If I recall correctly Shodan actually co-opted the phrase. I seem to remember that it was used against the conservative members of the board first. He certainly didn’t invent it, in any event.
That was Al Gore.
It is from Casablanca - "“Round up the usual suspects”.
Regards,
Shodan
Ah…thanks. 
Just wanted to clarify that. It’s one of those stock phrases that I sort of picked up here…I don’t recall anyone ever using it on any of the other boards I frequent. Of course, most of those boards are either technical or games oriented, so maybe not a big surprise.
-XT
So, that’s just “around here”? Other places you put forth your ideas, people pay rapt and respectful attention? Broken only by small gasps of admiration?
AWESOME snark Mr. Liberal. AWESOME.
Oh, please. Surely you can do better than that! Come on, let’s see some other names. Who else are you willing to name as a “Usual Suspect”? Or are you just too much of a coward to commit yourself?
I want you to define this term you use in every fucking political thread you poke your head into (usually right before you slink out when you get your ass handed to you). So let’s hear it- who ARE the Usual Suspects?
'Cause, you see, this thread is pitting the exaggeration of the partisan-ness of the board. Your casual dismissal of everyone you disagree with as a “Usual Suspect” is just a cop-out… so, please, let’s see that list of names, Senator McCarthy.
Well, that and “We have always been at war with Eastasia”. He’s been awfully fond of that one lately, no matter the context.
As for the “last nail” problem, Shodan, Sam Stone, and Bricker help each other out.
Well, because you said this -
and told us all to cut it out. My question is, why do I need to cut it out? Why don’t you just ignore it like I am supposed to ignore the nasties?
As I mentioned, I do not ignore reasoned debate and only do snark. The Usual Suspects (hi, Lightnin’!) say that I do, but that is merely because they can’t bear to read anything that they might disagree with.
I don’t think it is hyperbolic (within the limits of debate within the various forums) to describe some Dopers as the Usual Suspects, meaning a group that as a whole generally forswears reasonable debate in favor of horseshit. Airman Doors has mentioned a few of them. And as Malthus says, it is not possible to mention religion without one or another of the atheist assholes show up to issue blanket insults against religious believers, and several other atheist assholes to chime in with agreement. You cannot mention abortion without Der Trihs showing up to spout hate speech at anyone who disagrees with him in the slightest. There is a sizeable contingent on the SDMB who base their political beliefs on the notion that anyone who is not as liberal as they are must necessarily be a bad person. And make it a point to say so, over and over again.
Now, it is not the case that I only respond to the above-named jackholes. But on some topics, the majority of the responses are going to be a bullshit barrage. This is not affected by how the non-liberals react - it is pretty much automatic.
Yet it bothers you when I or another points out that a double standard is being employed (as it was in the Democrats Lying thread that Starving Artist mentioned). I posted reasonably in that thread. To no one’s surprise, least of all mine, the Usual Suspects responded with the usual barrage of No True Scotsman arguments, tu quoques, and double standards. Falling back on the only other thing they have to offer - “Bush Lied About Iraq”.
Gosh, when has that ever happened?
And here, I am sorry to say, you lost me altogether.
If I meant “all”, I would say “all”. If I mean “some”, I say “some”. If I explicitly say one thing and you say, “Well, he really means” something else, you lose my sympathy entirely.
If you can’t respond to what I say instead of what you wish I said, then you are going to have a much more unfortunate effect on the debate than any amount of “Republicans suck eggs”.
Regards,
Shodan
Holy shit. Dude, you post as much horsehit as debate tactics than than anybody in your little pet group. I point to your retarded line of “We’ve alsways been at war with Eastasia” comments and the eye-rolly “No, ACORN didn’t do anything wrong so don’t ask about it” cracks.
I agree with this Pitting. The population of the Dope does lean left, but there are still a number of “conservatives” who can explain their side of things well enough. Props to them for being outnumbered, but some people take it so far as an excuse, and that’s the idea being Pitted.
There are of course the partisan mixups in every thread, but it has some back and forth to it. Not so much of a chorus shouting down one person every time. I’ve learned to read between the sniping of the regulars to find the actual debates that take place. I have no personal interest in convincing anyone else of my opinions. I’m just looking for more information from varying sources. And laughs.
The Dope displays a huge variety of ideas. I browse political blogs, and most tell one side of The Stories of the Day. I haven’t found any that are as broad as SDMB in general. I can go to liberal or conservative blogs, and I don’t really find many shocking, unheard-of stories that SDMB missed. The discussion on those blogs tends to be far more one-sided and rude than the discussion here.
