FacebookTwitter
Hatrack River Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Hatrack River Forum » Active Forums » Books, Films, Food and Culture » old man blogs at cloud (Page 19)

  This topic comprises 37 pages: 1  2  3  ...  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  ...  35  36  37   
Author Topic: old man blogs at cloud
Lyrhawn
Member
Member # 7039

 - posted      Profile for Lyrhawn   Email Lyrhawn         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by JanitorBlade:
quote:
Originally posted by Jon Boy:
Eh, I couldn't get past "if there’s one thing the Left cannot tolerate today, it’s other people’s liberty."

I'd recommend finishing it if you can. He makes some pretty astute observations. I wish more people knew the history of labor in this country.

On our way back from Texas, Katherine and I drove by Trinidad Colorado, not even realizing it was the site of the Ludlow Massacre.

That was a watershed moment in labor relations, and as much as I love learning about unionization and how they operated here in the US, I didn't know so much of that incident.

Read Killing For Coal, great book on Ludlow by a really good historian.

He has an...okay grasp on labor history. He left out the part where the folks he supports spent 60 years gutting organized labor. We're the least organized first world nation and ALL our workers suffer for it. Every year the people he votes for trod out the same tired lines about how unions are destroying America. And they've dismantled almost all the protections for labor that the original labor movement fought and died for. Labor doesnt just drive up benefits for themselves, countries with unions usually find conditions for all workers are better thanks to the unions. There's a positive splash damage effect.

Progressivism meant a lot of different things in the 20s than it meant today. It was linked with things like helping the poor and workers, but it was also linked with a strong sense of moral policing. Henry Ford paid high wages but you had to agree to let the morality police literally come into your home, judge you, and tell you everything you were doing wrong with your life. He was also intensely, violently anti-Union. If you want a real progressive role model ( other than Teddy Roosevelt ) look to Upton Sinclair, America's most under appreciated progressive.

I feel like he does this a lot. He knows just enough about history to get the surface issues right, but generally doesn't hav a good grasp on what's happening underneath. He's drawing many of the wrong conclusions from half understood historical precedents.

Though I think his remedies at the end are mostly right, I'd love to meet his straw man liberal. I've yet to see him describe a liberal that I've actually met in real life.

Posts: 21894 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rakeesh
Member
Member # 2001

 - posted      Profile for Rakeesh   Email Rakeesh         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
He's probably a cousin to friend of labor Scott Walker.
Posts: 17149 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
scifibum
Member
Member # 7625

 - posted      Profile for scifibum   Email scifibum         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
What I liked about this column - relative to others - is that he made a reasoned argument that can be understood and challenged. It sucks that it's still got a few straw men, but compared to other columns which have nothing but, it was pretty good. He also did a better job than normal of aiming some of his criticism at the right wing.
Posts: 4266 | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dogbreath
Member
Member # 11879

 - posted      Profile for Dogbreath           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by scifibum:
What I liked about this column - relative to others - is that he made a reasoned argument that can be understood and challenged. It sucks that it's still got a few straw men, but compared to other columns which have nothing but, it was pretty good. He also did a better job than normal of aiming some of his criticism at the right wing.

It may be wishful thinking, but it seems like over the past few months his columns seem to have been gradually shifting to a more nuanced and reasonable tone, with less of the broad generalizations, ridiculous claims and straw man characterizations (his lecturing black pastors to stop letting democrats tell them what to preach was a low point for me), and bitter diatribes about smug liberal elitists. I really hope it continues that way.

I'm not sure what has inspired the change of heart, but it seems to coincide with his disgust with Donald Trump's popularity, along with maybe the fact that gay marriage is legal everywhere in the US and society hasn't collapsed yet, or maybe just some personal experiences that have given him pause.

quote:
I'd love to meet his straw man liberal. I've yet to see him describe a liberal that I've actually met in real life.
His typical liberal seems to either be a smug, sneering, intellectually dishonest, hyper politically correct, likes-the-smell-of-their-own-farts bohemian bourgeois member of academia (or Hollywood) or, if he likes the person in question, a brainwashed/cowed disciple believing the lies of gay agenda/global warming fanatics and being used as a pawn to further the downfall of America.

I suppose I've met a handful liberals who meet most of the qualities of the first example. But usually it just seems like they're very insecure and have latched onto that persona in the hopes that it will make people respect them - they're generally not bad people deep down. I tend to steer clear of people who put a lot of stock in image and parroting whatever political positions and interests they think will make them most acceptable, though, so I could be underestimating how many of them there are.

Posts: 2218 | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Orincoro
Member
Member # 8854

 - posted      Profile for Orincoro   Email Orincoro         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Those smug liberal professors, always standing on a chair and daring god to smite them if he exists. Thank god there are marines in every classroom in America to punch those professors in the face.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I've met a handful of people who get close to card's contrived liberal typecasting! One of them literally with a turtleneck sweater thing going on

but that took me living my entire life in a place that he would have considered a contemptible elitist liberal hive of liberals and acquiring furtive glances of maybe five or six of these stereotypes in my entire life.

