The Surge in Afghanistan
[Guest post by DRJ]
The Bush Administration is implementing a surge in southern Afghanistan:
“Afghanistan’s southern rim, the Taliban’s spiritual birthplace and the country’s most violent region, has for the last two years been the domain of British, Canadian and Dutch soldiers. That’s about to change. In what amounts to an Afghan version of the surge in Iraq, the U.S. is preparing to pour at least 20,000 extra troops into the south, augmenting 12,500 NATO soldiers who have proved too few to cope with a Taliban insurgency that is fiercer than NATO leaders expected.”
The article states that, since 2006, U.S. forces have concentrated in eastern Afghanistan along the Pakistan border while the south was “policed by 8,500 British troops, 2,500 Canadians and 2,500 Dutch.” The plan is to surge additional American troops into southern Afghanistan that will ultimately be under the control of U.S. Brig. Gen. John Nicholson.
As in Iraq, the goal is to establish security in the area followed by a system of government as well as economic and humanitarian aid. Also like Iraq, the situation may initially be more dangerous for American troops:
“If we get the troops, they’re going to move into areas that haven’t been secured, and when we do that, the enemy is there, and we’re going to fight,” said Nicholson, who spent 16 months commanding a brigade of 10th Mountain Division troops in eastern Afghanistan in 2006 and 2007.
That fighting should eventually clear the way for security and governance to take hold, he said. “If you want to summarize that as it’s going to get worse before it gets better, that’s exactly what we’re talking about,” he said.”
The Iraq surge started with the Sunni Awakening in western Iraq, one of the hotbeds of the insurgency. But the eastern provinces near Pakistan — not the south — have been the problem in Afghanistan. Difficulty engaging the eastern tribes is one reason experts believe a surge won’t work in Afghanistan.
Perhaps this is a variation of the surge where the goal is to isolate the eastern provinces. If security, government, and improved conditions can be established in the south, NATO forces will have a base to expand east. Maybe that will encourage the people of the eastern provinces to accept the benefits realized by their southern neighbors.
— DRJ
Is it really a “surge” or a replacement of troops unable to really fight with troops that can?
SPQR (26be8b) — 1/1/2009 @ 4:35 pmAfghanistan is where ’empires’ go to die.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/1/2009 @ 4:41 pmSPQR,
I think the Canadian and Dutch troops have done a good job, but there aren’t enough of them and the NATO countries aren’t willing to support and reinforce them.
DRJ (1a6fbf) — 1/1/2009 @ 4:56 pmAfghanistan is where ‘empires’ go to die.
Good thing we ain’t an empire, then.
Pious Agnostic (b2c3ab) — 1/1/2009 @ 5:10 pm#4- You might want to remind Condi Rice. She said it.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/1/2009 @ 5:35 pmIts a waste of lives and resources chasing down boogie men in Afghanistan in this fashion. Shades of chasing down Vietcong with B-52s. Like killing ants on concrete by dropping golfballs on them.
Good for the MIC though. Ike was right.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/1/2009 @ 5:40 pmDRJ, all of the NATO forces in Afghanistan have been found lacking. Either training, equipment, doctrine or political willpower or combinations. NATO countries are simply not performing at anywhere near the levels needed for real modern combat.
SPQR (26be8b) — 1/1/2009 @ 5:41 pmDCSCA, your comparison of modern counter-insurgency tactics to using B-52’s on Viet Cong shows two things. First, that you have no understanding of the Vietnam War. Second, that you have no understanding of operations in Afghanistan.
SPQR (26be8b) — 1/1/2009 @ 5:42 pmI hope they let them load their weapons, unlike the French unit that was ambushed.
The NATO armies are toy armies now. There was an article a few years ago about the unionized Belgian army. The British army does not have support of the people or the government. No wonder they are not enthusiastic about fighting.
The solution to Afghanistan, however, is in Pakistan. I hope the military is making contingency plans for a Pakistan collapse. It could come this year.
Mike K (2cf494) — 1/1/2009 @ 6:24 pmSPQR,
It’s my understanding NATO forces have had trouble switching from peacekeeping to combat missions, that their home countries have provided lackluster support, and their leaders has been reluctant to move forces outside secure areas. Those factors (and more) have made the NATO forces of marginal value. However, after reading various print and online sources, it’s also my impression that the Canadian and Dutch troops are brave and committed to doing a good job. That’s what I was talking about.
DRJ (1a6fbf) — 1/1/2009 @ 6:56 pmSPQR, do check the end of the “Playing Politics” thread. I’d like you to help me keep track of this.
If you have time or inclination, that is.
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/1/2009 @ 7:03 pm[…] Perhaps this is a variation of the surge where the goal is to isolate the eastern provinces. If security, government, and improved conditions can be established in the south, NATO forces will have a base to expand east. And hopefully that will encourage the people of the eastern provinces to accept the benefits realized by their southern neighbors. Continue reading . . . […]
The Surge in Afghanistan « Conservative Thoughts and Profundity (73499b) — 1/1/2009 @ 7:14 pmWhat exactly are we trying to do there now? Are we going to send our kids to die there in the hope of creating some kind of utopia? You’re not gonna drive every terrorist out of Afghanistan, or even from the US for that matter. When do we claim victory and bring the boys home?
We have spent trillions of dollars on bombs and missiles but we want to send human targets there instead? It’s crazy. I guess the argument to use the nukes against Japan to save American lives and bring a quicker end to the war is no longer any good.
J Curtis (3316b1) — 1/1/2009 @ 7:34 pm“Its a waste of lives and resources chasing down boogie men in Afghanistan in this fashion. Shades of chasing down Vietcong with B-52s. Like killing ants on concrete by dropping golfballs on them.”
DCSCA – Although your analogy is screwed up the thought is somewhat in the right direction unlike so many of your partisan friends. That’s why it has be so hilarious to listen to them complain that we didn’t devote enough resources to Afghanistan, diverted resources from Afghanistan, haven’t caught bin Laden, over the past seven years without any conception of the history of the place or the difficulty. Leftcult patellar reflex in action.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 1/1/2009 @ 7:49 pmWe want to send them warriors, J Curtis, so that the lives of others are not wasted.
We defeat the Taliban, enlist the local militia in peacekeeping, and drop back to bases. A generation or two down the line, they (and Iraq) might have a country.
Patricia (89cb84) — 1/1/2009 @ 8:27 pmPatricia – If Obama visits the country again maybe he can remember to take some unicorns this time. I think that would really help.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 1/1/2009 @ 8:33 pm#8- No doubt armchair generals such as yourself, loaded for bear with “cocktail courage and dinner table heroism” (apologies to Rod Serling) will keep us enlightened. If only you’d pay the bill for it all as well.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/2/2009 @ 12:12 am#14- It’s folly to fight there on the ground. Will only cost lives and treasure and in the end, end nothing. The smart way to defuse that bunch is to dry up their resources (aka $) and even then they’ll fight on. The feeders to that revenue stream are complex for sure and most likely contradict established relationships. The Saudis, for one, comes to mind.
Empires go to Afghanistan to die as recently parrotted by Condi Rice. ‘Gunga Dan’ Rather reported first hand how the Soviets were brought to their knees fighting there 30 years ago and televised it into our living rooms. It’s a miserable place to wage war in and over. They live in caves, eat garbage, breed at will and drink from rain puddles. They blow themselves up, fly into buildings and die with a passion so their cause lives on.
The West will never kill that will with brute force. It hasnt worked in the mideast for centuries and wont work there. But it’s great business for the MIC. As long as somebody can make a buck off it, it will continue. Free market capitalism, ya’know. Ya gotta love it, eh?
They’ll stop one day when they get tired of killing their young and burying their futures.
The smart move is to isolate the problem. That takes skilled diplomacy and killing the profit motive in the conflict instead. Something beyond the Texas mind set of Cowboy W and his Neocon wranglers. And most likely, Hillary Clinton as well. A very weak choice, in my humble opinion, for SOS. But then, I have never been a fan of hers since her ‘stay home and make cookies’ outburst 20 years ago. The potentates in that region will jerk her like a soda then eat her lunch.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/2/2009 @ 12:51 am#11- double-teaming, eh? It’s come to that.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/2/2009 @ 1:55 am(Maybe it’s a secret code they use to identify each other.) Ahem . . . firsthand and mindset are both single words, dude.
