The Glade 4.0

_________________
"It is true that democracy undermines freedom when voters believe they can live off of others' productivity, when they modify the commandment: 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.' The politics of plunder is no doubt destructive of both morality and the division of labor."

What an idiot.

_________________
This must be Thursday. I could never get the hang of Thursdays.

What a stupid remark made by an R&B disc jockey.

OMG, someone said something moronic... on a BLOG!. And they're an Obama supporter! That must mean all Obama supporters are morons!

OMG, TheRiov totally posted another **** strawman! That must mean all of TheRiov's arguments are stupid!

_________________

You're an idiot.

_________________
"It is true that democracy undermines freedom when voters believe they can live off of others' productivity, when they modify the commandment: 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.' The politics of plunder is no doubt destructive of both morality and the division of labor."

I don't give a crap who he supports. Anyone who suggests that a person be (re)elected to the Presidency based on the color of his\her skin is an idiot.

_________________
This must be Thursday. I could never get the hang of Thursdays.

In order for me to be making a strawman argument, I would have to be disagreeing with Nitefox's assumed contention that this is a fairly stupid thing to assert. I'm not doing that at all. I find the opinion that Joyner is making offensive in the extreme. HOWEVER, Nitefox (and several others here) have this fun little habit of pulling out quotes of individuals (or even groups) and then trying to paint everyone on the same side with the same brush.

Once or twice I could understand it would be "Lets hold up this idiot for public ridicule" -- but he doesn't do that for people on the right. Often he follows it up with general statements about "libs" the implication being that everyone who is a "lib" must therefore be affiliated.

edit: and once again, Khross is resorting to calling someone, or their arguments, stupid. Do you ever get tired of throwing insults? Stop hiding behind the anonymity of the internet where you can pretend to really be someone with a mask who no one knows. You continue to find excuses why you "cant" give out your identity, make tons of outrageous claims, most of which we suspect are lies, and find reasons why we can't verify them. And then you have the audacity to label others "Troll" ..... yet you're the metaphorical troll, lurking, hiding under the bridge, ambushing people with abuse and then hiding back under the bridge, for the next billy goat to come trip-tromping over the bridge.

Foamy: Yes. Sadly he was voted for or against by some originally, based on that very thing. I'm sure he will be again.

TheRiov: Don't take stuff so personally (your original post towards this thread, not the Khross rebuttal) Others' posts in this thread aren't directly pointed at you imho.

But I didn't do that.


If I want to take a swipe at folks, I do it. I'll say what I want to say. If I don't specifically do so, you can rest assured im letting whatever I'm saying or quoting or posting stand on it's own merits. So take your accusations and shove them up your ***. And just so you know for sure, that WAS directed at you.

_________________
"It is true that democracy undermines freedom when voters believe they can live off of others' productivity, when they modify the commandment: 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.' The politics of plunder is no doubt destructive of both morality and the division of labor."

If they are gonna support someone solely for being black, then why not support Herman Cain? I could certainly provide racial anecdotes that he's "more black" than BHO

_________________
I prefer to think of them as "Fighting evil in another dimension"

I've pondered this as well but the MSM and dem base of black voters only see Cain as an Uncle Tom.

_________________
"It is true that democracy undermines freedom when voters believe they can live off of others' productivity, when they modify the commandment: 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.' The politics of plunder is no doubt destructive of both morality and the division of labor."

why?
Because he's successful? So is Obama?
Because he didn't March? Neither did Obama?

_________________
I prefer to think of them as "Fighting evil in another dimension"

just imagine the **** that would fly if some radio personality suggested: “Let’s not even deal with the facts right now. Let’s deal with just our whiteness and pride — and loyalty. We have the chance to elect a White American president, and that’s what we ought to be doing. And I’m not afraid or ashamed to say that as white people, we should do it because he’s a white man.”

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me
█ ♣ █

_________________
"It is true that democracy undermines freedom when voters believe they can live off of others' productivity, when they modify the commandment: 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.' The politics of plunder is no doubt destructive of both morality and the division of labor."

_________________
"Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own." Jesus of Nazareth

Oh, wait, TheRiov's ***** about me calling his arguments stupid?

viewtopic.php?p=167009#p167009



You can leave the thread now, TheRiov.I'm sorry, but I'm have a little trouble taking you seriously when you're so blatantly contradicting your own statements about behavior in general. Perhaps taking your statement and making a few substitutions to create exactly the same kind of fallacious statement you made is ...

Actually, it doesn't matter. Your post was a straw man and quite fallacious. My post was a straw man and a tu quoque fallacy, but it was certainly intentional as a manner of demonstrating the failings of your post. However, since you seem to find that so offensive ...

_________________

It would be different if you didn't have a habit of it Khross. And attacking an individual idea is different than attacking all ideas from an individual.

Poisoning the well.

Yeah it'd be stupid to say this guy speaks for all blacks just like it's stupid to say Pastor Phelps speaks for all Christians. that doesn't mean we can't or shouldn't openly discuss these people and their points of view.

_________________
I prefer to think of them as "Fighting evil in another dimension"

Khross not sharing his identity on the internet is hardly something worth criticism. Plus, you should limit your argument about what "we" suspect or can't verify to just yourself, since my opinion of his claims don't hinge on his identity, it's pretty much based on each individual claim. I'd guess others are pretty much in that same boat, but you can make a poll if you'd like.

Would it make a difference to you if you knew Dr. Doom's secret identity?

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

What if he's, like, Hillary Clinton or something?

_________________
"Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own." Jesus of Nazareth

I'm pretty sure the last poll established that Khross was a black muslim, fighting The Man.

_________________
Sail forth! steer for the deep waters only!
Reckless, O soul, exploring, I with thee, and thou with me;
For we are bound where mariner has not yet dared to go,
And we will risk the ship, ourselves and all.

Or a hot chick?

_________________
"...but there exists also in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to attempt to lower the powerful to their own level and reduces men to prefer equality in slavery to inequality with freedom." - De Tocqueville

Whether or not he has this habit is irrelevant. Where did he do so in this case? He didn't, as far as I can tell, paint anyone with any broad brush.

That is what makes your argument a strawman. Nitefox made no comment whatsoever in his OP. You just leaped to the conclusion that he was doing so, because.. well, honestly I don't know why. I can think of several possible reasons, none of them very good.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

It'd probably be real dissapointing, since he's really a boring economics professor or something.

I would like to have TheRiov's address though, so I can send him a box of Vagisil and no-tears shampoo for Christmas.

_________________
"...the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?" -Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn