Why do *some* Bush supporters have to prevaricate about what others say? [Archive]

26th March 2004, 10:55 AM

(Note I'm sure that there are Kerry/Nadir/etc supporters who do the same thing, it's hardly a unique behavior. On the other hand, the transparent attempt at bullying these guys use is pretty far out there.)

Down in the thread on Kerry's Secret Service agent, Rockoon, and BobK all are screaming like stuck pigs, and claiming that I've said that everyone in the guard, reserves, or who avoided the draft by enlisting are all draft dodgers.

I've said nothing of the sort, and the words I've used, in context, are utterly, completely clear. Yes, I regard someone who used daddy's phone call (or the equivalent) to get jumped over everyone and into the guard ahead of the draft letter as a draft dodger. This does not mean, as BobK wishes us to think, that somebody who used their ability to get into the air force, is any such thing. That's an absurd claim and an absurd behavior on his part.

This does not mean that all guard folks are dodgers, either, despite Rockoon's claim that I said that. It is notable that he had to add the words himself in his own comment, because I didn't say them. I didn't say them, of course, because I didn't mean, think, or intend them.

Look, we all know I'm not a Bush supporter, but these crackpot bully-boys demonstrate the worst of his supporters. You folks who do support Bush, go see what's crawling around supporting him down there. (If I were a Bush supporter, I'd be furious with them, that's for sure. They don't read well on anyone or anything at all.)

There's something quite offensive going on here, and it's very simple. These shouting bullies simply wish to drown out the people they oppose, and they are willing to cross the line into complete falsehood in order to do it. That's not politics, that's mob rule. They think that if they scream loud enough and long enough, somebody will believe them. That's probably true, somebody, somewhere, probably will. They know that, and they want to dupe other people into buying their mob chant. It's clear that they studied at least one book very well. Since I don't want to invoke Godwin's Law in the first article, I'll stop here.

corplinx

26th March 2004, 11:02 AM

I just love how you derailed that thread and are now ditching your own derailment. Maybe its time to put you back on ignore you silly troll.

GroundStrength

26th March 2004, 11:08 AM

jj,

Your inner-liberal is showing.

Everyone on this GDMF forum does what you describe.

26th March 2004, 11:23 AM

Originally posted by GroundStrength
jj,

Your inner-liberal is showing.

Everyone on this GDMF forum does what you describe.

I don't think EVERYONE does.

What's more, the particular example is quite egregious, and its malice is just running in the gutters.

But, yes, I agree it's a behavior that many people need to avoid.

GroundStrength

26th March 2004, 11:48 AM

Okay not everyone, but most thread degenrate into this type of behaviour. I just though it was dishonest to say it was only Bush supporters (of which I am no loner one).

pgwenthold

26th March 2004, 12:18 PM

Originally posted by GroundStrength
Okay not everyone, but most thread degenrate into this type of behaviour. I just though it was dishonest to say it was only Bush supporters .

It might have been had he actually said that.

In fact, he said the exact opposite:

(Note I'm sure that there are Kerry/Nadir/etc supporters who do the same thing, it's hardly a unique behavior. On the other hand, the transparent attempt at bullying these guys use is pretty far out there.)

26th March 2004, 02:13 PM

Originally posted by GroundStrength
Okay not everyone, but most thread degenrate into this type of behaviour. I just though it was dishonest to say it was only Bush supporters (of which I am no loner one).

Um, I didn't say it was only Bush supporters.

Quoting myself:
(Note I'm sure that there are Kerry/Nadir/etc supporters who do the same thing, it's hardly a unique behavior. On the other hand, the transparent attempt at bullying these guys use is pretty far out there.)
---

That seems pretty clear, eh?

zenith-nadir

26th March 2004, 02:24 PM

http://people.bu.edu/democrat/pictures/al%20gore-%20cda.jpg I invented prevarication!

Sundog

26th March 2004, 02:27 PM

(rant alert)

I imagine Dick Clarke is wondering the same thing about now. It doesn't matter how clearly he explains his earlier statements supporting Bush; Repugnicans will simply refuse to understand.

I find myself by now absolutely polarized by the actions, morals, tactics and "intellectual" dishonesty of Republicans in general, to the point that I don't discuss it any more. I am simply determined that the cancer of Conservatism must be excised from this country and NEVER again allowed to hold power.

My disgust at the treatment of the HERO Richard Clarke at the hands of slimeball Republicans has me in an absolute fit today. How DARE they threaten him with contempt? No matter who it is, no matter how patriotic: criticize Shrub, and they'll go straight to character assassination, and then try to put you in jail!

Republicans want to SHUT EVERYONE ELSE UP, period. It's not going to happen. I no longer even socialize with Republicans, I don't want any Republican friends or acquaintances, and it's a big part of why I'm not here much any more. Through either sheer stupidity or dishonesty born from self-interest, they aren't capable of thinking straight and I'm through trying.

Don't bother flaming, I'm only here for a minute. I feel better now...

Luke T.

26th March 2004, 02:32 PM

jj, GroundStrength is right, except I wouldn't say "everyone" does it.

In the topic about the retarded kid who had a bomb strapped to his chest and sent into Israel to blow himself up, there were predictions/conclusions made about what Mr. Manifesto, The Fool, and A Unique Person would all say about it.

I saw what was done to you in the Kerry topic, and I commented on it. Tried to be light about it by saying the poster was starting to sound like Kerry.

I happen to know a lot more about you than the poster in question does. I think that is the key difference.

This sort of thing doesn't just happen here in the political topics. It happens all over the forum in all venues, except humor maybe.

Doesn't make it right. I know.

Usually, if someone tries to predict my thoughts and then makes conclusions and arguments against their predictions of my thoughts, I don't always get mad about it. Sometimes I do, but I try to correct them without flying off the handle and we usually get back on track pretty quickly and a productive conversation ensues.

I don't know if you know this, jj, but your temper comes across very strongly on here. Since I have known you a while, I know you aren't anywhere near as bad as you sometimes sound. ;)

There have been days when something on here really pissed me off. Just bring up the topic of abortion and watch. :D

I know enough to walk away and take a breather. Most of the time. I'd rather lose an argument than hurt my mind, you know?

rockoon

26th March 2004, 04:15 PM

Originally posted by corplinx
I just love how you derailed that thread and are now ditching your own derailment. Maybe its time to put you back on ignore you silly troll.

If you were JJ, and had said all the things that he said, wouldn't you also ditch it?

26th March 2004, 04:20 PM

Originally posted by zenith-nadir
http://people.bu.edu/democrat/pictures/al%20gore-%20cda.jpg I invented prevarication!