If I had to think of the most ridiculously stereotypable general kind of strawman conservative that we love to draft up and beat the snot out of online, I suppose they are easier to find because of how they cloister demographically?

Posts: 15384 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dogbreath
Member
Member # 11879

 - posted      Profile for Dogbreath           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Samprimary:
If I had to think of the most ridiculously stereotypable general kind of strawman conservative that we love to draft up and beat the snot out of online, I suppose they are easier to find because of how they cloister demographically?

Speaking of which, I've been watching your encounters with Brad on Facebook with a sort of morbid fascination. He seems to be trying very hard to check all the boxes on the "crazy conservative strawman" list.
Posts: 2218 | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
JanitorBlade
Moderator
Member # 12343

 - posted      Profile for JanitorBlade   Email JanitorBlade         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Lyrhawn:
quote:
Originally posted by JanitorBlade:
quote:
Originally posted by Jon Boy:
Eh, I couldn't get past "if there’s one thing the Left cannot tolerate today, it’s other people’s liberty."

I'd recommend finishing it if you can. He makes some pretty astute observations. I wish more people knew the history of labor in this country.

On our way back from Texas, Katherine and I drove by Trinidad Colorado, not even realizing it was the site of the Ludlow Massacre.

That was a watershed moment in labor relations, and as much as I love learning about unionization and how they operated here in the US, I didn't know so much of that incident.

Read Killing For Coal, great book on Ludlow by a really good historian.

He has an...okay grasp on labor history. He left out the part where the folks he supports spent 60 years gutting organized labor. We're the least organized first world nation and ALL our workers suffer for it. Every year the people he votes for trod out the same tired lines about how unions are destroying America. And they've dismantled almost all the protections for labor that the original labor movement fought and died for. Labor doesnt just drive up benefits for themselves, countries with unions usually find conditions for all workers are better thanks to the unions. There's a positive splash damage effect.

Progressivism meant a lot of different things in the 20s than it meant today. It was linked with things like helping the poor and workers, but it was also linked with a strong sense of moral policing. Henry Ford paid high wages but you had to agree to let the morality police literally come into your home, judge you, and tell you everything you were doing wrong with your life. He was also intensely, violently anti-Union. If you want a real progressive role model ( other than Teddy Roosevelt ) look to Upton Sinclair, America's most under appreciated progressive.

I feel like he does this a lot. He knows just enough about history to get the surface issues right, but generally doesn't hav a good grasp on what's happening underneath. He's drawing many of the wrong conclusions from half understood historical precedents.

Though I think his remedies at the end are mostly right, I'd love to meet his straw man liberal. I've yet to see him describe a liberal that I've actually met in real life.

Upton Sinclair's The Jungle, was required reading in my 11th grade US history class. Thanks for the book recommendation.

I too think Mr. Card does not really grasp why unions are still needed, granted today people are not murdered for striking or protesting, but IMHO businesses are simply amoral, and unions require them to grudgingly consider the needs of their workers instead of ignoring or discounting them. Sure some companies figure it out without being forced to, but the too many business decisions are made because the shareholders wants a return, without ever thinking, "Will our workers go for that?"

Posts: 1099 | Registered: Jun 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Dogbreath:
quote:
Originally posted by Samprimary:
If I had to think of the most ridiculously stereotypable general kind of strawman conservative that we love to draft up and beat the snot out of online, I suppose they are easier to find because of how they cloister demographically?

Speaking of which, I've been watching your encounters with Brad on Facebook with a sort of morbid fascination. He seems to be trying very hard to check all the boxes on the "crazy conservative strawman" list.
dogbreath ur posts are to long and full of bullshit.
Posts: 15384 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Elison R. Salazar
Member
Member # 8565

 - posted      Profile for Elison R. Salazar   Email Elison R. Salazar         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by JanitorBlade:
quote:
Originally posted by Lyrhawn:
quote:
Originally posted by JanitorBlade:
quote:
Originally posted by Jon Boy:
Eh, I couldn't get past "if there’s one thing the Left cannot tolerate today, it’s other people’s liberty."

I'd recommend finishing it if you can. He makes some pretty astute observations. I wish more people knew the history of labor in this country.

On our way back from Texas, Katherine and I drove by Trinidad Colorado, not even realizing it was the site of the Ludlow Massacre.

That was a watershed moment in labor relations, and as much as I love learning about unionization and how they operated here in the US, I didn't know so much of that incident.

Read Killing For Coal, great book on Ludlow by a really good historian.

