# More SDMB arguments I'm sick of **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [July 28, 2010, 5:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-sdmb-arguments-im-sick-of/548274 "2010-07-28T05:43:43Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Rand\_Rover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/db5fbb/32.png) [@Rand\_Rover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rand_Rover)\ **Post date:** [July 28, 2010, 9:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-sdmb-arguments-im-sick-of/548274/61 "2010-07-28T21:46:46Z")
FWIW, I’m happy when a liberal douche gets ass cancer or whatever. I like it when bad things happen to bad people. So, Shodan, I’m doing my part to balance out the equation. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [July 28, 2010, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-sdmb-arguments-im-sick-of/548274/62 "2010-07-28T21:50:14Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > I mean respecting people, even if they are different from you. As I explained in my earlier post, this is not what “tolerance” means. > [@](#): > > That seems to be a concept that liberals on the SDMB have a great deal more trouble with than the conservatives here. It never fails - some liberal dies or encounters some calamity, like Elizabeth Edwards’ cancer or Ted Kennedy and his brain tumor or whatever. We get the conservatives like **Bricker** and **Mr. Moto** and **Sarahfeena** and so on all chiming that “we disagree with him, but don’t wish him any ill based on that”. And conservatives like **ralph124c** or **Lonesome Polecat** gloating over his death. > [@](#): > > But when Tony Snow gets colon cancer, the Usual Suspects all chime in with “I hope he dies and it’s painful”. Purely because he is a Republican. And you get liberals like **Robot Arm** and **joebuck20** saying that as much as they disagree with the guy, they don’t want him to suffer and hope he recovers. ---
**Author:** ![Rilchiam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/2bfe46/32.png) [@Rilchiam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rilchiam)\ **Post date:** [July 28, 2010, 10:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-sdmb-arguments-im-sick-of/548274/63 "2010-07-28T22:51:02Z")
> [@A Monkey With a Gun](#): > > And then there’s the following in a thread about bullshit news media coverage of Brad Pitt’s [daughter](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=572380) > > > [@PrettyVacant](#): > > > > In other news, the USA killed 42 civilians in Afghanistan last week which the US military tried to keep quiet. Many were around the age of Ms Pitt. > > Now where the _fuck_ did that come from?! Don’t these idiots have a summit to protest or something? No, I think that was in the spirit of the OP. Brad Pitt’s daughter’s clothing choices is a stupid thing to report on. Civilian deaths in Afghanistan is not a stupid thing to report on. (Dunno about many of the civilians being three years old though – was it a school or a hospital or something?) ---
**Author:** ![Rilchiam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/2bfe46/32.png) [@Rilchiam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rilchiam)\ **Post date:** [July 28, 2010, 10:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-sdmb-arguments-im-sick-of/548274/64 "2010-07-28T22:56:17Z")
> [@Mississippienne](#): > > “You think YOU have problems? Be grateful you’re not one of the billions of people on Earth who live on a dollar a day in a shithole of a country!” > > This one is trotted out when someone posts about some difficulty they’re having in their lives. It’s stupid because perhaps the poster \*is \*deeply grateful they don’t live in a shithole Third World country somewhere and because it does absolutely fuck all to actually help the poster, or anyone else with similar problems who might be reading the thread for ideas. The Dopers who fling this poo-statement at their fellow Dopers do so claiming they’re giving them ‘perspective’, when what they’re really doing is saying ‘I don’t care about your problems, so therefore you should feel ashamed of caring about your problems!’ Oh, I know. Like in the gifts-are-for-kids thread, the OP was told that even if she wasn’t going to get any Christmas gifts at all, from anyone, even her parents, she should be glad she at least had a family and could spend Christmas with them. Which I daresay she kept **telling** herself. It’s like as long as you have air, water, and something to keep the elements out, you’re not allowed to want, or even be wistful for, anything else. ---
**Author:** ![MaxTheVool](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9fc29f/32.png) [@MaxTheVool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MaxTheVool)\ **Post date:** [July 28, 2010, 11:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-sdmb-arguments-im-sick-of/548274/65 "2010-07-28T23:39:07Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > FWIW, I’m happy when a liberal douche gets ass cancer or whatever. I like it when bad things happen to bad people. So, Shodan, I’m doing my part to balance out the equation. The question, though, is there a difference in your mind between “liberal douche” and “liberal”? ---
**Author:** ![kidneyfailure](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/9f8e36/32.png) [@kidneyfailure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kidneyfailure)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2010, 12:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-sdmb-arguments-im-sick-of/548274/66 "2010-07-29T00:00:22Z")
> [@The\_Second\_Stone](#): > > Glenn Beck has been diagnosed with macular dystrophy, which may cause him to lose some vision. I’m usually not one to laugh at the misfortune of others, but this is a guy who called a rival’s wife and mocked her miscarriage on the air. This piece of shit deserves everything he’s getting. ---
