I think you think that an issue that is highly important to you is more important to other people than it is.
I think it would be easier for you to accept that I am transphobic than to accept that I am apathetic about it.
To me you are just another denizen of this world in which we live. Neither a threat nor a boon to me, therefore I have no real dog in this fight.
I’ll own up to that one.
Miller As Brainglutton said they spend like drunken sailors. I of course am far from being the first to make this claim. I know a bunch of conservatives who agree with me. Peal back the layers of propaganda my son, and reveal what is truly going on.
Sure, “apathetic” enough to start a GD thread on it and keep posting there for 9 pages. Is “apathetic” yet another word you don’t really know the meaning of, or was the initial “a-” another “typo” and did you mean to say you were “pathetic about it”? Because that would be the truth (for a change)
Posting on the internet is my ‘Television’. I smoke pot in the basement with my computer and go post online. Them’s the facts. I mean you might think that it’s this big deal, but I can argue things passionately even if I don’t care, I’ve always been able to do it, drove my parents nuts. I have a thing for playing Devil’s Advocate, I like to defend the people who you’re not supposed to defend, in this case bigots. You can accept that or not, but really, I do not care about political issues that don’t affect me. I have no problem with transgender people. As I said, I think it’s sort of odd, but past that it’s not that big a deal to me. To each their own. I used to hang out in BDSM circles and I met a lot of people into many different things, including a few transgendereds. I think if someone wants to change their sex they should go for it, be my guest, it really doesn’t rate on the list of things I get actually passionate about. Where my passion came from in this case was messing with the status quo by arguing a status quo position. It’s the idiosyncracy of the debate that interests me, not the actual topic in this case. You don’t have to like that or respect it, but if you want to know my actual motives then there they are.
tom’s already shown how what you’ve done can only very, very charitably be said to approach a Devil’s Advocate argument. I know you don’t care, but it’s indistinguishable from trolling to me. If you were upfront about the ersatz nature of your advocacy, you’d attract a lot less opprobrium. There are several other current & recent threads where you haven’t been doing this and you’re coming across as a lot less of a jerk in them.
I think posting high is as dumb a move as posting drunk - you’re never as clever as you think you are at the time.
Also, I notice I’m not getting scrolled past. That didn’t last long, now did it? Colour me “not surprised”.
Posted in wrong thread. My apologies. :smack:
I’m sure you have a high old time at those John Birch Society meetings.
Oh, and BrainGlutton’s comment about their spending habits came after you described them as “fiscally conservative.” Keep move those goalposts, mswas. It’s what you do best.
Keep on abusing context, it’s what you do best. I said that they were fiscally conservative in their efforts to privatize everything. See out of context it just makes no sense, but in context it makes sense. Particularly since I was calling them liberals in relation to their liberal policies. So I called them fiscally conservative in relation to their fiscally conservative policies. I didn’t say that overall they were fiscally conservative. Actually, I said overall they were liberal, which spending like drunken sailors would seem to imply. ;p
I’m sorry I waited until post 13 to state that I am accepting of transgenders personally. I will try and make sure I don’t wait until the thread has gone out of control and reached an astronomical 13 posts before attempting to clarify that next time.
I think posting on internet message boards is of very little import. However that is not true, I often go back and find stuff that I said that I find quite hilarious when I’m sober.
Yeah well, you started geeking out on 90s RPGames. You found my weakspot. So sue me gamer. I had to reach deep into my soul to see if it was worth talking to you, I mean afterall you did say that Shadowrun lite was better than the real thing. I mean come on Cyberpunk introduced magic later in the game after they realized how much cooler Shadowrun was than Cyberpunk. Hacking is like the most boring part of those kinds of games. “Oooh look at me, I’m plugged into the Matrix, I’m shutting down security systems in a way that takes the majority of game play while everyone else is waiting around for their turn to shoot things.” Without Magic those games get real boring real quick.
This is the first thing I’ve read from you in a long time that’s coherently explained anything (albeit, explaining why you are often so incoherent).
Tell you what. You learn how to make two posts in a row without abruptly changing the entire context of your argument, and I’ll stop calling you on it when I see it. How’s that for a deal?
I didn’t change the context at all. I addressed a greater level of detail within the context by addressing subcontext within it.
Here’s how it works.
They are considered conservative by the mainstream.
Overall their policies appear pretty liberal. (to me)
The only policy I can see that resembles conservatism, particularly fiscal conservatism in this case, is their attempts at privatization.
I don’t see how that is a change of context in any way. Each statement established it’s own context within the larger context, and only one contextual statement conflicts with another. Either they are overall more conservative or overall more liberal. Calling one aspect of their policy conservative doesn’t reflect upon whether or not the bulk of their policies are either conservative or liberal.
Well good, then I pass you the blunt in the hope of a new sense of mutual understanding.
How about stating it outright in your OP, like an *honest *debater? Novel concept, I know, but imagine the possibilities!
Yet here you are…
It really isn’t about whether *you *find it hilarious. For that, there’s LJ.
Nope, I was geeking on folklore and fairytale. You’re the one who jumped to SR.
MrDibble Cutting through the Cruft, I’ll address the two most important points in your post.
- It’s true that Shadowrun is better than Cyberpunk.
- Some people did understand what I was saying just fine.
Posting while in any altered state, whether it be after consuming drugs one shouldn’t or not consuming drugs one should, is not a good idea
So you, uh, can call anarchists totalitarian in relation to their totalitarianism?
Good thing I didn’t mention Cyperpunk, then, isn’t it.
Cite?
Naa, it’s more of that “This is what fag means…when I say it” nonsense that ignores any shared meaning in language.