He has an...okay grasp on labor history. He left out the part where the folks he supports spent 60 years gutting organized labor. We're the least organized first world nation and ALL our workers suffer for it. Every year the people he votes for trod out the same tired lines about how unions are destroying America. And they've dismantled almost all the protections for labor that the original labor movement fought and died for. Labor doesnt just drive up benefits for themselves, countries with unions usually find conditions for all workers are better thanks to the unions. There's a positive splash damage effect.

Progressivism meant a lot of different things in the 20s than it meant today. It was linked with things like helping the poor and workers, but it was also linked with a strong sense of moral policing. Henry Ford paid high wages but you had to agree to let the morality police literally come into your home, judge you, and tell you everything you were doing wrong with your life. He was also intensely, violently anti-Union. If you want a real progressive role model ( other than Teddy Roosevelt ) look to Upton Sinclair, America's most under appreciated progressive.

I feel like he does this a lot. He knows just enough about history to get the surface issues right, but generally doesn't hav a good grasp on what's happening underneath. He's drawing many of the wrong conclusions from half understood historical precedents.

Though I think his remedies at the end are mostly right, I'd love to meet his straw man liberal. I've yet to see him describe a liberal that I've actually met in real life.

Upton Sinclair's The Jungle, was required reading in my 11th grade US history class. Thanks for the book recommendation.

I too think Mr. Card does not really grasp why unions are still needed, granted today people are not murdered for striking or protesting, but IMHO businesses are simply amoral, and unions require them to grudgingly consider the needs of their workers instead of ignoring or discounting them. Sure some companies figure it out without being forced to, but the too many business decisions are made because the shareholders wants a return, without ever thinking, "Will our workers go for that?"

Nifty article, basically they need to adapt a little and depart from their more 1950's New Deal form.
Posts: 12931 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
GaalDornick
Member
Member # 8880

 - posted      Profile for GaalDornick           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Samprimary:
quote:
Originally posted by Dogbreath:
quote:
Originally posted by Samprimary:
If I had to think of the most ridiculously stereotypable general kind of strawman conservative that we love to draft up and beat the snot out of online, I suppose they are easier to find because of how they cloister demographically?

Speaking of which, I've been watching your encounters with Brad on Facebook with a sort of morbid fascination. He seems to be trying very hard to check all the boxes on the "crazy conservative strawman" list.
dogbreath ur posts are to long and full of bullshit.
About time someone said it.
Posts: 2054 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lyrhawn
Member
Member # 7039

 - posted      Profile for Lyrhawn   Email Lyrhawn         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by JanitorBlade:
quote:
Originally posted by Lyrhawn:
quote:
Originally posted by JanitorBlade:
quote:
Originally posted by Jon Boy:
Eh, I couldn't get past "if there’s one thing the Left cannot tolerate today, it’s other people’s liberty."

I'd recommend finishing it if you can. He makes some pretty astute observations. I wish more people knew the history of labor in this country.

On our way back from Texas, Katherine and I drove by Trinidad Colorado, not even realizing it was the site of the Ludlow Massacre.

That was a watershed moment in labor relations, and as much as I love learning about unionization and how they operated here in the US, I didn't know so much of that incident.

Read Killing For Coal, great book on Ludlow by a really good historian.

He has an...okay grasp on labor history. He left out the part where the folks he supports spent 60 years gutting organized labor. We're the least organized first world nation and ALL our workers suffer for it. Every year the people he votes for trod out the same tired lines about how unions are destroying America. And they've dismantled almost all the protections for labor that the original labor movement fought and died for. Labor doesnt just drive up benefits for themselves, countries with unions usually find conditions for all workers are better thanks to the unions. There's a positive splash damage effect.

Progressivism meant a lot of different things in the 20s than it meant today. It was linked with things like helping the poor and workers, but it was also linked with a strong sense of moral policing. Henry Ford paid high wages but you had to agree to let the morality police literally come into your home, judge you, and tell you everything you were doing wrong with your life. He was also intensely, violently anti-Union. If you want a real progressive role model ( other than Teddy Roosevelt ) look to Upton Sinclair, America's most under appreciated progressive.

I feel like he does this a lot. He knows just enough about history to get the surface issues right, but generally doesn't hav a good grasp on what's happening underneath. He's drawing many of the wrong conclusions from half understood historical precedents.

Though I think his remedies at the end are mostly right, I'd love to meet his straw man liberal. I've yet to see him describe a liberal that I've actually met in real life.

Upton Sinclair's The Jungle, was required reading in my 11th grade US history class. Thanks for the book recommendation.

I too think Mr. Card does not really grasp why unions are still needed, granted today people are not murdered for striking or protesting, but IMHO businesses are simply amoral, and unions require them to grudgingly consider the needs of their workers instead of ignoring or discounting them. Sure some companies figure it out without being forced to, but the too many business decisions are made because the shareholders wants a return, without ever thinking, "Will our workers go for that?"

Did you know that Sinclair originally wrote The Jungle not as a story about food safety but about difficulties in labor organizing? That's since been obscured in the historical record.