Naaah. He was way down the line. On the other hand, how far should we go back. Andrew Johnson, Garfield, McKinley, and so on would seem to qualify for earlier prevaricators. I don't even recall which party(ies) they were, either.

Troll

26th March 2004, 04:21 PM

Originally posted by Sundog
(rant alert)

My disgust at the treatment of the HERO Richard Clarke at the hands of slimeball Republicans has me in an absolute fit today. How DARE they threaten him with contempt? No matter who it is, no matter how patriotic: criticize Shrub, and they'll go straight to character assassination, and then try to put you in jail!

Republicans want to SHUT EVERYONE ELSE UP, period. It's not going to happen. I no longer even socialize with Republicans, I don't want any Republican friends or acquaintances, and it's a big part of why I'm not here much any more. Through either sheer stupidity or dishonesty born from self-interest, they aren't capable of thinking straight and I'm through trying.

Don't bother flaming, I'm only here for a minute. I feel better now...

If Clarke was/is such a hero then why did he wait until he was out of work before criticizing both Bush and Clinton? Wanna talk about self-interest?

26th March 2004, 04:25 PM

Originally posted by rockoon

If you were JJ, and had said all the things that he said, wouldn't you also ditch it?

Too cowardly to discuss your misbehaviors, eh?

You still can't bring yourself to realize that I said none of the terrible things you wish I said. You simply can't understand that some of us, older perhaps, with more experience in the world, realize that very little is black and white, and that we don't polarize the world like you do, perhaps.

You really read badly on Bush supporters. Were I the actual Kerry supporter you seem to imagine I was, I'd be quoting you all over the (*&&(* planet as an example of why nobody should vote for Bush. Now, that would be unfair to Bush, because he's not responsible for your appalling performance, but that is what a political animal would do.

I'm not a political animal, I despise unethical politics, and that's one of the more important reasons that I find you repugnant and revolting. The fact that you attempt represent a whole class of people, and that you respond in very strong, bullying terms to those who stand up to you, suggests that your only interest is being "on top", and that you think that the ends justify the means.

We have many historical examples of how that works out, they are just about uniformily tragic, too.

26th March 2004, 04:34 PM

Originally posted by Luke T.
I don't know if you know this, jj, but your temper comes across very strongly on here. Since I have known you a while, I know you aren't anywhere near as bad as you sometimes sound. ;)

Bear in mind that it's not my temper you are seeing. I am simply reflecting the original poster's own misbehaviors back at him, within the bounds of ethics (I will not, for instance, misquote or extract from context on purpose, I certainly try not to, which does put me at a rhetorical disadvantage to the likes of Rockook, BobK, or Jockemo).

If someone is civil, I'll be civil.

It seems, though, that a variety of bullies here think that they can have their way just by lying, cheating, and blustering. It's time we all face them completely down, all the way down, into their rhetorical grave, tear up their attempts at bullying, and make the example of them that they attempt to make of us, with the one exception that we are telling the TRUTH about their gestapo tactics. I require that last sentence, personally. (Yes, it puts me off many politicians of all "colours", you can certainly count on that. I put high value on truth, and that seems to leave me out of a [b]lot ]/b]of conversations about politics, these days.)

It seems that some here are of the idea that if they are "strong" enough they'll scare us "weenie liberals" away. That's really stupid, I was flaming people on the internet before most of these sick puppies were properly born (although BobK does seem to be old enough to know better, given the dates of service he mentioned), and I've learned that there are better things to do with my time like hugging my wife and playing with my kids, or discussing philosophical things with CIVIL people.

I prefer building to tearing down. Building involves understanding and communication, not willful, intentionally deliberate misunderstanding and willful polarization.

But if it comes to that, I can flame, and if this part of the forum keeps going downhill like this, I shall. I doubt that anyone on the forum has actually seen a full-blown flame from me, well, with the exception maybe of Epepke.... If it keeps up here, I will regard it as an ethical imperative.

26th March 2004, 04:36 PM

Originally posted by Troll

If Clarke was/is such a hero then why did he wait until he was out of work before criticizing both Bush and Clinton? Wanna talk about self-interest?

Well, I'm not entirely decided about Clarke myself, as you can probably tell by the fact I've not raised the issue, but your question is silly, obviously he should do so, and obviously he must wait until it is legal for him to make his criticisms.

26th March 2004, 04:37 PM

Originally posted by Luke T.
In the topic about the retarded kid who had a bomb strapped to his chest and sent into Israel to blow himself up, there were predictions/conclusions made about what Mr. Manifesto, The Fool, and A Unique Person would all say about it.

Sorry, just noticed this. Do you notice WHO is the target in each of these cases? There is a strong trend here, I think, although I fully agree that no side maintains complete innocence indeed.

rockoon

26th March 2004, 04:45 PM

Originally posted by jj

You still can't bring yourself to realize that I said none of the terrible things you wish I said.

I quoted you exactly.

You simply can't understand that some of us, older perhaps, with more experience in the world, realize that very little is black and white, and that we don't polarize the world like you do, perhaps.

You mean black and white such as your draft dodging rant? Or your addictive personality rant?

You really read badly on Bush supporters. Were I the actual Kerry supporter you seem to imagine I was, I'd be quoting you all over the (*&&(* planet as an example of why nobody should vote for Bush. Now, that would be unfair to Bush, because he's not responsible for your appalling performance, but that is what a political animal would do.

I never said you were a Kerry supporter and I never said I was a Bush supporter. Still making things up as you go?

I'm not a political animal, I despise unethical politics, and that's one of the more important reasons that I find you repugnant and revolting. The fact that you attempt represent a whole class of people, and that you respond in very strong, bullying terms to those who stand up to you, suggests that your only interest is being "on top", and that you think that the ends justify the means.

Huh? I have posted precisely two posts to that thread. The first post simply quotes you and does a summation. The second post responds to your paranoia.

Troll

26th March 2004, 04:49 PM

Originally posted by jj

Well, I'm not entirely decided about Clarke myself, as you can probably tell by the fact I've not raised the issue, but your question is silly, obviously he should do so, and obviously he must wait until it is legal for him to make his criticisms.

Yeah he should wait until it is legal to do so. And to be heroic about it, he should be willing to take a risk and quit so that he could legally do it. He didn't quit. And a skeptical viewing of that fact should make one consider his actual motive. That and a new book.

Ladewig

26th March 2004, 05:01 PM

I am unsure what percentage of board posters of at either end of the spectrum are guilty of your accusation. I am unsure of what percentage of the general population is guilty of the accusation. I am sure that on the radio, the conservatives book more broadcasting hours engaging in that behavior than the liberals do.

