|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
 Posted: Wed Aug 10, 2005 4:12 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Nowhere Man wrote: |
I'm commenting on your comments in a single thread. These comments are commentary on topics relevant to and, in some cases, related directly to me.
Your hypocrisy-laden commentary portrays you as having some non-existent position of pure objectivity.
It is fair game.
If you think you're being harassed, do contact a mod and point that out. |
Your hatred and arrogant cynicism project such a marvelous image of you: you're an extremist. You can't imagine such an objective position, so, in your narrow little mind, it's "hypocrisy-laden." You take my comments as being directed at you personally? That's a trait of paranoia.
So it must suck to be you, "bro": the intolerant moronic simpleton with no room for diverse perspectives in a world of rigid absolutes. People like you waste time by spending their lives crying over spilled milk, refusing to move beyond the past and into the future. Why? Well, what else do you have to talk about?
You try to weasel your way out of my polite request to stop harassing me by claiming that it's "fair game." But you have cited words I've spoken from other threads. That is borderline stalking-like behavior: did you go for comments to support your aggressive purposes? You must have an empty life. In any case, please stop harassing me.
Oh, yeah, one other thing. If you don't like what I've said, do contact a mod and point that out. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
The Bobster
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 11, 2005 3:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| You try to weasel your way out of my polite request to stop harassing me by claiming that it's "fair game." But you have cited words I've spoken from other threads. That is borderline stalking-like behavior. |
You might still be a little new to the mini-culture that exists in not just the CE Forums but the other parts of the Cafe as well. One reason this board asks us to choose a handle and post under it is to reduce the irresponsiblity inherent in anonymity. No one knows your real name, but if you post often enough you create an aura of personality around that name, and people will react either positively or negatively depending how they felt about things you have said in the past.
There are good and bad things about this. It is true that we often feel "harassed" by specific individuals who feel it their mission to discredit everything we might want to say in the future, even about unrelated topics. I confess I have at times been on both sides of such a syndrome ... in the end it tends to be as much a cause of regret as it is vindication, even when one feels one has "vanquished" the opponent. These things can get a bit bloody, I've been there, so take my word for it.
It is also true that the same dynamic impels us to both be more polite to one another and to speak responsibly, taking at least a little care to present views that can be examined logically and for which at least some modicum amount of support and evidence can be provided. If I say something that comes directly from my heart but which cannot be granted a coherent argument, well, I think we can all allow such a thing, but more particularly if it is couched and presented as exactly that, an opinion and one that is deeply felt. It might still be attacked, but it will be granted more respect and tact than if it were shown and described to all as plain Truth instead ...
In your case, I believe you have argued a position that "objectivity" is something that exists and can be attained. There are some (I count myself as one) who doubt such a theory. Therefore, you have placed yourself at risk of being shown examples where your own goal of being able to view the world divorced from from your feelings and opinions are, shall we say, lacking.
Yeah, you will notice the same people coming around and trying to knock you down from time to time, or even seemingly incessantly. It happens. My advice is to either get used to it, develop skin a little thicker than it was before ... or find another hobby.
As for the mods, it's a big bunch of forums, and I'm guessing the concensus is that paying so much attention to who is feuding with whom is likely to have a deleterious effect on the free exchange of opinions that we all enjoy when we come here.
But, yeah, feel free to contact them, it's what they are there for, and maybe they will explain things a little differently.
Wish you well, here, though, despite that I agree with you not so much as either of us would like. Regardless, I think the contributions you've made lately have put some interest and life into discussions that might not have been there otherwise, so as for me, I'm hoping you don't find another hobby very quickly.
Last edited by The Bobster on Thu Aug 11, 2005 7:50 am; edited 3 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 11, 2005 3:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
Appreciate your kind words and good advice, and your style of disagreeing without being disagreeable above is admirable.