As for the ‘substance’ — “They’ll stop one day when they get tired of killing their young and burying their futures” — Where is the evidence that they will EVER get tired of taking actions that have such costly consequences? Eating garbage and drinking from rain puddles has been S.O.P. there since long before the age of international terrorism. It is the people that feel they have nothing to lose that often turn out to be the most dangerous.
Icy Compound Word Cop (b7d162) — 1/2/2009 @ 2:01 am#20– Who knows how many decades or centuries it will take. One day they will, or cease to be. But enabling it by arms sales and deal making with those who support them out the back door doesnt do anything to help end it.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/2/2009 @ 2:08 am“bogeymen”, not “boogie men”; come the f@#% on, now!
Icy Truth (b7d162) — 1/2/2009 @ 2:37 amThat is, unless you thought we were fighting Heatwave-in-Afghanistan.
Icy Truth (b7d162) — 1/2/2009 @ 2:40 amComment by Icy Compound Word Cop — 1/2/2009 @ 2:01 am
love2008 (1b037c) — 1/2/2009 @ 2:41 amHello Icy. You are a real class act you know. 🙂 I asked you a question in another thread, do you think I should change my screen name?
Ya know, some of us have to work for a living (only 14 hours today; I was slacking).
The first thing that comes to mind is “loved2008”, mainly in reference to the election of your man, Obama.
Icy Truth (b7d162) — 1/2/2009 @ 2:56 am[…] Afghanistan surge. Jump to Comments Patterico’s Pontifications » The Surge in Afghanistan. […]
Afghanistan surge. « True Sailing Is Dead (dae628) — 1/2/2009 @ 3:31 am“Loved2008”? What’s there to love? Besides, it’s now 2009. Was wondering if I should move up to say, Love2009. I don’t know.
love2008 who wants a new name for '09 (1b037c) — 1/2/2009 @ 4:02 amHow about “suicide2009”?
Mossberg500 (9fd170) — 1/2/2009 @ 4:15 amThe only “armchair general” in the room is you. You have consistently displayed a sigularly inept knowledge of the military, military affairs, and the people posting here.
EW1(SG) (e27928) — 1/2/2009 @ 4:37 amWhen we were fighting in Iraq, the liberal trolls said it was a distraction from the real issue in Afghanistan. Now that Iraq is more or less over, it’s Afghanistan that’s the distraction.
Evil Pundit (843b74) — 1/2/2009 @ 6:31 amOnly liberals can decide the worth of going to war. I’m sure PeBO will “feel” Darfur is a worthwhile place to deploy our troops, so our military can be used like an international “meals on wheels” program.
Mossberg500 (9fd170) — 1/2/2009 @ 6:36 amAre we going to send our kids to die there in the hope of creating some kind of utopia?
This is so stupid and inane. There have been huge mistakes made in Afghanistan but we have already seen the consequences of leaving them with this: They’ll stop one day when they get tired of killing their young and burying their futures.
Instead, they sold the place to bin Laden and friends and we got hit. There is a new world situation that does not involve peace and love. We will have to deal with militant Islam until they have a reformation of the Saudis stop funding them.
One of the mistakes made in Afghanistan is we should just buy the annual opium crop every year. Instead, we have tried to destroy it in a country with no other economic system. The benefit of dealing with Iraq first was that they have a chance of a viable society. It’s sort of like the reason we went after Hitler first although he had not attacked us.
It’s sad to see the historical absurdities being pronounced by the products of progressive education.
Mike K (2cf494) — 1/2/2009 @ 8:31 amerm, 8,500 plus 2,500 plus 2,500 equals 13,500.
linda seebach (6290d5) — 1/2/2009 @ 9:03 amIt’s folly! It’s defeat! It’s Vietnam!
Where have I heard this song before? Oh yes, in pre-surge Iraq days.
We can either change tactics…or wait for the unicorns. The baseline is to keep jihad from acquiring territory, like they did when we walked away in the ’80s.
Patricia (89cb84) — 1/2/2009 @ 9:40 amHow about “suicide2009″?
Comment by Mossberg500 — 1/2/2009 @ 4:15 am
love2008 who wants a new name for '09 (1b037c) — 1/2/2009 @ 9:53 amDon’t do it, Moss! Think of the kids. I mean, isn’t it too early in the year to contemplate suicide? 🙁
Don’t do it! (Am I too late?)
Isn’t it a bit presumptuous to state that you love this year from Day 1? After all, the Messiah hasn’t actually done anything yet.
Icy Truth (b7d162) — 1/2/2009 @ 9:58 amMike K,
It sounds like you are calling me a product of a liberal education even though you are the one who objects to bombing the hell out of the place and would rather send American kids there to die needlessly while transferring our wealth to these piss poor worthless nations. To my ears, that is the thing that sounds “progressive”.
The US is home to terrorists too. They just finished a trial for some jihadis last week. Where is the surge in the United States? Is the plan in Afghanistan to make the place less jihadi prone than the US?
Instead, they sold the place to bin Laden and friends and we got hit.
We had bin laden in our cross-hairs and refused to drop a bomb on him and his group. Instead, we allied with al qaeda in Kosovo to slaughter Christians in the Balkans.
J Curtis (9237c8) — 1/2/2009 @ 10:22 amComment by Icy Truth — 1/2/2009 @ 9:58 am
love2008 who wants a new name for '09 (0c8c2c) — 1/2/2009 @ 11:55 amI can see you’ve gone back to your original name, Icy. Missed that. There are other good reasons to love a year besides Barack Obama, you know. When we say “Love 2008” we mean that love should be our goal in 2008. And it was. It doesn’t mean we should love everything about the year. And yes, we had a lot of good things happening in ’08. Apart from Obama. But in ’09 I need a name that captures the spirit of the year. Maybe Love2009. Or some other ideal. Pray for me y’all.
Dropping atomic bombs on Japan worked because Japan was our enemy. Dropping atomic bombs on Afghanistan will not work because Afghanistan is not our enemy.
It seems J Curtis you do not have a problem with killing the terrorists, but are concerned about the lives of those Americans in harm’s way. Perhaps it is the strategy or even tactics that are objectionable?
Bombing exclusively will not work in Afghanistan, because a) they are not our enemy, and b) our enemy uses guerilla tactics in the field and terrorist tactics against civilians. I wish it would, as I too share your concern for our troops.
Nobody has the tactical answers for this region of the world. Our generals and commanders know what will not work. So they will try new methods, most of which will fail, but some will succeed. Then we build on that.
There are evil men there, who have the desire and ability to hurt us. We cannot ignore them (tried that and we lost thousands on that horrible day in September). We cannot isolate them (tried that and the Taliban took over). We cannot negotiate with them (as they want our death). We have no choice.
Pons Asinorum (5fa803) — 1/2/2009 @ 12:55 pm#29- “You may very well think that. I could not possibly comment.”– Francis Urquhart (Ian Richardson) House Of Cards, BBC, 1991
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/2/2009 @ 1:05 pmThe Soviets (and the other empires’ alluded) went to conquer Afghanistan. Their enemy was the Afghan People. We are going there not to conquer but to defend ourselves and then get out. The Afghan People are not our enemy (mostly).
I wish it would be that easy. The “profit motive” is not remotely related to the world of the high Hindu Kush. It is a region that works on completely different principles than anything like the modern civilized world.
One note about skilled diplomacy: it requires the intelligence and wisdom not to call the opposition names. Name calling makes one seem so weak and incapable.
Pons Asinorum (5fa803) — 1/2/2009 @ 1:21 pmThe Soviets (and the other empires’ alluded) went to conquer Afghanistan. Their enemy was the Afghan People. We are going there not to conquer but to defend ourselves and then get out. The Afghan People are not our enemy (mostly).
I wish it would be that easy. The “profit motive” is not remotely related to the world of the high Hindu Kush. It is a region that works on completely different principles than anything like the modern civilized world.
One note about skilled diplomacy: it requires the intelligence and wisdom not to call the opposition names. Name calling makes one seem so weak and incapable.
