Is this the real reason we are at war? Maybe not, but it sure looks bad...

Great Debates
161

It is a commonplace among nations, when diplomatic relations have been severed, for a nuetral party to serve as an “interest office”, to relay information that might not otherwise pass. For the moment, I will serve that function for the People’s Republic of Stoid.

She is of the opinion that some of the posters to this board have repeatedly violated any presumed standards of argumentive courtesy, and refuses to recognize those posters directly. In this, she intends to preserve her dignity.

She has a point.

I have directly, and with rather unaccostomed sincerity, discussed this with Scylla. I am advised by him that I have merely confused rhetorical flourishes with unbecoming sarcasm. Presumably, this is what he means when he refers to my opinions as “diarhhea”. Very droll.

Now comes Brother Milo, to forcefully point out that Stoid has the audacity, the sheer gall, to express appreciation for the expressed support of Jabe, and yet refused to directly answer his own blisteringly cogent ripostes (as he would have it). Further, he congratulates himself for his tolerance in not bringing the Mods (peace be on thier names!} to bear on her outrageous conduct.

This is, as Mr. Clemens has it, “a chestnut”.

Milo, surely you will agree that it is perfectly normal and polite, even somewhat obligatory, to acknowledge a gracious statement of support and approval. Members of your own support group have expended considerable effort in mutual admiration. Indeed, you yourself must find it difficult to keep up with returning appreciations for the innumerable kudos and boquets of admiration thrown your way.

I disagree with her only this far: that her dignity was never under threat from the much feared crew of the Dread Ship Polliwog. Much like myself: if you imagine that a cannonade of BB’s will crumble the Rock of Gibralter, well, have at it.

If you find this enlightening, if it causes you to re-examine your behavior, then I have far exceeded my poor expectations. If not, no harm done.

162

elucidator:

**
Isn’t the idea of starting a Great Debate to say, “Here is my position; here are some reasons why I feel that way; if you disagree with me, state your position and why you feel that way, and I’ll tell you why you’re wrong (or I’m more right than you), or I’ll concede to your points if they are more correct than mine?”

Stoid stated a position. It very quickly had holes poked in it from all sides. She then tried to recast and tone down her position several times, all the while refusing to answer very specific questions from those with a differing viewpoint.

**
Quite the contrary, my always-insulting old buddy. Stoid is now doing nothing except expressing appreciation to those who agree with her. She has made non-entities anyone who wishes to engage her on the flaws in her premises.

Give me Wildest Bill any day.

Where do I say my ideas on this subject are “blisteringly cogent?” Hell, I’m begging her to tell me why they’re not, with specificity!

**
If that’s all you are doing, and you are not answering any specific questions posed to you, you are not debating.

**
Ah, elucidator. You know, once I figured you out, I really kind of started enjoying your posts.

Don’t go changin’.

163

elucidator:

Actually, I really couldn’t care less. It’s not a personal issue to me. If I see ignorant and insupportable claptrap being posted, I’ll treat it as such.

Methinks the claim of persecution is disingenuous at best, and a mere excuse to avoid having to defend the indefensible.

I don’t like having my ass handed to me in a debate either, but the solution isn’t to claim persecution. The solution is not to post utter crap with the expectation that it will be greeted as dogma.

This is, after all a debating forum. We have other forums for posting opinion, you know? If one doesn’t wish to engage in debate one might be advised to visit there. I especially don’t feel that I need to engage in debate according to anybody’s else’s rules other than those of the forum I’m participating, nor do I feel any compelling need to be especially gentle when refuting prejudiced and damn near bigoted ignorant bullshit.

I call them like I see them, and I debate them like I see them. Nothing personal, as you’ll notice we’re squarely in the same camp in the ongoing Hillary debate.

I certainly don’t have any propblem with Stoid not addressing me. That’s her perogative.

At any rate, if you can’t handle the heat, perhaps you shouldn’t sail the Spanish Main… or something.

164

Once again:

Has anyone accused anyone of being unpatriotic?

A traitor?

Those were in the rules set down in the OP.

Also:

Has anyone dismissed the ideas espoused in the OP solely because of who was making them (“the left wing”)?

(This was also a rule.)

Perhaps one, maybe two. And who knows what’s truly in another’s heart? But I’d say plenty of people have been as fair as one reasonably can, have at least tried to argue the points on their own merits (or lack thereof). These initial arguments were ignored on the following basis:

They were dismissed because of who was making them.

That should ring some kind of bell.

This is part and parcel of what I have always tried to take issue with in this post. The presumption in the OP that, if I disagree with it, I am predisposed to calling you a traitor or saying you are unpatriotic, that I am blindly writing off opinions because they come from the left wing, and that I don’t question authority.

In short, that unless I agree, I am both stupid and unfair.

If you think that’s a wee bit oversensitive, and that I’m reading a lot into this, I’d probably agree with you. If you told me to grow up and suck it up, I’d say you’re right, I should.

I’d also tell you to go look in a mirror.

165

To be fair, this is the right forum for witnessing. I just wish Stoid would label it as such.

