Your nose has many functions beyond just making your face look good, Weirddave – put down the knife!
Daniel
You have obviously never seen my face. 
It’s just that I’m not sure how the cliche “Cutting off your nose to, well, quite honestly, improve your face” applies in this situation.
Daniel
Please, if you would, share with us what the division between “rational” and “irrational” hatred of Bush is.
I’ve always believed that if someone is acting and speaking in ways that one finds deeply offensive / wrong / frightening / hateful / dishonest / manipulative, etc, one has a basis upon which to base negative feelings towards the someone in question. Such negative feelings might even extend to hate. This is perfectly rational.
I don’t think it can be debated that Bush has and does act in ways that some people might find extremely upsetting. So why is it “irrational” to hate him for it?
Stoid:
An example from some time back that illustrates it perfectly: Reeder posted a Pit thread excoriating Bush for his failure to visit any of the wounded troops in local military hospitals.
When it was pointed out that Bush had in fact several times visited the troops, Reeder immediately switched to the tack that it wasn’t enough before abandoning the thread.
That, I’d argue, is irrational hatred: taking rational hatred and extending it to absurd lengths, near-imaginary grievances, and tinfoil hat conspiracy theories.
- Rick
Good thing there are an abundance of perfectly valid and rational reasons to hate Bush.
It’s an interesting theory. I think I have a better one.
I do not think that these fallacious attacks are a sign of irrational hatred, nor do they represent anything of the kind.
Time and time again in the types of threads that you mention, the purveyor of the simplistic irrational attack demonstrates mental flexibility and rhetorical skills which seem to contradict the irrational nature of the complaint.
I submit to you therefore that it is not irrational at all.
They exist under the theory that if you say something often enough, or vociferously enough, people will begin to give it credence under a “where there’s smoke, there must be fire” hypothesis.
I will further submit that while this technique is generally unspoken, it is nonetheless deliberate.
The evidence that this is true, and this kind of thing happens, is something you must be considering yourself at this moment.
Your recent political debating activities have elicited a very consistent and seemingly coordinated response from a certain quarter.
What we actually have going on here, I theorize is something like a school of fish, where each fish gives signals and recieves signals from others in it’s school, giving to all intents and purposes a coordinated gestalt.
hmm interesting - let’s see if it works “SH possessed weapons of mass destruction and in order to protect ourselves from him and terrorists, we must invade immediately”
By jove, you’re right. it works.
Man, you guys make more leaps of faith than the trampolining nuns of the Order of Sister Beryl (the original Bedazzled, the funny one…)
A piddling accusation of neglect is lodged against the Shining One. It is proven to be untrue. Therefore, all accusations against him must be untrue.
Not even fish are that damned stupid!
Fish got gestalt?
gestalt - for those who think Jung.
I dunno, luci. I’ve never met a fish that didn’t have trouble with Aristotelian logic. They always get confused about whether universal statements imply existential ones. You can show them Venn diagrams again and again, but they just don’t get it.
Bricker, do you believe that President Bush has been successful in the bi-partisanship he promised? Are the two parties working together more harmoniously now?
You know, that is really strange. I said almost those exact words in a letter to President Bush.
A lot of the unemployment is in the South which strongly supported George Bush in 2000. Tennessee, my home state, has lost between 65,000 and 72,000 jobs – depending on whether you count the numbers from yet another plant that is closing soon.
Many Southerners are opposed to the change in immigration laws that President Bush is supporting.
The Volunteer State is concerned about cuts in veterans programs – especially when they see the national debt mounting at breakneck speed for other programs. We are also tired of the body bags. No…the transportation tubes. I forgot. The name had to be changed.
Bricker, Lyndon Johnson’s budget increase percentages for the Great Society were less than half of what President Bush’s increase percentages have been. Until now, that budget has been the one that all fiscal conservatives have pointed to as governmental big-spending’s worst nightmare.
Meanwhile, the President has made 15 trips to Missouri but only 12 trips to the podium for press conferences. Rare interviews are heavily coached. Speeches are scripted. From what I have seen of his spontaneous moments, he would make a really good high school football coach.
I could understand your support for a number of Republicans – Senate Majority Leader Frist is honorable. John McCain. But why George W. Bush?
[quote]
Jonathan Chance:…“free-speech-killing PC-types”
Well now that is me. You have me pegged. When someone calls Bricker a racist, bigot or homophobe, I have a “liberal knee-jerk reaction” and get a court order which forbids (under penalty of death) that those words will ever be spoken, written, typed, coded, signed or signaled by that person again. Said person no longer has freedom of speech and I was able to take it away totally against her or his will.
Actually, the part about the court order was a blatant lie. Just by expressing my opinion of your word choices, I can do what no court in the land can do: I can take away your freedom of speech.
It’s amazing the powers you credit to us “PC types,” Jonathan. :dubious:
No. This is an area in which I absolutely concede Mr. Bush has been remarkably ineffective.
An electorate gets the government it deserves.
Bush will win.
It’s funny 'cause it’s true!