Pons Asinorum (5fa803) — 1/2/2009 @ 1:24 pmPay no attention, Pons, anyone who claims that there has not been any diplomatic successes during the Bush admin is just showing their utter ignorance of the last 8 years.
SPQR (26be8b) — 1/2/2009 @ 2:11 pm39
How will we know when we’ve eliminated the last terrorist in Afghanistan who wishes to do harm to Americans? Do we just need to eliminate 50% of the terrorists before we bring the troops back home? 75%? What is the goal?
j curtis (45baf3) — 1/2/2009 @ 2:23 pm#42- Incursions into Aghanistan has little to do with ‘defending ourselves’ but its a nice Neocon cover. The profit motive has a great deal to do with selling arms and accessing resources and routs to and from same in that region. As for ‘name calling,’ is Cowboy W and his Neocon Wranglers seems a slur to you, then it is in the mind of the beholder. Clearly it has hit a truthful mark.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/2/2009 @ 2:55 pmDCSCA – your claims about Afghanistan are getting nuttier by the day, now you are recycling long discredited myths about the invasion.
“Neocon” label is an excellant signal that the one employing it is filled with whacky conspiracy nut nonsense.
SPQR (26be8b) — 1/2/2009 @ 2:59 pm#43 Comment by SPQR — 1/2/2009 @ 2:11 pm
I know SPQR, just having fun 😉
I have enjoyed many of your insights and humor. Have a great new Year SPQR.
Pons Asinorum (5fa803) — 1/2/2009 @ 3:14 pmGreat question JC.
Normally when it comes to threat evaluations, I believe one develops an intelligence profile. Such a profile includes many parameters such as strength, disposition, assets, chatter, allied assessments, current attack trends, recruitment trends, financial transfers, political support, etc (all kinds of stuff). Each parameter is then given a reliability factor (source, confirmation, past performance, etc).
Then based on a calculus developed for threat evaluation (which is constantly refined) one is able to assess the ability of a potential adversary.
If it is below a certain value, the potency of the adversary is considered disabled. Of course there are several degrees, but in general that is how we can say we are done.
Alternatively, we can assess the capabilities of our ally (in this case the Government of Afghanistan) and if they have a higher value than the adversary, then we can go home (kind of what we are about to do in Iraq).
At least that is how I would do it, and of course our government is much more capable than my speculation.
Pons Asinorum (5fa803) — 1/2/2009 @ 3:35 pmNot sure if I can help you here DCSCA, but I will try:
September 11, 2001.
Good luck DCSCA, I hope you can figure it out.
Pons Asinorum (5fa803) — 1/2/2009 @ 3:47 pm(I think you mean routes not routs, right?)
Resources and routes in…Afghanistan? I think this would be a much more interesting argument if you were referring to Iraq, but as you wish. Exactly what resources and routes are you referring? As for the arms trade, is it your position that this fight is being perpetuated by the arms trade?
If so, please note that all the major US Presidential candidates, a majority of Congress, and an even larger majority of the American People have and currently support our Country’s Defense efforts in Afghanistan. I do not believe that was ever even an election issue among rational people (the vast majority of the 160 million of us that voted anyway).
Pons Asinorum (5fa803) — 1/2/2009 @ 4:02 pmPons, he’s recycling long discredited left wing nonsense that was debunked many years ago.
SPQR (26be8b) — 1/2/2009 @ 4:12 pmYou didn’t really answer the question. One man’s analysis can say “stay” while another man’s calculus says “go”. You might give one parameter more import than another assessor might. It’s all very subjective.
There apparently is some point where you will be advocating for bringing the troops home. There will no doubt be someone else calling you a defeatist at that point and demanding that we must sacrifice American lives on the battlefield until the last terrorist is dead. I’m not implying that that is what you are doing towards me, I’m just making the factual point.
When Afghanistan democratically elects a Taliban government and Iraq democratically elects Baathist types back into power, what do we do then?
j curtis (03075b) — 1/2/2009 @ 4:18 pmReferring to the President of our Country using slurs are, well slurs.
It is not so much in the mind of the beholder as in the mind of the name-caller. I understand your need to deny these slurs in your own mind, but the words are slurs nevertheless (heck if I used this language describing the President of our Country in a time of War with American troops in the field, I would be ashamed as well, both intellectually and as an American – so I have complete sympathy with your denial).
Lets see:
Fighting for resources and routes in…Afghanistan
Fighting for the arms industry
Calling the President “Cowboy W” is not a slur (especially in a time of war).
The only “truthful mark” struck is way, way left of center. In fact I doubt most liberal believe you.
Anyway, thank you for making me laugh, that was most kind of you.
Pons Asinorum (5fa803) — 1/2/2009 @ 4:24 pmHow I miss John McCain. 🙁
love2008 who wants a new name for '09 (0c8c2c) — 1/2/2009 @ 4:30 pmSPQR, do you think he really believes this stuff?
I mean I feel like a greedy fish seeing an easy meal, I bite and the next thing you know, I am having a really silly (and pointless) debate with a flat-earther type.
Pons Asinorum (5fa803) — 1/2/2009 @ 4:31 pmPons, DCSCA seems to be of the shallow credulous type that believes any stupid nonsense that fits into the simplistic left-wing fantasy in his mind.
SPQR (26be8b) — 1/2/2009 @ 5:42 pmYep, it happens all the time. That’s why we have a person who makes the big bucks, called a President. Sometimes right, sometimes wrong, but he is the person elected to make the decision (either go/stay/stop/other).
Then, if that happens, perhaps you and I can debate that person together.
If they leave us in peace, then we say “see ya”. If they still keep trying to kill us, then we keep fighting.
JC, although these hypothetical’s are kind of fun to imagine, it is quite easy to create a diverging thought process where common sense and moral compasses get confused. Please remember, we do not have a choice in the matter at hand.
Pons Asinorum (5fa803) — 1/2/2009 @ 6:00 pm#46– You were exposed. You lost. Accept it.
Lesson time again about rewriting history:
1+1=2, not 11.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/2/2009 @ 6:02 pm#54– w\Which one of his mistresses are you?
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/2/2009 @ 6:03 pm#49- A little too much Cheney for me, thanks.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/2/2009 @ 6:06 pm#56- “For God’s sake, Jamie, give your brain a chance!” -Battle Of Britain, Reel 1, 1969
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/2/2009 @ 6:10 pmusing slurs are, well slurs.
Let’s not forget his usage of the term neocon. Translation: Joos = Evil.
Dmac (eb0dd0) — 1/2/2009 @ 6:17 pmYep, I see what you mean, he is out there.
Pons Asinorum (5fa803) — 1/2/2009 @ 6:40 pmDCSCA, #58. I was exposed? This is more of your incoherent nonsense. The whole “Afghanistan was invaded because the oil companies want to build a pipeline” crap you are channeling is one of those kooky conspiracy nut things that one finds on Socialist websites and Lew Rockwell’s website. The only thing that’s been “exposed” is your kookiness.
SPQR (26be8b) — 1/2/2009 @ 6:55 pmThe pipeline! Of course, an oldie but a goldie. I had forgotten all about that. Okay, now I know precisely what I am dealing with.
Thanks SPQR for clearing that up and for making me laugh. I truly had no idea what he was talking about in #45 (damn, that is funny).
Pons Asinorum (5fa803) — 1/2/2009 @ 7:09 pmYep, it happens all the time. That’s why we have a person who makes the big bucks, called a President. Sometimes right, sometimes wrong, but he is the person elected to make the decision (either go/stay/stop/other).
You got to kidding me. I was asking for your opinion and you punted it to the president and buried your head in the sand. I guess the idiot masses could elect Michael Moore, Rosie O’Donnel, Barrack Obama, Peewee Herman or OJ Simpson for president and your argument remains the same.
j curtis (31c783) — 1/2/2009 @ 7:12 pmPons, what ought to be more amusing is whatever tactic DCSCA uses to pretend not to really be the kook his writings reveal.
SPQR (26be8b) — 1/2/2009 @ 7:22 pm#62- Dmac spells Webster’s?
Time for a lesson. 1+1= 2, not 11.
ABC is a television network, not a sighting by a yellow jacket.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/2/2009 @ 7:35 pm#64- My. The conservative mindset is indeed a blunder to behold.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/2/2009 @ 7:37 pm$48 — “… and of course our government is much more capable than my speculation.”