166

and my aforementioned personal favorite accolade “diarrhea”

If all of this lies within the boundary of civil debate, what pray lies outside it? The suggestion that a poster suffers STD’s as a result of hamster stuffing? A succinct and pithy “Jo Mamma!”?

No doubt, as you say. you are impelled to such by your own rigorous personal honesty and integrity. Pray remember that lesser beings oftimes cringe from the light of such relentless clarity, and perhaps grant the charity that behooves one who bestrides the SDMB like a colossus.

Blacksheep, I am uncertain as to the thrust of your post. Have you anyone in mind? I have taken your last suggestion to heart, and went straight to my mirror. It has brightened my day, to glance upon my features and be reminded that one is in rather good form, for one who is on the very threshold of late maturity.

If only the hot young babes I meet wouldn’t call me “Sir”.

167

No, elucidator, it’s pretty clear you haven’t taken a thing to heart.

Keep doing it, though. You seem to be having fun, and honestly, you do a much better job of proving my point than I have.

168

This thread is fun!
[b[Stoid**, you should read Harry Turtledove’s Great War trilogy. It’s an alternate history of World War I fought in North America between the United States and the Confederacy, which had won its independence back in the 1860s. In the series, the Socialist Party, being officially pacifist and dedicated to preserving the class struggle against capitalism, has protested the prosecution of the war
by the Democrats. There is a line from the third book, Breakthroughs, you should take to heart.

“If you run a campaign that doesn’t do anything but shout ‘They’re tricking you!’ over and over, you’re going to lose…right now, anyhow, nationalism is stronger than class solidarity.” pp. 394-395.

Shiver me timbers, me hearties, arrr.

169

Elucidator:

Arrrr,

boo-fucking hoo!

Die on your feet like a man ya scalliwag, and quit yer blubberin’ and complainin’!

Yer ship is sunk. Had yer arguments not been fer crap it might’ve gone differently, but now it’s you and Stoid who’s walking the plank. Cryin’ ain’t gonna change that, ya lost fair and square, and methinks this is gettin’ a whee bit pathetic.

As I said before, The Dread Pirate Scylla takes no prisoners.

Think on that before ye angle tangle with the good ship “Reality” while she’s flyin’ the Skull and Crossbones.

…And now it’s time for ya to walk the plank. Try and do so with a little dignity, and don’t make me order Milo to throw ya in…

In any event, have a nice swim.

170

::wanders in::

::views elucidator and Scylla bashing each other over the head with 2x4’s while Stoid looks on with approval::

::wanders back out::

171

Quote Stoid 1:
First, did I say Congress does not do their job? Their job is to do what we want them to, how many times am I going to have to go over this?

Quote Stoid 2:
As to Congress keeping an eye, Congress does what Congress thinks will get Congress re-elected. If they think that the country wants them to let Dubya do whatever he wants, they’ll let him do it. That would be the heart of my point: we mustn’t let this fear of terrorism make us blind.

With approval ratings as high as 90% in some polls, Congress got the message: Rubber Stamp what Bush wants right now because we have faith in him and want things to happen quickly. Congress represented the people even when “rubber stamping”, as you put it.

SPEED is of the essence in these milestons times in America, and Congress recognizes that. It seems to be “rubberstamping”, which is just your spin on saying that Congress is acting fast on behalf of whom they represent, and that just means the President gets things wizzed through, at a time when they should be wizzed through.

The fat-ass Congressmen wouldn’t rubberstamp a whole number of things if it was going to offend who they represent - Not en masse anyway - maybe one rep would rubberstamp something here ‘n’ there. When rubberstamping is done en masse, it’s because they know DAMN well the message and universal support given to the President by the people they represent. I.E. The MAJORITY of the people they represent.

So, your concern that rubberstamping what Dubya wants means that congress is not “watching” over him really contradicts the responsibility of congress to represent the people.

When the people want him watched more closely, and it’ll happen when times get tougher, watch the partisonship surface…and then I expect you to put the spin on the scenario as “Congress is finally watching the Pres”.

I know Clinton was soooooo picked on. Poor Bastard.

172

Well, I tried. She was right, I was wrong. We’ll do it your way.

Silly-ass

Arrrr, foc’sle yer mainsail, keelhaul the bos’n mate, and blow me, uh, down.

173

[Moderator Hat ON]

Ok, everybody, take it down a notch. This is supposed to be Great Debates, not third-grade recess.

[Moderator Hat OFF]

174

Oh, OK, Miss Gaudere.

(hangs head, kicks rock )

        [sub](But he started it!)[/sub]

(Jeeez, one more detention and I’m on special double secret probation)

175

Arrr, I be havin’ great fun dispelling these fallacious myths, and am filled with good will to one and all.

176

Well, at least you finally (sort of) see that you were not understanding me.

I absolutely disagree. Speed for what? The White House was insisting that the anti-terrorism bill that Ashcroft presented be pushed through in 48 hours. Why? What good would that have done? The only reason speed was necessary was to keep the Congress from actually reading the dang thing.