Objectivity, or at least the attempt to be objective, begins with a sincere effort to look at the world through someone else's perspective. It's not entirely possible to do this, leaving yourself behind, but it is better than simply listening to someone else's perspective long enough to argue against it, and using rididule (see above) only exacerbates the situation.
{section deleted}
Many people on this forum seem to be stuck in this same mode, that is, the high school debate team mode. Thus the friction.
Last edited by Gopher on Sat Nov 10, 2007 2:33 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nowhere Man
Joined: 08 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 11, 2005 4:30 am Post subject: ... |
|
|
| Quote: |
| You can't imagine such an objective position, so, in your narrow little mind, it's "hypocrisy-laden." |
Perfect example of what I was talking bout. Thank you.
"I'm more objective than you" is still a subjective statement.
It's a silly, pretentious thing to say.
| Quote: |
So it must suck to be you, "bro": the intolerant moronic simpleton with no room for diverse perspectives in a world of rigid absolutes. People like you waste time by spending their lives crying over spilled milk, refusing to move beyond the past and into the future. Why? Well, what else do you have to talk about? |
And it would seem that your marvelous parlor of diversity doesn't have room for someone showing the President joking about the hunch he sent people to die for. That's manipulative and has an agenda. You, on the other hand, are free to spin this as you like? Hypocrisy.
| Quote: |
| You try to weasel your way out of my polite request to stop harassing me by claiming that it's "fair game." But you have cited words I've spoken from other threads. That is borderline stalking-like behavior: did you go for comments to support your aggressive purposes? You must have an empty life. In any case, please stop harassing me. |
And I'm not harassing you. I reiterate. If you think think you're being harassed, contact a mod. Be sure to include the hyperbole about stalking. The single word "dweeb" came from another thread. You post comments on the board. I'm free to both read them and respond. Here or on any other thread. Deal with it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 11, 2005 4:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
You make the case that parents should be licensed before raising children. So consumed by your own extremism and anti-Bush hatred, that you probably foam at the mouth when you talk about him.
Here's a brief review:
I object to this video as an "emotional propaganda piece."
You respond by mischaracterizing me: You say that I said "showing people who've died for Bush's incorrect 'hunch' about NON-EXISTENT WMD's 'alienates'" me; you accuse me of "daring" to talk about propaganda; and you say that I say "it's only propaganda if it's anti-Bush."
Of course, I never said those things, but your abandonment of any hope to objectivity seems to give you great license to twist others' comments as you please...like I said before, you're a simplistic moron, and you don't know any better, so I guess that's just about all there is to know about you.
You also never learned manners. Your mommy and daddy didn't raise you so well, huh?
For example, you call me "flaccid" because I don't support Bush, but yet I feel that anti-Bush propaganda is inappropriate at this time and is simply not constructive. Extremism has always alarmed me, so I seek centrist positions and compromise in politics and you, intolerant of this, accuse me of "worming" my way between two absolute positions.
Then you arrogantly mischaracterize an entire list of things, and deign to say "carry on."
It's clear that there are quite a lot of people who share your narrow-mindedness and simplistic style of analysis, but thankfully, I'm not one of them. People like you are lost unless you have something to disagree with.
So, by all means, carry on...
Last edited by Gopher on Thu Aug 11, 2005 4:58 am; edited 3 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nowhere Man
Joined: 08 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 11, 2005 4:52 am Post subject: ... |
|
|
What? Why that's just plain HATEFUL!
MANIPULATIVE!
AGENDA! AGENDA!
STOP STALKING ME! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 11, 2005 5:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
Fact: Bush and everyone else at that dinner were laughing at the ill-advised jokes Bush's speechwriters put together for him.
Fact: They were not laughing at people who died in the Iraqi invasion, and those photos were only superimposed later.
Fact: Putting disparate, non-contemporaneous audio and video together for its emotional effect is manipulative propaganda. It is not news reporting, it isn't historical analysis, it's propanda. Just because it gets you off, doesn't mean it ain't propaganda.