**Author:** ![digs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/digs/32/14889_2.png) [@digs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/digs)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2010, 12:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-sdmb-arguments-im-sick-of/548274/67 "2010-07-29T00:03:23Z")
> [@The\_Second\_Stone](#): > > Glenn Beck has been diagnosed with macular dystrophy, which may cause him to lose some vision. Seriously? Whoa. This just stopped me in my tracks. And I sobered up from my gleeful hatred of Faux-‘Newscasters’, and I said a quick prayer for the guy and his family. \*\*In your face, Fundies! A pro-choice, anti-gun Obama-worker loves Jesus! Ha! Wrap your shriveled hate-dessicated minds around _that_.\*\* ---
**Author:** ![The\_Second\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@The\_Second\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Second_Stone)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2010, 12:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-sdmb-arguments-im-sick-of/548274/68 "2010-07-29T00:11:14Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > > [@The\_Second\_Stone](#): > > > > Bennett certainly was a hypocrite for gambling away at least 8 million dollars because he set himself up as a moral arbiter and general scold of general weaknesses. He wrote books on morals and virtues. The fact that he never mentioned gambling in his list of weaknesses only indicates that he knew he was screwing his family out of his hard earned money through such a weakness and wanted to save gambling from his list to protect himself from scolding by family and the public when they found out. > > No, it indicates that he didn’t regard gambling as immoral or a weakness. > > I’m sure he would have regarded leaving his family in dire financial straits as a moral failing … but then, he didn’t do that. > > You’re doing precisely what the OP complains of: ascribing motives to him based on others’ statements, not his. Nope. He was a general scold, arguing for a general return to morality and virtue. He made no exception for the various vices that he didn’t bother to mention that are generally accepted as vices. Gambling at all, even in small amounts, is a traditional vice. Gambling enough money to feed all of Haiti for a year is vice. That he avoided mentioning gambling when he is decrying all traditional vices for the sole purpose of saying he is not a hypocrite if and when he is finally caught makes him inappropriate to be a general purpose scold. All of us have vices, that is why we normally leave scolding of the sort that Bennett was making lots of money off of and then gambling it away to institutions so that the individual member’s vices don’t make the message hypocritical and hilarious. St. Augustine traditionally used this as pointing out that being baptized by the Church got one past the sinning state of the potentially corrupt priest. Bennett set himself up as an institution on morality and virtue. His lack of traditional virtue and the extent of his vice make it hypocritical and ridiculous, inviting the public to treat all exhortations to virtue as a sick Elmer Gantry joke, which is how Bennett is now viewed. That is not to say that you did not make a noble effort on Bennett’s behalf, as Bennett did himself. But the intellectual dishonesty of putting together a plausible syllogism that pissing away $8 million plus is not a vice and hypocrisy coming from someone who claims general virtuousness, is simply a further warning that those who make such arguments make them not out of a desire to show humility and help fellow sinners, but because there is a buck to be made out of it. So much less money is being made by Bennett now that it is actually encouraging to know that so much of the public is disgusted by his hypocrisy. Even as a technical point, he always railed against excess, immoderation and addiction. ---
**Author:** ![Rand\_Rover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/db5fbb/32.png) [@Rand\_Rover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rand_Rover)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2010, 12:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-sdmb-arguments-im-sick-of/548274/69 "2010-07-29T00:27:03Z")
> [@MaxTheVool](#): > > > [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > > > FWIW, I’m happy when a liberal douche gets ass cancer or whatever. I like it when bad things happen to bad people. So, Shodan, I’m doing my part to balance out the equation. > > The question, though, is there a difference in your mind between “liberal douche” and “liberal”? Well, I’m sure there’s a difference between what I mean by liberal douche and what Shodan means by liberal. I just mean fiscal liberals, but I think Shodan includes social liberals in that term (I’m a social liberal though). ---