Fortunately, Congress didn’t fail us there, they didn’t buy it.

I think SPEED is deadly in a situation like this. Reacting in the heat of anger and fear is foolish. So far the White House has been more restrained and patient than I expected.

But again, reacting in the heat of pain and fear and rage, whether it’s the populace’s or the Congress’ is unwise. My point has been…okay, we’re getting some distance from 9-11, let’s get back in touch with a little bit of our cynicism. It’s healthy. All this rah-rah-rah, we’ve-been-hurt-so whatever-the-gummint-wants-to-do-is-groovy-by-us is not wise. Our unity in the face of these attacks is ripe for exploitation.

Which has been proven already, not only by that bill which thankfully ended up being picked apart and toned down, but by the call to pass the energy bill right away because of the attacks…which was just disgusting opportunism, and it took all of 14 days to surface.

Stoid

PS: I didn’t miss all the mishegas above and I wrote a long and detailed response to it. But then I realized what a waste of time it was and how not interested I am in publicly dragging this crap around. Anyone who is sincerely interested in my point of view can write to me and I’ll email it to you privately.

177

Stoid said:

Do you think that Ashcroft actually thought he could “trick” Congress into somehow not reading a bill before they signed it?

If so, what do you suppose is in that Bill (which is available online, I understand) that he was trying to hide?

If you think that they were trying to sneak something in there that nobody would notice (which on the face of it seems pretty ridiculous,) how about citing it?

This is silly. Not only did they pass the bill, they gave about twice as much money as was actually asked for. I’d say that’s “buying” it, wouldn’t you?

Well, I for one am pleased the passengers of the hijacked third plane didn’t share your perspective in thinking that they had all the time in the world to bandy about the situation.

Speed is important for a number of large and obvious reasons, among which are:

  1. Getting the money equiptment and resources to conduct relief efforts in NYC (there was a little bit of a mess that needed attending to.)

  2. Keeping several airlines from going bankrupt in the immediate wake of the disaster.

  3. Beginning to move equiptment and personnel in place for potential military operations.

  4. Authorizing funds to call up reservists.

  5. Mobilizing intelligence

  6. Paying for the higher expense of an increased and active military alert to provide homeland defense (this needed to start immediately.)

  7. Getting the money for the absolutely tremendous law enforcement mobilization and investigation that had already begun (you’ll recall that time was of the essence as they managed to intercept a couple of terrorists looking to board a plane with weapons, the very day the airports reopened.) I for one am thankful that they didn’t sit around and talk about it, but actually went to work.

  8. Pay for increased security both domestically and abroad.

And numerous other reasons as well. All those things needed to be done immediately, and they were all time sensitive, and they all cost money.

You will note that those things are all good common sense initiatives in the face of the crises, none of which involves the anger based response you seem to suggest was the basis for the hastiness of the bill. Actually, nothing could be further from the truth. Our response was and has been, coldly and carefully considered.

178

As regards:

Actually, I did not see any arguments that were dismissed without first being blown out of the water. (Arrrr, arrr, mizzen the yardarms and back the stuns’ls, ye scurvy swab.)

The problem being, the left in America has to pick its shots better. The more often they accuse Bush and Co. of the most egregious sins based on non-existent evidence, the more likely we are to dismiss what they say as all equally unworthy of serious attention.

Then, when Bush/Nixon/Clinton/Gore/Millard Fillmore are really up to no good, and the loyal opposition starts jumping up and down and pointing to the crime and trying to warn everybody, the response is likely to be ‘What, again?’ and casual dismissal. And that would be a Bad Thing.

Stoid - remember how annoying it was when Clinton took office, and some people weren’t even going to let him have a few days to get settled before they started in on him? And remember how nasty it was to have all this partisan crapola distract us from the real issues that faced us? And remember how Clinton could have achieved something significant if he hadn’t had to deal with all the scandals during his administration?

That’s how we feel now.

Bush is doing the best he can in a very difficult situation. He needs and deserves our support. The situation in the world has taken a turn for the worse, and it’s important that the current administration not be distracted by people throwing dust in the air, calling it smoke, and screaming that Bush has set things on fire.

If you have significant evidence of wrong doing, then present it. Until then - don’t bother the grown ups, dear, they’re busy.

Regards,
Shodan

179

You’ve kind of quoted me here, Shodan, but you’ve misinterpreted me.

My point was never that it was the pirates who did the initial dismissing.

Just the opposite. And I think they turned to a life at sea when they saw their points being ignored again and again.

The logic being, well, if I’m to be ignored as a jerk no matter what I do or say, I might as well try to have fun.

180

Jeez, Shodan, you were doing so well, right up to the very last and then…

Just couldn’t help it, huh?

Reminds me of a story. Parish priest did his priest thing for years, retired, then was put back in harness due to a shortage of available priests. His duties were cut down, he only listened to confession, which he did for a further 15 years, till he finally got some relief troops in. He was asked about what he had learned listening to about 50 years of confessions:

“There are no grown-ups” he replied.