Fact: No matter what I say you're going to twist it and slant it, so there's not point in continuing this. As I've said before: you apparently don't know any better, and I should know better than to attempt to reason with someone who knows they are right.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nowhere Man
Joined: 08 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 11, 2005 8:21 am Post subject: ... |
|
|
Oh, so now you want to be harassed, eh?
| Quote: |
| Fact: Bush and everyone else at that dinner were laughing at the ill-advised jokes Bush's speechwriters put together for him. |
If we're to exercise our super-shrewd powers of critical thinking and "real objectivity", I don't think we can make claims as to what these people were laughing at. Could be they thought it was funny. Could be they were kissing ass. Could be they were nervously laughing at how deranged it all was. But I think that's beside the point.
According to my info, Bush is a grown man with more than one Ivy-league degree. Some even call him the leader of the free world. As such, the man should be able to exercise his own critical-thinking abilities about what is in good or bad taste. To lay the blame on speech writers is to offer him an easy out. He speaks the words. He should be responsible for them.
On a more personal note, you have stated your appreciation for the guy's ability to joke about himself. Now, you're pawning off his ability to joke about himself on his speech-writers. This is a contradiction.
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| Fact: They were not laughing at people who died in the Iraqi invasion, and those photos were only superimposed later. |
|
This point has already been addressed. I don't think anyone thinks that the photos were in the original presentation. But is that a point? Could photos have been superimposed in the original presentation? Yes. As others have pointed out, over 600 people had died at the time this joking took place. So what? It's OK to joke about currently fallacious reasons for war as long as you don't bring up the people who've died for this joke?
But I think the main point here is that you even suggest that people viewing this video believe that the photos were a part of the original presentation. This is a manipulative attempt to dumb the video down. It also speaks something of the cloak of objectivity you claim to bear.
| Quote: |
| Fact: Putting disparate, non-contemporaneous audio and video together for its emotional effect is manipulative propaganda. It is not news reporting, it isn't historical analysis, it's propanda. Just because it gets you off, doesn't mean it ain't propaganda. |
Well, the fact remains that 600 people had died at the time this was shot.
If not for this fact, I might consider it manipulative. Your admonitions about reading history backwards suggests that these deaths happened later, that they weren't contemporaneous. That is not the case, and you persist in ignoring that FACT. This smacks of you having an agenda.
Moreover, your reaction to the video wasn't news reporting. It wasn't historical analysis. It was you explaining how you thought it was OK and don't like people who make this kind of stuff. It was apologist.
| Quote: |
| Fact: No matter what I say you're going to twist it and slant it, so there's not point in continuing this. As I've said before: you apparently don't know any better, and I should know better than to attempt to reason with someone who knows they are right. |
You call the above commentary slanted and twisted, but I call it showing the parts that you've ignored. I don't place myself on some pedestal of higher objectivity. As I've said, I think the notion of one being more objective than the other is subjective, silly, and pretentious.
More to the point, the supposition that moderates are more objective because they straddle the right and left is patently false. At any given time, the point between right and left moves. It is quite arbitrary. If the Nazis were the right or Mao's communist's the left, would you be so proudly standing on the fence? Not that Bush is a Nazi, but some seriously evil shit has come to pass over the last 5 years. I'm not cajoling you to hop off the fence on my side. I do think you think you're trying to be objective, but points about love and hate do not define righteousness. By humane standards, I'd say that it is perfectly OK to hate the Nazis. While it is not as extreme as the Nazis, I believe there is damning evidence to hate Bush:
Abu Ghraib
Guantanamo
WMD
Arar
among others...
