Yes, you can. But that isn’t the standard you set for iiandyii, is it? You want him to lambast ALL liberals who do things you don’t like. Well, I want you to lambast ALL conservatives who do things I don’t like, or you’re being an unreasonable twit and not worth talking to. When you’ve achieved whatever you think the correct moral stance is or whatever, based on the totality of your rejection of like-minded people with poor tactics, lemme know.
No? You’re not gonna do that? Then why the fuck should iiandyii? :dubious:
Your use of “inclination” is presumptuous, but it’s your litter analogy that is really misplaced. If anything, a thread is MORE littered (ie cluttered with irrelevant debris) if the posters start addressing bullshit arguments instead of just ignoring them. If you want the threads free of “litter”, you should call for the Mods to DELETE unworthy posts, which I understand is common on other boards. Good luck with that.
Look, the guy is a known quantity, he’s almost a brand name. You buy a pound of hamburger, you are not going to get chopped sirloin. Myself, I gasp with wonder often at his capacity for intellectual gymnastics and the way he can offer the rational in place of the reasonable, to argue that so long as something is possible, it is therefore reasonable.
“Well, objectively considered, a sow’s ear is comprised of various organic elements such as proteins, collagen and others. Silk is also a biological product, composed of elements that are quite similar in many respects. Therefore, the only distinction between a sow’s ear and a silk purse is the configuration and presumed purpose…”
You, I, and Bricker can only control how we post and react. When Bricker ignores or simply glosses over an intelligent point by a poster, in favor of responding to some dumbass insult, it only adds to the problem, not solves it. It’s like a bunch of 2nd graders screaming for attention, when Bricker gives it to them, it only exacerbates the problem. Because he’s now the second grader screaming for attention too.
As a (mostly) thoughtful poster who, I like to think, has some intellectual heft, I despise the masses of 2nd graders who may agree with me politically, and they don’t make it better, they make it worse. In large part because it gives people like Bricker the opportunity to ignore the actual points someone makes, and instead focus on making the idiots look idiotic. Sure, it’s easy pickings for Bricker, he gets to make fools look like fools, but it does nothing to forward any discussion. It just lets him pretend he’s oh so much smarter than the dumb kids in class.
Bricker’s the 4th grader who screams and yells just like the 2nd graders and blames it on the them for making the playground loud. Sure, he could ignore them and go play with the 5th graders, but where’s the fun in that?
The answer seems to be much the same as usual - “I can ignore cheap shots aimed at you - why can’t you ignore cheap shots aimed at you?”
Object strenuously when Bricker does it. Ignore when Der Trihs and Lobohan and ElvisL1ves and BobLibDem and elucidator and Hentor the Barbarian and Fear Itself and iiandyii do it. That’s fair.
Something to note, Bricker isn’t losing the argument in the voter ID thread because he’s being piled on.
He’s losing it because his argument, that “as long as the law was enacted legally, neener neener, and IDs are easy to get for the poor, so who cares if they’re too lazy to get them to vote” is a shitty argument. He’s been shown that there are like ten cases of in-person voter fraud, and millions of people who don’t have an ID.
He advocates voter ID, as enacted by the GOP as the solution to the problem of distorted elections, but the solution as written vastly distorts elections more than the handful of in-person voter fraud cases.
His problem is that Bricker can’t count. He wants to cut off an arm to cure a hangnail.
He has crafted the Bricker Pity Party narrative in order to explain that he’s losing the argument. And he’s taken to lying about other people’s positions, like mine for instance.
Bricker isn’t the victim here, he’s the guy who is rationalizing his losing the fight.
Well, I know what arguments I generally consider bullshitty and I gather Bricker knows what he considers bullshitty (otherwise he wouldn’t be complaining that liberals are failing to police other liberals for bullshitty arguments), but if you want a universal definition, all I can do is suggest you look up lists of common fallacies and form your own opinion.
Its easy to see why he uses it and considers insults a “weapon”. He knows he’s not going to convince us since reality is on our side, so therefore to get his little conservative rocks off, the next best thing he can do is insult liberals.
Somewhere, near the bottom of the list, scribbled in crayon and after the entry about women’s clothes causing rapes is written “Admit I’m wrong and change my beliefs to fit the facts”
I am presuming inclination based on your posts. I’m using this definition: urge to act or feel in a particular way; a disposition or propensity. If you object, I will withdraw the descriptor.
I think the litter analogy is particularly apt. We should all ignore bullshit arguments. However, if we leave the litter unaddressed it brings down the quality of the neighborhood. Maybe people will stop littering on their own but it doesn’t seem to be happening, IMO.