Luke T.

26th March 2004, 05:11 PM

Originally posted by Ladewig
I am unsure what percentage of board posters of at either end of the spectrum are guilty of your accusation. I am unsure of what percentage of the general population is guilty of the accusation. I am sure that on the radio, the conservatives book more broadcasting hours engaging in that behavior than the liberals do.

They will soon catch up. Al Franken has a radio show starting next Wednesday.

RandFan

26th March 2004, 05:41 PM

Originally posted by Sundog
(rant alert)

I imagine Dick Clarke is wondering the same thing about now. It doesn't matter how clearly he explains his earlier statements supporting Bush; Repugnicans will simply refuse to understand.

I find myself by now absolutely polarized by the actions, morals, tactics and "intellectual" dishonesty of Republicans in general, to the point that I don't discuss it any more. I am simply determined that the cancer of Conservatism must be excised from this country and NEVER again allowed to hold power. Your take on the situation is very disapointing. Are you suggesting that Clarke must be taken at face value and that we can't decide for ourselves his true motivations? We can't consider that he was demoted or that he has a personal connection to Kerry? We can't consider that he has any monetary motivation.

I was disgusted by his appology to the victims. I found it grandstanding and self serving. "hey look at me, I did something bad but mea culpa forgive me and look at how bad Bush is...and oh buy my book."

I used to really like you Sundog. But your inability to think critically and the way the way you see the world in such a Black and white way (Republicans bad Dems and Liberals good) makes me question YOUR honesty.

My disgust at the treatment of the HERO Richard Clarke at the hands of slimeball Republicans has me in an absolute fit today. How DARE they threaten him with contempt? No matter who it is, no matter how patriotic: criticize Shrub, and they'll go straight to character assassination, and then try to put you in jail! If he didn't lie then no problem. It looks like Mr. Clarke could very well have done all of this for money and politics. Have the objectivity to question EVERYONE and not just assume that only the Repuplicans lie.

Republicans want to SHUT EVERYONE ELSE UP, period. It's not going to happen. I no longer even socialize with Republicans, I don't want any Republican friends or acquaintances, and it's a big part of why I'm not here much any more. Yeah, you don't want to be with THOSE people.

Through either sheer stupidity or dishonesty born from self-interest, they aren't capable of thinking straight and I'm through trying. Have you thought of looking in the mirror? It might be a good start.

Don't bother flaming, I'm only here for a minute. I feel better now... Yeah, no courage to stand up for your convictions. Just accuse others of lying and run away. Nice, real nice.

I can only say that you are irrational. People ae people you will find good and bad ones in any group.

26th March 2004, 05:43 PM

Originally posted by rockoon

I quoted you exactly.

You extracted parts of what I said from context. That's not an exact quote, that's you choosing to be misleading by selective quoting, out of context.

You mean black and white such as your draft dodging rant? Or your addictive personality rant?

Again, your quoting out of context proves only your own extreme lack of ethics and/or morals.

My comments on Shrub's personality are supported by the little information that hasn't been disappeared. If you don't like it, take it up with the people doing the quoting of reports, etc.

Huh? I have posted precisely two posts to that thread. The first post simply quotes you and does a summation.

Your first post unethically creates a false impression by removing quotes from context and interposing your own illicit interpretations.

That action, in and of itself, is fully dishonorable and repugnant.

You area scoundril, not a a patriot.

The second post responds to your paranoia.
It seems that anything that disagrees with your own schizophrenic-looking misinterpretations is "paranoia"? Um, are you having Post-Trauma Stress Syndrome on me?

rockoon

26th March 2004, 07:54 PM

Originally posted by jj

It seems that anything that disagrees with your own schizophrenic-looking misinterpretations is "paranoia"? Um, are you having Post-Trauma Stress Syndrome on me?

Paranoia such as claiming I am somebodies sock puppet.

Ahem.

Maybe they ARE out to get you.

26th March 2004, 09:30 PM

Originally posted by rockoon

Paranoia such as claiming I am somebodies sock puppet.

Ahem.

Maybe they ARE out to get you.

Well, slick, at least I ain't lost.

(Or are you ignorant of the Arkansas Traveller, too, rockook?)

rockoon

26th March 2004, 11:03 PM

Originally posted by jj

Originally posted by rockoon

Paranoia such as claiming I am somebodies sock puppet.

Ahem.

Maybe they ARE out to get you.

Well, slick, at least I ain't lost.

(Or are you ignorant of the Arkansas Traveller, too, rockook?)

Thanks for conceding that you are paranoid. I assume that also means you concede that your entire self-generated arguement with me is a direct result of your paranoia.

You know.. if you are going to generate arguements on the fly.. you could at least choose defensible ones.

26th March 2004, 11:17 PM

Originally posted by rockoon

Thanks for conceding that you are paranoid.
Tut, tut, that old propensity of yours to lie about what the other guy said is showing its nasty little behind again.

I assume that also means you concede that your entire self-generated arguement with me is a direct result of your paranoia.

Let's see. You showed up, lied about what I said, maliciously quoted me out of context, fabricated a position that you tried to maintain I held, even though I specifically have said I didn't ...

You know, you're really pretty awful when looked at in the light of day. You showed up, completely misrepresented what I've said, and now you're accusing me of "paranoia".

You know.. if you are going to generate arguements on the fly.. you could at least choose defensible ones.

Well, I suppose you figure that accusing me of what you routinely do is called for, I guess it's one of those "I can call you what you called me" counterplays that people use when they've utterly lost the debate.

Thank you for admitting that, and slick,

I still ain't lost.

rockoon

27th March 2004, 04:23 AM

Was he draft-dodging? During the time he was liable for service, one need ask only one set of questions:

WAS HE IN THE GUARD?

The answer is "yes".

Did he get bumped on the wait list?

The answer is "yes".

Was he, therefore, a draft dodger?

The answer is "yes".

JJ's logic:

DRAFT DODGER = [GUARD] AND [BUMPED].

Thanks.

American

27th March 2004, 06:37 AM

Why do *some* Bush supporters have to prevaricate about what others say?

Because many people use odd words just to look smart.

Nitpick

27th March 2004, 10:05 AM

Originally posted by American
Originally posted by jj
Why do *some* Bush supporters have to prevaricate about what others say?

Because many people use odd words just to look smart.

The more those odd words are being used, the less odd they'll be in the future. ;)

BTW, which word do you mean? Bush? Yeah, that`s really an odd one! :p

27th March 2004, 10:27 AM

Originally posted by rockoon

JJ's logic:

DRAFT DODGER = [GUARD] AND [BUMPED].