**Author:** ![Rand\_Rover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/db5fbb/32.png) [@Rand\_Rover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rand_Rover)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2010, 12:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-sdmb-arguments-im-sick-of/548274/70 "2010-07-29T00:28:44Z")
> [@The\_Second\_Stone](#): > > > [@Bricker](#): > > > > > [@The\_Second\_Stone](#): > > > > > > Bennett certainly was a hypocrite for gambling away at least 8 million dollars because he set himself up as a moral arbiter and general scold of general weaknesses. He wrote books on morals and virtues. The fact that he never mentioned gambling in his list of weaknesses only indicates that he knew he was screwing his family out of his hard earned money through such a weakness and wanted to save gambling from his list to protect himself from scolding by family and the public when they found out. > > > > No, it indicates that he didn’t regard gambling as immoral or a weakness. > > > > I’m sure he would have regarded leaving his family in dire financial straits as a moral failing … but then, he didn’t do that. > > > > You’re doing precisely what the OP complains of: ascribing motives to him based on others’ statements, not his. > > Nope. He was a general scold, arguing for a general return to morality and virtue. He made no exception for the various vices that he didn’t bother to mention that are generally accepted as vices. Gambling at all, even in small amounts, is a traditional vice. Gambling enough money to feed all of Haiti for a year is vice. Says you. Bennett obviously disagrees. What’s so hard for you to grasp here? ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2010, 1:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-sdmb-arguments-im-sick-of/548274/71 "2010-07-29T01:56:38Z")
> [@Boyo\_Jim](#): > > Well he’s always had a shitty point of view, so big deal. That comes from having his had up his ass for so long. Now I wish he would lose his voice too. ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2010, 1:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-sdmb-arguments-im-sick-of/548274/72 "2010-07-29T01:58:00Z")
> [@Uzi](#): > > > [@jsgoddess](#): > > > > As a liberal, I think that: > > > > 1. Science might be able to find a cure for macular dystrophy, > > 2. Taxes should fund research into this and other diseases, > > 3. Treatment for said diseases should be universally available, > > 4. The blind should be supported through disability funding and the like if they are unable to work, and > > 5. Glenn Beck deserves these benefits because he’s a human being, not because he has done anything personally to earn it. > > As a conservative, I agree\*. But then I’m a Canadian and it might not count. > > \*Except for #5. Don’t really know who Glenn Beck is, but there are some ‘human’ beings who I’d be quite glad to see bricked up in their tomb long before they actually officially qualify for it. A cask of Amontillado perhaps? ---
**Author:** ![The\_Second\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@The\_Second\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Second_Stone)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2010, 2:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-sdmb-arguments-im-sick-of/548274/73 "2010-07-29T02:20:48Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > > [@The\_Second\_Stone](#): > > > > > [@Bricker](#): > > > > > > > [@The\_Second\_Stone](#): > > > > > > > > Bennett certainly was a hypocrite for gambling away at least 8 million dollars because he set himself up as a moral arbiter and general scold of general weaknesses. He wrote books on morals and virtues. The fact that he never mentioned gambling in his list of weaknesses only indicates that he knew he was screwing his family out of his hard earned money through such a weakness and wanted to save gambling from his list to protect himself from scolding by family and the public when they found out. > > > > > > No, it indicates that he didn’t regard gambling as immoral or a weakness. > > > > > > I’m sure he would have regarded leaving his family in dire financial straits as a moral failing … but then, he didn’t do that. > > > > > > You’re doing precisely what the OP complains of: ascribing motives to him based on others’ statements, not his. > > > > Nope. He was a general scold, arguing for a general return to morality and virtue. He made no exception for the various vices that he didn’t bother to mention that are generally accepted as vices. Gambling at all, even in small amounts, is a traditional vice. Gambling enough money to feed all of Haiti for a year is vice. > > Says you. Bennett obviously disagrees. > > What’s so hard for you to grasp here? Suck on it tax boy. ---
**Author:** ![PlainJain](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/5daacb/32.png) [@PlainJain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PlainJain)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2010, 3:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-sdmb-arguments-im-sick-of/548274/74 "2010-07-29T03:00:47Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > Says you. Bennett obviously disagrees. I haven’t read Bennet so I’m just asking. Did he specifically say he didn’t think gambling was a vice or did he just not mention it? ---
**Author:** ![The\_Second\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@The\_Second\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Second_Stone)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2010, 3:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-sdmb-arguments-im-sick-of/548274/75 "2010-07-29T03:37:51Z")
> **[William Bennett | Gambling](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Bennett#Gambling)** > > In 2003, it became publicly known that Bennett - who had spent years preaching about family values and personal responsibility - was a high-stakes gambler who lost millions of dollars in Las Vegas. Criticism increased in the wake of Bennett's publication, The Book of Virtues, a compilation of moral stories about courage, responsibility, friendship and other examples of virtue. Joshua Green of the Washington Monthly said that Bennett failed to denounce gambling because of his own tendency to g Ben... > [@](#): > > Gambling > > In 2003 it became publicly known that Bennett was a high-stakes gambler who reportedly had lost millions of dollars in Las Vegas.