Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Frazzled wrote:
Kettle meet pot.

You're imagining things again. I've not insulted your profession, and you haven't provided any criticism of me. You've pretended towards McLintock!, but that doesn't actually describe anything beyond your own self-image.

dogma wrote:

Frazzled wrote:
Kettle meet pot.

You're imagining things again. I've not insulted your profession, and you haven't provided any criticism of me. You've pretended towards McLintock!, but that doesn't actually describe anything beyond your own self-image.

You've questioned my sanity among other things on this thread, and I should not reply?
You put forth statements as if your opinion is any better than other poster here. Just wanted to put your opinion in perspective from where its coming from. Neither you nor I are exactly Stephen Hawkings.

Besides only the wife can question my sanity, and the State of Texas but that was just a misunderstanding...

Frazzled wrote:
You've questioned my sanity among other things on this thread, and I should not reply?

No, you should reply in a way that is sensible. The phrase "kettle meet pot" implies that I took the same line of criticism that you did. I didn't, and you just admitted to that fact.

Frazzled wrote:
You put forth statements as if your opinion is any better than other poster here. Just wanted to put your opinion in perspective from where its coming from.

From a person? A person who's been published repeatedly in political science, philosophy, neuroscience, and gender studies? Einstein was a patent clerk.

Not that I'm claiming to be comparable to Einstein. Though it does strike me as amusing that you tend towards populism in all things that don't relate to intelligence.

Frazzled wrote:
Neither you nor I are exactly Stephen Hawkings.

Of course you don't know that, you're assuming it. Really, if you ever read Steven Hawking, I bet you would think less of him. You seem to think less of anyone who isn't of your academic standing (none).

Frazzled wrote:
Besides only the wife can question my sanity, and the State of Texas but that was just a misunderstanding...

Apparently I can as well. Because, you know, you just said that I did. Though I never actually did. I questioned your reasoning ability, that isn't sanity.

dogma wrote:

Frazzled wrote:
You've questioned my sanity among other things on this thread, and I should not reply?

No, you should reply in a way that is sensible. The phrase "kettle meet pot" implies that I took the same line of criticism that you did. I didn't, and you just admitted to that fact.

Frazzled wrote:
You put forth statements as if your opinion is any better than other poster here. Just wanted to put your opinion in perspective from where its coming from.

From a person? A person who's been published repeatedly in political science, philosophy, neuroscience, and gender studies? Einstein was a patent clerk.

Not that I'm claiming to be comparable to Einstein. Though it does strike me as amusing that you tend towards populism in all things that don't relate to intelligence.

Frazzled wrote:
Neither you nor I are exactly Stephen Hawkings.

Of course you don't know that, you're assuming it. Really, if you ever read Steven Hawking, I bet you would think less of him. You seem to think less of anyone who isn't of your academic standing (none).

Frazzled wrote:
Besides only the wife can question my sanity, and the State of Texas but that was just a misunderstanding...

Apparently I can as well. Because, you know, you just said that I did. Though I never actually did. I questioned your reasoning ability, that isn't sanity.

I seem to have hit a nerve there PE boy.

Yep, extra trolly.

No, not really. I'm simply detailing what you're doing. Both for your benefit, and that of others.

The Tea Party Movement and Sarah Palin are slowed.

For proof of Palin, all you had to do was watch the news when election was going on.

For the Tea Party Movement, look up videos on youtube about them. The spokesmen have very narrow views, and are quite dumb on their own.

dogma wrote:No, not really. I'm simply detailing what you're doing. Both for your benefit, and that of others.

Mmm...so personal attacks pass for "detailing" in the gym does it?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

RustyKnight wrote:Yep, extra trolly.

Nope just responding in like manner.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Karon wrote:The Tea Party Movement and Sarah Palin are slowed.

For proof of Palin, all you had to do was watch the news when election was going on.

For the Tea Party Movement, look up videos on youtube about them. The spokesmen have very narrow views, and are quite dumb on their own.

And my point proves itself.

Hello? We were discussing tea bagging?

Oh. Those guys. Never mind.

Frazzled wrote:
Mmm...so personal attacks pass for "detailing" in the gym does it?

Explication can be attacking when the intent of the poster is to conceal his actions, or when the poster does not himself know what he's doing.

Frazzled wrote:
Nope just responding in like manner.

Responding in like manner does not indicate that you aren't also trolling. They aren't mutually exclusive descriptors.

Evidently the English language is not something which you fully grasp.

dogma wrote:

Frazzled wrote:
Mmm...so personal attacks pass for "detailing" in the gym does it?

Explication can be attacking when the intent of the poster is to conceal his actions, or when the poster does not himself know what he's doing.