19 guys with $500,000 kicked your multi-trillion dollar government assets through the uprights at Giants Stadium. Competence is hardly a term associated with the Bush Administration.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/2/2009 @ 7:42 pmAgain, I will issue a challenge to you, since you seem to have missed the last one.
I wager strongly that you are incapable of answering direct questions – questions posed civilly and without insult as judged by DRJ and Aphrael – without dodging the issue raised or insulting the speaker.
If you accept, I suggest the following stakes: The loser goes away.
If you prove me wrong, so be it. If you fail to prove me wrong, we lose nothing but someone incapable of civil discourse.
Do you accept?
Scott Jacobs (90ff96) — 1/2/2009 @ 7:48 pmScott, I doubt that the bet will be taken (but who knows). The goal of this poster is very clear. Some of the “insults” are being repeated on other threads by the person.
And the sad part is, it doesn’t have to be that way.
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/2/2009 @ 7:58 pmScott – DCSCA is just another in a long line of unhappy leftcult members who come here to inflict their unhappiness on others. That this one chooses to project an effete eccentric personality makes no fundamental difference. Recycling of comments and repetition of boilerplate leftcult conventional wisdom showd this on has little imagination or range in spite of its grand pretensions.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 1/2/2009 @ 8:26 pmI’ve seen versions of Eliza that mimic sentience better.
SPQR (26be8b) — 1/2/2009 @ 8:26 pm#73 daleyrocks:
Pretty short on smarts, but damn is it long on pretension!
EW1(SG) (e27928) — 1/2/2009 @ 8:36 pmI already gave you my opinion on why I think we should not use nuclear weapons (#39 first paragraph).
I already gave you my opinion on why I think bombing-only will not be sufficient to obtain victory (#39 third paragraph).
I already gave you my opinion on why I think we must fight (#39 last paragraph).
I already gave you my opinion on when I think the war should be stopped (#48).
I already gave you my opinion on why the final decision is the Presidents (#57).
I played with your hypothetical’s (the “what if” stuff) all of which were my opinions (#57).
I am not sure why you are having a spasm.
Not sure what the big mystery is for you, but I hope you figure it out.
Your disgust with the American People and the principles of democracy are revealed by your words.
I am not certain what kind of junta you prefer, but my money is on the “idiot masses” (in fact I am proudly one of them). And yes, my argument would be EXACTLY the same. You see in a democracy or more specifically in a republic, we elect officials to make decisions about such matters as war, peace, law…second thought never mind (you will not understand).
I hope you find your way JC, good luck.
Pons Asinorum (5fa803) — 1/2/2009 @ 8:37 pmInteresting how you a) only parse only part of my sentence — I guess too scared to use the whole sentence– then b) attach it to an economic argument which is completely out of context, and c) came up with “19” guys as though that is the sole complement of the Executive branch.
Not only was SPQR right about you, he was kind considering your intellect.
Pons Asinorum (5fa803) — 1/2/2009 @ 8:47 pm#72- Truth as ‘insult.” My. Again, the conservative mind is a blunder to behold.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/2/2009 @ 10:21 pm#71– “Sorry Scotty.” — Chuck Yeager (Sam Shepard) ‘The Right Stuff,’reel 2, 1983
You do like to order others about, don’t you.
Here’s a more challenging (and revealing) propositon for you. Give it a try. You have an eternity to answer and I’ll check back on you from decade to decade.
Over the past 150 years or so, list TEN positive things conservativism has left as a legacy to better our world.
Lotsa luck.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/2/2009 @ 10:40 pm#72– Eric, you were tagged out at second three innings ago and you’re still running the bases for home. You’re out, fella.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/2/2009 @ 10:43 pm#73- Put on a little Nat King Cole… ‘Smile, though your heart is breaking, smile…’
Americans have rejected conservativism. You lost. Accept it. Move on… dot org. =ugh=
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/2/2009 @ 11:16 pmYeah. Didn’t think you would be up to it. You are unable to hold polite debate, and thus don’t feel like losing. That’s fine.
I’ll just take your refusal to be an admission of defeat.
Scott Jacobs (90ff96) — 1/3/2009 @ 12:06 am#82- “You may very well think that. I could not possibly comment.” Francis Urquhart (Ian Richardson) House Of Cards, BBC, 1991
List nine, Scotty.
You can’t, can you.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/3/2009 @ 12:21 am#82- Over the past 150 years or so, list TEN positive things conservativism has left as a legacy to better our world.
The world awaits…
Try nine.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/3/2009 @ 12:25 am#82 List eight?
I’ll take your avoidance as an admission of the terrifying realization that there are none.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/3/2009 @ 12:29 amOver the past 150 years or so, list TEN positive things conservativism has left as a legacy to better our world.
Lotsa luck.
You’re kidding, right? You must be kidding, because this statement reveals so much historical ignorance and strawman fallaciousness it could have come straight out of Howard Zinn. This is what happens when one tries to project a modern leftist mindset on people who lived in an entirely different time within an entirely different cultural framework. It’s even thrown in with a vague generalization that such accomplishments should have “bettered our world” when you never even bothered to define what exactly would constitute such betterment.
Modern conservatism didn’t even come into form until Barry Goldwater bothered to outline what its principles should be in Conscience of a Conservative. If you had tried to impose these modern definitions of “conservatism” and “liberalism” on Americans 150 years ago, no one would know what the hell you were talking about. You equate “liberalism” with a long-running record of protecting individual freedoms while conservatism has supressed them, but it’s a false dichotomy. A modern conservative would have been horrified by the racial separatism that was considered du jour by Americans 150 years ago, because back then, people though differently about race than they do today–even so-called liberals during that time would have thought that the idea of say, mixed-race marraiges would have been absurd. Yet you imply that these same conservatives would have acted as apologists for such segregation and prejudicial mindsets rather than opposed them.
Quite frankly, your smug demand to “list” the ways that conservatism has “bettered our world” isn’t even worth engaging on an intellectual level because it’s base sophistry, an appeal to prejudice and intellectual dishonesty which presumes that only those who share your opinions are correct and all those who don’t are ignorant or wicked by default. So spare us the cheap sideshow theatrics–if you can actually make a spirited defense of the modern progressive mindset with a clear understanding in where its philosophical roots lie (and here’s a hint, some of the people who laid that foundation did quite the opposite of “bettering our world”), then your arguments might be worth engaging on a mature level. As it stands right now, you’ve offered the intellectual equivalent of a shit sandwich.
Another Chris (c8de0b) — 1/3/2009 @ 12:42 amI see that J Curtis is off his meds again.
Icy Truth (b7d162) — 1/3/2009 @ 1:52 amAnd what was it they did back in 2004? 2002? They rejected liberalism, didn’t they?
Pablo (99243e) — 1/3/2009 @ 2:45 am76
Your disgust with the American People and the principles of democracy are revealed by your words.
I know. I’ve never tried to conceal it. There are no “principles” of democracy. Hitler was democratically elected. The people of Afghanistan would elect bin laden as their leader if they were allowed to. The US elected Obama because he was the closest thing to Osama they could find.
87
I see that J Curtis is off his meds again.
Am I supposed to call you a name now?
j curtis (bf21a3) — 1/3/2009 @ 5:02 amComment by DCSCA — 1/2/2009 @ 6:03 pm
love2008 who wants a new name for '09 (0c8c2c) — 1/3/2009 @ 5:46 amMoron.
Americans have rejected conservativism. You lost. Accept it. Move on… dot org. =ugh=
Comment by DCSCA — 1/2/2009 @ 11:16 pm
love2008 who wants a new name for '09 (0c8c2c) — 1/3/2009 @ 6:12 amThis must be the most moronic, stupidest, and most retarded statement ever to be made. Obama’s victory was because of the conservative vote. He knew it that is why he is picking people who are more conservative-leaning in his next cabinet. He has also picked a conservative Pastor to pray the prayer of invocation at his inauguration. A vote for Obama was a vote against the status-quo. Not a vote against conservatism. If just the liberals and all those whacko left-wingnuts were the only votes Obama got, do you think he would have smelled the white house? Your stupidity is embarrassing.
