My bad. I deserved that.
I’m not painting anyone with a brush. I actually refuse to acknowledge december as a conservative, as he soils the word. I know there are rational reasons to be anti- (insert political situation here), but the difference between having an opinion and having an agenda is very different.
If you wanted to start a thread about something, I would assume that you have information and links to back your point up.
december seems to pick random articles and read his own political bent onto them and come to the conclusion that they prove his point and cannot be wrong.
Big, Big difference.
december isn’t so much a conservative as he’s a nutjob who happens to hold views on the conservative side of the spectrum. This board is certainly not alien to the concept, at least, of an anti-december of sorts … someone who, when combined with december, would produce an explosion the net result of which would be … nothing. No december, no anti-december.
Hmm…
I get more enjoyment reading december’s threads than most others. Watching many of you guys piss and moan and start foaming at the mouth, and him plodding methodically along is often better than a movie. Plus, I think he makes a lot of good points.
december: “well, I read this article; here’s a [biased] summary; what do you guys think?”
reactionary poster 1 (say, Collounsbury, for instance): “december’s stupid…fucking twit…ignorant…” but then he at least tries to present a counter debate
reactionary poster 2: (say, Guinastasia for instance): "Oh, no; not december again…Here’s my contribution to the debate: :rolleyes:
Ironically, in the threads I’ve read, he’s usually the most polite poster in the debate.
If you disagree, debate him without the personal insults. Or ignore him. It can’t be that hard, can it?
december’s acknowledged deception in the Clinton gifts thread is beyond the pale of civilized debate, dm. He pulls that shit on a fairly frequent basis. The hostility and frustration are entirely appropriate reactions to his behavior.
So you don’t know anything, but feel the need to opine regardless?
december is an idiot. Not because of his “views”, rather in how he expresses them and conducts himself on the boards.
He richly deserves each Pitting, and sadly I think he is starting to enjoy the attention.
But I am not sure he has risen to the level of a banning.
Although I wouldn’t miss him if he was gone. The conservative view point has plenty of credible, well-spoken supporters here that probably cringe everytime that doofus posts.
If your a moderate, you should want december to stay around, has he works hard to make conservatives look like tin-foil hatted nitwits.
minty, please take another look at that other thread. As a lawyer, you are ideally qualified to analyze the legal validity (or lack thereof) of the offered excuse. In particular, can you point us to the laws in question?
However, I concede that the OP ought to have addressed the suficiency or insuffciency of the Clinton excuse in the OP.
People probably would, if he didn’t insist on repeatedly launching threads containing false or misleading information in GD. By now, if I see a new thread in GD with a question in the subject line and december’s name attached, I pretty much know it’s going to contain useless information, and it appears that many of the regulars here agree.
Typical pattern for a december GD thread:
Subject: Is it OK for Palestinians and Democrats to barbeque live kittens?
Selective quote from media article implying that Palestinians and Democrats do in fact barbeque live kittens, followed by statement from OP claiming that if the article concerned Israelis and Republicans, the liberal outcry would be deafening
First reply notes that poster followed link provided and discovers that rather than claiming that Palestinians and Democrats barbeque live kittens, article states that someone may have heard a kitten mewing somewhere and intends to launch an investigation
Five or more additional replies expressing displeasure with OP’s wasting of their time, noting that this is the 376th iteration of basically the same thread by the OP
OP steps back in to say that he never claimed that live kittens really were being barbequed, simply that this sort of behavior fits a pattern long known among Palestinians and Democrats, that it’s not his responsibility because he is simply posting a news item for the benefit of the board, that once again the mean old liberals are simply bashing him for sport, and by the way, even if no live kittens have been barbequed, here’s a link to another article that proves conclusively that the Clintons failed to report a cheese tray that they received as a gift in 1992, and that’s really the pretty much the same thing, isn’t it?
Collective groan from those posters who can still be bothered to open a december thread
…
What I don’t understand is why he persists in posting these kinds of things to GD when his claims are almost always immediately and comprehensively shown to be false, often by following the links he himself provides, and when he has apparently been warned repeatedly about this by the mods.
He’s definitely got a martyr complex, and thus it’s obvious that he’ll keep pushing board rules until he gets himself banned, in an effort to demonstrate how unfair this hotbed of liberalism is to dissenting voices. I just wish he’d hurry up and get on with it.
