I keep forgetting I’m dealing with a moron. When I say “provide a source”, I refer to an “unbiased” source. When one of your links starts ranting about things like “Republicans opposed civil and voting rights for minorities. They oppose affirmative action” or “Republicans are the party of choice for the KKK and American Nazis” then an intelligent person would immediately realize that such information is suspect. Have you ever considered that those links that you provided may be twisting the truth and being misrepresentational so as to get their political policies enacted?
Look, I can go back and forth with you all day about what constitutes an insult (oh no, I called you short-sighted… grow some skin, you overly-sensitive twerp. Who are you, Ned Flanders?) or what “proof” is (you’ve still failed to provide proof that Farmer knew who won the election at the time of his posting… oh, that’s right, you don’t have any).
But from your behavior in this thread, I can tell that you’ll vehemently oppose any viewpoint that contradicts your own beliefs, and you’ll ignore any comment or evidence that contradicts your own beliefs. This is very trollish behavior. And while I normally enjoy posting here on the SDMB, I usually like to think that I’ve done so while pumping a couple of bytes of information into someone’s head. You, sir, are unreceptive, you are intolerant, you are stubborn, and you throw political buzzwords around as if they meant nothing.
I recall an old saying about talking to brick walls…
Anyway, I’ve said all I need to. In your mind, I am “hateful”, I will always be “hateful”, simply because I did not immediately agree on an issue. You claim that the Republican Party is considered “hateful”. I disagree with that, and counter that anyone who would make such grossly unjustified generalizations is being hypocritical.
I suggest that you closely examine your own views, even if you may not like the ugliness that seems to scar your psyche. If you can call a huge demographic “hateful” based on skant evidence, then turn around and take offense at being called “short-sighted”, then you definitely have some sort of mental problem.
In conclusion… take that Pole of Liberality out of your ass and beat yourself over the head with it, you holier-than-thou-wannabe. (Now THAT, sir, is an “insult”)
Forget this nitpicky crap, I’m still reeling from the hateful intent and wording of the OP.
Lessee, the wish was for Democrats to “go to hell, to to hell and die”. The sequence seems weird, to begin with, but not half as bizarre as the sentiment. So half (or so) of the voting population deserves eternal torment and damnation. Well, that’s certainly ::koff:: comprehensive.
Sorry, this is just insane, no matter the parsing or political orientation. I don’t give a technicolor damn what political position “justifies” this kind of idiocy: spewing this kind of emotive, gut-hate garbage disgraces the speaker. Doesn’t matter if the target is Republicans, Libertarians, Socialists, whatever.
As long as I have my dander up…this kind of shit has done more damage to thoughtful, principled conservatism than anything. Wish I remembered the name of the staunch conservative Republican, years back, (Maine? Mass? shit, brain death is a bear) who canvassed door to door for the GOP. One homeowner treated him to an vile, enthusiastic tirade against “those people”. Whereupon the real conservative icily informed the inflamed partisan that his views were bigoted, offensive and a disgrace to the party.
This isn’t an UL; just can’t remember which historical GOP stalwart it was. (Book blur; it happens.)
And maybe it says something–besides about my memory–that an example of that quality is forgotten while hate, platitudes and posturing still thrive.
On second thought, on behalf of that (temporarily) forgotten icon of principled conservatism: you, sir, are a bigot and a disgrace; your narrow, self-indulgent rantings reflect your own limited grasp, not the courteous beliefs of reasonable people.
Jee-Zus SPOOFE, are you really this thick-headed!!! Surely not – you must be pretending not to understand me, just to practice your Pit personality. You’re acting like a 3-year-old with his fingers in his ears.
Of course the links are biased. You have to be biased to conclude that Republicans are the party of Hate. I obviously don’t think the entire Republican party is the Hate Party. In fact, I voted Republican in '84 and '88. As further evidence, I offer my own words from this very thread:
Emphasis and bracketed comments by me.
I don’t know why I even try, you will probably continue to ignore these words and forever claim telepathically that I think all Republicans are full of hate. However, I do think you are full of ignorance.
Good Lord, kid! What would you accept as evidence, an electroencephalogram of his brain waves at that precise moment?? All I have to work with is his measly few sentences and the timing of his post, which as I’ve shown was after Bush had been declared the winner by the networks and Gore had phoned him conceding, but prior to Gore’s retraction and the state being declared too close to call again. Oh yeah, I forgot… Spoofe has ESP and positively knows what Farmer was thinking. Besides, all that matters is I thought he was aware of Gore’s concession. What?..you’re clairvoyant? I wasn’t thinking that, huh? Damn, there’s just no fooling you psychic types!
