Hilarious: We’re calling you an old fool, and you object to being called old!
I couldn’t write better comedy. You’re the classic fool in some Nineteenth Century novel.
Double points if you get them to be nostalgic for something they roundly and loudly hated at the time.
Just one more reminder that the heart of dirty argumentation is failure to engage any substantive issues. We see this, above, quite humorously when Starving Artist attempts to make our insults of him about his age when we’re using his age to attack his idiotic nostalgia for a period he was barely around for. He sees the attacks, knows he can’t fight them head-on, so he picks some irrelevancy and focuses on it to the exclusion of all else.
Believe it or not, this can be done well. Not honestly, but effectively.
The age of the protestors is irrelevant except as far as the people closest to the dead would necessarily be in a narrow age band, given that this was a school shooting. Focusing on it is the exact same thing as taking offense to being called old when people are saying you’re an old fool, except worse, because it means we can never take the victims of school shootings seriously.
Saying it’s perpetually “Too Soon” is one thing. That, at least, has some figleaf justification in the supposed feelings of the surviving victims. This is simply throwing the victims in the trash because the gunners have focused on one irrelevant thing they all have in common because the gun fetishists can’t come up with one single honest argument to justify their screeching fury at so much as discussing revisiting the issue of gun control.
The gunners are saying the victims are subhuman because it’s become too hard to defend the kind of gun rights they take as their irrevocable privilege.
Sorry dear, but you’re an idiot. I don’t watch Fox, I didn’t watch O’Reilly, I don’t watch (or even like much) Sean Hannity. Limbaugh was manna from heaven when he first came on the scene because finally there was somebody in the media standing up for America, apple pie and vacuuming in pearls. But I stopped listening to him parrot my own thoughts and views when he made fun of Chelsea Clinton. I listen to music on the radio and don’t watch so much as four hours a month of television, and when I do it’s usually a movie or a replay of my beloved Nero Wolfe A&E DVD series with Timothy Hutton. I realize it’s so hard for you people to accept that conservative people in this country hold the views they do all on their own without having been fed it by evil conservative media figures, but by and large conservative commentators are merely serving to substantiate what their audience feels and believes already and their primary function is to let their audience know that there are others out there who feel the same way they do. You know, kind of like how you guys get the same thing from the MSM.
So, you guys aren’t going to do me a solid after all. Might have known. Welp, just gonna have to use some self-discipliine and leave anyway despite the gigantic mounds of horseshit being thrown my way in an effort to get me to stay. I’m sorry, but you’re going to have to call yourselves idiots for the rest of the night. Chow!
Just because you don’t specifically watch Fox or Hannity or other conservative TV shows or listen to conservative talk radio doesn’t mean that you’re not spewing rightwing-media talking points. They don’t propagate solely via radio and television, you know.
Yeah, especially when the conservative people suddenly start expounding the same views on a particular issue at about the same time using very similar language. Must be just our distrustful nature.
Well, nobody here is stopping you. If you didn’t have the self-discipline to stop posting in a thread after explicitly and gratuitously announcing three times that you were quitting for the night, that’s your problem. Pleading with us to stop responding to you because you don’t have the self-control to leave on your own is not doing wonders for that independent-minded self-reliant image you’re trying to project.
Much as I’m sure you’d all love to see me get a warning - and I may - the fact is that I didn’t reword any specific comment, I didn’t use any of the words that Derleth spoke, and I replied to his post as a whole, which is why his name comes up in bold above what I did say. This was so it would be apparent as to who “blah, blah, blah” was in response to. Therefore it was and is my opinion that my post did not break the rules about changing quotes in the quote box as I did not change anything Derleth said. I merely characterized the post as a whole. So we’ll see.
Very good points. I think both are true: a) more guns per gun owner, by themselves, shouldn’t cause more shooting deaths; and b) our relationship with guns is toxic, and buying lots and lots of them is one way in which this manifests.
Wrong. People bringing that up are, out of kindness, offering you an excuse for your senile ramblings. But you insist on claiming to be thinking independently and objectively, so it’s on you.
SA: We’re not criticizing your age. Most Dopers are over 50. We’re criticizing your dated concepts and limited scope. You seem bound and determined to hold on to the concept that liberal boogeymen are brainwashing high school and college students, and it has no basis in fact. You’re only going by your personal observations, and verifying them with opinion instead of fact. You’re like the president: the truth is only what you want it to be. You simply don’t understand that we’re skeptics who want verifiable data uncolored by opinion.