Thanks.

Once again, you're taking the whole statement out of context. In very simple terms, "bumped", as even your buddy-in-lies BobK acknowledged, was referring to using influence.

Your buddy-in-lies BobK tried to change the meaning of "influence", you want to redo what "bumped" meant. When that failed, you jumped in, accepting his lies as true, and now that you've been driven off that s***pile, you're trying to redefine something else to justify your bullying.

Using one's own skills is not using "influence" nor is it getting "bumped". Skills are good things, phone calls from daddies are not, in this context, and we all know that.

Since we all know this, so why do you continue to try to redefine words just so that you can pick a fight?

Wait! I can answer that! You're a bully. You want to pick a fight. That's what it is, and all it is, and we all know that. You WANT to pick a fight, for reasons known only to your testosterone-poisoned, hyperagressive brain. I'm serious, do you have PTSD? You act like some very unhappy folks I know who do.

If you do, there are ways to cope, and reinforcing the stress is most certainly not one of them.

I'll thank you for a full admission that I haven't put down all guard members, nor have I put down anyone who used their own skill, nor have I said anything bad about the services. Do make sure to acknowlege that you have made servicepeople look bad, by acting exactly like the nutty-liberal (as opposed to liberal) stereotype of the military man.

You dishonor yourself, the services, and your country. You should be ashamed of yourself and your behavior.

rockoon

27th March 2004, 07:08 PM

Originally posted by jj

Once again, you're taking the whole statement out of context. In very simple terms, "bumped", as even your buddy-in-lies BobK acknowledged, was referring to using influence.

Whos influence?

Are you saying GWB had "influence" at the time?

Your buddy-in-lies BobK tried to change the meaning of "influence", you want to redo what "bumped" meant.

Are you saying that according to you, bumped means someone else using influence on your behalf?

Answer the question please.

When that failed, you jumped in, accepting his lies as true, and now that you've been driven off that s***pile, you're trying to redefine something else to justify your bullying.

I didnt redefine anything. I used your definition, which was a redefinition, which you clearly stated: Draft Dodger = Guard AND bumped.

You have yet to retract this. You now however have redefined 'bumped' to mean 'using influence' - however to my knowledge GWB didn't have any influence. Are you prepared to cite the influence GWB had in the late 60's?

Using one's own skills is not using "influence" nor is it getting "bumped". Skills are good things, phone calls from daddies are not, in this context, and we all know that.

If that is so, why did you call BobK a draft dodger and then later edit the post to withdraw that accusation? Is editing posts to change their meaning a common tactic of yours?

Since we all know this, so why do you continue to try to redefine words just so that you can pick a fight?

Bumped means to be REMOVED from a list NOT moved to the head of it as you have continualy maintained. But I have faithfully used YOUR redefinition. If you want to play the definition game then you have continualy proved that you wish to redefine the word bumped.

I am not comming at you with semantics. I am comming at you with your lack of logic. You can redefine the word all you want but even with your redefinition it lacks the logical foundation to stand scrutiny. Claiming that I have redefined it, when all I have been doing is using your definition, is just your silly attempt to deflect the issue.

Too small to take back your claim but too proud to just let it drop?

A bad combination.

You dishonor yourself, the services, and your country. You should be ashamed of yourself and your behavior.

Which service? Which country?

Since you don't know which service I may or may not have served in and you dont know which country I reside in.. this is just you again making wide sweaping assumptions about things you have no knowledge of.

Paranormal abilities?

27th March 2004, 08:23 PM

Give it up. You're hadn't heard the word "redefine" until I pointed out you were doing it, so now you're trying it on me.

Give it up. You're a raging kook who likes to pretend he's been insulted and then picks fights.

Go back to kindergarden.

rockoon

27th March 2004, 08:50 PM

Originally posted by jj
Give it up. You're hadn't heard the word "redefine" until I pointed out you were doing it, so now you're trying it on me.

Give it up. You're a raging kook who likes to pretend he's been insulted and then picks fights.

Go back to kindergarden.

Dear Mr. Paranoid

My very first post on the subject used the word. The very first.

Still making it up as you go! You know.. if you are going to make things up.. do yourself a favor and make something up that is defensible.

P.S. I never said or infered that I was insulted. Still got me confused with someone else? BobK said he was insulted by your insinuation that he was a draft dodger. I am not BobK even tho you claimed that I was his sock puppet. Oh wait, you gave two options for whos sock puppet I was. I am not anybodies sock puppet Mr Paranoid.

27th March 2004, 09:32 PM

Originally posted by rockoon

Dear Mr. Paranoid

If you are so convinced, I trust you're doing your civic duty.

If you aren't, obviously you aren't a good citizen.

Oh, wait! You knew better in the first place. Oh, and I didn't suggest you were a sock puppet either, I phrased that mildy ambiguously on purpose just to see if you'd take that the wrong way, too.

Listen, Rockook, you've failed every test of rhetoric and ethics you've been given with the exception of persistance.

rockoon

28th March 2004, 12:38 AM

Originally posted by jj

If you are so convinced, I trust you're doing your civic duty.

If you aren't, obviously you aren't a good citizen.

Oh, wait! You knew better in the first place. Oh, and I didn't suggest you were a sock puppet either, I phrased that mildy ambiguously on purpose just to see if you'd take that the wrong way, too.

Listen, Rockook, you've failed every test of rhetoric and ethics you've been given with the exception of persistance.

Oh, so now your you arent makign things up.. you are 'testing me' is that it?

I doubt it.. you are just making things up.

28th March 2004, 06:44 PM

Originally posted by rockoon

Oh, so now your you arent makign things up.. you are 'testing me' is that it?

Not everyone is as simple as you. You should realize that.

I doubt it.. you are just making things up.

Don't rate others' ability by your own.

rikzilla

29th March 2004, 06:06 AM

Originally posted by Sundog
(rant alert)

I imagine Dick Clarke is wondering the same thing about now. It doesn't matter how clearly he explains his earlier statements supporting Bush; Repugnicans will simply refuse to understand.

I find myself by now absolutely polarized by the actions, morals, tactics and "intellectual" dishonesty of Republicans in general, to the point that I don't discuss it any more. I am simply determined that the cancer of Conservatism must be excised from this country and NEVER again allowed to hold power.

My disgust at the treatment of the HERO Richard Clarke at the hands of slimeball Republicans has me in an absolute fit today. How DARE they threaten him with contempt? No matter who it is, no matter how patriotic: criticize Shrub, and they'll go straight to character assassination, and then try to put you in jail!

