Razorsharp - care to dance, you misguided little twit?

[GomiBoy]

So you called me a liar. I would expect little else from someone as small-minded as you, and you do seem to take the lead from your televised masters on the Fox channel when it comes to political debate. If at first you don't succeed in your argument, throw up as many abstractions as possible and start personally insulting anyone who disagrees.

But that went a bit too far.

You are an idiot. Nothing you say on this board makes the least bit of sense, and every thread you try to start turns into a train wreck. To quote rjung,

You mean besides a lame-ass attempt by a self-proclaimed "sharp" guy to try to catch Kerry in a corner? Only to get peeved when every wandering reader pokes big holes in his OP after a brief scan?

You talk out of your ass constantly, and when that does not work, you fall back on personal insults.

So bring it on, you partisan little shit.

Oh, and just so you're sure it's the pit - fuck you, you inbred coal-country moron. Learn to write, learn to type, and people might just take you a bit seriously.

No, actually, scratch that. You're a fuckwit, and everyone will know that as soon as you open your mouth no matter how purty you talk.

[Lissa]

Originally Posted by GomiBoy

So you called me a liar. I would expect little else from someone as small-minded as you, and you do seem to take the lead from your televised masters on the Fox channel when it comes to political debate. If at first you don't succeed in your argument, throw up as many abstractions as possible and start personally insulting anyone who disagrees.

But that went a bit too far.

You are an idiot. Nothing you say on this board makes the least bit of sense, and every thread you try to start turns into a train wreck. To quote rjung,

You talk out of your ass constantly, and when that does not work, you fall back on personal insults.

So bring it on, you partisan little shit.

Oh, and just so you're sure it's the pit - fuck you, you inbred coal-country moron. Learn to write, learn to type, and people might just take you a bit seriously.

No, actually, scratch that. You're a fuckwit, and everyone will know that as soon as you open your mouth no matter how purty you talk.

Do you have the original op? I always find it interesting to track back and look at the argument.

Thanks

[Governor Quinn]

I learned the hard way (in one of his threads about the 17th Amendment) that it is utterly useless to try to debate Razorsharp, and, as a result, I have never bothered to post in one of his threads again.

I advise you all to try the same.

[Mockingbird]

Originally Posted by Lissa

Do you have the original op? I always find it interesting to track back and look at the argument.

Thanks

Check any of the GD threads Razorsharp(an oxymoron of a username if I ever saw one) has started.

[GomiBoy]

Originally Posted by Lissa

Do you have the original op? I always find it interesting to track back and look at the argument.

Thanks

Sorry - here.

[jshore]

Never has a pitting been so richly deserved.

[Who_me?]

Originally Posted by Mockingbird

Check any of the GD threads Razorsharp(an oxymoron of a username if I ever saw one) has started.

I believe you can leave the oxy part out...

[El_Kabong]

I would expect little else from someone as small-minded as you, and you do seem to take the lead from your televised masters on the Fox channel when it comes to political debate.

To be fair, apparently R-sharp believes that none of the major media are to be trusted on much of anything, and his views strike me as rather more reactionary than anything dreamed up on Fox.

That said, he really shouldn't be posting in GD at all, IMO. He seems to be too busy to spend much time actually supporting his OPs; much more important, apparently, to continually remind us how incredibly intelligent and what a master, uh, debator he is, and how jealous and churlish the rest of us are for not admitting his sheer genius at argument.

[GomiBoy]

Not as much fun when he doesn't show up to attempt to defend himself, though

Still, fighting ignorance is sometimes a difficult journey, full of tribulations. Guess I will do my little bit to keep it up.

[Mockingbird]

Originally Posted by Who_me?

I believe you can leave the oxy part out...

Well, he is also an acne preventative, so I think it's still appropriate.

[PatriotX]

He's a molehill.

Give it a rest.

[GomiBoy]

Originally Posted by SimonX

He's a molehill.

Give it a rest.

Too right, but felt good to vent. Thanks, all...

[BobLibDem]

Never engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent.

Never mud wrestle with a pig. You both get all dirty, and the pig likes it.

[Left Hand of Dorkness]

Awhile back, I somehow misread his name as Hammersharp, and it's stuck. Think of him that way, and his posts make far more sense.

Daniel

[WordMan]

He's a twit, GomiBoy - completely not worth it.

His politics are his business - it's his process that is completely assinine.

