Six Things Greg Needs To Stop Saying

[Jonathan]

I think Palin is in a similar position. She’s not a bad lady. In fact, she is exactly normal. She is exactly average. She is exactly as qualified to speak on political issues as the wife of the barber down the street, and almost as knowledgable. I think I would LOVE her if she was running the delicatessen near my house. She and I would get along splendidly. In fact, I am very good friends with many folks who are not only exactly like Palin, but look up to and idolize her.

So if that’s the case, what’s my problem with Palin?

My problem with her is that she’s being taken seriously by the right-wing politisphere. That’s unacceptable in my mind. And it isn’t because she has original ideas to contribute, it’s because she’s parroting crap she hears in church. She has nothing of value to contribute.

I think that Palin is brighter than, say, Obama or Elizabeth Warren, not to mention significantly more honest and in touch with reality. I think that if the media were to do to almost anyone what they've done to Palin, hardly anyone would handle it as well as she has. It's really too bad that the right doesn't go after leftist morons in the way that the left goes after its enemies. Instead, we have Republicans running for office saying what intelligent and super-nice and wonderful human beings their opponents are (while being accused by those opponents of starving babies and throwing granny off the cliff).

And then rank and file Republicans and libertarians buy into the negative image that the left has created, and start repeating it and reinforcing it themselves, as Kacy is doing here. Democrats never do that. You'll never see them destroying their own no matter how stupid their statements or policies are.

What I'd like to see is how well Kacy would hold up to the smears and gotcha "journalism" that Palin has faced. I think that, in the national spotlight, with the media out to make him look foolish, he'd come across as an absolute dunce compared to Palin.

J

[Selene]

Here we go.

Here's one way the left does it.

MSK,

That site is reprehensible and I'd recommend her security team take it seriously as well.

There is no excuse, no defense, no justification for something like that.

Umm, I agtee that her security team should evaluate the risk/reward ratio, with her imput.

However, we have this sticky thingy on some parchment with a First Amendment and this ain't no theatre where you can falsely shout fire in either.

[KacyRay]

I think Palin is in a similar position. She’s not a bad lady. In fact, she is exactly normal. She is exactly average. She is exactly as qualified to speak on political issues as the wife of the barber down the street, and almost as knowledgable. I think I would LOVE her if she was running the delicatessen near my house. She and I would get along splendidly. In fact, I am very good friends with many folks who are not only exactly like Palin, but look up to and idolize her.

So if that’s the case, what’s my problem with Palin?

My problem with her is that she’s being taken seriously by the right-wing politisphere. That’s unacceptable in my mind. And it isn’t because she has original ideas to contribute, it’s because she’s parroting crap she hears in church. She has nothing of value to contribute.

I think that Palin is brighter than, say, Obama or Elizabeth Warren, not to mention significantly more honest and in touch with reality. I think that if the media were to do to almost anyone what they've done to Palin, hardly anyone would handle it as well as she has. It's really too bad that the right doesn't go after leftist morons in the way that the left goes after its enemies. Instead, we have Republicans running for office saying what intelligent and super-nice and wonderful human beings their opponents are (while being accused by those opponents of starving babies and throwing granny off the cliff).

And then rank and file Republicans and libertarians buy into the negative image that the left has created, and start repeating it and reinforcing it themselves, as Kacy is doing here. Democrats never do that. You'll never see them destroying their own no matter how stupid their statements or policies are.

What I'd like to see is how well Kacy would hold up to the smears and gotcha "journalism" that Palin has faced. I think that, in the national spotlight, with the media out to make him look foolish, he'd come across as an absolute dunce compared to Palin.

J

While I always appreciate the insinuation that I am somehow more susceptible to media-generated illusions than, say,you are, I am compelled to trust my own judgment on what I see.

It's easy to delegitimize someone elses evaluation with arbitrary contentions that they an unwitting victim of swallowing the caricature someone else is selling, but you state it as though it were established fact.

How can you possibly know what I know about Sarah Palin???