Good for you if you think that's all OK and it's manipulative to point these things out. It's also manipulative to play them down. And that's what you're doing. When you label things as manipulative, you're also manipulating. Not from some objective high ground. Just a different place. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 11, 2005 8:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Nowhere Man wrote: |
| On a more personal note, you have stated your appreciation for the guy's ability to joke about himself. Now, you're pawning off his ability to joke about himself on his speech-writers. This is a contradiction. |
You're lying about what I said. He is responsible for what he says, but presidents have speech writers. Whether or not this gets him off the hook, or whether he was really on the hook, is not the issue. You're looking too hard to split hairs with me. Stop mischaracterizing.
| Nowhere Man wrote: |
| This point has already been addressed. I don't think anyone thinks that the photos were in the original presentation. But is that a point? Could photos have been superimposed in the original presentation? Yes. As others have pointed out, over 600 people had died at the time this joking took place. So what? It's OK to joke about currently fallacious reasons for war as long as you don't bring up the people who've died for this joke? |
Your cynical worldview makes you see things this way. You're twisting facts here. Stop lying.
If you think that anyone in the United States, even the president you foam at the mouth over, thinks that it's funny to joke about dead soldiers or civilians, you're on drugs.
This video, of course, juxtaposes audio and video to give us that impression, but it's obviously a ploy by someone who thinks as bitterly as you. Perhaps it's your sick creation and that's why you're so wired about this?
Again, Bush should be criticized for Iraq and all of its consequences. But criticize him honestly, this kind of propaganda is unworthy of us.
| Nowhere Man wrote: |
| But I think the main point here is that you even suggest that people viewing this video believe that the photos were a part of the original presentation. This is a manipulative attempt to dumb the video down. It also speaks something of the cloak of objectivity you claim to bear. |
Stop mixing issues and lying. Any attempt to associate two separate things in order to influence public opinion in this manner is manipulative. Pointing this out is only manipulative in the cynical world in which you live. Again, stop lying and twisting facts.
| Nowhere Man wrote: |
| Well, the fact remains that 600 people had died at the time this was shot. |
Do you really believe that the laughter of those people at that dinner had any relationship at all to this fact? that they were laughing at this? Seek therapy.
Bush is guilty of, yet again, speaking ill-advised, insensitive words. The others there are guilty of laughing without putting too much thought into the situation, and just going along.
For you to turn this into an exhibit for the Nuremburg Trials is ridiculous. You're simply incapable of examing an issue from all sides. Someone probably talked about postmodern theory to you once, and you liked it, so you decided it was OK to abandon all efforts to be objective and just take a position and argue your case.
But if everything is presented as a case for the prosecution, the way you seem to think, then you're only going to "persuade" those who already think like you, and you're only going to alienate those who don't.
| Nowhere Man wrote: |
| I don't place myself on some pedestal of higher objectivity. As I've said, I think the notion of one being more objective than the other is subjective, silly, and pretentious. |
That's your problem, bro. You can't imagine it, so therefore it is silly and pretentious? Maybe you just have a limited imagination. You're offended that I seek to understand all sides? You're intolerant. These are your issues, not mine.
And I don't know where it entered your narrow little mind that I claim to occupy "some pedestal of higher objectivity" -- I certainly never said that, and I never suggested it either. Stop twisting my position and putting words into my mouth.
| Nowhere Man wrote: |
| I believe there is damning evidence to hate Bush |
That's another of your deep-seated problems. You're consumed by hatred. You're an extremist. You're not capable of seeing anything but your own point of view, which is, sadly, skewed by the emotion you admit to harbor. Indeed, you're no better than Bush, just on the opposite side of the fence, but, this notwithstanding, you're still just as simplistic and caught up in your own Righteousness as he is.
| Nowhere Man wrote: |
| Good for you if you think that's all OK and it's manipulative to point these things out. It's also manipulative to play them down. And that's what you're doing. When you label things as manipulative, you're also manipulating. Not from some objective high ground. |
Again, stop twisting my words and claiming that I have said things I haven't said. You're a broken record of mischaracterization. Don't you know any other tunes?
I prefer to deal with facts and not emotions. Bush has made many errors, some of them particularly bad. But we need to deal with raw facts and figures and not silly videos that mix noncontemporaneous things together to produce an emotional effect.