Republicans want to SHUT EVERYONE ELSE UP, period. It's not going to happen. I no longer even socialize with Republicans, I don't want any Republican friends or acquaintances, and it's a big part of why I'm not here much any more. Through either sheer stupidity or dishonesty born from self-interest, they aren't capable of thinking straight and I'm through trying.

Don't bother flaming, I'm only here for a minute. I feel better now...

Wow! Sundog has seen the light of THE TRUTH(tm)!! Congratulations 'Dog! You may feel free now to leave the JREF forum forever. No longer will you ever have need for your critical thinking abilitites! No longer must you defer to logic when all is so blindingly black and white. Once you have seen THE TRUTH(tm) and hang out only with others who know the same TRUTH(tm), (hereafter known as the "congregation"), you will never need to go through the bothersome hassle of critical thinking ever again!

How very 'Dog-matic of you! :p You now have only to hang a "CLOSED" sign on your mind.

Actually I'm very sad for you Sundog. You've gone over to the dark side. I don't mean your politics...I mean your suddenly closed mind. Think for one last minute before you put that sign in your mind's window. Think of the people who you do join in the land of the closed mind. The young earth creationists, the holocaust deniers, Ann Coulter, Michael Moore, The Spanish Inquisition.....

Stop, save yourself before it's too late.

-z

Chaos

29th March 2004, 09:02 AM

Originally posted by rikzilla

Wow! Sundog has seen the light of THE TRUTH(tm)!! Congratulations 'Dog! You may feel free now to leave the JREF forum forever. No longer will you ever have need for your critical thinking abilitites! No longer must you defer to logic when all is so blindingly black and white. Once you have seen THE TRUTH(tm) and hang out only with others who know the same TRUTH(tm), (hereafter known as the "congregation"), you will never need to go through the bothersome hassle of critical thinking ever again!

How very 'Dog-matic of you! :p You now have only to hang a "CLOSED" sign on your mind.

Actually I'm very sad for you Sundog. You've gone over to the dark side. I don't mean your politics...I mean your suddenly closed mind. Think for one last minute before you put that sign in your mind's window. Think of the people who you do join in the land of the closed mind. The young earth creationists, the holocaust deniers, Ann Coulter, Michael Moore, The Spanish Inquisition.....

Stop, save yourself before it's too late.

-z

Shut up, ´Zilla!

I am serious. STFU! I´m tired of your endless slander, insults, flames, trolling and name-calling. (Did I leave anything out?)

You´re just the right person to talk about black-and-white. It´s the only way to see the world for you, after all. You, and "Skeptic"/Fanatic, and the rest of the Rabid Right.

Everyone who does not agree with Israel´s action vs. the Palestinians is an anti-semite and wants to see all jews dead.
Yeah, right...

Everyone who does not agree with the Bush administration´s foreign policy and does not take their lies and spin at face value is an anti-American leftist b*st*rd who wants to see America destroyed. Yeah, right...

Everyone who does not agree that invading a country that had NOTHING to do with terrorism and killing thousands of people who had NOTHING to do with terrorism is a terrorist supporter. Yeah, right...

Everyone who is fed up and tired with the lies, spin, slander, flaming and hate-mongering of you and your kind is on the same level as Holocaust deniers and the Spanish Inquisition. Yeah right...

You just p!ss me off. You and your posts, as well as the posts of your fellow Rabid Rightists, are a disgrace to this forum, to political debate, and to human intellect. They are a waste of bandwidth and of our precious time.

Just shut the f*** up. Forever.

29th March 2004, 09:26 AM

JJ says, without any sarcasm at all, because he doesn't really mind, HIJACK AWAY!

It only shows the rabid right for what they are.

rikzilla

29th March 2004, 10:14 AM

Originally posted by Chaos

Shut up, ´Zilla!

I am serious. STFU! I´m tired of your endless slander, insults, flames, trolling and name-calling. (Did I leave anything out?)

You´re just the right person to talk about black-and-white. It´s the only way to see the world for you, after all. You, and "Skeptic"/Fanatic, and the rest of the Rabid Right.

Everyone who does not agree with Israel´s action vs. the Palestinians is an anti-semite and wants to see all jews dead.
Yeah, right...

Everyone who does not agree with the Bush administration´s foreign policy and does not take their lies and spin at face value is an anti-American leftist b*st*rd who wants to see America destroyed. Yeah, right...

Everyone who does not agree that invading a country that had NOTHING to do with terrorism and killing thousands of people who had NOTHING to do with terrorism is a terrorist supporter. Yeah, right...

Everyone who is fed up and tired with the lies, spin, slander, flaming and hate-mongering of you and your kind is on the same level as Holocaust deniers and the Spanish Inquisition. Yeah right...

You just p!ss me off. You and your posts, as well as the posts of your fellow Rabid Rightists, are a disgrace to this forum, to political debate, and to human intellect. They are a waste of bandwidth and of our precious time.

Just shut the f*** up. Forever.

Wow! Please take your meds or something. Please feel free to ignore me if you must. But your insane rant was not only uncalled for,...it was simply insane.

-z

BTW: You could say all this and more to me in PM if you like. As it is, now everyone will be privy to your immature spew. :rolleyes:

Monketey Ghost

29th March 2004, 10:53 AM

Rick, you really are the last person who should be preaching to others about keeping an open mind politically. THE last.

Chaos

29th March 2004, 10:59 AM

Originally posted by rikzilla

Wow! Please take your meds or something. Please feel free to ignore me if you must. But your insane rant was not only uncalled for,...it was simply insane.

-z

BTW: You could say all this and more to me in PM if you like. As it is, now everyone will be privy to your immature spew. :rolleyes:

I have ignored you long enough. I don´t mind being the target of stupidity myself - but I can´t stand watching other people becoming the target for speaking their mind, using - as far as I am concerned - a much more rational language and better argument than the other side of the aisle.

And, by the way, I only use PM if I don´t want to make public what I want to say. But I DO want to make public what I think of the poison you keep spitting.

Jocko

29th March 2004, 11:23 AM

29th March 2004, 11:25 AM

Originally posted by No Answers
Rick, you really are the last person who should be preaching to others about keeping an open mind politically. THE last.

Well, there is Rockook, BobbyK and Jockemo...

Perhaps Larry, Curly and Moe in another incarnation, but with blond hair, blue eyes, and vile politics.

