Some very non-Pitting questions for Bricker

Bricker, as you’ve surely noticed, my new sig
[quotes you]
(http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=17629474&postcount=139) as follows: “I’m convinced that applying your concept of morality to our country would destroy us in a couple of generations.”

I’ve got a few questions for you about this:

  1. AFAICT, my concept of morality isn’t all that different from most left-leaning posters on this board. Am I right about that?

  2. If the answer to (1) is ‘no,’ what distinguishes me in particular from the general run of SDMB liberals?

  3. If the answer to (1) is ‘yes,’ you seem to be saying that most of us SDMB lefties seek policies that would doom this country. What policies are these that we favor, that would not just result in outcomes that would displease you, but would bring ruin to this great nation?

  4. Also if ‘yes,’ this would suggest a difference in worldview so great as to render rational debate nearly pointless, as such debate needs to rest on a foundation of shared assumptions. If so, why do you waste your time on us heathens? I certainly wouldn’t debate someone who got their facts from Fox News, because we wouldn’t regard the same things as factual, and there’d really be no point to it, given that lack of a common foundation. But you seem to be saying that you and the rest of us share a similar lack of common foundation for debate.

I didn’t want to hijack the thread you made this statement in, so I thought I’d bring this here. And despite the fact that this isn’t a Pitting, other fora didn’t seem appropriate. In a way, it’s a GD sort of thing, except it’s about your beliefs and mine.

Obviously you don’t have to reply and attempt to explain your remarks from the GD thread (and if you choose not to, I’d prefer that the mods close the thread in short order, rather than give other posters an open-ended space to purport to provide their own explanations of you), but I’d appreciate the courtesy of an explanation of such a sweeping statement. Hence this thread.

I have no way of knowing, but I suspect that’s true.

If the left were put in unfettered charge – that is, there was no counterbalancing influence – then it’s hard to say what kinds of things might cause ruin first. Unchecked immigration might strain our social infrastructure’s ability to provide support, for example. An unwillingness to use military force, or to use such force only when civilian casualties and American military deaths are near zero, might create instabilities in the world. An unwillingness to support Israel might lead to an untenable Middle East situation. The willingness to raise minimum wages to some left concept of a living wage would probably stifle business growth, destroy a tax base, and lead us further into ruin by inviting a more Stalinist set of government controls, blaming the failures on greedy profiteers instead of the destructive nature of such controls.

I’m not sure which malady would tip us into ruin.

There are remaining shared assumptions, such as the legal system. (I know you regard the legal system as a mere annoyance and obstacle standing in the way of your visions of perfect society, but you can hardly help acknowledging that it exists).

(post shortened)

It’s rather confusing that you chose to publically post your inquiry and not expect/want other members to reply. Wouldn’t a Private Message have better suited your expressed purpose?

It’s not confusing at all. His hope is to incite another in the regular series of pile-on Bricker pittings, in which the mass of mouth-breathing idiots compete for the privilege hurling the most vicious insults they can.

That’s his “morality.” And he’s shocked, shocked to hear that his morality isn’t automatically acceptable as a standard for resolving disputes.

Hey Bricker, do you need some help carrying that cross around on your back?

(post shortened)

How much do you charge to carry crosses? Or are you expecting some government agency to carry the load and for the taxpayers to cover the cost?

(post shortened)

In your spare time, could you please provide your own concept of morality. Just for comparison purposes.

We’ll need migrant workers. Carrying crosses is just another of those jobs that Americans don’t want to do.

But all cross carriers have to speak English like Jesus did. Anything else would be un-American.

“…in which the mass of mouth-breathing idiots compete for the privilege hurling the most vicious insults they can.”

Um, kinda looks like you’re starting it.

How much do you charge to supply migrant workers? Or could you suggest some government agency that is currently shipping illegal aliens/migrant workers from the southern border to non-border states? Preferably at the taxpayers expense.

Bricker comes here to be noticed. He could hang out at Republican sites, sure, but his opinions are quite ordinary there, nobody would pay him any special attention. Some time ago, when the moderate Republican wasn’t quite extinct yet, he would have gotten some argument, but now he would just be another inmate of a mynah bird and parrot aviary. When everybody is saying the same thing, nobody cares who is saying it. Not even his sparkling wit would garner attention!

Still, Arty, it was kind of you to make his day.

Hahahaha. Did you consider the OP in your thought process/logical reasoning?

The police called. Your Freshman Composition 101 teacher is on a ledge, threatening to jump…

For him, it’s a simple statement of fact.

Do you consider RTFirefly’s OP as an attempt to be noticed? Why else would someone make a public inquiry if they only want a private conversation?

I consider your repeated posts in this thread an attempt to stroke off Bricker, which is pretty lame. You should probably stop doing that.

I’m afraid you’ll have to find your own. Just like every hard working American small business owner with a farm or construction business or meat processing plant. They certainly don’t expect any gov’t handouts. Just cheap labor with no tax or employee benefits overhead imposed on them by those damn godless liberals.

I think that generally, the side that resorts to personal attacks rather than addressing the issue is the side that is weaker in the debate.

You don’t spare one word for RTFirefly, whose stated purpose for this thread is belied by its existence as a Pit thread instead of a private message.

But you immediately attack me, which of course I predicted.