If you can't see that, then, again, that's not my problem but yours. If you want to cite those facts -- and I believe that they are very pertinent to an evaluation of the Bush Administration -- don't lie and cite them out of context -- you only undermine your own credibility, which, I'm not sorry to say, only exists, at best, in your circles, where people sit back and nod their heads to your nonsense because they already think like you. If you want others to listen to you, though, you need to speak more credibly.
Again, I am not a Bush supporter and I disagree with most, if not all, of his policies. But I don't hate him (like you). Hard to see you functioning in a democratic system with such a rigid, uncompromising worldview. You say that because I reject this video for what it is -- an underhanded attempt to manipulate public opinion -- that it necessarily follows that I am downplaying Bush's behavior as president...again, you're twisting and assuming and putting words into my mouth. I never downplayed Bush's behavior. However, fair is fair, and this video is unfair.
It is unfair and inaccurate to do what these kind of propaganda pieces do -- to the right or the left. If changes nothing, it helps nothing, it does not contribute to a better understanding of Bush's record and motives. It only takes half-educated people like you and fuels preexisting hatreds.
Again, you seem to argue that objectivity is nonexistent and that it's silly. [deleted]
Last edited by Gopher on Sat Nov 10, 2007 2:37 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 11, 2005 6:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| What the democrats need is less Michael Moore and more Spencer Ackerman of The New Republic. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nowhere Man
Joined: 08 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 12, 2005 4:33 am Post subject: ... |
|
|
| Quote: |
Nowhere Man wrote:
On a more personal note, you have stated your appreciation for the guy's ability to joke about himself. Now, you're pawning off his ability to joke about himself on his speech-writers. This is a contradiction.
You're lying about what I said. He is responsible for what he says, but presidents have speech writers. Whether or not this gets him off the hook, or whether he was really on the hook, is not the issue. You're looking too hard to split hairs with me. Stop mischaracterizing. |
You HAVE stated your appreciation for the guy's ability to joke about himself. This is a fact. In the context it was offered, I would read it as an explanation as to why you think this particular joking is OK.
Later, this becomes "the jokes his speech writers put together for him". Given that you entered this thread making apologies for the president's behavior, I think it's a fair assumption that you brought up speech writers to lay the blame for what happened somewhere other than on Bush. Why else would you bring up speech writers?
| Quote: |
Nowhere Man wrote:
This point has already been addressed. FACT
I don't think anyone thinks that the photos were in the original presentation. OPINION
But is that a point? QUESTION
Could photos have been superimposed in the original presentation? QUESTION
Yes. ANSWER
As others have pointed out, over 600 people had died at the time this joking took place. FACT TO BACK UP ANSWER
So what? It's OK to joke about currently fallacious reasons for war as long as you don't bring up the people who've died for this joke?
ARGUMENT |
| Quote: |
| Your cynical worldview makes you see things this way. You're twisting facts here. Stop lying. |
Label it however you like. Where have I lied about anything? This is seriously hypocritical for someone chanting, "Stop mischaracterizing me."
| Quote: |
| If you think that anyone in the United States, even the president you foam at the mouth over, thinks that it's funny to joke about dead soldiers or civilians, you're on drugs.This video, of course, juxtaposes audio and video to give us that impression, but it's obviously a ploy by someone who thinks as bitterly as you. Perhaps it's your sick creation and that's why you're so wired about this? |
This is footage of someone joking about an apparent mistake he sent people to die for. I've said that more than once now. The video points out how obscene it is to be making such a joke in the comfort of a White House Dinner while people have died and are still dying for what is hardly a joking matter. You yourself have called the jokes ill-advised. Please explain.
| Quote: |
| Again, Bush should be criticized for Iraq and all of its consequences. But criticize him honestly, this kind of propaganda is unworthy of us. |
There is nothing dishonest about this video. All you prove is that you don't like it.
| Quote: |
Nowhere Man wrote:
But I think the main point here is that you even suggest that people viewing this video believe that the photos were a part of the original presentation. This is a manipulative attempt to dumb the video down. It also speaks something of the cloak of objectivity you claim to bear.