:wally

[WordMan]

I just feel like elaborating, in case his twit-ness ever gets around to reading this thread.

Razorsharp allow me to introduce you to a little thing - they're called manners. Your whole approach to setting up a thread with a provocative OP, then throwing dismissive insults and misdirections at people who genuinely want to discuss THE TOPIC is rude.

INSIGHT - if people get frustrated with you this much, YOU ARE DOING SOMETHING WRONG! Get a clue.

I suppose it might be one thing if the point you were trying to make were remotely insightful - ooooo, Kerry might be trying to have it both ways - or if you were holding some deeply "holier than thou" position worth considering. But your little point is trivial, and your mocking tone is a pain.

Play nice fuckwit and maybe we would want to actually discuss THE ISSUES you raise and not what a fucking fuck from fucktown you act like.

[F. U. Shakespeare]

You say manners, right-wingers say political correctness, let's call the whole thing off.

[Monkeypants]

The subject of this post is cheesy.

Care to dance. Pfft.

[GomiBoy]

Originally Posted by Monkeypants

The subject of this post is cheesy.

Care to dance. Pfft.

You want some! I'll take you all on!

[Liberal]

Is there any criticism at all over which Kerry supporters would not cringe? If your contention is that RazorSharp's particular criticism of Kerry is misguided, then what criticism do you believe would be defensible?

[Who_me?]

Originally Posted by Liberal

Is there any criticism at all over which Kerry supporters would not cringe? If your contention is that RazorSharp's particular criticism of Kerry is misguided, then what criticism do you believe would be defensible?

Unfortunately, unless he's stated something since last night, I have no idea of where he stands on much of anything. He just spouted some bullshit in an OP and refuses to elaborate. Most of what he posted in that thread is just disagreeing with whoever posted last, regardless of what that last poster said.

[Liberal]

Originally Posted by Who_me?

Unfortunately, unless he's stated something since last night, I have no idea of where he stands on much of anything. He just spouted some bullshit in an OP and refuses to elaborate. Most of what he posted in that thread is just disagreeing with whoever posted last, regardless of what that last poster said.

Perhaps, but that was not my question. Is there any criticism at all over which Kerry supporters would not cringe? If your contention is that RazorSharp's particular criticism of Kerry is misguided, then what criticism do you believe would be defensible?

[Who_me?]

Originally Posted by Liberal

Perhaps, but that was not my question. Is there any criticism at all over which Kerry supporters would not cringe? If your contention is that RazorSharp's particular criticism of Kerry is misguided, then what criticism do you believe would be defensible?

Maybe you've found Razorsharp's criticism... I still haven't. I saw the question that he wanted to pose to Kerry...

Originally Posted by Razorsharp

"Senator Kerry, you have said, in so many words, that the war with Iraq was unjustified, being that Saddam Hussein did not have the purported weapons of mass destruction, Iraq was not an imminent threat to the United States and there was no link between Iraq and 9/11, would you release Saddam Hussein from custody?"

No criticism there, just a question...


When posters responded with their opinions that Kerry wouldn't release Sadaam, we get this...

Originally Posted by Razorsharp

But, according to John Kerry's worldview, wouldn't the arrest and incarceration of a country's leader require the passing of a "global test"?

Not a very thoughtful answer.

That's an opinion of what Kerry may think, but not a criticism of anything Kerry has done or said.

After that, the thread gets semi-hijacked by the OP himself...

Originally Posted by Razorsharp

Oh, so if you (all you Kerry supporters who are critical of the war on Iraq, but are supportive of keeping Saddam in custody) were to inform the police of a neighbor's possession of illegal weapons, and the police, armed with a search warrant for illegal weapons, searched that neighbor's house but did not find any illegal weapons, but did discover a collection of "kiddie porn", it would be okay to arrest and incarcerate him on that count?

And the reponders try to explain to the OP how search warrants work. Now, if you can find a legitimate criticism of Kerry somewhere in that thread, let me know what it is.

Also, I don't see anyone cringing. unless that word has a different definition than the one I normally would use.

[Dead Badger]

Originally Posted by Liberal

Perhaps, but that was not my question. Is there any criticism at all over which Kerry supporters would not cringe? If your contention is that RazorSharp's particular criticism of Kerry is misguided, then what criticism do you believe would be defensible?