Do you realize how presumptuous it is to assume that my evaluation of Sarah Palin is nothing more than a product of manipulation, but yours is not? What justification do you have for assuming that I'm just a puppet bouncing on George Soros's strings but you are a free-thinking, independent thinker with a mind completely untarnished with the opinions and propagations of others?

"What I'd like to see is how well Kacy would hold up to the smears and gotcha "journalism" that Palin has faced. I think that, in the national spotlight, with the media out to make him look foolish, he'd come across as an absolute dunce compared to Palin."

I'd be happy to take you up on that.

"Instead, we have Republicans running for office saying what intelligent and super-nice and wonderful human beings their opponents are (while being accused by those opponents of starving babies and throwing granny off the cliff)."

Heh.... ok.

[Serapis Bey]

I see that, true to form, you can't complete a thought without the need to inform me about my emotional state. I don't reply to polemic demagoguery. I don't engage people who need to resort to unfalsifiable assertions about how I feel regarding a particular issue. If it entertains you to imagine me sitting behind a computer monitor drooling and shivering in a cold sweat as I read the painful words of truth that serve as a harbinger to the catastrophic collapse of my collectivist, socialist, liberal worldview, knock yourself out. Don't expect me to take you seriously when you do that.

You don't get me -- I wasn't thinking in terms of any particular point of view, whether political or psychological. You didn't address any of the content of my post and instead focused on the meta-issue of the epistimological error I was making. And what was your claim? That I was presenting opinion as fact. I think I have cleared that issue up, pointing to my use of the word "speculation", and if anyone bothers to look, I also went to the trouble of inserting qualifiers like, "it seems to me", and "probably", and "I suspect."

I'll be honest, it pains me to even go to those lengths, but some people still manage to feel aggrieved. I guess I can see how my qualifiers might be overlooked -- I presented my opinion in forceful language. Somebody get the smelling salts...

So, no I have no fantasies about your reaction as you have described above. What my closing statement was intended to address was your response as such.

I'll plead guilty. I DID present my opinion in a rather forceful and self-confident way. And why? Because I know the posters here are intelligent, professional adults. Explicitly commited to the use of Reason. If I'm full of shit, they can pick it apart. I give them enough credit in seperating the wheat from the chaff. They don't need to have their hands held, bogging down every discussion into these side-roads.

Henceforth, my dear philosophers, let us be on guard against the dangerous old conceptual fiction that posited a "pure, will-less, painless, timeless knowing subject"; let us guard against the snares of such contradictory concepts as "pure reason," absolute spirituality," "knowledge in itself": these always demand that we should think of an eye that is completely unthinkable, an eye turned in no particular direction, in which the active and interpreting forces, through which alone seeing becomes seeing something, are supposed to be lacking; these always demand of the eye an absurdity and a nonsense. There is only a perspective seeing, only a perspective "knowing"; and the more affects we allow to speak about one thing, the more eyes, different eyes, we can use to observe one thing, the more complete will our "concept" of this thing, our "objectivity," be. But to eliminate the will altogether, to suspend each and every affect, supposing we were capable of this -- what would that mean but to castrate the intellect?" - Nietzsche

[KacyRay]

I'll plead guilty. I DID present my opinion in a rather forceful and self-confident way.

You mean smug?

Oh, I forgot... that's only what you call it when Rachel Maddow does it. When you do it, it's "forceful and self confident". Because you're all objective and shit.

Anyway, my omission of a response to your substantive points was deliberate and I explained my reasoning. I've grown weary of the presumptions and microaggressions that permeate every comment you direct at me. Just be advised, if you insert those sorts of elements in a comment directed at me, it is unlikely I will respond to the substance of the comment if I respond at all, regardless of whatever other merits the comment might have.

And that doesn't apply to everyone. Just you and your soul twin, both of whom have used up of every last bit of my patience.