Stop mixing issues and lying. Any attempt to associate two separate things in order to influence public opinion in this manner is manipulative. Pointing this out is only manipulative in the cynical world in which you live. Again, stop lying and twisting facts. |
The people who've died "to disarm Iraq" and the missing WMD are not separate issues. It was you first who took it upon yourself to twist the video to your liking (or disliking). You appear to have the market cornered on the video's intention and interpretation. Stop mischaracterizing me.
| Quote: |
Nowhere Man wrote:
Well, the fact remains that 600 people had died at the time this was shot.
Do you really believe that the laughter of those people at that dinner had any relationship at all to this fact? that they were laughing at this? Seek therapy. |
The subject of the joking is absolutely related to said deaths. It is unfathomably crass to be making "whoopsie" jokes about something you sent people to die for. Laughing at such jokes is not quite as bad, but remains despicably crass. By your reasoning, this is fair game as long there aren't any "How many dead soldiers does it take to disarm Saddam?" jokes. Poke fun at your errant policy of death. It's fine as long as you don't actually bring up the dead. And shun he who points out those who've died for what you now treat as a punchline.
| Quote: |
| Bush is guilty of, yet again, speaking ill-advised, insensitive words. The others there are guilty of laughing without putting too much thought into the situation, and just going along. |
Yes. That is basically what the video is about. Apparently, it is propaganda to point that out. Notice the little "ho-hum" attitude twisted into that.
| Quote: |
| For you to turn this into an exhibit for the Nuremburg Trials is ridiculous. You're simply incapable of examing an issue from all sides. Someone probably talked about postmodern theory to you once, and you liked it, so you decided it was OK to abandon all efforts to be objective and just take a position and argue your case. |
More hyperbole. Yes, if only I had examined all sides. Then I'd surely be alongside gopher apologizing for Bush and demonizing these hateful, manipulative propagandists. NOW that would be objectivity.
| Quote: |
| But if everything is presented as a case for the prosecution, the way you seem to think, then you're only going to "persuade" those who already think like you, and you're only going to alienate those who don't. |
Welcome to the club, Mr. Objectivity.
| Quote: |
Nowhere Man wrote:
I don't place myself on some pedestal of higher objectivity. As I've said, I think the notion of one being more objective than the other is subjective, silly, and pretentious.
That's your problem, bro. You're offended that I seek to understand all sides? You can't imagine it, so therefore it is silly and pretentious? Maybe you just have a limited imagination. You're intolerant. These are your issues, not mine. |
Yes. You really busted a nut to understand that video before you started labeling it. You "know" what sides I've examined because I disagree with you? Just because you choose to tolerate and apologize for a homicidal idiot since that's what you expect from him makes you more objective than me?
| Quote: |
| And I don't know where it entered your narrow little mind that I claim to occupy "some pedestal of higher objectivity" -- I certainly never said that, and I never suggested it either. Stop twisting my position and putting words into my mouth. |
See your comments directly above.
| Quote: |
Nowhere Man wrote:
I believe there is damning evidence to hate Bush
That's another of your deep-seated problems. You're consumed by hatred. You're an extremist. You're not capable of seeing anything but your own point of view, which is, sadly, skewed by the emotion you admit to harbor. Indeed, you're no better than Bush, just on the opposite side of the fence, but, this notwithstanding, you're still just as simplistic and caught up in your own Righteousness as he is. |
Deep-seated hypocrisy. You have offered nothing but your own point of view. Personally liking Bush while opposing his policy is not evidence of some higher understanding on your part. It's simply another point of view.
| Quote: |
Nowhere Man wrote:
Good for you if you think that's all OK and it's manipulative to point these things out. It's also manipulative to play them down. And that's what you're doing. When you label things as manipulative, you're also manipulating. Not from some objective high ground.