Business has managed to convince people that they should be grateful for any job at all. A century ago they couldn't really threaten to move a job to China. Globalization has empowered owners at the expense of workers. But just in time production and tight supply chains should have empowered workers. A strike is arguably more devastating than it used to be becuase most workers are less replaceable than they used to be. Most jobs now require at least some training that can take weeks or months . But thus far most workers have been unable to leverage that advantage to do historically low unionization rates.

I'm technically white collar I suppose, and hopefully very white collar in the near future. But our wages are pushed up along with our benefits because the UAW sets a baseline that corporate has to meet or beat for the office workers. That spills down to our hundreds of suppliers as well. And ripples out to other industries.

We need organized labor now more than ever.

Posts: 21894 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
theamazeeaz
Member
Member # 6970

 - posted      Profile for theamazeeaz   Email theamazeeaz         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
That’s because the difference between “attentive, loving courtship” and “stalking” is whether the identical behavior is being perpetrated by a male deemed to be “attractive” or a male judged as “no way ever, death before disgust.”
Statements like these really drive me nuts.

Then again, some people like Twilight, and others think it's horrible, because actually, they don't exempt sparkly vampires from horrible behavior.

Posts: 1756 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dogbreath
Member
Member # 11879

 - posted      Profile for Dogbreath           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
To be honest, I read that as more of a sarcastic jab at the often troubling or downright creepy and controlling male love interests in YA novels aimed at girls rather than "being a stalker is OK if you're hot."
Posts: 2218 | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lyrhawn
Member
Member # 7039

 - posted      Profile for Lyrhawn   Email Lyrhawn         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"Stalker" is probably too strong.

But I actually do think the level of a man's (or woman's) attractiveness affects whether we label something "cute" or "creepy."

Posts: 21894 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rakeesh
Member
Member # 2001

 - posted      Profile for Rakeesh   Email Rakeesh         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
To an extent there is something unfair in this-I agree that depending on the charisma and attractiveness of the pursuer, they might be either a stalker or a courter. On the other hand, though, shouldn't the decision as to whether or not romantic attentions are welcome be up to the person receiving them anyway? File this under the umbrella of 'attractive people have an advantage', other things being equal.
Posts: 17149 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by GaalDornick:
quote:
Originally posted by Samprimary:
quote:
Originally posted by Dogbreath:
quote:
Originally posted by Samprimary:
If I had to think of the most ridiculously stereotypable general kind of strawman conservative that we love to draft up and beat the snot out of online, I suppose they are easier to find because of how they cloister demographically?

Speaking of which, I've been watching your encounters with Brad on Facebook with a sort of morbid fascination. He seems to be trying very hard to check all the boxes on the "crazy conservative strawman" list.
dogbreath ur posts are to long and full of bullshit.
About time someone said it.
like honestly seriously though I like to think I hit all the bingo checkmarks in that particular conversation. the end result was just surreal in its perfection. they all but just completely defaulted to saying essentially "you am use too many fancy-pancy pinko commie words, me am not read ur posts no more" as a final defense

it's like

okay

that's great

thanks

Posts: 15384 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dogbreath
Member
Member # 11879

 - posted      Profile for Dogbreath           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Rakeesh:
To an extent there is something unfair in this-I agree that depending on the charisma and attractiveness of the pursuer, they might be either a stalker or a courter. On the other hand, though, shouldn't the decision as to whether or not romantic attentions are welcome be up to the person receiving them anyway? File this under the umbrella of 'attractive people have an advantage', other things being equal.

Have you ever actually seen this, though? I mean in real life, not in movies.

- Keep in mind the scenario here - boy (or 90+ year old creepy sparkle vampire dude who just happens to look like a boy) is interested in girl, girl may or may not be interested but hasn't reciprocated yet, boy goes through increasingly obsessive and grandiose displays of affection until he wins girl's heart. (Maybe starting with the more innocuous stuff like buying her flowers or making her a mix CD before elevating to lurking outside her bedroom, that sort of thing) Clearly this example doesn't really apply to people already in established relationships, unless it would somehow be stalkerish for an unattractive person in a relationship to do it. -

Because I can't off the top of my head think of a time when I've seen it happen successfully in real life. Which isn't to say it doesn't happen, of course. But it seems that in all the cases I've seen, being respectful of the other person's choice and understanding boundaries seems to be the usual story, with the guys who go for grandiose gestures and/or can't seem to understand "no" (or even "I'm not sure, give me some space") are labeled as stalkery or creepy not because they're unattractive, but are rather considered unattractive because of their actions.

