in a number of different ways. A matter of perspective.

I know a couple of people who are all mean and nasty online, but in the real world, they are just scared little kids. Whether or not they need the net to somehow vent is really not very interesting to me.

Paranoid?

Excuse me, but people have told me, to my face, that my attitude is going to get me in trouble. That is not paranoia, it is fact. Paranoia would be an irrational fear based on the false belief that people will punch me for saying what I do. An example of that would be the people that insist I would say something different in person, like you. Perhaps you should learn the difference.

 

[Statistikhengst]

Ahem.

An Asphedoras is a prehistoric creature, one of the ugliest that ever existed. It looked like an anatomical inversion, where it's ass what where it's face was supposed to be.

Word has it that Asphedorii stank so bad that even the biggest of Dinos gave them a wide berth.

Some claim that a couple of Asphedorii survived, as Neo-Asphorites, but this is not yet confirmed. Some sightings have been claimed to be made:

But as I said, this has not yet been confirmed.

Others claim that Asphedora is actually an herb that causes anal warts.

Take yer pick.

You argue that we should never attack people, then use a picture of a real person simply to make a stupid joke. Do uyou see why I refuse to let you dictate how I talk to the scumbags that demand something from me they don't give to others?

In case you missed it, I just called you a scumbag.

Actually, no you didn't. That was two different posters you lumped together.

And QW swings.......


....and misses!!!

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I have been posting on various boards since the 90's.......During that time I've played nice and Polite all the time.....................

However, when they call us Anarchists for our opinions, Nazi's and the like which is done all the time I have no REASON to PLAY NICE.................

I ditch PC...............To me it is utter BS..........I can be polite, and often I am just as I can throw mud with the best of them............

These LIBS always say WE NEED TO COMPROMISE WITH THEM..............aka Do as I say and OBEY.........Get to the back of the bus........ignore our facts and REASON all the time..........and when we refuse to OBEY they simply LIE and call us names..............

They have refused to cut ANYTHING EXCEPT Sequster which was an Obama plan.........and then cry like babies about a 1% cut as they increase the size of Gov't.

That isn't compromise...........It isn't compromise when they purposely ignore the Damage done by Obamacare, and the Debt problem..............

They can spare me the Faux Outrage on this issue...........When they finally come to the table with REASONABLE approaches to BIG GOV'T, then we can talk.......Until then THEY CAN GO TO HELL...........

That's the deal..............

Anyone who doesn't like it can iggy me, or simply choose not to engage..........But should they decide to engage, I will not back down on my principles..........And when they call me Anarchist and a Nazi..................they will get it back from me.

So your position about "BIG GOV'T" is 100% correct and everyone else can "CAN GO TO HELL" until they are willing to "compromise" by agreeing with you?

Do you have any idea how that sounds to normal, sane, reasonable people?

Blacksand is right that we cannot control how others will perceive what we post.

So the onus is on US to make sure that we express ourselves as clearly and concisely as possible. Something that is virtually impossible to do when the vocabulary range is restricted to vulgarities.

So let's try a little experiment here.

Your position is that "BIG GOV'T" is the problem. You want to downsize the government. Exactly how small do want to make it? Are you with Grover Norquist who wants to make it small enough to drown in a bathtub? Put something on the table and say exactly how small you want it to be by stipulating exactly what you will eliminate and justify how those services will be provided to We the People once they are no longer part of this "SMALL GOV'T" that you insist is the only alternative. But have you done that? Is there actually a feasible and viable "SMALL GOV'T" alternative that caters for all of the existing programs and services and ensures that We the People will not suffer any short or long term harm from your "SMALL GOV'T"? So far I have never seen any such proposal. All I have seen is a whole heap of blame piled upon "BIG GOV'T" opponents but nothing in the way of realistic alternatives.​

So what are the results of that little experiment?

1. There is no viable "SMALL GOV'T" alternative.
2. Since there is viable alternative there can never be a "SMALL GOV'T" solution.
3. The whole concept is nothing more than a way to rile people up and get them angry for partisan political purposes.
4. Your anger and rage is being used by the powers that be to turn you against your fellow Americans.​

To summarize, your excuse for using vulgarities is that you are standing on an untenable position and you blame everyone else for not drinking the same Koolaid.

So ask yourself if you continue to stick to your extreme position are you ever going to get what you want? Or would you be better off at least getting at least some of what you want if you cannot get all of it?

Look at that, someone is applauding a blatant display of arrogance simply because he agrees with the arrogant asshole and disagrees with the other arrogant asshole that expressed an opinion.