Look at Rockook and BobbyK. They're so busy wanting to be insulted that they invent new meanings for words. When you point that out to them, they repeat their own diagnoses and scream "paranoid". Then there's Jockemo, who seems to have been the point guard here, busy asking leading questions and ready to take things out of context.

Sorry, Mags, but there's a whole set of candidates for "last one to talk about open minds" here.

29th March 2004, 11:27 AM

Originally posted by Jocko
plenty of company on the left. Witness JJ,

I'm no more a leftist than you are, Jockemo. If you don't know why I call you that, go see "Court Jester". Rent the DVD, and watch out, when somebody snaps their fingers your REAL personality will come out again.

I'm not on the left. I'm just not on the neo-fascist right, either, and that's what peeves you off to such end that you and your buddies have to pick fights.

Picking fights while you're falsely claiming to be oppressed is a classic method, detailed in a very famous book. Do you know the title of the book?

Kodiak

29th March 2004, 11:35 AM

Originally posted by Chaos
...but I can´t stand watching other people becoming the target for speaking their mind...

If you don't want your points, opinions, or arguments examined and countered, then I suggest keeping them to yourself, moving on, or designing your own forum where only YOU are allowed to post.

Kodiak

29th March 2004, 11:39 AM

Originally posted by Chaos

Shut up, ´Zilla!

I am serious. STFU! I´m tired of your endless slander, insults, flames, trolling and name-calling. (Did I leave anything out?)

You´re just the right person to talk about black-and-white. It´s the only way to see the world for you, after all. You, and "Skeptic"/Fanatic, and the rest of the Rabid Right.

Everyone who does not agree with Israel´s action vs. the Palestinians is an anti-semite and wants to see all jews dead.
Yeah, right...

Everyone who does not agree with the Bush administration´s foreign policy and does not take their lies and spin at face value is an anti-American leftist b*st*rd who wants to see America destroyed. Yeah, right...

Everyone who does not agree that invading a country that had NOTHING to do with terrorism and killing thousands of people who had NOTHING to do with terrorism is a terrorist supporter. Yeah, right...

Everyone who is fed up and tired with the lies, spin, slander, flaming and hate-mongering of you and your kind is on the same level as Holocaust deniers and the Spanish Inquisition. Yeah right...

You just p!ss me off. You and your posts, as well as the posts of your fellow Rabid Rightists, are a disgrace to this forum, to political debate, and to human intellect. They are a waste of bandwidth and of our precious time.

Just shut the f*** up. Forever.

Me thinkith thou doth protest too much...or something like that.

Got anything besides Ad Hominems and Strawmen?

Oh, and I'd just LOVE your list of "Rabid Rightists". :D

Jocko

29th March 2004, 11:47 AM

Originally posted by jj

I'm no more a leftist than you are, Jockemo. If you don't know why I call you that, go see "Court Jester". Rent the DVD, and watch out, when somebody snaps their fingers your REAL personality will come out again.

I'm not on the left. I'm just not on the neo-fascist right, either, and that's what peeves you off to such end that you and your buddies have to pick fights.

Picking fights while you're falsely claiming to be oppressed is a classic method, detailed in a very famous book. Do you know the title of the book?

Look, you angry little man, I wasn't talking to you, simply pointing out your left-leaning petty crap, and that of "your buddies." I can't help that you're blind to your own biases.

And of course you kindly supplied a perfect example of the kind of schoolyard nonsense I'm talking about.

Your video selections don't interest me any more than your politics do, and I was relatively polite in pointing out that pricks come from all ends of the political spectrum. If anyone's picking a fight it's you, so kindly bugger off.

Chaos

29th March 2004, 11:55 AM

Originally posted by Kodiak

If you don't want your points, opinions, or arguments examined and countered, then I suggest keeping them to yourself, moving on, or designing your own forum where only YOU are allowed to post.

Give me your arguments any time. But keep your insults. I´ve heard them all, I don´t need any new ones.

I´ll admit, though, that the left on this board has its share of...well...special people. Let´s call them the Loonie Left. However, my (admittedly subjective) obseration is that the left specializes in whacky arguments while the right favors questioning the intellect, sanity and moral integrity of opponents - although neither side has a monopoly on its strong point.

But...just because the left has them, too, that doesn´t mean you have to post that way. How about setting a good example?

Monketey Ghost

29th March 2004, 12:12 PM

"How about setting a good example?"

What a great idea! Those who argue from the right, argue solely within the confines of rational, pleasant verbiage. That way, if the lefties don't follow suit, it will be the left which will look bad, and the left here will lose face.

I'd like to see it.

29th March 2004, 12:35 PM

Originally posted by Jocko

Look, you angry little man, I wasn't talking to you, simply pointing out your left-leaning petty crap, and that of "your buddies

Jockemo, I'm still not a leftist, and I'm not even left-leaning.

I would suggest that you fiind out what the left actually says these days. Of course, that would be research, something you don't seem very comfortable with.

Jocko

29th March 2004, 12:52 PM

Originally posted by jj

Jockemo, I'm still not a leftist, and I'm not even left-leaning.

I would suggest that you fiind out what the left actually says these days. Of course, that would be research, something you don't seem very comfortable with.

Of course you're not. I don't know how anyone could get that impression. You and Al Franken belong squarely in the moderate/centrist camp, all right.

On a lighter note, care to explain your diminutive take on my name, or is this your idea of high-minded debate? Considering how you gripe about ad hominems and baiting, I'm wondering if your definition of "insult" is as broad as your definition of "leftist."

I can appreciate a good jibe, but man, "Jockemo" just doesn't make any sense.

Tmy

29th March 2004, 01:08 PM

Jockemo backwards is "Omekcoj"...........which is Swahilli . Roughly translated it means "pussy whipped douche bag".

Hes got you pegged Jocko!

Jocko

29th March 2004, 01:16 PM

Originally posted by Tmy
Jockemo backwards is "Omekcoj"...........which is Swahilli . Roughly translated it means "pussy whipped douche bag".

Hes got you pegged Jocko!

Wow, how did he know I speak swahili? You're right, that's scary. Now, what's Samoan for "big-boned," Timmy? I'll bet you know that one by heart.

Monketey Ghost

29th March 2004, 01:27 PM

Jocko, I was wondering myself, and just now realized where "Jockomo" is from. AFAIK, it isn't the least bit insulting.

"...See that guy all dressed in green
Aiko Aiko one day

He not a man
he's a rubbin machine - Jockomo fino anane.

Talking 'bout hey now
hey now
Aiko Aiko one day
Jockomo fino anane,
Jockomo finane."

An old old song called "Iko Iko" with various spellings. Great beat, good party song.