And of course, going back to the high school analogy (am I the only one who didn't really see the point of relationships in high school? I didn't even go to my own prom) from OSC's post, an unpopular, unattractive, uncharismatic guy (a "dork" if you will) will probably be subjected to much more open ridicule and disdain than an attractive, popular guy (whose buddies might even encourage his behavior, bro culture and all that), but I don't know if it means his target will find his behavior less unsettling because of it. (though she may be pressured into pretending she's flattered or not complaining about it)

Or maybe it does work that way. I don't know - it's been close to a decade since I was in high school, and even when I was in it I tended to avoid situations like that. Also, we had 0 vampires at our school. What I do know is, given some personal experiences I've had with abusive and mentally unstable people, even if it was someone I found devastatingly attractive (let's say Scarlet Johansson)... if I told her no or that I didn't want to see her and, rather than leaving me alone, she sent me lots of presents and notes and started following me around and then showed up outside my window at night after I moved across the country I wouldn't be thinking "awww, how sweet" I would be thinking "ohmygod, she's going to skin me and wear me like a suit. nononononono, oh god, please don't cut my face off Scarlet!"

YMMV.

Posts: 2218 | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dogbreath
Member
Member # 11879

 - posted      Profile for Dogbreath           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Samprimary:
quote:
Originally posted by GaalDornick:
quote:
Originally posted by Samprimary:
quote:
Originally posted by Dogbreath:
quote:
Originally posted by Samprimary:
If I had to think of the most ridiculously stereotypable general kind of strawman conservative that we love to draft up and beat the snot out of online, I suppose they are easier to find because of how they cloister demographically?

Speaking of which, I've been watching your encounters with Brad on Facebook with a sort of morbid fascination. He seems to be trying very hard to check all the boxes on the "crazy conservative strawman" list.
dogbreath ur posts are to long and full of bullshit.
About time someone said it.
like honestly seriously though I like to think I hit all the bingo checkmarks in that particular conversation. the end result was just surreal in its perfection. they all but just completely defaulted to saying essentially "you am use too many fancy-pancy pinko commie words, me am not read ur posts no more" as a final defense

it's like

okay

that's great

thanks

He sure told you.

What amazed me is his buddy actually straight up told me "yeah, I know I'm being a racist asshole, I just don't care." (with worse grammar) Like, he literally doesn't care about being right or justified in his actions or even having a coherent worldview, he just blithely dismisses anything - up to and including literal, non-disputable, easily verified facts - that doesn't give with his narrative.

Which kind of explains why Ben Carson is so popular with these folks, actually. It takes a special sort of person to just make shit up out of thin air and then accuse anyone asking even basic factual questions of a "liberal media witch hunt."

Posts: 2218 | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
GaalDornick
Member
Member # 8880

 - posted      Profile for GaalDornick           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Uh. I don't know the context about this particular conversation, but for the record I was just kidding about concurring with Sam's assessment of DB's posts. [Razz]

Well, half joking.

Posts: 2054 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dogbreath
Member
Member # 11879

 - posted      Profile for Dogbreath           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
WHICH HALF OF YOU WAS JOKING
Posts: 2218 | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
either he half was kidding about concurring with a full assessment of DB's full posts or he was full kidding about half of sam's assessment of DB's full posts or full kidding about full sam's assessment of DB's half posts or a quarter kidding about half and full or full and half but with a half repeating end-in on either side, or full on half, but not half on half on full or half on full on half, because that's a quarter.
Posts: 15384 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
GaalDornick
Member
Member # 8880

 - posted      Profile for GaalDornick           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I was kidding about agreeing with the bullshit half.

The other half was true, your posts are too long.

I'm just saying what we're all thinking.

Posts: 2054 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
GaalDornick
Member
Member # 8880

 - posted      Profile for GaalDornick           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
GaalDornick: Making Hatrack Great Again.
Posts: 2054 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
scifibum
Member
Member # 7625

 - posted      Profile for scifibum   Email scifibum         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
lol
Posts: 4266 | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dogbreath
Member
Member # 11879

 - posted      Profile for Dogbreath           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by GaalDornick:
I was kidding about agreeing with the bullshit half.

The other half was true, your posts are too long.

I'm just saying what we're all thinking.

My posts are neither short nor long. They're exactly the size I intend them to
Posts: 2218 | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dogbreath
Member
Member # 11879

 - posted      Profile for Dogbreath           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
*be.
Posts: 2218 | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Elison R. Salazar
Member
Member # 8565

 - posted      Profile for Elison R. Salazar   Email Elison R. Salazar         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Dogbreath:
quote:
Originally posted by Samprimary:
quote:
Originally posted by GaalDornick:
quote:
Originally posted by Samprimary:
quote:
Originally posted by Dogbreath:
quote:
Originally posted by Samprimary:
If I had to think of the most ridiculously stereotypable general kind of strawman conservative that we love to draft up and beat the snot out of online, I suppose they are easier to find because of how they cloister demographically?