Again you're hiding behind pretty words. When it comes down to it, its still insults.

Frazzled wrote:
Again you're hiding behind pretty words. When it comes down to it, its still insults.

I'm not hiding behind anything. This is how I post, and how I speak. It is who I am.

In any case, description is only an insult if it is taken as such. I cannot be faulted if you are uncomfortable with your own nature.

dogma wrote:

In any case, description is only an insult if it is taken as such. I cannot be faulted if you are uncomfortable with your own nature.

Slick words like an eel. At least man up about and admit you play in the mud like the rest of us and can't resist the insults in covered speech. Oh well. Back to putting you on ignore.

Come now lads, lets find something we can all hate together! How about C.S. Goto? He is someone we can all have a mutual disgust for, so lets put this all behind us eh?

My god, you really have no grasp of what's going on here, do you? You have all these sad preconceptions about me, and my nature that you're using to judge me without even bothering to pay attention to what I write.

When have I ever said that my hands are clean?

JEB_Stuart wrote:Come now lads, lets find something we can all hate together! How about C.S. Goto? He is someone we can all have a mutual disgust for, so lets put this all behind us eh?

Is he the one who wrote abut kids putting rocks in the gunnbarrels of falcons. He really does suck.
(Takes deep breath) ok. Calming down.

If you want to talk about the Tea Party. Talk about the actual party, potential positions, the synthesis of a potential new party, co-opt by the Big Two just saying they are all loons is stupid and both parties do so at their peril.

Notice how the second post in this thread, by me, indicates that calling them crazy is foolish? No you didn't, because you don't pay attention.

JEB_Stuart wrote:Come now lads, lets find something we can all hate together! How about C.S. Goto? He is someone we can all have a mutual disgust for, so lets put this all behind us eh?

Well, it's pretty certain he's been fired so...

HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOORAY!

This is pretty sad.

Fraz, if you're going to post in the thread, only doing so to say "nuh uh" is not productive, or constructive. If you want to participate in the discussion of an article, and you're going to assert that there are better sources of information about the subject matter, it behooves you to cite some. As Shuma pointed out, even going to a website in favor of the movement and quoting directly from their own public statements doesn't do them any favors. They come off as paranoic and delusional.

dogma wrote: No you didn't, because you don't pay attention.

Ketara wrote:

dogma wrote: No you didn't, because you don't pay attention.

Woah, it's like the Last Starfighter, only more awesome.

What?

NOTHING is more awesome than The Last Starfighter, you heathen!

This thread has become glorious.

'Behooves'.


I like that. What does it mean?

It means you gotta keep your horses away from hornet nests.

Nah, it's like beheading someone only to do with hooves. So it must mean chopping off horses feet.

It sounds like 'giving someone a hoof or hooves'.

Or it could just have been a spelling mistake.


I think 'hooves' just became my new favourite word. C'mon - say it with me:

'Hooves'.

This thread lacks needed amounts of Multilaser to speak of the greatest Author ever to live: C.S. Goto

To talk of C.S. Goto (Note, he is god) you must offer up the heads of 1000 virgin readers every time you read the word multilaser.

Such is the will of God Goto.

I think what the thread needs is the axe. Can a mod other than frazzled do it?

dogma wrote:3. The majority of the liberal posters on this board (Shuma, Sebsters, etc.) don't make many factual errors.

That's the nicest thing anybody has ever said about me.

dogma wrote:It wasn't meant to be witty, its a statement which describes my regard for your reasoning ability. You value your emotions far too much to be considered of sound mind. Unless you're simply putting on an act for internet.

I think people can approach use very different approaches to different parts of their lives. I know a medical researcher who (as near as I can tell anyway, I have to admit most of his stuff goes way over my head) is extremely good at what he does. He's also a 9/11 truther. If you switch from one topic to the other the difference in approach is incredible, completely different mindset, he goes from giving balanced, considered arguments to wild speculation, there's even a change in his tone of voice.

The first is the result of having a mindset beaten in to him by his profession. You simply learn to give balanced, considered analysis or you get drummed out of the field. The latter has no consequences for poor methodology, and as consequence he has no discipline.

I have no problem believing Fraz could be a decent lawyer, despite his methods of arguing on-line.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Frazzled wrote:If you want to talk about the Tea Party. Talk about the actual party, potential positions, the synthesis of a potential new party, co-opt by the Big Two just saying they are all loons is stupid and both parties do so at their peril.

So my earlier summary, that the party started as a response by core Republican voters, mostly movement conservatives, to the failure of the GOP to hold to their values, particularly fiscally... is that more or less what you think?