[6] As a Catholic, Bennett was not prohibited from gambling (although the Catholic Church states that one should be stewards of their money and use moderation) but some felt it conflicted with his public image as a leading voice for conservative morals. Criticism elevated in the wake of Bennett’s publication, The Book of Virtues, in which he argued for self-discipline— an attribute at odds with problem gambling. Bennett and Empower America, the organization he co-founded and headed at the time, opposed the extension of casino gambling in the states.[7] > > Bennett never said he had a problem with gambling and has maintained that his habit did not put himself or his family in any financial jeopardy. After Bennett’s gambling became public, he said that he did not believe that his habit set a good example, that he had “done too much gambling” over the years, and that his “gambling days are over”. “We are financially solvent,” his wife Elayne told the USA Today. “All our bills are paid.” She added that his gambling days are over. “He’s never going again,” she said.[8] > > Several months later, Bennett qualified his position, saying “So, in this case, the excessive gambling is over.” He explained that “Since there will be people doing the micrometer on me, I just want to be clear: I do want to be able to bet the Buffalo Bills in the Super Bowl.”[9] ---
**Author:** ![MaxTheVool](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9fc29f/32.png) [@MaxTheVool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MaxTheVool)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2010, 4:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-sdmb-arguments-im-sick-of/548274/76 "2010-07-29T04:24:28Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > > [@MaxTheVool](#): > > > > > [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > > > > > FWIW, I’m happy when a liberal douche gets ass cancer or whatever. I like it when bad things happen to bad people. So, Shodan, I’m doing my part to balance out the equation. > > > > The question, though, is there a difference in your mind between “liberal douche” and “liberal”? > > Well, I’m sure there’s a difference between what I mean by liberal douche and what Shodan means by liberal. I just mean fiscal liberals, but I think Shodan includes social liberals in that term (I’m a social liberal though). Not my question. Does making someone a liberal automatically make them a douchebag in your mind? That is, is the phrase “liberal douchebag” as redundancy? Or are there liberals who you think are not douchebags? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2010, 4:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-sdmb-arguments-im-sick-of/548274/77 "2010-07-29T04:39:03Z")
In Bill Bennet’s case, its more a lack of math skills and common sense. His gambling wasn’t anything remotely rational, he was addicted to high-stakes _slot machines_. He would have been better off just writing them a check and saving the air fare to Vegas. What a maroon. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2010, 12:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-sdmb-arguments-im-sick-of/548274/78 "2010-07-29T12:19:43Z")
> [@PlainJain](#): > > … the reason I didn’t give a fuck about his getting cancer was his lying with every breath to the American public about the horse shit and damage his administration was doing. The distinction is between disagreeing, even strongly, with someone’s opinions, and hoping they die a painful death because they hold those opinions. Everybody on the SDMB does the first, liberal and conservative alike. The second is confined pretty much only to the left side hereabouts. That’s why people like **Miller** are pretending not to understand the difference between respecting people and agreeing with their opinions. Decent people do the first even when they can’t do the second. Liberals who can’t do the first with anyone who disagrees with them on their hot button issues are not, therefore, behaving like decent people. Tony Snow dies, and we get the assholery already mentioned. **Diogenes** says he hopes Reagan’s corpse is dug up and sodomized. **Boyo Jim** says he hopes Glenn Beck dies. Ted Kennedy dies, and **mswas** is banned for too often mentioning that Kennedy got drunk, drove off a bridge, abandoned a woman he was trying to fuck to drown and then lied about it. In a way it’s too bad, but in a way it is OK. It makes it easy to see who is arguing their politics based on principle, and who is motivated merely by hate. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Jack\_Batty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jack_batty/32/3201_2.png) [@Jack\_Batty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jack_Batty)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2010, 1:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-sdmb-arguments-im-sick-of/548274/79 "2010-07-29T13:05:19Z")
\*\*mswas \*\*banned for begging the mods to ban him. Kennedy had nothing to do with it. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2010, 1:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-sdmb-arguments-im-sick-of/548274/80 "2010-07-29T13:14:33Z")
> [@The\_Second\_Stone](#): > > Nope. He was a general scold, arguing for a general return to morality and virtue. He made no exception for the various vices that he didn’t bother to mention that are generally accepted as vices. Gambling at all, even in small amounts, is a traditional vice. And why do you get to be the one who not only decides what the world in general should accept as a vice, but also decide in Bennett’s specific case? And why can you do do it unselfconsciously in a thread started for the precise purpose of castigating those who inaccurately see hypocrisy in others by imputing general beliefs to specific people who don’t share them? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-sdmb-arguments-im-sick-of/548274.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-sdmb-arguments-im-sick-of/548274.md?page=5)