Speaking of which, I've been watching your encounters with Brad on Facebook with a sort of morbid fascination. He seems to be trying very hard to check all the boxes on the "crazy conservative strawman" list.
dogbreath ur posts are to long and full of bullshit.
About time someone said it.
like honestly seriously though I like to think I hit all the bingo checkmarks in that particular conversation. the end result was just surreal in its perfection. they all but just completely defaulted to saying essentially "you am use too many fancy-pancy pinko commie words, me am not read ur posts no more" as a final defense

it's like

okay

that's great

thanks

He sure told you.

What amazed me is his buddy actually straight up told me "yeah, I know I'm being a racist asshole, I just don't care." (with worse grammar) Like, he literally doesn't care about being right or justified in his actions or even having a coherent worldview, he just blithely dismisses anything - up to and including literal, non-disputable, easily verified facts - that doesn't give with his narrative.

Which kind of explains why Ben Carson is so popular with these folks, actually. It takes a special sort of person to just make shit up out of thin air and then accuse anyone asking even basic factual questions of a "liberal media witch hunt."

I remember reading the /r/russia subreddit and there was a thread about why is Russia so homophobic and most of the replies were some variation of "You wouldn't think it normal to see a BDSM couple spanking each other in the street right?" or "We just aren't infected by PC bullshit."
Posts: 12931 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
NobleHunter
Member
Member # 12043

 - posted      Profile for NobleHunter           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
My posts are neither short nor long. They're exactly the size I intend them to
quote:
*be
[dies and is ded]
Posts: 185 | Registered: Apr 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dogbreath
Member
Member # 11879

 - posted      Profile for Dogbreath           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Elison R. Salazar:
quote:
Originally posted by Dogbreath:
quote:
Originally posted by Samprimary:
quote:
Originally posted by GaalDornick:
quote:
Originally posted by Samprimary:
quote:
Originally posted by Dogbreath:
quote:
Originally posted by Samprimary:
[qb]If I had to think of the most ridiculously stereotypable general kind of strawman conservative that we love to draft up and beat the snot out of online, I suppose they are easier to find because of how they cloister demographically?

Speaking of which, I've been watching your encounters with Brad on Facebook with a sort of morbid fascination. He seems to be trying very hard to check all the boxes on the "crazy conservative strawman" list.

dogbreath ur posts are to long and full of bullshit.

About time someone said it.
like honestly seriously though I like to think I hit all the bingo checkmarks in that particular conversation. the end result was just surreal in its perfection. they all but just completely defaulted to saying essentially "you am use too many fancy-pancy pinko commie words, me am not read ur posts no more" as a final defense

it's like

okay

that's great

thanks

He sure told you.

What amazed me is his buddy actually straight up told me "yeah, I know I'm being a racist asshole, I just don't care." (with worse grammar) Like, he literally doesn't care about being right or justified in his actions or even having a coherent worldview, he just blithely dismisses anything - up to and including literal, non-disputable, easily verified facts - that doesn't give with his narrative.

Which kind of explains why Ben Carson is so popular with these folks, actually. It takes a special sort of person to just make shit up out of thin air and then accuse anyone asking even basic factual questions of a "liberal media witch hunt."

I remember reading the /r/russia subreddit and there was a thread about why is Russia so homophobic and most of the replies were some variation of "You wouldn't think it normal to see a BDSM couple spanking each other in the street right?" or "We just aren't infected by PC bullshit."
Wait, what?
Posts: 2218 | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Wingracer
Member
Member # 12293

 - posted      Profile for Wingracer           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Elison R. Salazar:
I remember reading the /r/russia subreddit and there was a thread about why is Russia so homophobic and most of the replies were some variation of "You wouldn't think it normal to see a BDSM couple spanking each other in the street right?" or "We just aren't infected by PC bullshit."

Tell them to come to Florida. I see crazy stuff every day. I think it's the bath salts.
Posts: 890 | Registered: Feb 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Orincoro
Member
Member # 8854

 - posted      Profile for Orincoro   Email Orincoro         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Wingracer:
quote:
Originally posted by Elison R. Salazar:
I remember reading the /r/russia subreddit and there was a thread about why is Russia so homophobic and most of the replies were some variation of "You wouldn't think it normal to see a BDSM couple spanking each other in the street right?" or "We just aren't infected by PC bullshit."

Tell them to come to Florida. I see crazy stuff every day. I think it's the bath salts.
Ask people about themselves, and they will tell you how they wish to be seen.

Yes, in my experience (and I have a lot of experience here), Russians like to be seen as pragmatic, rather than knee-jerk conservative when it comes to what they see as moral, social issues.

In fact, they are mostly infected by a deep fear of not fitting in and being victimized, and a powerful culture of conformity where power is respected, and nonconformity or individuality is deemed a weakness.

This is why essentially all resistance to the Kremlin is inevitably charged with some form of moral failing (sexual perversion, nazism, etc), and all "abnormalities," or deviations from the mainstream are in turn conflated with resistance to proper authority.