Isn't that rather up to RazorSharp? If he presents a ludicrous false dilemma, as he did, and is consequently called on it, it's not really incumbent on those who call him on it to help him out with a real argument. I don't see what point you're trying to make, unless it's somehow that because Kerry supporters will accept no criticism whatsoever, their protestations at stupid criticism are worthless. Surely one can take such objections as they come. RazorSharp's proposition (that Kerry must support Hussein's release) is as daft as they get (well, excepting the "Bush had a cheat sheet" one, I guess), and it doesn't matter who says it.

I guess since I'm feeling charitable I'll suggest a valid criticism, though; Kerry's sounding off about outsourcing and protectionism smacks of populism, with worrying implications for the progress of free trade under a Kerry administration. I suspect this isn't snappy enough for RazorSharp, though, and I'd be surprised if he himself were sanguine about outsourcing, too. Most other criticisms I have of Kerry are typical of the entire US political arena, and thus aren't very interesting (failure to oppose the death penalty, failure to support gay marriage, etc. etc.). Of course, once he starts doing things, assuming he wins, then there will be criticisms aplenty.

[WordMan]

Originally Posted by F. U. Shakespeare

You say manners, right-wingers say political correctness, let's call the whole thing off.

Actually, no - political correctness, to me, is when someone states what they consider to be a "hard truth" - maybe they think affirmative action shows inappropriate favoritism or that one group of people by race, gender or something simply can't perform with the rest of people. Whatever.

The point is - that "hard truth" can be delivered thoughtfully and diplomatically, or rudely. One *can* say something like: "I know some folks will consider this inappropriate, but IMHO I think we need to look at....." One can disagree with the position and call it politically incorrect, but the person is not exhibiting bad manners within the context of a GD.

But Razorsharp instead, does what Who Me? describes:

He just spouted some bullshit in an OP and refuses to elaborate. Most of what he posted in that thread is just disagreeing with whoever posted last, regardless of what that last poster said.

That, to me, is rude.

And Razorsharp still hasn't shown up in this thread to defend himself. What a twit.

[GomiBoy]

Liberal - I am not pitting Razorsharp because he criticised Kerry. I am pitting the dipstick because his debate style is exactly as described - post a ridiculous premise, insult anyone who dares to tell him he's wrong, then throw up as many unrelated issues as possible whilst being sure to disagree violently with whoever posted last. I personally pitted him because he called me a liar. If he had simply told me I was wrong, I could accept that, but I am not a liar and take great offence when someone calls me that.

While I believe Razorsharp is an asshat, I would not pit him simply because he criticized Kerry.

Just for honor's sake, here are some valid Kerry criticisms, all of which make me cringe a bit to support him:
Trying to act as a populist whilst worth millions of dollars is pretty hypocritical
Complaining about a war, and throwing away medals won in that war, then trotting out your record from that war, is pretty damn disrespectful of those you served with, and is really damn hypocritical to boot
Getting an inexperienced running mate from a southern state, just to balance the ticket, is incredibly risky and might backfire on Kerry in his bid

If he had posted any of those, I would attempt to argue, but would do so in calm, civil tones and accept defeat if my argument was not strong enough.

Hell, if he had posted a valid complaint of any sort, regardless of it's correctness, I would not have pitted him.

What he posted instead, was a hypothetical, inflammatory, and highly partisan question, to which many attempted to formulate hypothetical answers, to which he responded by venting his spleen at them.

[Liberal]

I stand down, GomiBoy. You have made a compelling argument.

[GomiBoy]

Originally Posted by Liberal

I stand down, GomiBoy. You have made a compelling argument.

Well, I am pretty new at this, so getting validation from someone of your experience feels pretty nice.

So thanks.

[DrDeth]

Originally Posted by jshore

Never has a pitting been so richly deserved.

Except that none are deserved at all, as this whole "pitting" of fellow members thing is silly and immature.

[DrDeth]

Originally Posted by GomiBoy

Just for honor's sake, here are some valid Kerry criticisms, all of which make me cringe a bit to support him:
Trying to act as a populist whilst worth millions of dollars is pretty hypocritical
Complaining about a war, and throwing away medals won in that war, then trotting out your record from that war, is pretty damn disrespectful of those you served with, and is really damn hypocritical to boot
Getting an inexperienced running mate from a southern state, just to balance the ticket, is incredibly risky and might backfire on Kerry in his bid

1. Bush did & does the exact same thing- or don't you know Bush is filthly rich also?

2. He had a valid complaint about that war, and why we were there. OTOH, while he served in that war, he did so with honour and bravery. Nothing hypocritical about that. It's called "doing your duty even though you disagree with the Administration", and it's the opposite of being a hypocrite.

