Dogface and the Liberals of Doom

[mhendo]

*Originally posted by Tusculan *
**I’ve seen him do it whenever he feels his cherised Republican America is under attack. He peeks in the thread, throws in a prickly post, and goes his merry way without every looking back. He’s like a debating guerilla. **

It might interest you to know that Dogface claims to hold both liberals and conservatives in equal contempt, and believes that terms like “moderate” are also deceptive. Of course, this leaves him with little in the way of meaningful political descriptors. Let’s look at his argument, shall we?

Originally posted by Dogface
**The problem with “centrist” or “moderate” as terms is that they presume that the “Left” and the “Right” are somehow two extremes on a continuum that embraces all possible political thought. This is, of course, false. The “Left” and the “Right” greatly encourage this sort of “thinking”, because it forces people to play into their hands. What I see is that the “Left” and the “Right” are fundamentally indistinguishable. They are totalitarian idiot-logs (ideologues). Anything that doesn’t fit their political cult must be re-cast to fit or cast into the Realm of the Demons (aka “the other side”). They routinely and reflexively demonize anyone who fails to worship their particular shibboleths. They believe that they possess the unique keys to history and the unique and exclusive means whereby to produce a Paradise on Earth. Any information that contradicts their dogmas is dismissed as “propaganda”. The one thing that keeps them propped up is the tired old lie that they represent the only “pure” political philosophies and everything else is merely “indecisive”, “waffling”, or some “mixture” of the two.

In essence, if one examines their methods, one sees that they are not the two ends of the only possible “political spectrum”. Instead, they are merely two faces of the same coin, sharing the same fundamental core with each other. But we don’t need spend that political wooden nickel.

Other political mindsets can exist than “Left”, “Right” and “not Left or Right”. I mean, after all, isn’t this just another re-use of “Christendom” vs. “Infidels”, with both the “Left” and the “Right” casting themselves as Christendom?

I propose that the term “Sane”, “Reasonable”, or “Civilized” be used to describe people who reject the “Left” vs. “Right” false dilemma.**

Presumably our hero puts himself into the category of “Sane,” “Reasonable,” or “Civilized.”

And you can see by his formula, expressed in this thread and this one, that he is eminently sane and reasonable:

Originally posted by Dogface
Liberal == conservative == totalitarian

In another thread, we see our hero criticizing the very behavior that characterizes his own posts. And, of course, once again it’s liberals that are to blame:

Originally posted by Dogface
It has been my experience that liberals are far more likely to resort to name-calling and ad hominem attacks than are conservatives. It’s usually on the order of “you are stupid” or “you believe that because you are stupid”.

Well, if that’s true, i guess i’ve been too hard on Dogface. It’s obvious that he really is a liberal.

[minty_green]

Originally posted by Dogface
It has been my experience that liberals are far more likely to resort to name-calling and ad hominem attacks than are conservatives. It’s usually on the order of “you are stupid” or “you believe that because you are stupid”.

That must be why the jerk just labeled me “some idiot” in a GD thread. But what’s really amusing is that he doesn’t even know what a “general election” is. What a schmuck.

[mhendo]

*Originally posted by minty green *
**That must be why the jerk just labeled me “some idiot” in a GD thread. But what’s really amusing is that he doesn’t even know what a “general election” is. What a schmuck. **

I assume you saw my post above, minty, regarding his confusion (or deliberate lying) over the electoral college and the popular vote?

Schmuck, indeed.

[minty_green]

Sure, I saw that too. It’s just that the claim about liberals being such nasty name-callers was funnier in the context of his own personal name-calling.

[Trinopus]

When is it going to be Brutus’ turn for a pitting?

(When is it going to be mine?)

Trinopus

[Giraffe]

*Originally posted by Trinopus *
When is it going to be Brutus’ turn for a pitting?