Russians are taught that they live in a world of choices- that the strong choose who and what to be, and if they are not strong, or not normal, then it is because of the weakness of their own personal character. It's quite a stunning denial of more relativist western theories, and it's startling if you aren't familiar with its basis in history.

For half a century, being outside the mainstream in Russia and the Russosphere meant being out of society entirely- maybe even dead. For decades, this was a nation that ruthlessly hunted and destroyed the parts of itself that were capable of self-reflection. Nothing could hold a mirror to the communist reality- nothing was allowed to.

And from the perspective of someone married to an ethnic Russian born in that world, I can say this: to many Russians, difference is weakness. Being unusual is dangerous, and thinking unorthodox thoughts is irresponsible. To many Russians, if you aren't toeing the line, you are being reckless with the future of your family.

For a people who emerged from feudalism essentially several centuries behind the west, we do tend to try and treat Russians as if they have our same social history, when they really, really don't.

Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
when last significantly polled about the issue somewhere between 33 to 37 percent of Russians stated their belief that homosexuals should be eliminated. Not just imprisoned or deported, but flat-out executed.

add to that the percentage of Russians who merely wanted the homosexuals to be imprisoned and it pushes the number of Russians who even permit homosexuals to live without their being homosexual explicitly being a punishable crime into minority status.

If this information is accurate, Russia is Uganda level bad about homosexuality. It's brutal. And the Kremlin exploits it wholesale to keep the citizenry aligned in the correct way.

Posts: 15384 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
GaalDornick
Member
Member # 8880

 - posted      Profile for GaalDornick           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by NobleHunter:
quote:
My posts are neither short nor long. They're exactly the size I intend them to
quote:
*be
[dies and is ded]

lol
Posts: 2054 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Please take note that there is a serious movement to bar anyone who does not affirm their faith in "Climate Change" (i.e., human-caused global warming) from the Paris conference on climate.

In other words, before deciding what actions should be taken by governments around the world, anybody who challenges the scientific basis of climate change activism must be shut out of the conversation. So the decisions are to be made before the process of decision-making begins.

This is, on its face, a complete confession that there is no science supporting the climate-change radicals. Science never seeks to shut out questioning or contrary voices.

And since there is no evidence whatsoever supporting the claim that changes in global temperature are causally linked with humans' carbon emissions, and not one prediction made by the climate-change radicals has ever come true, it is the climate-change lobby that needs to prove that they represent science in any way, while the skeptics about climate change are the only people in the conversation who are acting like scientists.

What's his likely source for this
Posts: 15384 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dogbreath
Member
Member # 11879

 - posted      Profile for Dogbreath           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I... honestly don't understand where his beliefs as far as global warming come from. They seem so far out of right field and bizarre. I could be wrong, but I don't think he *has* ever named a source, just one day he started saying "yeah, that thing that virtually all scientists agree on is just a giant conspiracy" and just sort of kept with it without ever bothering with a source or a reason why he thinks it's all made up. It's baffling, honestly.
Posts: 2218 | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rakeesh
Member
Member # 2001

 - posted      Profile for Rakeesh   Email Rakeesh         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Well, it combines several of what can be termed his hates: liberals, democrats, and academics. With the way his brain as seen in his writing seems to work on politics now, it was almost a given that he would say this sort of thing.
Posts: 17149 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Yeah but he's all like "please note the existence of this SERIOUS MOVEMENT"

What

Where

Where is this thing he is talking about

What are the details

Where are the deets

What is his source

Posts: 15384 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
NobleHunter
Member
Member # 12043

 - posted      Profile for NobleHunter           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I'm sure it will come as a suprise to many scientist that they're required to listen to the "contrary" and "questioning" ranting of the tin foil hat brigade.
Posts: 185 | Registered: Apr 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Elison R. Salazar
Member
Member # 8565

 - posted      Profile for Elison R. Salazar   Email Elison R. Salazar         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Its so baffling as a Science fiction writer he should be better informed than most Republicans but I'm *SURE* he's acknowledged climate change in his works.
Posts: 12931 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
C3PO the Dragon Slayer
Member
Member # 10416

 - posted      Profile for C3PO the Dragon Slayer           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Elison R. Salazar:
Its so baffling as a Science fiction writer he should be better informed than most Republicans but I'm *SURE* he's acknowledged climate change in his works.

You may be thinking of the gaiaology in Xenocide/Children of the Mind, where it's revealed that the Descolada is manipulating the plant/animal balance of Lusitania to control the climate.

Or maybe Pastwatch, where an unspecified ecological catastrophe has basically doomed the future of humanity on Earth. Although the disaster is anthropogenic in this book, I don't think it's ever said to be global warming.

Posts: 1029 | Registered: Apr 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MrSquicky
Member
Member # 1802

 - posted      Profile for MrSquicky   Email MrSquicky         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Samprimary:
Yeah but he's all like "please note the existence of this SERIOUS MOVEMENT"

What

Where

Where is this thing he is talking about

What are the details

Where are the deets

What is his source

My take:
I don't think that's how OSC's mind (which, as I've stated before, is full of angry bees) works.