Over the past 150 years or so, list TEN positive things conservativism has left as a legacy to better our world.
Lotsa luck.
Comment by DCSCA — 1/2/2009 @ 10:40 pm
DCSCA,
Another Chris is quite right. But just because I’m tired of your repeated and tiresome false claim that conservatives don’t believe that conservatism is a better legacy to our world, here are MORE things than you asked for (over the last 150 years or so):
1. More emphasis than liberalism on governmental fiscal responsibility (no, not EVERY conservative shares this view but a majority does)
2. More emphasis than liberalism on respect for following the law even when it does not benefit oneself (how the two parties handle disputed elections is a stellar but by NO means isolated example of this)
2. More emphasis than liberalism on respect for human life from conception to natural death (yes, I do include how conservatives handle war in this). Deserving special mention here is the TRULY pro-woman stance of offering true help to women facing the crisis of unplanned pregnancies, not the cheap, false, insulting “help” of “Here, have a dead baby to grieve for years – that’s THE MOST we can do for you.”
3. Action, not merely words, on racial justice and equity (which party, pray tell, was against Jim Crow laws and which was for? Which party is the descendant of the party supporting slavery? I include in this the TRUE racial progressiveness of rejecting affirmative action, the latter of which has hindered, not helped, the goal of a lack of focus on race in this country
4. More respect than liberalism for the value and purpose of the traditional nuclear family in society and its undeniable better effects on children
5. Increased private charity (study after study documents how much more conservatives give of their OWN money, not others’, to help poor people)
6. Massive, unprecendented aid to combat AIDS in Africa, if you go by President Bush’s actions
7. More respect generally than liberalism of the value of faith in God in a person’s life (any form, provided it’s not life-threatening extremism like radical Islam)
8. More emphasis than liberalism on the rights of our country’s people to security (and attendant spending on defense) as opposed to trying to make the rest of the world like us, “respect us” (whatever that means) and feel good about us
9. More emphasis on self-sacrifice and doing what is RIGHT as opposed to “MY RIGHTS”/feeling good (as evidenced by liberalism’s stance on abortion, drug laws, gay marriage, etc etc etc etc)
10. More emphasis than liberalism on ALL the rights in the Constitution (see Amendment, Second). (I say this as someone who will never personally own a gun by the way, but I will defend to the death YOUR right to own one.)
And, just for good measure,
11. More emphasis than liberalism on UNIVERSAL application of all the rights in the Constitution for our citizens (see Amendment, First). That is, what is the political affiliation, do you think, of those who draw up “hate speech” laws and “speech codes” on college campuses, etc.?
I would prefer not to hear you repeat falsely again that conservatives can’t come up with anything – thanks.
Notice I never called liberals evil or completely off the mark – only that many (not all) of liberalism’s ideas are simply not good for society, families, or how people are made. That is what conservatives believe.
Your turn. 10 things please. Actually, how about 11 like I gave you. Thanks.
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 1/3/2009 @ 6:58 amThe troll has failed to do anything but abandon each vapid “point” in turn.
SPQR (26be8b) — 1/3/2009 @ 7:21 amTo get back to the issue:
In the 14 Nov 2008 issue of the New Yorker, Dr. David KilCullen, the Australian Colonel counter insurgency expert who helped General Petraeus plan and implement the Iraq strategy weighs in on a variant for Afghanistan. The article is entitled, “Kilcullen on Afghanistan: “It’s Still Winnable, But Only Just.”
It’s a think piece.
arch (feb22b) — 1/3/2009 @ 7:49 amComment by no one you know — 1/3/2009 @ 6:58 am
love2008 who wants a new name for '09 (1b037c) — 1/3/2009 @ 8:19 amExcellent work there, NOYK. And a happy new year to you my friend. 🙂
Comment by love2008 who wants a new name for ’09 — 1/3/2009 @ 8:19 am
love2008,
Happy New Year to you also.
PS What’s wrong with “love2009” for your new handle? Someone else already suggested that and I think it’s a good idea.
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 1/3/2009 @ 8:39 amAmericans have rejected conservativism. You lost. Accept it. Move on… dot org. =ugh=
Comment by DCSCA — 1/2/2009 @ 11:16 pm
This must be the most moronic, stupidest, and most retarded statement ever to be made.
Comment by no one you know — 1/3/2009 @ 6:58 am
Nah, it’s simply another infantile statement, first ensconced within, then emanating from the Progressive Cult, which also constitutes the Progressive Mind.
They’ve got an infinite number of such statements, virtually all of which either specifically deny or at least disregard reality, and any discussion thereof.
So that’s all you are ever going to get from hominids such as DCSCA, infantile statements presuming or at least hoping to involve everyone in their own infantile “world”, complete with its narcissistic, ad hoc Fairy Tale structures/”narratives”.
In other words, you are never going to get a “DCSA” out of its infantile La-La-Land by means of rational discussion.
As proven.
J."Trashman" Peden (5bd536) — 1/3/2009 @ 8:41 amopps, scratch “Comment by no one you know” in my above post, replace with “Comment by love2008 who wants a new name for ’09 — 1/3/2009 @ 6:12 am” for correct attribution.
My apologies to both of youse.
J."Trashman" Peden (5bd536) — 1/3/2009 @ 8:48 amAm I supposed to call you a name now?
— Why would you do that? I didn’t call you a name.
Icy Truth (b7d162) — 1/3/2009 @ 10:03 am#94 Comment by arch — 1/3/2009 @ 7:49 am
Arch, that was a great article, thanks.
Pons Asinorum (5fa803) — 1/3/2009 @ 12:12 pmWhen Love2008 isn’t on your side as a Liberal, you have truly jumped the shark… 🙂
Scott Jacobs (90ff96) — 1/3/2009 @ 1:24 pm#86– This is what happens when one tries to project a modern leftist mindset on people who lived in an entirely different time within an entirely different cultural framework.
I see. The Modern Conservative era of “1+1=11, not 2.” It has done so well for us. Americans will keep that in mind as they file for bankruptcy and bail out Wall St and ever other vital organ to sustain modern life.
Modern conservatism didn’t even come into form until Barry Goldwater bothered to outline what its principles should be in Conscience of a Conservative. If you had tried to impose these modern definitions of “conservatism” and “liberalism” on Americans 150 years ago, no one would know what the hell you were talking about.
I see. I’ll allow you have sound reason for omitting Dixiecrats and the Birchers. That blight needs ‘Stalinized’ from your history. So embarrassing. But then things were so different 150 years ago, weren’t they. Of course if you check Webster’s, the definition of ‘conservatism’ was coined in 1832. But then they were so illiterate then, weren’t they. After all, Confederates were conservatives and Unionists, like lefty Lincoln, liberals. When I visited the Soviet Union, the party monitors traveling around with us tried to ‘impose’ upon us over and over there was no Russian history before the, ‘glorious revolution of October, 1917.’ I see you’ve read their handbook.
It never ceases to amaze how ‘modern conservatives’ believe it’s purely an American cancer and not a disease that has wrought suffering upon other cultures in other lands in other guises in times past. Thankfully, it is finally in remission in the United States.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/3/2009 @ 2:20 pm#92– Are you doing Scotty’s homework for him? For shame. Try eating his lunch next. I’ll have to peruse you post for substance when I have more time. But I automatically give you credit for trying. T’ain’t easy.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/3/2009 @ 2:25 pmComment by DCSCA — 1/3/2009 @ 2:20 pm
Hey, Woody, before you completely piss off everyone here, do everyone (including yourself) a favor and just leave.
Silence is truly golden.
Oh, and BTW, everything you have said here is 100% spot on!
AD (ad74e9) — 1/3/2009 @ 2:26 pmThank you for bringing it all to our attention.
#86- A postscript. So after a long-winded ‘non-denial denial’ flailing of verbal chaff, you acknowledge you cannot list ten positive things conservativism has left as a legacy to better our world.
Thank you. I’d have given you points for attempting five.
Diss-missed.
Next.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/3/2009 @ 2:33 pm#90– Better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all. Write a book.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/3/2009 @ 2:49 pmMike K,
It sounds like you are calling me a product of a liberal education even though you are the one who objects to bombing the hell out of the place and would rather send American kids there to die needlessly while transferring our wealth to these piss poor worthless nations. To my ears, that is the thing that sounds “progressive”.