Jocko

29th March 2004, 01:46 PM

Originally posted by No Answers
Jocko, I was wondering myself, and just now realized where "Jockomo" is from. AFAIK, it isn't the least bit insulting.

"...See that guy all dressed in green
Aiko Aiko one day

He not a man
he's a rubbin machine - Jockomo fino anane.

Talking 'bout hey now
hey now
Aiko Aiko one day
Jockomo fino anane,
Jockomo finane."

An old old song called "Iko Iko" with various spellings. Great beat, good party song.

Sheesh, it's a good thing I didn't go with "Louie Louie" as my forum name - mangled lyrics are a serious social problem and I don't want to make the situation worse.

Still, it's only mildly clever WITH context, though I sure you put much more thought into it than JJ did. Thanks for the laugh. :D

Suddenly

29th March 2004, 01:56 PM

Originally posted by Jocko

On a lighter note, care to explain your diminutive take on my name, or is this your idea of high-minded debate? Considering how you gripe about ad hominems and baiting, I'm wondering if your definition of "insult" is as broad as your definition of "leftist."

I can appreciate a good jibe, but man, "Jockemo" just doesn't make any sense.

He's already told you where it comes from. Scroll up a few posts. Read them this time.

Jeez. No Answers missed it too. Unless he's just messing with you.

It should be spelled Giacomo, BTW. JJ's using a bit of license in that regard.

Jocko

29th March 2004, 01:59 PM

Originally posted by Suddenly

He's already told you where it comes from. Scroll up a few posts. Read them this time.

Jeez. No Answers missed it too. Unless he's just messing with you.

It should be spelled Giacomo, BTW. JJ's using a bit of license in that regard.

Sorry, I didn't realize I was expected to keep track of JJ's childish name-calling, particularly when they're misspelled. What I HAVE looked for is where I've come off as the fascist he's labeled me. Any sign of that?

Edited to add: Know who else uses a lot of "license" *cough*illiteracy*cough* in his posts? KOA.

29th March 2004, 04:31 PM

Originally posted by Jocko

Sorry, I didn't realize I was expected to keep track of JJ's childish name-calling, particularly when they're misspelled.

#define "sarcasm.h"

Yee haaa. A spelling flame. My life is complete.

As it turns out I don't recall having seen the name spelled out, although, yes, it is Giacomo on the side of the wagon (thank you DVD), so yeah, it was misspelled.

And you flamed me. Life is complete. Let us now mention Adoph Hitler, invoke Godwin's law, and rename you the Inspector General.

HAIL RODNEY!

rockoon

29th March 2004, 05:43 PM

I invoke Godwin's Law on JJ

29th March 2004, 08:00 PM

Originally posted by rockoon
I invoke Godwin's Law on JJ

Anibus fidemus!

BobK

29th March 2004, 08:10 PM

Finding no one named BobbyK listed as a forum member, jj must be referencing (A)someone famous such as R.F. Kennedy(known as Bobby) or (B)me.

I think it's more likely me, but I'm not entirely sure. If it's not me, I apologized for causing unnecessary bandwidth usage.

Otherwise, this is posted for your viewing pleasure.

Current opinions on appropriate usage of the term: draft dodger

Single post view
jj's opinion (http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&action=showpost&postid=1870375342) at beginning of post

BobK's opinion (http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&action=showpost&postid=1870381053) about five paragraphs down.
________________

Thread view starting with jj's post. (http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&postid=1870375342#post1870375342) Others also made comments. Quite enlightening.

jj said above that I "invent new meanings for words"? I guess it depends on what jj's new meaning of new meaning is.

Or maybe he's redefining "invent" or "words". You never can tell with him.

edit...
changed view to viewing

29th March 2004, 10:22 PM

Originally posted by BobK
Current opinions on appropriate usage of the term: draft dodger

Taken out of context.

Single post view
jj's opinion (http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&action=showpost&postid=1870375342) at beginning of post

Taken out of context.

BobK's opinion (http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&action=showpost&postid=1870381053) about five paragraphs down.

Don't much care what your opinion was. INstead of righting what you misunderstood, you decided to deliberately pick a fight, shout fighting words, and launch into fullcourt bullying.

That's because, I submit with no proof, only supposition, that what you really wanted to do was pick a fight.

You didn't, and don't, give a hoot about understanding anyone who doesn't bow to your personal politics.

BobK

30th March 2004, 12:04 AM

And your new meaning of the term draft dodger is equal to the standard meaning?

Might you not be redefining it simply to make a slanderous charge against someone?

You decrease the derogatory value of the term by redefining it as you did.

Enlisted in guard = draft dodger

You could have used list jumper which is likely true, but evidently that isn't malicious enough for you.

You seem have a lot of pent up hatred jj. Get a grip.

You know, I wouldn't have even posted to this thread if you hadn't cast aspersions on me a few posts up.

Giz

30th March 2004, 04:02 AM

Originally posted by Chaos

I have ignored you long enough. I don´t mind being the target of stupidity myself - but I can´t stand watching other people becoming the target for speaking their mind, using - as far as I am concerned - a much more rational language and better argument than the other side of the aisle.

And, by the way, I only use PM if I don´t want to make public what I want to say. But I DO want to make public what I think of the poison you keep spitting.

Ummm, so:

Flaming Rik for speaking his mind: Good
Rik admonishing Sundog for giving up debate: Bad
"but I can´t stand watching other people becoming the target for speaking their mind" : Good

Do I get a flame now as well? Sheesh, not everyone will agree with you Chaos, get over yourself. You might just be wrong! (Only kidding, we know it's the evil coservatives who are wrong really but there's a philosophical point here).

Incidentally, from my browsing of the forum a couple of these:

"Everyone who does not agree with Israel´s action vs. the Palestinians is an anti-semite and wants to see all jews dead.
Yeah, right...

Everyone who does not agree with the Bush administration´s foreign policy and does not take their lies and spin at face value is an anti-American leftist b*st*rd who wants to see America destroyed. Yeah, right...

Everyone who does not agree that invading a country that had NOTHING to do with terrorism and killing thousands of people who had NOTHING to do with terrorism is a terrorist supporter. Yeah, right..."

... might be slightly exagerated. For example one could say that:
"Israel is more sinned against than sinning (but the settlements should go). Some posters here however seemingly reserve their criticism for Israel only, why such a lack of proportion?"
Or
"When France said that it would NEVER approve violence it fatally undermined any remaining (scant) chance of sabre-rattling diplomacy frightening Saddam into complience. For whatever the reason that pledge was made, the effect was to make the stabilzation of the region a trickier business"

The above are rather milder and are more likely to be the kind of things that (shudder) right wingers might actually be saying. Obviously I cant speak for the Destroyer Of Tokyo (does Rik know something about the future of the war on terror that we don't) but I think (and perhaps I should have just said this and pruned the rest of my post) you're reading things into what's been written thats not justified, simply because you're frustrated with his politics.