There’s really no point to pitting Brutus. No one really pays attention to what he says, and calling him stupid is just too obvious to be that interesting. It’s like calling the sky blue.

blah blah blah stupid liberals blah blah blah stupid french people blah blah blah yeah, but Clinton blah blah blah liberals bad blah blah blah stupid UN blah blah blah

[Spavined_Gelding]

The basic problem here, I am convinced, is that we are dealing with a minor player in a series of protegees of the departed New Jersey actuary. For good or ill none of them measure up to the sheer immobility and pig headedness of their master. Being unable to hunker down like a wart hog perused by leopards and defy all comers in the true retired actuary style, the want-t-bees have to resort to fancy foot work, denial, anger and slinking off into the bushes. There is a guy presently advocating a discredited reading of the Internal Revenue Code over in Great Debates with an audacity that would make the master proud.

Out friend Dog’s Breath, or what ever his name is, is simply not sufficiently toughened by battle or equipped with enough just plain gall to pull it off in the style we have all become use to and long to see again, much as we long for the return of Richard Nixon because it was so satisfying to hate him. Once our friend Dog’s Breath, or what ever his name is, gets a few honest fights under his belt, develops a jab and a left hook to replace his all too predictable right handed hay maker and bothers to at least land in the vicinity of a verifiable fact his posting may become worth responding to.

At this point, “get away, kid, you bother me,” is a sufficient recognition that he is hanging around the outskirts of the camp snatching up scraps of offal.

[Lissa]

*Originally posted by Spavined Gelding *
** At this point, “get away, kid, you bother me,” is a sufficient recognition that he is hanging around the outskirts of the camp snatching up scraps of offal. **

I imagine he was one of those kids who would run up to where the jocks were hanging out, shout an insult, then run like hell.

[Brutus]

*Originally posted by Trinopus *
**When is it going to be Brutus’ turn for a pitting?

(When is it going to be mine?)

Trinopus **

If you are going to intimate that I should be Pitted, at least have the balls to do so yourself.

[cheddarsnax]

Dogface, apparently undeterred by my totally awesome rant (see above), recently posted this gem in reference to protestors being kept away from President Bush (link):

It’s beyond shitty. It stinks so bad it could be a liberal policy. Indeed, it smacks a great deal of the sort of PC speech code rubbish that I had to deal with in college. Certain attitudes were permissable and others had to be hidden away from public view.

GWBush could not be more blatantly liberal if he tried with this policy. It screams “speech code” like a siren.

Geez, Dogface! First, get over college. Look, I’m sorry you had to deal with those commie socialist neo-fascists. I really am. But you need to stop referring to it in every other post. Second, enough with your vendetta against the left. It’s old. Really old. If you’re going to present a cogent argument, post away. But if your only reason for wandering into Great Debates is to post lame anti-liberal drive bys, please contact an administrator and ask that your account be terminated. Then go sit in the corner and think about what you’ve done, ya dirty sack of donkey shit.

[cheddarsnax]

What is a fascist? I’ve been wondering for quite some time. Fortunately, Dogface has provided a simple explanation:

No, anything that is fascist or crypto-fascist either is or is indistinguishable from being liberal.

Liberals, conservatives, all of them are totalitarian and fascist.

Everyone is a fascist. Everyone except Dogface.

Dogface on censorship:

That depends upon whether or not one is a nutcase loonybin paranoid leftist or not, I would say. What I’ve found is that “censor” in the USA means “disagree with the prejudices of a few elitist, narrow-minded, leftist, self-appointed ‘experts’” more often than not.

Really, I can’t think of anything to say to this. Well, there is one thing. Dogface, take your lunatic rants to the Pit, where they belong. Your posts are not great, and you are not debating. If you believe you are, you’re deluding yourself. Snap out of it.

To the rest of those reading this thread, this will likely be my last collection of Dogface posts. It’s easier to just search under his username a week back in GD.

Oh… and don’t think I haven’t noticed that his ignorance goes both ways. Dogface often condemns conservatives along with liberals, and it’s just as ridiculous then, what with the lack of fascism among most SDMB conservatives.

[rjung]

Whenever I see the handle Dogface, I conclude that he must have chosen it because Dogbutt was already taken.