If you will avoid silly generalizations, I will try a discourse. If it descends into trollspeak, I will quit.
The American Army is a volunteer organization staffed by men and women who think these things are important. We tried your solution of abandoning these “piss poor” nations for the Clinton decade and it came back to bite us. Pakistan has nuclear weapons. It may end up with India having to bomb them into the stone age but it would be nice to avoid that, if possible.
One way is to try to stabilize Afghanistan as it was before the 1979 Soviet invasion, stimulated by Jimmy Carter’s fecklessness. The first stage was punishing the Taliban for allowing al Qeada to use bases there to attack us. Then we have made an effort to provide enough security for a stable government to form. If it goes back to the warlord system, and it is close, we will have more trouble.
Much more important is Pakistan but it is hardly any more likely to survive as a nation state. The partition of India was a terrible blunder by Mountbatten who had many other blunders to his credit.
The US is home to terrorists too. They just finished a trial for some jihadis last week. Where is the surge in the United States?
We like to call it the border fence and enforcement of the law.
Is the plan in Afghanistan to make the place less jihadi prone than the US?
I don’t know what that means.
Instead, they sold the place to bin Laden and friends and we got hit.
We had bin laden in our cross-hairs and refused to drop a bomb on him and his group. Instead, we allied with al qaeda in Kosovo to slaughter Christians in the Balkans.
Comment by J Curtis
First, it wasn’t we who wouldn’t give Billy Waugh and the CIA the go ahead to take him out. It was Clinton and his nancy boy advisor, Anthony Lake.
Second, you might try learning something about Kosovo before you post crap. This might be a good place to start. If you read Michael Totten’s blog, you will sound less stupid.
I would be less confrontational if you were.
Mike K (2cf494) — 1/3/2009 @ 2:52 pmRemember your own advice, Dr. K. This character is just a troll. I think it is nice that you tried, but get ready for the insults and bizarre statements.
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/3/2009 @ 2:55 pmComment by Mike K — 1/3/2009 @ 2:52 pm
There is no link.
AD (ad74e9) — 1/3/2009 @ 2:56 pmI don’t respond to trolls but I will compliment NOYK on the list.
that many (not all) of liberalism’s ideas are simply not good for society, families, or how people are made. That is what conservatives believe.
New Years in Britain is a good example. Theodore Dalrymple has many examples. You could spend a week reading his articles and his books and find it well spent.
Mike K (2cf494) — 1/3/2009 @ 3:00 pmDCSCA:
No, it hasn’t. The faux math lessons have accomplished nothing, aside from permanently cementing your reputation as an incurable idiot. Which I guess does accomplish something.
Of course they were, dumbass. In 1859, slavery was still legal in roughly half the states. Anyone who supported that status quo or that tradition was living on a different planet from anyone who supports today’s. So to compare yesterday’s “conservatives” to today’s, or even one country’s “conservatives” to another’s, is pure and unadulterated dumbassery.
And no, I didn’t say that because I think 1 + 1 = 11. I said it because I know that D + C + S + C + A = incurable retard.
Xrlq (62cad4) — 1/3/2009 @ 3:01 pmOn my amplitude-shift decoder ring, it spells:
M O R O N !
AD (ad74e9) — 1/3/2009 @ 3:04 pmIt was Clinton and his nancy boy advisor,
Mike, I think our Troll here may have much in common with that characterization.
Dmac (eb0dd0) — 1/3/2009 @ 3:11 pmPS What’s wrong with “love2009″ for your new handle? Someone else already suggested that and I think it’s a good idea.
Comment by no one you know — 1/3/2009 @ 8:39 am
love2008 who wants a new name for '09 (1b037c) — 1/3/2009 @ 3:26 pmOkay. Looks like I might consider that. I am going to spend more time praying and fasting for divine clarity on that. Thanks.
Hilary is going to pacify the Taliban?
Load up, rev up, and charge.
JerryT (cafc90) — 1/3/2009 @ 3:32 pmWow just flew in and discovered truthy has some stiff competition for top petty, smug, repetitive, sanctimonious, shallow, douchebag Progressive award. Go for the gold, DSCSA!
Jack Klompus (b0e238) — 1/3/2009 @ 3:34 pm#92– Are you doing Scotty’s homework for him? For shame. Try eating his lunch next. I’ll have to peruse you post for substance when I have more time. But I automatically give you credit for trying. T’ain’t easy.
Comment by DCSCA — 1/3/2009 @ 2:25 pm
DCSCA,
Here is a quote from you about two hours prior:
That was not Scott’s homework, that was directed at all of us. Not “Scott can’t do it” but “there are none.”
Really, now, do try to read what you write before you make yourself look so foolish.
Translation of your 2:25 pm comment: “I know you took my challenge, which I did in effect address to everyone, but I either don’t want to bother taking a few moments reading what someone else wrote in direct response to my request, or I have no answer for the points made so I’ll just make up something about having no time to read it.”
The unmistakable impression you leave is your incredible lack of common courtesy, honesty in conversation, and/or intellect – I don’t much care which. I’d be delighted to be proven wrong. Unfortunately I have things to do tonight which I trust will be more productive than hoping for such proof from you, given your track record so far on these few threads. Hope you have a good evening.
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 1/3/2009 @ 3:37 pmOkay. Looks like I might consider that. I am going to spend more time praying and fasting for divine clarity on that. Thanks.
Comment by love2008 who wants a new name for ’09 — 1/3/2009 @ 3:26 pm
my dear love2008,
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 1/3/2009 @ 3:40 pmHere’s some divine clarity (:) ) for you: If Almighty God gave Man the power to choose all the names of the animals and virtually all the children of Adam, I think He will certainly delight in your freedom to choose whatever nom de blog pleases you. 😀
Remember, NOYK—-this character is about eliciting your angry response, and wasting your time. That’s it. Remember TMJ? He or she or it out and out stated that that was the goal.
This is no different.
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/3/2009 @ 3:40 pmAnd I don’t mean love2008, of course!
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/3/2009 @ 3:41 pmYour turn. 10 things please. Actually, how about 11 like I gave you. Thanks.
Comment by no one you know — 1/3/2009 @ 6:58 am
love2008 who wants a new name for '09 (1b037c) — 1/3/2009 @ 3:48 pmActually, NOYK you gave 12 points. Two points were given to number “one”, twice. That’s what I call “over and above measure.” Just like God gives us more than we ask for. Good job.
Hi Eric,
Good to see you around. Appreciate the good advice.
This character hasn’t made me lose my temper yet (trolls, with only one exception I can remember on these boards, generally don’t). But I must admit it’s great fun turning trolls’ own words against them and then watching them get so annoyed that they start sputtering nonsense.
Point taken about not encouraging dishonest commenters though (i.e. those who really don’t want discussion, just bile). Frankly I think they live to get sworn at so they can feel like martyrs. Which is why I always try to treat them with respect even if their views have to get my respect “the old fashioned way.” So they will be the unequivocal jerks, not me. 🙂
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 1/3/2009 @ 3:50 pm#116– As I said, I’ll ‘read’ your paper later and flush out your errors. Ofuscation, it seems, is a conservative mantre. From what I’ve perused so far, empty vagaries and zero declarative statements of a positive legacy left by conservativism for the world to build on.
It should ber fairly easy exercise, at least when applied to th United States. That is, if there are any. A few examples for the progressive legacy:
1. The 40 hour work week.
2. Voting rights for women.
See how easy it is?
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/3/2009 @ 3:54 pmI think He will certainly delight in your freedom to choose whatever nom de blog pleases you.
Comment by no one you know — 1/3/2009 @ 3:40 pm
love2008 who wants a new name for '09 (1b037c) — 1/3/2009 @ 3:56 pmLOL! Okay, you got me there. LOL.
Hi NOYK:
I have sometimes seen people I had thought were “trolls” actually discuss things in a civil fashion. It all depends on the intent of the poster—troll or dissident? I think that, since many posters here tend toward the right of our political divide, some “dissidents” feel driven to “speak truth to power.” But other times, it seems that it is just about (as I have observed before) acting “tough” in an electronically safe environment, without much of a unifying principle besides being unpleasant.