Again, stop twisting my words and claiming that I have said things I haven't said. You're a broken record of mischaracterization. Don't you know any other tunes? |
Again, are you not playing down Bush joking about something people have died for because you don't think it's a big deal? Are you not at the same time assailing the makers of the video because you think it's inappropriate?
Note: You can answer both questions with a simple yes or no.
| Quote: |
| I prefer to deal with facts and not emotions. Bush has made many errors, some of them particularly bad. But we need to deal with raw facts and figures and not silly videos that mix noncontemporaneous things together to produce an emotional effect. |
Your response to the video has been nothing but emotional.
600 people were dead at the time this footage was shot. That is contemporaneous. I've already explained that.
| Quote: |
| If you can't see that, then, again, that's not my problem but yours. If you want to cite those facts -- and I believe that they are very pertinent to an evaluation of the Bush Administration -- don't lie and cite them out of context -- you only undermine your own credibility, which, I'm not sorry to say, only exists, at best, in your circles, where people sit back and nod their heads to your nonsense because they already think like you. If you want others to listen to you, though, you need to speak more credibly. |
Don't try to dictate contexts to me. 600 people had died in the search for WMD when Bush chose to make WMD a moment of levity. Look at the condescension above. Is that not a pedestal from which you're speaking?Look at the number of times you've called me a liar without any evidence.
Look at your infantile attempts to claim I'm harassing you. Don't talk to me about credibility.
| Quote: |
| Again, I am not a Bush supporter and I disagree with most, if not all, of his policies. But I don't hate him (like you). Hard to see you functioning in a democratic system with such a rigid, uncompromising worldview. You say that because I reject this video for what it is -- an underhanded attempt to manipulate public opinion -- that it necessarily follows that I am downplaying Bush's behavior as president...again, you're twisting and assuming and putting words into my mouth. I never downplayed Bush's behavior. However, fair is fair, and this video is unfair. |
Thanks for once explaining what you define as twisting. I assume it's clear from above, but you are playing down there being something wrong with Bush making these jokes, no? You instead prefer to admire his ability to joke about himself, no? And you, Mr. Nuremburg, get the final say on what is fair and unfair, no? Sounds fair to me.
| Quote: |
| It is unfair and inaccurate to do what these kind of propaganda pieces do -- to the right or the left. If changes nothing, it helps nothing, it does not contribute to a better understanding of Bush's record and motives. It only takes half-educated people like you and fuels preexisting hatreds. |
Boo hoo. Woe be to poor half-educated me. Of course it contributes nothing to Bush's record. The right thing to do would be to save a space in your heart for this ignorant, insensitive, dangerous dweeb (your words). If the doors of perception were cleansed, we could see the right political path as it is: fence-riding and apologist.
| Quote: |
| Again, you seem to argue that objectivity is nonexistent and that it's silly. The American Historican Association and many news editors would take exception to that. But, hey, you're the famous "Nowhere Man" from Dave's ESL Cafe, what are they to you? |
Trying to be objective is a virtue. Falling in love with one's own "objectivity" is a folly. Note that the only instances where I've claimed objectivity were where I said this is a fact. You, however, cite objectivity and understanding quite frequently as proof that your opinions are correct and/or superior to those of others. This is a habit you might want to unlearn.
I find your whole stance weak and pretentious, but that's just my opinion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
death from above
Joined: 31 Jul 2005
Location: in your head
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 12, 2005 4:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| what with FOX news (#1 rating) and "Conservative Talk Radio" (everywhere), can someone please tell me how the hell the media is liberal???? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 12, 2005 4:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| death from above wrote: |
| what with FOX news (#1 rating) and "Conservative Talk Radio" (everywhere), can someone please tell me how the hell the media is liberal???? |
I think most people consider them alternative media for the most part.
Take them out of the equation and the media is liberal. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 12, 2005 11:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Hey Joo: thanks for the recommendation. I think his writing style is balanced and informative. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 13, 2005 12:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
deleted
Last edited by Gopher on Mon Nov 12, 2007 1:40 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