3. Edwards is a US Senator, and was a very viable candidate in his own right. This is actually one of the best & smartest moves Kerry did.

[Liberal]

Originally Posted by DrDeth

1. Bush did & does the exact same thing- or don't you know Bush is filthly rich also?

But that does not mitigate the complaint about Kerry. It is a mere tu quoque.

2. He had a valid complaint about that war, and why we were there. OTOH, while he served in that war, he did so with honour and bravery. Nothing hypocritical about that. It's called "doing your duty even though you disagree with the Administration", and it's the opposite of being a hypocrite.

I don't think that's what GomiBoy meant. The hypocrisy is in using the war in whatever way you find politically expedient. If you throw away your medals and criticize the war, fine: it is an unambiguous statement of opposition. But don't come forward when it is convenient for you and use the war you've condemned for political gain. I would respect him more if he still said, "Yes, I tossed those medals. I'm ashamed of them. It was a ghastly war, and we should never have been there."

3. Edwards is a US Senator, and was a very viable candidate in his own right. This is actually one of the best & smartest moves Kerry did.

Again, you miss GomiBoy's point. He did not say that Edwards is unqualified or not viable, but that the decision made by Kerry was not a good one. It brought a ton of baggage and paid very little fare.

[GomiBoy]

Damn it, Liberal, you beat me to the punch! I do like your turn of phrase, though - "brought lots of baggage but paid little fare" I am going to steal for sure!

Originally Posted by DrDeth

1. Bush did & does the exact same thing- or don't you know Bush is filthly rich also?

2. He had a valid complaint about that war, and why we were there. OTOH, while he served in that war, he did so with honour and bravery. Nothing hypocritical about that. It's called "doing your duty even though you disagree with the Administration", and it's the opposite of being a hypocrite.

3. Edwards is a US Senator, and was a very viable candidate in his own right. This is actually one of the best & smartest moves Kerry did.

1. Yes, Bush is as rich, if not richer than Kerry, and yes, both try to play 'Common Man' to the electorate. It pisses me off when either of them talks about understanding the pain of the poor or the jobless, as neither has ever experienced any of it. Does this invalidate my point that Kerry is a hypocrite for doing so simply because Bush is a hyprocrite as well?

2. Yes he did have a complaint, and voiced that complaint well, and accomplished good things by doing so. But trotting out his war record and pumping it up in order to help him get elected President stinks of hypocrisy. Please see Liberal's response, as that is exactly what I meant.

3. I know he's a senator. A one-term senator, who hasn't even filled that much of a role, coming from a purely civil background, with no experience (other than his short time in senate and even fewer actual votes) of any sort of politics, even at a local level. He is a political black hole, and as a result of which I find it pretty hard to throw my support behind him, even though I support Kerry. Besides, there were, IMO, better candidates. Kerry should have tried to romance a centrist (could you imagine how hard it would be for Bush / Cheney to beat Kerry / McCain?) or maybe even a Republican as his running mate. Then he would have stiched up the election and rather than have a potential liability on his ticket.

But none of that's really the point,

Any of these can be a topic for debate (and have and will continue to be), and whilst I think they are potentially damaging to Kerry, you do not. Therefore we can debate and discuss and talk about why we each think the way we do.

If you or I, for instance, were to bring any of these premises up in a GD thread, they could be talked about them like reasonable adults, exchange ideas, maybe you change my mind, maybe I change yours; either way we both win, as we're both more informed as a result of it.

My problem with Razorsharp is that he does none of these things, for reasons already thoroughly stated. He wants to use a GD thread like a pulpit, and when I didn't let him, he personally insulted me.

As for pitting 'fellow members' I won't apologize for that - that's what the pit is here for, amongst other things (like complaining about moderators / management, and just plain ol' fashioned venting)

[jshore]

Originally Posted by Liberal

I don't think that's what GomiBoy meant. The hypocrisy is in using the war in whatever way you find politically expedient. If you throw away your medals and criticize the war, fine: it is an unambiguous statement of opposition. But don't come forward when it is convenient for you and use the war you've condemned for political gain. I would respect him more if he still said, "Yes, I tossed those medals. I'm ashamed of them. It was a ghastly war, and we should never have been there."