Still, it is a good thing that you try, especially if you don’t get angry. Since, after all, getting people angry (something that seems like quite a waste of time) is too often the goal. And you might actually see some genuine discussion as a result.
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/3/2009 @ 4:02 pmA few examples for the progressive legacy:
1. The 40 hour work week.
2. Voting rights for women.
That’s all you can come up with? Geez, you’re lazy.
The first blinding speed example took over 200 years to accomplish. Whoopee.
Your second example is dubious at best, because women showed their appreciation for their newfound voting power granted by progressives by overwhelmingly sweeping Democrats out of office. The Dems lost 62 seats in the House and ten seats in the Senate. The Dems got shellacked in the 1920 Presidential election: 404-127 in electoral votes, while the popular vote, 60% to 34%, is to this day the largest landslide since 1820.
Paul (creator of "Staunch Brayer") (43e430) — 1/3/2009 @ 5:04 pmYes, Paul, but the 1920 election was a referendum on the disaster that was Woodrow Wilson – including the suppression of dissent by imprisonment, Red Scare, the rise of influence of the KKK in Democratic circles, the racist campaign of the Democratic Presidential Slate of Cox and FDR, etc.
SPQR (26be8b) — 1/3/2009 @ 5:17 pmIf you read Michael Totten’s blog, you will sound less stupid.
Comment by Mike K — 1/3/2009 @ 2:52 pm
Reading Totten hasn’t exactly done wonders for your intellect.
Is your boy Totten going to convince me that we didn’t ally with al qaeda in Kosovo to slaughter Christians in the Balkans? That would be an amazing feat. I don’t believe there are too many Americans who have done more research than myself on the topic and I suggest you familiarize yourself with bin laden’s Albanian al qaeda operation where he trained KLA forces before he handed them over to serve under the command of Wesley Clark.
j curtis (6a1ffd) — 1/3/2009 @ 5:18 pmj curtis, your comments are not getting more coherent lately …
Especially if you think that the KLA served under the “command” of Wesley Clark.
SPQR (26be8b) — 1/3/2009 @ 5:20 pmComment by SPQR — 1/3/2009 @ 5:20 pm
I distinctly remember the negotiations between Clinton and bin Laden working out the Status of Forces agreement over the Kosovo expedition – isn’t that why Ron Brown was sent to the Balkans?
AD (ad74e9) — 1/3/2009 @ 5:30 pm#92: I see you’re focusing on ‘modern conservatism’ as manifested in the United States. More is the pity. I’ll attempt to follow your numbering.
1. More emphasis than liberalism on governmental fiscal responsibility (no, not EVERY conservative shares this view but a majority does)
Wrong. Deficits have soared under administrations cloaked in the guise of ‘conservativism.’ A real swing and a miss. You’re ‘majority’ is an ineffective minority, it seems. Hardly a legacy issue you’d want to claim, either. Denied, as a favor.
2. More emphasis than liberalism on respect for following the law even when it does not benefit oneself (how the two parties handle disputed elections is a stellar but by NO means isolated example of this)
THat’s silly. And of course it implies conservatism is an infection unique to one party. The wreckage of the Grant, Harding and Nixon administrations totally refute your premise anyway. The verdict on the Bush crowd is forthcoming but appears dour. Abrahamoff etc… Quite a provincial answer.. And hardly a ‘legacy’ listing. Next.
3. More emphasis than liberalism on respect for human life from conception to natural death (yes, I do include how conservatives handle war in this). Deserving special mention here is the TRULY pro-woman stance of offering true help to women facing the crisis of unplanned pregnancies, not the cheap, false, insulting “help” of “Here, have a dead baby to grieve for years – that’s THE MOST we can do for you.”
I see. So liberals like Jonas Salk, Albert Einstein… Oppenheimer… Curie… Katharine Hepburn… Bogart… a young Reagan… they treasured life less than say, old Ronald Reagan… or old Douglas MacArthur or old Dwight Eisenhower, eh? Wrong. Why is this so hard for conservatives to do. A simple list of ten positive things. Next.
4. Action, not merely words, on racial justice and equity (which party, pray tell, was against Jim Crow laws and which was for? Which party is the descendant of the party supporting slavery? I include in this the TRUE racial progressiveness of rejecting affirmative action, the latter of which has hindered, not helped, the goal of a lack of focus on race in this country.
I see. Well this nebulous statement is just wrong- or wrong-headed. You might want to take it up with the conservative Klan, the conservative Dixiecrats, the conservative Birchers and so on. And as a gentle reminder, secessionist conservatives hell-bent on breaking up the United States and were pro-slavery in 1860. We called them Confederates (also traitors) in New York.
5. More respect than liberalism for the value and purpose of the traditional nuclear family in society and its undeniable better effects on children
Wrong… and nonsense. Conservatives have no monopoly on, or better respect for, family values than anybody else. That’s, dare I say it, ‘elitist’ thinking on your part. Ask Harding. Of the more recent crop of croppers, Dole, Gingrich, Limbaugh, Reagan (who knocked up Nancy, by the way, before they were wed) even McCain… divorced philanderers all. But then this isnt a legacy issue, anyway. And again, conservatism is a disease not confined to North America. Denied.
5. Increased private charity (study after study documents how much more conservatives give of their OWN money, not others’, to help poor people)
I see. And no hard data, but a game scatter shot effort on your part. Hardly a legacy issue, though. And of course, not unique to conservatism. You’d get an argument from liberals like Spielberg and such after the Mayhoff mess, who lost billions in charity donations just last month. Of course, Clara Barton was a Unionist. But then that was a liberal cause in 1860. Not a unique legacy issue. Denied.
7. Massive, unprecedented aid to combat AIDS in Africa, if you go by President Bush’s actions
I see. for the purposes of your list, Bush is a conservative today. I’ll allow humanitarian efforts are a plus but it’s not a unique legacy solely in the conservative column. Disallowed. For instance, Bush’s AIDS package is no Marshall Plan, a progressive effort all the way.
8. More respect generally than liberalism of the value of faith in God in a person’s life (any form, provided it’s not life-threatening extremism like radical Islam)
I see. “My God is better than your God.” God help you. Not a legacy lister. Denied.
8. More emphasis than liberalism on the rights of our country’s people to security (and attendant spending on defense) as opposed to trying to make the rest of the world like us, “respect us” (whatever that means) and feel good about us
I see. So FDR, Truman, JFK, LBJ etc., all failed at keeping the nation secure. WW1, WW2, duck and cover ring a bell? Hiroshima? Bikini Atoll perhaps? Korea? The Cuban Missile Crisis? (I’m sure you’re not Dana Perino.) Security, to you, is a 15th aircraft carrier, not a good job? ‘Happiness Is A Warm Gun,” as it were. Suggest you review the fall of the Roman Empire and the recent dissolution of the Soviet Union on that point. Progressives like FDR who spent billions on defense to fight World War II were in error, then, over say, conservatives like Cooledge or Hoover, who were battled by rabid progressives like Billy Mitchell on defense matters. Not really a legacy issue anyway. Denied.
.
9. More emphasis on self-sacrifice and doing what is RIGHT as opposed to “MY RIGHTS”/feeling good (as evidenced by liberalism’s stance on abortion, drug laws, gay marriage, etc etc etc etc)
I see. Suggest you take up ‘self-sacrifice’ with the thousands of JFK’s Peace Corps volunteers. Not a unique legacy. None of these ‘cultural war’ dustups really tally to the caliber of a legacy as times are always changing. If you wore a miniskirt in 1940 you’d have been arrested. Denied. And of course, opium dens flourished long ago in the United States when Chinese trade was ‘high’ and howza about that new fangled Coca-Cola at the turn of the last century? Cocaine a main ingredient at the start, you know. Denied, denied, denied.
10. More emphasis than liberalism on ALL the rights in the Constitution (see Amendment, Second). (I say this as someone who will never personally own a gun by the way, but I will defend to the death YOUR right to own one.)
I see. Odd choice as the United States Constitution is a very progressive document penned by the radicals of their time, designed to be amended as times and circumstances changed. Not a uniquely ‘conservative’ legacy at all. Denied, denied, denied.