30th March 2004, 09:39 AM

Originally posted by BobK
And your new meaning of the term draft dodger is equal to the standard meaning?

"Standard meaning"? Perchance you are talking through your hat.

Might you not be redefining it simply to make a slanderous charge against someone?

Slanderous? That's a threat of lawsuit, then? Over political speech? And with a third party threatening it? You really need some help here.

The discussion about Bush contains what the press would call fact. Sometimes that's lame, often not. Would you care to explain why you're not threatening the press with a lawsuit?

You decrease the derogatory value of the term by redefining it as you did.

Enlisted in guard = draft dodger

I didn't say that, and your asssertion that I did makes you a nothing but a cheap. cheating liar.

You know, I wouldn't have even posted to this thread if you hadn't cast aspersions on me a few posts up.
Your claims about what I said make you nothing but a dishonorable liar.

BobK

30th March 2004, 01:08 PM

jj,

You don't think there is a standard meaning to draft dodger? Yeah, well I guess there is another one. Someone that stays out of drafty buildings. Somehow I don't think you meant that though.

Still chopping up my posts and trying to make it seem you've addressed everything in the post?

You forgot this part of my post.You decrease the derogatory value of the term by redefining it as you did.

And this part.You could have used list jumper which is likely true, but evidently that isn't malicious enough for you.

You seem have a lot of pent up hatred jj. Get a grip.

Why isn't list jumper a better description? It's not malicious enough for you?

Your bile backing up on you? If you gargle with mouthwash, that might improve the taste and make it easier to swallow.

30th March 2004, 01:31 PM

Originally posted by BobK
jj,

You don't think there is a standard meaning to draft dodger?

Go read what LukeT said to you again. And again. And again, until you GET IT, will you?

And stop trying to confuse the issue by insisting that getting jumped up a list via ability is the same thing as getting jumped up the list because your daddy called their daddy, because it isn't, wasn't, we all know that now, and *I* think we all knew that, including you, when you said otherwise.

Why do I think that? Because if you were sincere, you'd have said "oh, yeah, I didn't think of that" and stopped arguing. You wanted an argument, you piddled all over the language to start one, and now you seem to be annoyed that you still have an argument to deal with. Blame yourself for that.

In other words, short, small ones, you're trying to pick a fight, you're nothing but a cheap, nasty bully, and your actions are contemptable.

Luke T.

30th March 2004, 01:48 PM

You know, if I put a marshmallow on a stick and hold it about three feet from this topic for 30 seconds, it turns a nice golden brown! Mmmmmm, yummy!

:D

Hey, BobK. Going by your situation during the Viet Nam war, jj has stated pretty clearly that he doesn't think you were a daft dodger. If you wanted jj to not like you for being a draft dodger, I'd say you have failed. If you just wanted jj to not like you, I would say you have succeeded.

Hey, jj, where you going with that gun in your hand? Ok. Bad Hendrix reference, but you know what I'm saying? Have a beer, or a saspirilla, on me. Let's call it a day, eh?

30th March 2004, 03:39 PM

Originally posted by Luke T.
You know, if I put a marshmallow on a stick and hold it about three feet from this topic for 30 seconds, it turns a nice golden brown! Mmmmmm, yummy!

:D

Bet you haven't tried it. If you did, you'd have the world's first plasmafied marshmallow. You might even get carbon-carbon fusion going from this one!!

Hey, BobK. Going by your situation during the Viet Nam war, jj has stated pretty clearly that he doesn't think you were a daft dodger.

In so many words, correct. I do, however, think he's "daft". :)

f you wanted jj to not like you for being a draft dodger, I'd say you have failed.

Again, in so many words, correct.

If you just wanted jj to not like you, I would say you have succeeded.

And, three for three.

Hey, jj, where you going with that gun in your hand?

Why did Kurt Weil come to mind? Ooooh. Alabama!

Ok. Bad Hendrix reference, but you know what I'm saying? Have a beer, or a saspirilla, on me. Let's call it a day, eh?
Have to wait until I go home, but I shall raid the fridge for something.

As to calling it a day, I'm really tired of this unholy trinity of Jockemo (Yes, I know, it's Giacomo, but gimme some license here), BobbyK and Rockook trying to convince the world I said something I didn't.

It's a classic political attack, put words in somebody's mouth and keep claiming that they said it, on and on, until people start to believe them.

It's an old, old tactic, Cassius was a past-master at it, Sophicles (sp?) likewise, and in the present or nearly-present day we've seen at least two large-scale applications, both in Eurasia, and both were a disaster.

So I feel some ethical obligation to expose their nastiness.

Sorry, but that's how I see it.

Suddenly

30th March 2004, 05:46 PM

Originally posted by jj

(Yes, I know, it's Giacomo, but gimme some license here)

NEVER!!!

Then again, if he's "Jockemo," does that make him a "phull?"

gnome

30th March 2004, 08:28 PM

BobK

31st March 2004, 01:43 AM

Originally posted by Luke T.
You know, if I put a marshmallow on a stick and hold it about three feet from this topic for 30 seconds, it turns a nice golden brown! Mmmmmm, yummy!

:D

Hey, BobK. Going by your situation during the Viet Nam war, jj has stated pretty clearly that he doesn't think you were a daft dodger. If you wanted jj to not like you for being a draft dodger, I'd say you have failed. If you just wanted jj to not like you, I would say you have succeeded.

Hey, jj, where you going with that gun in your hand? Ok. Bad Hendrix reference, but you know what I'm saying? Have a beer, or a saspirilla, on me. Let's call it a day, eh?

I couldn't care much less what jj thinks of me, that has not been the point. I have simply been trying to get him to retract his illogical and purely emotional definition of draft dodger.

It isn't really whether he considers me a draft dodger, as I pointed out to you in the other thread. It is the fact that by calling someone who enlisted in any branch by that term, He is making light of the term, thereby reducing the derogatory value of that term.

Since it is a term that when used, can generate emotional feelings, he is evidently trying to appeal to emotion and he got his wish.

His dearth of cogent argument, inability to admit to his incorrect usage of the term, and emotional lashing out at those that fail to agree with him, tends to leave one with the idea that jj's opinion simply isn't worth much consideration.

Having come to this conclusion, I think I'll exit the thread for now.