[Serapis Bey]

microaggressions

[Robert Baratheon]

"Microagression usually involves demeaning implications and other subtle insults against minorities, and may be perpetrated against those due to gender, sexual orientation, and ability status. According to Pierce, “the chief vehicle for proracist behaviors are microaggressions. These are subtle, stunning, often automatic, and nonverbal exchanges which are ‘put-downs’ of blacks by offenders”."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microaggression

[Reidy]

Would I be out of place to ask who Greg is?

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Pete,

Greg is "moralist."

If you click on his name to the left of one of his posts, that will take you to his user page. There you will see his name.

Michael

[Serapis Bey]

"Microagression usually involves demeaning implications and other subtle insults against minorities, and may be perpetrated against those due to gender, sexual orientation, and ability status. According to Pierce, “the chief vehicle for proracist behaviors are microaggressions. These are subtle, stunning, often automatic, and nonverbal exchanges which are ‘put-downs’ of blacks by offenders”."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microaggression

That's not quite what I had in mind RB. What struck me about his usage of the word is that I had covered this ground with him before, on this board, back in April:

...But this is only one of the possible outcomes of your perspective. All the way at the other end of the spectrum is the fact that when people are allowed to indulge their vanities, you end up with a race to the bottom where the most thin-skinned in the population win the "Victim Olympics." Consider the following website, and spend some time there. I assure you that the website is completely serious:

http://www.microaggressions.com/

"Microagressions", indeed. This is the end of the Progressive road. As I characterized it in another thread: "The World become Maternity Ward of Mewling Babies." Since there is no objective arbiter, when people are left to their tender feelings and precious egos, this is what you end up with. Imagine trying to socialize with such people! You would almost never be able to say anything if you had a scintilla of empathy for them and attempted to be a Good Person in speaking with them.

But the truly insidious element here is that such people have discovered the power of victimhood. By digging ever deeper into themselves for signs of hurt and pain, they have been allowed to wield their outrage as a club to silence others.

I would urge any older folks reading to pay a visit to that site -- get a feel for "what the kids are up to" these days. These people are almost exclusively women and thin-skinned males, i.e., liberals.

I guess I can't say I'm surprised by this latest addition to Kacy's vernacular, but I really wish I was.

[Robert Baratheon]

Yes, I recall the conversation, and I made him aware of the Microaggressions website privately.

[Brant Gaede]

Are "microagressions" (sic) endemic to Micronesia?

--Brant

don't want to go there

[Jonathan]

"What I'd like to see is how well Kacy would hold up to the smears and gotcha "journalism" that Palin has faced. I think that, in the national spotlight, with the media out to make him look foolish, he'd come across as an absolute dunce compared to Palin."

I'd be happy to take you up on that.

I'd love to see it. Do you have experience being in front of cameras on the national stage selling your ideas in front of media members who are hostile to you, and who ridicule you? If not, you seem to think that experience isn't important, and that without ever having faced anything like it, you could not be easily made to look like a dunce. That suggests to me that you have no appreciation of the professions of politics and media, or possibly any other profession. It makes me wonder if you also overestimate your ability to step into the role of brain surgeon, NBA forward or violin soloist without any training.

Fortunately, Palin had at least some experience with the spotlight and the media before being thrown into the fire. A novice like you, on the other hand, would be a mumbling blob of flop-sweat after five minutes of what Palin has been through.

"Instead, we have Republicans running for office saying what intelligent and super-nice and wonderful human beings their opponents are (while being accused by those opponents of starving babies and throwing granny off the cliff)."

Heh.... ok.

Are you disagreeing with me that the Republicans pull their punches in an effort to appear to be nice? Was Romney or McCain your idea of dedicated fighters? Are they the type that you prefer to someone like Palin?

J

[KacyRay]

"Are you disagreeing with me that the Republicans pull their punches in an effort to appear to be nice?

No, I'm acknowledging your statement and indicating that I don't feel it's a point worth arguing.

Was Romney or McCain your idea of dedicated fighters? Are they the type that you prefer to someone like Palin?"

I'd prefer the guy who works the drive-thru window at the Wendy's down the street to Palin. (I might be exaggerating just a bit, but not a whole lot).