There ya go. When all else fails, simply shout “Troll! Troll!” and hope that bolsters your argument. Sorry, charlie. I doubt you’ll find much support for your estimation of me as a troll, unless you have a few sockpuppets secured for just such purposes.
But this begs the question – what viewpoint am I vehemently opposing? The idea that Republicans cannot be stereotyped as hateful? As I’ve shown, far from opposing it, I agree with this viewpoint. What else – that Farmer knew of Gore’s telephoned concession? You have no more evidence than I of his state of mind. Unless of course we consider your job at the Psychic Friends Network.
What exactly am I unreceptive or intolerant of, besides your baseless accusations that I am prejudiced? But you are right about one thing. I am very stubborn. It has served me well throughout life, and I prefer to characterize it as determination.
You are arguing with yourself, much as you have this entire thread. Again, read (likely for the first time) my words quoted above and see if you still think I consider the entire Republican party hateful, or if I consider the characterization deserved. Perhaps I should have followed my opening sentence with the phrase “by the misinformed”, but I guess I mistakenly assumed a certain level of intelligence that would make the phrase superfluous. Regardless, my follow-up remarks should have cleared up any confusion.
Spoofe, you need to remove your lips from the crack pipe and cling zealously to your few remaining brain cells. As evidence I offer the following litany of errors by you:
SPOOFE claim #1
hardcore concludes all Republicans hateful - bzzzzt!Wrong answer. See quotes above.
SPOOFE claim #2
timing of Farmer’s post precludes him from thinking Bush won - bzzzzt!Wrong again. See this account of the events on CNN’s site if you have any doubt.
SPOOFE claim #3
hardcore invented the “Republicans are hateful” reputation - bzzzzt!Wrong yet again. See links in previous post. Though I might add, on the miniscule chance you might have removed your fingers from your ears, I don’t agree with the reputation. I really like my mother and father, along with most of my relatives and many of my friends.
SPOOFE claim #4
Farmer didn’t know Gore had conceded - bzzzzt!Wrong answer. Wait… we need a judge’s ruling on this one. Technically, you might be right, so we’ll give you a half-point, even though the point is moot.
Ya know, I grow weary of this tiresome gameshow schtick. It has been done previously by those far more eloquent than I – besides, my hands are cramping listing your errors. Needless to say, you need to stay in school.
Perhaps I misunderstood Farmer and, as Rysdad suggested, he intended this as some sort of sick takeoff of South Park. Had he mentioned this in an ensuing post, I would have responded that it was in poor taste, but I could relunctantly see the humor in it.
I give it about a 6.3 on a scale of 1 to 10. It lacks originality and style, but it does have a certain rhythm. Given your considered experience in the craft, I expected something better.
I’ll make things real simple for the simpleton, Mr. Core, in the form of a quiz:
Do you deny that you said:
… AND NOTHING ELSE in response to the OP? (Wow, deja vu).
If so, you are a liar (big surprise). If not, why the hell are you keeping this up? I already conceded that your words were giving a certain impression, and in no way claimed them to be the 100% accurate scope of things.
And, sir, there is a difference between a “Troll” and “trollish behavior”. I do not use such accusatory words lightly (as certain, unnamed others are wont to do).
Again, I re-iterate… I believe you need to reexamine your own personality and your own life before you begin talking about the “problems” other people have. You know, all that stuff about motes and beams, and all that.
SPOOFE, when have I ever denied what I posted? What I have consistently denied is your interpretation of what it meant. And your invalid conclusion that I am in any way prejudiced.
I’m not surprised that you quoted my first two sentences for the 53rd time. Those appear to be the only ones you have read.
I find it ironic that redneck scum like you can have the temerity to call me illiterate. You are misinformed, ill thoughout, and a poor writer. I think you need to clean the shit out of your mind and start putting down cogent concepts, rather than your usual drivel.
That’s the POINT. You CAN’T deny what my interpretation is. My interpretation of what you say is the only possible message I can take away. From the start I’ve been telling you what my impression of your words was, and it wasn’t until many posts (and much stubbornness) later that you finally clarified your position.
That being said, how can YOU deny what MY interpretation is or was? I can interpret your words to mean anything that I choose. My accuracy, of course, may be in question, but I’ve already stated my reasons for why I read your post the way I did. And, as I’ve already stated (twice, now), you’ve finally managed to clarify your words.
In short, you were taken out of context with a very generalized, non-specific post. I trust that both of us can learn to identify such possible problems in the future.
SPOOFE, I didn’t say that I denied what it meant TO YOU. Quit putting words in my mouth for the umpteenth time.