"Climate Change isn't real." is, I think, the belief of his that rests most completely on his hatred of groups of people. I don't believe he has any other reason for his other than that he hates the people who are pushing for it to be addressed.

He hates those groups in large part because he sees them as arrogant, elitists who think they know better than everyone else and who purposely ignore and belittle anyone who disagrees with them.

So you get a compact little circle where he hates them because they do this and he knows that they do this because he hates them. He knows better than anyone else and doesn't need to consider people's opinions who disagree with him, as they are mostly just sheep, arrogant fools, or actively evil.

Posts: 10176 | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
man but i could be almost totally positive that somewhere there are articles or series of articles from a handful of sources which collectively define and present the case he believes is the reality of the worldwide mass global warming false-flag conspiracy

i just want to know what it is, honestly.

quote:
You may be thinking of the gaiaology in Xenocide/Children of the Mind, where it's revealed that the Descolada is manipulating the plant/animal balance of Lusitania to control the climate.
TEACH THE CONTROVERSY
Posts: 15384 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
So I guess Orson Scott Card can't get through a pretty simple task like writing an article about that Trump is writhing garbage without being a writhing piece of garbage himself

quote:
These voters are keenly aware that the Constitution is no longer amended through constitutional processes. Instead, appointed judges now invent "constitutional" rights out of nothing but the latest fads of inconsistent, incoherent, and often unjust and inhumane "progressive" ideology.

The Equal Rights Amendment was rejected, so the Left abandoned the constitutional amendment process -- and now, when judges decide that the Constitution requires that women must tolerate the presence in public restrooms of any man who decides to put on a dress, anyone who thinks this has nothing to do with the Constitution, and is dangerous to women, is declared to be a bigot who should be fired from his job and permanently silenced.

Thanks for outing yourself as a transphobic bigot to add to your retinue of already-established homophobic bigotry. was very nice of you.
Posts: 15384 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
JanitorBlade
Moderator
Member # 12343

 - posted      Profile for JanitorBlade   Email JanitorBlade         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Maybe he is talking about this?

Link.

Edit: Also you are welcome to say that Mr. Card's words express transphobic and bigoted characteristics, but you cannot call him one. Please amend your words.

Posts: 1099 | Registered: Jun 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Do you expect in any real way that Orson Scott Card would try to play off that quote as not being anti-trans and claim it was solely about a bad-faith abuse of laws that let trans people not be forced to use the bathroom of an assigned-at-birth gender?

I mean it would be impressively mendacious if he did and I could outline all the problems with it if he did, but ...

Posts: 15384 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
JanitorBlade
Moderator
Member # 12343

 - posted      Profile for JanitorBlade   Email JanitorBlade         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I wouldn't expect Mr. Card to play anything off in what he writes. He's a very sincere person. He might possibly admit that he was angry when he wrote it, or that he was wrong, but I don't really have a clue as to what his intentions or thoughts were at the time he wrote this words.

Were I to guess I think he would very much look at the link I posted as an example of people assuming rights that the Constitution does not grant them.

But who cares what his motives are? Why don't we just stick to whether his arguments are salient or not. Many of them are not IMHO. Many of them are.

Are there instances where any man can put on a dress and walk into the women's restroom in a public place? Yes. Are they prevalent enough to demonstrate a real problem? I don't think so, not yet. Could it be a problem on paper, yes IMHO.

Posts: 1099 | Registered: Jun 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rakeesh
Member
Member # 2001

 - posted      Profile for Rakeesh   Email Rakeesh         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I agree a concern with motives should not be so important. I admit to feeling quite strangled by the irony, though.
Posts: 17149 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
BlackBlade
Member
Member # 8376

 - posted      Profile for BlackBlade   Email BlackBlade         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
*nod*
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
King of Men
Member
Member # 6684

 - posted      Profile for King of Men   Email King of Men         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
put on a dress and walk into the women's restroom in a public place?
Actually, to me this raises the question of why we have gendered restrooms in the first place. Put everyone in stalls and there's sufficient privacy; cooties are not, actually, a thing. What exactly is the reason for this custom?

I further opine that a rapist in a dress can likely walk into a women's bathroom without consequence anyway; few people really look at strangers, and who's going to be the one to say "Excuse me, are you a woman?" The consequences would come if he actually raped someone; and at that point, of course, being in the wrong bathroom is not a very interesting crime. I think this is basically a made-up rationale for a basic discomfort with Weird Men Who Wear Dresses, rather than a serious worry.

Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 37 pages: 1  2  3  ...  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  ...  35  36  37   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Hatrack River Home Page

Copyright © 2008 Hatrack River Enterprises Inc. All rights reserved.
Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.


Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2