McCain, I'd prefer of any of the others you named before. At least, if he was young enough to serve as President, which I don't think he is at this point. But that's only if I had to choose, which I don't.

[Selene]

"Are you disagreeing with me that the Republicans pull their punches in an effort to appear to be nice?

No, I'm acknowledging your statement and indicating that I don't feel it's a point worth arguing.

Was Romney or McCain your idea of dedicated fighters? Are they the type that you prefer to someone like Palin?"

I'd prefer the guy who works the drive-thru window at the Wendy's down the street to Palin. (I might be exaggerating just a bit, but not a whole lot).

McCain, I'd prefer of any of the others you named before. At least, if he was young enough to serve as President, which I don't think he is at this point. But that's only if I had to choose, which I don't.

Wow...how do you unpack that post..."I'd prefer..." Then, we have another "if" which conflates with the rest of the sentence...and ends with another "if," suggesting that "if" he had to choose, he wouldn't!!

WTF????

[KacyRay]

Yeah, I'm a wacky whack!

[Selene]

Yeah, I'm a wacky whack!

Ok, most of us are...at least develope a theme song...

[KacyRay]

I'm whack, y'all...

I'm whack, y'all...

I'm whackkity whack whack a-whack, y'all...

[Selene]

I'm whack, y'all...

I'm whack, y'all...

I'm whackkity whack whack a-whack, y'all...

Got some music while you whack off?

[Jonathan]

"Are you disagreeing with me that the Republicans pull their punches in an effort to appear to be nice?

No, I'm acknowledging your statement and indicating that I don't feel it's a point worth arguing.

Was Romney or McCain your idea of dedicated fighters? Are they the type that you prefer to someone like Palin?"

I'd prefer the guy who works the drive-thru window at the Wendy's down the street to Palin. (I might be exaggerating just a bit, but not a whole lot).

McCain, I'd prefer of any of the others you named before. At least, if he was young enough to serve as President, which I don't think he is at this point. But that's only if I had to choose, which I don't.

Wow...how do you unpack that post..."I'd prefer..." Then, we have another "if" which conflates with the rest of the sentence...and ends with another "if," suggesting that "if" he had to choose, he wouldn't!!

WTF????

I think that Kacy is confirming my suspicion that his opinions here are little more than an aesthetic response to how well, or how poorly, he feels that politicians are posing as moral, competent and intelligent. His fear of Palin's potential future abuses of power, and his ignoring McCain's track record of them, can be nothing but an aesthetic response. I think that if we were to have a woman read a random selection of Ayn Rand excerpts to Kacy in Palin's Northern You-Betcha accent, he'd prefer Marxist ideas if they were read to him by someone with a good radio voice.

J

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

I think that Kacy is confirming my suspicion that his opinions here are little more than an aesthetic response to how well, or how poorly, he feels that politicians are posing as moral, competent and intelligent. His fear of Palin's potential future abuses of power, and his ignoring McCain's track record of them, can be nothing but an aesthetic response. I think that if we were to have a woman read a random selection of Ayn Rand excerpts to Kacy in Palin's Northern You-Betcha accent, he'd prefer Marxist ideas if they were read to him by someone with a good radio voice.

Jonathan,

You just described a huge chunk of the mainstream public. They land on one side or the other more by geographic accident or outright whim of the moment (like supporting a sports team), or maybe to piss off family members and friends , and then root for their team while judging the politicians on their side according to posture and aesthetics.

We live in a video game...

Michael

[KacyRay]

Liberty University <hearts> Palin.

I'm sure they are all aware that she would *never* work to bring about their theocratic vision. </sarcasm>

[Selene]

Liberty University <hearts> Palin.

I'm sure they are all aware that she would *never* work to bring about their theocratic vision. </sarcasm>

And your point in posting that last post is...????

[KacyRay]

To piss you off man. Don't you know that's why I'm here!

[Selene]

To piss you off man. Don't you know that's why I'm here!

As long as you are owning up to being a petulant child, I am good to go with it.