I'd suggest that you go watch "Going Upriver" if you want to understand better the sort of emotions that were involved in the tossing of the medals. For many of them, it was one of the most difficult and emotional things that they did. They did not do it lightly but because they felt it was important to take such a step to show just how strongly they felt that the war was wrong. (If they had tossed something that had no significance to them, it wouldn't be as strong a statement, no?)

I don't think it is right for you to tell someone that they can't have a mixture of emotions about their service...That they can't feel great pride and that they gave up a lot, some making the ultimate sacrifice, in order to do defend the nation. That they then came to realize that this sacrifice wasn't really necessary for the defense of the nation does not belittle that sacrifice. It belittles only the policymakers who misled them and the nation.

[Hamlet]

Originally Posted by Left Hand of Dorkness

Awhile back, I somehow misread his name as Hammersharp, and it's stuck. Think of him that way, and his posts make far more sense.

Daniel

Oh, thanks a ton, Daniel. Now every time I see his name, my head will be full of "2 Legit....2 Legit to Quit" and "Hammertime." You bastard.

And GomiBoy, it really aint worth it. Razorsharp has proven himself to be a complete idiot who refuses to support his arguments, uninterested in debate, and quick to go for the insult, even in GD. Don't even bother with him.

[GomiBoy]

Originally Posted by jshore

I'd suggest that you go watch "Going Upriver" if you want to understand better the sort of emotions that were involved in the tossing of the medals. For many of them, it was one of the most difficult and emotional things that they did. They did not do it lightly but because they felt it was important to take such a step to show just how strongly they felt that the war was wrong. (If they had tossed something that had no significance to them, it wouldn't be as strong a statement, no?)

I don't think it is right for you to tell someone that they can't have a mixture of emotions about their service...That they can't feel great pride and that they gave up a lot, some making the ultimate sacrifice, in order to do defend the nation. That they then came to realize that this sacrifice wasn't really necessary for the defense of the nation does not belittle that sacrifice. It belittles only the policymakers who misled them and the nation.

never doubted for a minute that it was a strong gesture of support for his personal cause, and also never thought that it was a simple or easy gesture. I am a veteran, albeit not with the same types of experiences as Kerry. For me to throw away my medals would be a huge statement.

My point was that he has explained the throwing away of medals in a wishy-washy way and although I believe the Swifties are a bunch of partisan fuckwits, I think they have a valid point about being insulted by Kerry's use of the Vietnam War in later years to support his political aspirations. That's the hypocrisy - if he had answered as Liberal suggested, then I wouldn't have a problem with it. Thing is - he didn't. It is the one thing that he really is wishy-washy on, and I don't like that.

And just to confirm - I think we agree that one can serve honorably in a dishonorable situation, and many Vietnam vets feel exactly as you do and exactly as Kerry (I think) does. I just don't like politicians using things like that for political gain.

[GomiBoy]

Originally Posted by Hamlet

And GomiBoy, it really aint worth it. Razorsharp has proven himself to be a complete idiot who refuses to support his arguments, uninterested in debate, and quick to go for the insult, even in GD. Don't even bother with him.

I notice he hasn't responded directly to me in the original GD thread, so I am tending to agree with you... I might respond to his posts in future, but only to destroy his premise as well as I am able...

[Mtgman]

Originally Posted by GomiBoy

I might respond to his posts in future, but only to destroy his premise as well as I am able...

It's usually quite easy. He's only got a couple tricks. The "male abortion" which is BS because he's deluded into believing in a legislative/judicial conspiracy to give women an "out" post-conception which men don't have. The 17th amendment, which is usually a non-starter because no one really cares if senators are elected at large or by majorities of the state legislatures. Then he's got some quirks related to gun control, but those aren't anything special either.

Enjoy,
Steven

[BrainGlutton]

Razorsharp once described himself as "A liberal's worst nightmare: A redneck with a gun permit and a library card."

So, he has a library card. So, he reads. I think it was Voltaire who penned the epigraph: "This book is a mirror. When a monkey looks in, no philosopher looks out."

[Revtim]

Originally Posted by BrainGlutton

Razorsharp once described himself as "A liberal's worst nightmare: A redneck with a gun permit and a library card."

So, he has a library card. So, he reads. I think it was Voltaire who penned the epigraph: "This book is a mirror. When a monkey looks in, no philosopher looks out."

And a library card != reading, for that matter. There's plenty of DVDs and video tapes at my local library.