Liberal vs Conservative politics has fuck-all to do with the motivations of the survivors who saw 17 of their friends mowed down with an AK-47. They’re expressing anger, frustration, sorrow and rage. They want to prevent this tragedy from happening again, and they’re being targeted by deniers who don’t want their status quo disrupted.
What do you do when you witness a tragedy? Do you think about the political ramifications before expressing your thoughts?
And these children that you spit on
As they try to change their worlds
Are immune to your consultations.
They’re quite aware of what they’re going through.
[INDENT]David Bowie[/INDENT]
This is an aspect of the Good Old Days doddering old fools always skip over.
Alcohol is absolutely, unquestionably the most destructive drug that has ever existed; it has destroyed far more lives than all narcotic drugs combined, and it used to be WAY worse than it is now. Up to fairly recently, alcoholism in America was incredibly common and destructive.
People in Starving Artists’ beloved 1950s were just as likely to be drug addicts as the have ever been; the only thing that was different is that booze was likelier to be the drug of choice.
Again, I have a busy day and unfortunately no time to deal with the nonsense that’s arisen since I was here last night. But your characterization of me and my stance on alcohol, unsurprisingly, couldn’t be more wrong. I’ve said more than once on this board that as much as I love alcohol, I’d give it up gladly should it be made illegal, and that I in fact do favor making it illegal.
Still, I doubt very much that alcohol has been more destructive to more lives than drug use (and by drug use I’m talking about recreational drugs of the type not taken for pain or to control illness but merely to get high and/or escape from the realities of the world). Certainly I’ve seen far more people ruin their lives with recreational street drugs than alcohol.
Further, I’ll posit that it wasn’t the conservatives of the time who were responsible for fighting prohibition and responsible for its repeal. Liberals are always all about enabling irresponsible and destructive personal behavior.
Look, liberalism is an immature and faulty ideology. It’s reflexive and based on emotion and not on common sense or reason. It takes root among the young, who are idealistic and for whom everything takes on exaggerated importance, which is why people often become more conservative in their politics as they age. There are many millions of people my age in this country who lived in it when it was still civilized who are just as fed up with the way things are now as I am. To the degree our age puts us at odds with liberalism it’s because we’ve personally experienced the safer, saner, and less destructive and nonsensical world that life in the U.S. used to be. This is not to say a surprising number of young people today aren’t also conservative in their politics, as a surprising number are. But it’s in the nature of immature young people to be swayed by liberalism and this is the reason that our liberal-dominated educational system is increasingly focused on inculcating them with it and at increasingly younger ages. I’ve been pleased to observe, however, that as they grow up many see the folly of their previously liberal beliefs and abandon them more and more as they mature.
And thanks, Knowed Out, for your calm and polite post. I disagree pretty strongly though with your contention that liberals aren’t brainwashing college and high school students (if not younger these days). In generations previous to mine people didn’t suddenly become raving lefties upon going off to college, now a great many of them do. Twenty years ago most kids came out of high school fairly uncommitted and ignorant politically, now they’re increasing starting to come out as impassioned lefties as well. I know of no other reason why kids should suddenly become politically impassioned toward the liberal point of view than that they’re being manipulated into it at school. Time and again we see incidents online where some high school teacher is filmed ranting and raving over politics from a left-wing perspective, or berating a student who’s exhibited conservative beliefs or leanings. And of course the college environment has been a hotbed of leftist radicalism since the late sixties, as is going on now where conservative speakers are shouted down or forced to cancel appearances for fear of violence, and they’re the environment that has given rise to antifa and other violent and radical movements. The fact that someone like Yvette Felarca can still have her job, teaching middle-school students no less, should be evidence enough of how the educational environment in this country tolerates and allows liberal classroom influence upon its students.
And to everyone in general, people of my age aren’t contemptuous of liberalism because we’re old fools, it’s because we lived in a time when drugs and crime weren’t everywhere, when the police hadn’t been forced to morph into para-military units, when kids grew up in intact families with a parent there to care for them when they got home from school, and when everyone wasn’t pissed off at everyone else who wasn’t 100% inline with them on every issue imaginable.
