The Hunting of the (terrorist) Snark

[Cynthia]

Again, the double standard on grand display......rabid anti-Bush opinions and baldfaced lies about Bush lies are the supposed product of thoughtful well reasoned, fully researched observations & readings, but such opinions that are not in agreement must, by design, be directly attributed to neocons & Bush, with no thought what-so-ever

I don't think I have ever assigned such motives to you. You are free to draw your own conclusions, and I can respect the fact that they differ from mine. Where you run into trouble with me is belittling mine and my thought processes with comments like 'reasonable people think this' or 'logical people think like this', somehow hinting that I am unreasonable or illogical, or otherwise insulting my intelligence. Then I have no qualms bringing out the fireworks. You have the very bad habit of speaking down to others and taking a superior tone rather than stopping to think that it is entirely possible to consider the facts and information available and come to entirely different conclusions than your own. And for that, I generally ignore you. You've pulled that shit so many times, you're not worth the trouble anymore.

YES!!!!! Finally, someone sets this guy straight....d'oh well, maybe....he's never going to stop belittling others, so the ignore button is the only thing left.


Sirs Tactics:
Without fact. Without argument worth a damn.
Always, however, a clear patronizing tone and word.

 Geeezzzus....



::)Thank you HP!

[Plane]

I am afaraid I did assume faslely that you could not mean arresting triggermen only , I must be giveing your thinking to much credit for being thought out.

Either that or I seem to have given you too much credit. Your oversimplification of everything makes this conversation ridiculous.

How can we do better?

I like the Bush plans because it is very hard on the terrorists , I don't like the ways you would depart from it because it would make the terrorists job easy. Many of the things you suggest are already in process but the diffrences you want are all things that have been tried and found wanting.

This is a very general picture , it might be better to talk about smaller parts of the whole to make the discussion less slippery.

[sirs]

YES!!!!! Finally, someone sets this guy straight....d'oh well, maybe....he's never going to stop belittling others, so the ignore button is the only thing left.  Sirs Tactics: Without fact. (ignoring of course facts presented) Without argument worth a damn. (pure opinion) Always, however, a clear patronizing tone and word.  Geeezzzus....

Amazing, someone who truely dislikes my criticizing them, agreeing with someone who truely dislikes my criticising them.  Must have also missed the part where despite your obnoxious transition as a MM parrot, I still respect you and your POV.

Go figure

[Cynthia]

YES!!!!! Finally, someone sets this guy straight....d'oh well, maybe....he's never going to stop belittling others, so the ignore button is the only thing left.  Sirs Tactics: Without fact. (ignoring of course facts presented) Without argument worth a damn. (pure opinion) Always, however, a clear patronizing tone and word.  Geeezzzus....

Amazing, someone who truely dislikes my criticizing them, agreeing with someone who truely dislikes my criticising them.  Must have also missed the part where despite your obnoxious transition as a MM parrot, I still respect you and your POV.

Go figure

When you give a comprehensive and straight 'n arrow POV, I am there in the front line. . .all ears, Sirs. But when you slur the stir and shoot in the barrel of apples to make a person feel less than......that's the thorn in the side of Sirs' posts. Frustrating and so uncomfortable to hear....especially from a person who really and truly has a lot to say , in the end.

Just stick with your ideas, facts and points to prove...and stop making others out to be "lesser than".

[sirs]

Just stick with your ideas, facts and points to prove...and stop making others out to be "lesser than".

I have, if you hadn't noticed.  Simply wrong does not equal "lesser than"

[hnumpah]

"Unlike some, I don't check in with any political party or hack group to see what I am supposed to think about the issues"

Actually, it was a response to your accusation that my opinions were formed by the DNC (whose web site - I suppose they have one - I've never visited, and whose postings I've never read, as far as I know) or some other talking heads whose blogs and bullshit I don't read or pay attention to. I don't read political blogs at all, actually. I could care less about them, regardless of which side they support.