—Apos, you should get your blow jobs from James Carville.—
Sure, but then I wouldn’t need a penny for every time someone’s said “Wow, am I actually agreeing with december on this one?” I’m not THAT impoverised…
Anyway, that was a terrible, terrible methaphor. What I meant to emphasize is: it seems like even those that hate dec the most still seem to agree with him, even surprising themselves that they do, from time to time. So he can’t be ALL baiting…
Go ahead. I’d love to see these quotes.
I think it’s hilarious that people like this are STILL burned up on Clinton. My god, what a piece of work that man must be to have imprinted himself that deeply on them.
Well, since I was mentioned:
No, he makes few if any good points - he makes a large number of assertions that generally fall apart when one looks at the underlying data/article etc.
And there is the key. December actively misrepresents data, lies about what articles say etc. His summaries go beyond ‘biased’ to active and clear misrepresentation. And he has done this frequently. Now, if you are drooling moron, an idiot or a gullible fool, you may buy his backpeddling, his game of “I really meant this” but enough repititions, enough times being caught excising damning paragraphs etc.
Of course, again, for the morons, the idiots, the gullible ideological fools and for those simply unacquainted with logical argumentation and analysis, this may not be terribly noticeable.
Now, reading the train wrecks for the pure amusement value, I can understand that.
My reaction is an accurate representation.
[quote]
Ironically, in the threads I’ve read, he’s usually the most polite poster in the debate.
[/quyote]
And? He distorts, lies and otherwise engages in highly “unpolite” misrepresentation of sources.
I personally could care less about his ostensible politeness, what I care about is honesty in regards to the sources etc. In my book that is fundamentally more important and ultimately more respectful of the forum.
There seems to be something that you do not quite grasp, although this is unsurprising if you have somehow through some tortured and belabored grinding of gears have come to think that december frequently makes good points, that debate requires honest engagement with the facts - good or bad for one’s point - and at the very least ** a lack of lying ** in regards to characterizing one’s sources.
When someone has demonstrated they are unable or unwilling to do so, their behaviour becomes relevant. The ad hominem is a logical fallacy when it is irrelevant to the debate, it is indeed relevant to the argument when the arguer’s character does indeed bear on the argument, on the degree to which one can trust the arguer’s representation of sources, facts, engagement with the argument in grosso modo.
December is not debating in any real sense of the term, it has been demonstrated rather frequently, for those who care to engage their grey matter and ponder this.
It seems to me that the majority of his recent GD threads are really Pit rants where he doesn’t want someone to be able to (deservedly) curse at him. Was “Are homophobic ads OK if they’re run by Democrats?” even a minor debate?
Please! Like Carville would ever stop talking long enough to give anyone a blow job.
Guin, I vote we just keep dredging up the old “December is a big fat idiot” thread whenever fresh material arrives.
That way the moron could leave a permanent legacy.
And if you’re worried about anyone listening to his claptrap, you could point him to the Moron Memorial.
Are you trying to give me nightmares?
I would like to see him either get a clue and stop this behavior or be banned. Given his history, I’m saying banning would be easier. As a person who would rather see ignorance dispelled with knowledge, I’d personally rather see him get a clue. Sadly he seems remarkably reluctant to actually learn anything or re-examine his own behavior.
The wisest thing he could do is simply stop posting, or stop posting OPs at least, for a while and just read. Many of the posts and debate styles in GD use proper styles and support their positions with facts, not opinion pieces. The assertions are supposed to be provided by the posters, and then we all examine the facts and see if it’s a valid assertion. Coming to a debate with an agenda and a series of biased sources to cite would get you laughed/thrown off the stage in real life. I’ve seen it done. Yet on the Internet we’re pretty much a captive audience. I can’t load up GD without seeing december’s drek. I can’t read a thread he’s posted in without seeing his posts. So I, and many others, end up wasting our time dispelling the ignorance he spews so prolifically. If we were making headway towards getting december to honestly debate real issues I wouldn’t be writing this. His continued trolling of GD with partisan, slanted, half-cocked OPs is the real problem.
The fight against ignorance is too important to waste time with the willfully ignorant. We’ve got plenty of people out there who could be getting actual knowledge from this board. Instead they’re reading more diatribes of right-versus-left politics which is nothing more than mental masturbation.
Enjoy,
Steven
Jack Dean Tyler was not dissimilar to december, and he got old after about a week.
So happy we can amuse you, though…
How 'bout Edwin Meese III?