SPOOFE, I clarified my position on my 3rd post, the 2nd being extremely short. But you’re right, it wasn’t until many posts later that you finally settled down enough to listen.
What I probably will take from this is a desire to refrain from posting in the Pit. Too much emotion – not enough logic.
but the reality is that if every republican shit the bed right now, the world would be a better place. It should be fatal. They are just cryptofascist misogynistic, racist, bigoted “Christian” slime. They refuse to acknowledge that we only have one planet amongst us and that it’s stewardship is in need of serious reform. Once they get a little, their paranoia takes over and they hop on the Nazi bandwagon. Fuck all you mean spirited republican ingrates and fuck that shaved chimp you fielded from the backwaters of the south (yes, texas is the south; go there and see how they talk and stay there while you are at it). Values? That little coke sniffing, drunk driving, C student, run-corporations-into-the ground, forhead by dint of electrolysis acephalic is going to bring honor back to the presidency? What kind of sick joke is that? Anyone who voted for him should take a hard look at their cognitive abilities and straighten their shit out.
Gooollllly, Chronolicht, until you came along, the Democrats (ignoring the spat between **hardcore[/b and SPOOFE, which left Plain-Silly Land ten posts ago) were holding the moral high ground. Thanks for leveling the playing field. What a schmuck.
I’ll make it real simple for you. My pa’s a Republican. I will vouch that he isn’t any of the vile things you described him as. He and I disagree on politics, but it’s with respect. And don’t let him me you - even at his advanced age, he’ll kick your ass.
Are there people in the GOP like those you describe? Unfortunately, yes. Equally unfortunate is the fact that the Democrats have people like you.
" Chronolicht, until you came along, the Democrats (ignoring the spat between hardcore[/b and SPOOFE, which
left Plain-Silly Land ten posts ago) were holding the moral high ground. Thanks for leveling the playing field. What a
schmuck.
I’ll make it real simple for you. My pa’s a Republican. I will vouch that he isn’t any of the vile things you described
him as. He and I disagree on politics, but it’s with respect. And don’t let him me you - even at his advanced age, he’ll kick your ass.
Are there people in the GOP like those you describe? Unfortunately, yes. Equally unfortunate is the fact that the
Democrats have people like you."
Spare me the trite platitudes. I am actually not a Democrat in the present partisan sense of the word. I am a democratist. The question should be representative of who? Why should California, who has 68 times as many people as South Dakota, only have 18 times as many electoral votes? This means that if you live in South Dakota, your vote is worth a great deal more than if you live in the Sunshine state. It is bad enough that “Christian” (derisive sneer) podunk should wield such power over the bulk of the population, but they have two senators to each of the large states two as well. This is why we are the laughing stock of the world. It is a sham and a plutocracy. If we were to prohibit soft money and limit campaign duration we might actually begin to hear more than just what sounded good to people. You might be offered some solutions to the rampant social pathologies we face. I am also a pragmatist. I watched both of the speeches of the two candidates at the conventions. Gore sounded more like a new deal Democrat and a populist while Bush had nothing but rhetoric about “strong leadership” and “governing by values not polls”. What the hell is wrong with governing by polls? At least you have pleased a majority. The sick thing is that his values are those of the super rich spoon fed wealthy and he has taken to his role with relish. He has never mastered anything. Gore on the other hand, condescending policy wonk that he is, has sat on numerous committees and built concensus on issues that Bush could scarcely understand.
It helps to understand that the federal govt’ is, in effect, a giant corporation which provides services to everyone. Now, do you people want Gore–someone well versed in the intricacies of managing govt’–or Bush, a smug little coke snorting drunk driving " compassionate" (he takes 15 minutes to decide if someone should die in the chair), lying asshole?
The Republicans are nobody’s friends but the wealthy and they are certainly not friends to your children because their policies will ensure that they inherit nothing but a smoking fucking husk. My regards to your father.
That’s all you have to say after your mincing prancing little tirade in your Stoidela thread? Sunshine, Golden, etc. whatever. The reality is that people from urban areas are more sophisticated and yes, smarter.
“Republicans have no right to live. They should be shot and buried for the sake of the people. We should rely on the
sophisticated democrats who are more enlightened than the simple country folk to make the decisions on who deserves
to live. If you happen to disagree with me, you are either selfish, simple or ignorant.”
Life satires itself better than anyone possibly can. This chump wrote this in jest, but it’s true!
Yoesmitebabe? You are probably a four hundred pound trog with bad teeth who eats lots of canned meat. And a myopic fascist twit to boot. My kinda woman. Whole lotta woman.