And I have no problem with people who disagree with the president, or with going to war, or with me.  Where you run into trouble is belittling the common sense of believing the overwhelming intel that nearly every leader believed

My problem with that is, even though they trumpeted that all over the news in order to con the American people into supporting the invasion, enough actual facts made it through that, if folks had really been paying attention, they would have seen there were no WMDs, no operational ties to Al Qaeda, and in fact, none of the things that were being passed off as excuses to go to war in Iraq. And viola! There weren't.

...and literally demeaning those that actually support the notion that a free and democratic Iraq is a good thing...

Where?

...anyone that supports what common sense also supported.  It was common sense to believe that Saddam, left completely unfettered by inspectors, would be indeed restocking his WMD stockpiles.  The intel simply validated such.  It was common sense to believe that terrorists who perpetrated 911, would also love to get their hands on some of Saddam's WMD.  It was common sense to believe that terrorists and Saddam could actually work out arrangements against a common enemy, the U.S.  Intel simply reinforced the direct and indirect  ties that Iraq had with Islamic terrorists.  Yet when that point is brought up, you get all defensive, claiming some personal insult and attack.  Yea, the intel got it wrong, but at the time, it was supposedly a "slam dunk", AND it was common sense to think so as well

Nope. I keep telling you, I get defensive when you start intimating that 'it was common sense' blah blah blah, as though I haven't got any. Which is where you're heaqded now.

...rationally minded folks, allowing a predisposition of being opposed to war and/or to Bush, completely mucking up that rational thought process.   Basically seeing what they want to see, and damn any facts to the contrary...

And, we're off...

My issues with you are in the paragraph above, though again, I don't recall even you conceding anything even remotely (+) about Bush & the war.

Yep. I agreed with the attack on Afghanistan. Iraq was, and still is, a stupid mistake.

[Xavier_Onassis]

Sirs general attitude is that he gets the truth straight from the Prime Mover and therefore we should prostrate ourselves at his feet. If we don't do this and disagree with him, he likes to do prickster stuff like the legendary,

"Bzzz... WRONG!""

This naturally convinces everyone that they are indeed wrong, having lost a round in the sirs' Questionman Challenge.

[Cynthia]

Sirs general attitude is that he gets the truth straight from the Prime Mover and therefore we should prostrate ourselves at his feet. If we don't do this and disagree with him, he likes to do prickster stuff like the legendary,

"Bzzz... WRONG!""

This naturally convinces everyone that they are indeed wrong, having lost a round in the sirs' Questionman Challenge.

Right, XO.  I agree.


Sirs plays dirty and below the belt. Period.

[sirs]

Yea....right.....well, you're goona see what you want so see, Cynthia.  And that truely is unfortunate, considering our past correspondences     

[fatman]

I'm not sure where you folks are getting that with sirs.  I've disagreed with him several times and never has it gotten personal.  He's just as human as you or I or anyone else here, with the same flaws.

Are you going to try and convince me that none of you become pedagogic on some issues?  If you disagree with him on some issues, fine, let it be that and let it go.  There's not really a need for the personal bickering, the main culprit of that has left and the forum is better for it.  Let us not devolve back into it.

Just my opinion of course.

[sirs]

Thanks for the kind words, Fat.  I'll try to swing my rudder back into form.  It's a cause of frustration, but not impossible to put aside. 

[Amianthus]

This naturally convinces everyone that they are indeed wrong, having lost a round in the sirs' Questionman Challenge.

And of course, naturally, you're always right.

[Cynthia]

Sirs general attitude is that he gets the truth straight from the Prime Mover and therefore we should prostrate ourselves at his feet. If we don't do this and disagree with him, he likes to do prickster stuff like the legendary,

"Bzzz... WRONG!""

This naturally convinces everyone that they are indeed wrong, having lost a round in the sirs' Questionman Challenge.

Sirs needs to keep the "personal attack door" shut and allow his "point window" to remain open.

We would all breathe better that way.

I have hope for him.

[sirs]

    yee of such thin skin.   I'll tell you Cynthia, if you were to take every criticism of your position as some "personal attack", I'm not sure how you could tolerate it in here

[Amianthus]

Sirs needs to keep the "personal attack door" shut and allow his "point window" to remain open.

We would all breathe better that way.

If saying "you're wrong and I'm right" is a "personal attack" then you are guilty of the same actions, as is XO.