SHODAN has never elevated the tenor of a debate. He goes straight into snark and insult ,then claims like responses are being uncivil to him. It he just stuck to facts expressed his stance like an adult , the level of discourse would be elevated. But ,he argues like a teenager. Put downs and insults will not win a debate.
That’s a good point. Liberal or conservative, foreign or domestic, good or evil, there is always somebody arguing the other side of each debate here.
There was also a movie by that title, which by contrast featured a smart guy pretending to be a dimwit, who had everybody fooled…
It was me. Time to cast aside false modesty, and set the record straight. It was me. Inspired by the movie of the same name? Don’t recall, doubt it, it was a handy cliche long before that flick hit the screen. It was used by me several times, by other like-minded a few times, then blatantly stolen by Shodan, which contaminated it beyond any usefulness.
Not to suggest that I’m above stealing a line, or simply neglecting to offer credit where due. Of course not, I’m utterly shameless, no better than the next girl on the street. But not this time. It was me. In the words of the evangelist Aimee Semple McPherson, that’s my story, boys, and I’m sticking to it.
Didn’t Twain have a widely quoted aphorism about stealing stuff?
Oh yes, here it is:
Funny you should mention that. Twain was a bit of the Yogi Berra of his time, things were attributed to him simply on that basis of being funny. For instance, the line about “lies, damned lies and statistics” was coined by Benjamin Disraeli. He also didn’t say “Wagner’s music is better than it sounds”, and quite a few others.
The crowning irony is that Twain was a tireless promoter of fellow humorists, esp. the unjustly forgotten Petroleum V. Nasby. He was aways quick to offer a favorable review, or to repeat a “good one” with proper attribution. Didn’t matter, when the public at large heard a good quip, they assumed it was Twain.
Indeed.
So, where were the 9/11 perps safely based, again?
I don’t care about being outnumbered, I can handle that. I don’t care that reasonable people can have reasonable disagreements, I can handle that too. I don’t even care that I may at times be wrong, because being wrong sometimes is how you learn.
What I DO care about is when I post something and rather than having it met with well-reasoned arguments it is met with snark.
An example: gun-related threads. Someone posts something, perhaps it is a reasonable question asked innocently and perhaps not, it doesn’t matter. I trouble myself to put down something about the laws of the United States and why I as a gun owner feel the way that I do. So far so good, right? That is, until 5 posts later Diogenes posts about our “penis compensators”, DanBlather tells us how we stroke our weapons in anticipation of being able to kill someone, and elucidator chimes in with his first of 20 content-free posts that do nothing but derail the thread.
Then BobLibDem, ElvisL1ves and Czarcasm enter with their posts on how there is no individual right to keep and bear a firearm in spite of the Heller decision in the Supreme Court last year. By then I am so sick of typing, trying to answer the question that was asked but instead fighting mountains of nonsense, that I give up. Every so often I make it through a few pages whenever I set my jaw and feel like fighting, but that is so rare anymore that I leave it to people like ExTank, someone who doesn’t mind it.
This pattern is so repetitive that we even have a meta-joke about how the thread is going to turn into Gun-Rights Debate #8675309. It happens every time, with the same pattern and the same people. And for the same reason, too. Politics. It always comes down to politics. Liberals v. Conservatives. But one side is invariably the “aggressor”, as it were, the side that lights the fuse with insults and innuendos. It’s not the erstwhile Conservatives, I can tell you that.
It doesn’t have to be that way. But because it is, it chases people away until all that is left is combatants calling each other names. Why would I want to be a part of that?
And the worst part of it all is that the above is just one of many topics that play out exactly the same way, which further discourages participation to the point that it becomes an echo chamber, disrupted only by a few people that don’t mind getting beat down, like Shodan and Bricker.
You want reasonable conversation? Fine. I will participate until the first insult flies from either party to the debate. After that I’m through. I don’t have the stomach for it anymore.
Um…in your first post you cited various things which did not address the OP’s request for lies specifically told by prominent Democrats (and ended with a pre-emptive accusation of “No True Scotsman arguments, tu quoques, and double standards” that weren’t in evidence). Your second post was similarly unconstructive, claiming that CBS counted as “prominent Democrats”. And then there was your third post:
I guess that’s one definition of “posting reasonably”. Because, you know, it’s other people’s fault that your examples weren’t on topic.
I’m not saying that thread didn’t descend into idiocy (the retread of the Palin “VP runs the Senate” debate and the racist covenant hijack really didn’t need to happen) but your contributions were far from reasonable.
The sad thing is that I’ve seen you post coherent, intelligent, interesting things on this board on several occasions. Since the election, however, you seem to prefer to throw your toys out of the buggy on every possible occasion, claiming that the other side only disagrees with you out of sheer partisanship and not because you might just possibly occasionally be wrong.
What a waste.