11. More emphasis than liberalism on UNIVERSAL application of all the rights in the Constitution for our citizens (see Amendment, First). That is, what is the political affiliation, do you think, of those who draw up “hate speech” laws and “speech codes” on college campuses, etc.?
See #10. Denied.
I give you an A for effort but a D for not being capable of listing even five things conservatism has left in history to better the condition of our world. Failure is not an option in my mind for conservatives as they can be saved from themselves.
The cancer of conservatism has always inhibited progress. And always will. It is not confined to the United States, or either major party (although the tumor has grown mostly in the GOP for nearly 40 years.)Thankfully, it is in remission.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/3/2009 @ 5:35 pmActually DCSCA, your response to the item 8 is pretty hilarious since you seem to think that WWI was about making our nation “secure”. Given that WWI had literally nothing to do with US “security” that’s pretty hilarious. But hardly the funniest part of your comment. Already forgotten Woodrow Wilson’s legacy in the suppression of liberty within the US, I see? FDR’s incompetence seems to have escaped you as well, between the surprise at Pearl Harbor and FDR’s handling of MacArthur’s botched work in the Pacific. JFK and LBJ bungle Vietnam and you cite them as securing our nation? Hilarious.
SPQR (26be8b) — 1/3/2009 @ 5:43 pm#126- “Lazy?” Nice try. The myopic conservative automatically tries to split conservatism into a them versus us battle, belittle the better then warp the conflict into a 1+1=11 universe. Conservatism is a cancer not unique to either major party or this country.
The challenge remains.
List ten things conservatism has left as a positive legacy to better our world over the past 150 years or so.
A short list of declarative sentences will do.
You can’t do it. Wonder why?
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/3/2009 @ 5:46 pmComment by DCSCA — 1/3/2009 @ 5:35 pm
Bitter, and Ignorant, is no way to go through life!
AD (ad74e9) — 1/3/2009 @ 5:50 pmAD, that his understanding of history is filled with so much mythology is indicative enough.
SPQR (26be8b) — 1/3/2009 @ 5:54 pm#132- You were tagged out at second in the sixth inning of last weeks game. Stop running the bases. It’s a new game.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/3/2009 @ 5:54 pmBitter, Ignorant, and full of Profound Non-sequiters.
AD (ad74e9) — 1/3/2009 @ 5:56 pmYah got nuthin’.
#134- “Fat, drunk and [conservative] is no way to go through life, son.” –Dean Wormer “Animal House,” reel 2, 1978
If you’re gonna do it. Do it right. <- free slogan for rabid conservatives.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/3/2009 @ 5:57 pmThat’s “Fat, drunk, and stupid”, Stupid!;
AD (ad74e9) — 1/3/2009 @ 5:58 pmand, you do resemble that remark.
DCSCA #136, still embarrassed at how little you know of history? Well, that’s a liberal education for you.
SPQR (26be8b) — 1/3/2009 @ 6:06 pmComment by SPQR — 1/3/2009 @ 6:06 pm
Please, there are some very fine Liberal Arts Colleges & Universities, and DCSCA might qualify for entrance at them if he can overcome all of the handicaps he has developed within the public-educational system to which he, unfortunately, has been consigned.
AD (ad74e9) — 1/3/2009 @ 6:19 pm#140- List ten.
You cant. Wonder why?
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/3/2009 @ 6:41 pm#139 – I guess you would know.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/3/2009 @ 6:42 pmDCSCA, I only need to list one. Conservatives worked to free hundreds of millions from Communism. Liberalism not only allowed Communism to expand, but presided over the murders of more than a hundred million people at the hands of Communists while lauding them ala Duranty.
But you wouldn’t know that, since you lack any knowledge of history.
SPQR (26be8b) — 1/3/2009 @ 6:46 pmComment by SPQR — 1/3/2009 @ 6:46 pm
AD (ad74e9) — 1/3/2009 @ 6:49 pmPoint, Set, Match!
“ Given that WWI had literally nothing to do with US “security” that’s pretty hilarious. But hardly the funniest part of your comment. Already forgotten Woodrow Wilson’s legacy in the suppression of liberty within the US, I see? FDR’s incompetence seems to have escaped you as well, between the surprise at Pearl Harbor and FDR’s handling of MacArthur’s botched work in the Pacific. JFK and LBJ bungle Vietnam and you cite them as securing our nation? Hilarious.”
You still don’t get it, do you, conservative.
1+1=2, not 11. No matter how hard you try to convince the world it adds up to 11. It doesn’t. It adds up to 2.
List eight. Seven, perhaps? How about five?
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/3/2009 @ 6:52 pmDCSCA, #146, you really are that ignorant eh? And willing to prove it in public? Astonishing.
SPQR (26be8b) — 1/3/2009 @ 6:54 pmConservatives worked to free hundreds of millions from Communism.
What’s more, liberals embraced Charles Darwin’s “survival of the fittest.” Every mass murderer of the 20th Century–Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, Pol Pot–endorsed and employed variations of that doctrine.
Paul (creator of "Staunch Brayer") (43e430) — 1/3/2009 @ 6:55 pm#
#140- List ten.
You cant. Wonder why?
Comment by DCSCA — 1/3/2009 @ 6:41 pm
At the end of my comment # 92 I asked you to make a similar list. I haven’t yet taken that as a mark of your “stupidity” or “inability” to do so or taken it as a mark against liberals as a whole, as you have now several times done against conservatives. That would be overgeneralizing and unfair, correct?
Yet let’s try it out and see how it sounds:
Why haven’t you made a list? It must be because it can’t be done, right? Scared, right? Could it be that…you are aware that many of the same phrases you used to dismiss (not answer) several items on my list can also be used against a “liberal” list? Or…perhaps it’s that you know that a simplistic “laundry list” doesn’t take into account the fact that many conservatives and liberals have fought together for or against this item or that, or that a “liberal” in one area (like suffrage) would be a diehard “conservative” in another (like abortion and gay marriage) (see Anthony, Susan B and Stanton, Elizabeth Cady) and that therefore your take on history is perhaps too simplistic? “Progressive” = anything you like and “conservative” = anything you don’t like, is that it?
Maybe that’s what a few people above mean when they say that your grasp of history perhaps needs a bit of, to borrow a progressive phrase, “nuance?” People, “progressive” and conservative, aren’t so easily boxed as you seem to think.
But you’re welcome to try.
I’ll ask again: Your list of eleven (even though I gave you twelve), please?
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 1/3/2009 @ 6:59 pm“no one you know”, he has all the “grasp” of history of a Thalidomide baby.
SPQR (26be8b) — 1/3/2009 @ 7:05 pmDCSCA,
you said I’d given no link for conservative vs. liberal giving, and you were right.
Here you go (3 links):
1. New York Times, N. Kristof, 12/20/08
2. http://philanthropy.com/free/articles/v19/i04/04001101.htm
3. http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/opinion/columnists/will/s_559181.html
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 1/3/2009 @ 7:22 pmProgressivism did wipe out a generation of hemophiliacs with an AIDS-tainted bloody supply. That must mean a lot to the eugenecists behind Planned Parenthood who think Sarah Palin should have aborted her Downs Syndrome baby.
Progressivism has also given us between 35% (white) and 70% (black) of children being raised by an unmarried/abandoned mother without a father in the house.
nk (d08690) — 1/3/2009 @ 7:22 pm#144- I only need to list one. Conservatives worked to free hundreds of millions from Communism. Liberalism not only allowed Communism to expand, but presided over the murders of more than a hundred million people at the hands of Communists while lauding them ala Duranty.
But you wouldn’t know that, since you lack any knowledge of history.
I see. Ten was the challenge but in your case, one seem all you can muster.
So the Cold War containment policies manitained by Truman, JFK, LBJ and even Carter, enforced by Republican presidents as well, promoted communist expansion. You find reds under the bed. too?
Mao must have sent them a thank you note. Fidel and Nikita, too. That pinko liberal Gorbachev had nothing to do with the end of communist rule in Soviet Russia, of course. And that Red, Yeltsin, was really red white and true blue through and through, eh? And of course, Stalin wasnt a rigid, conservative-minded dictator, right? Nor Little Nikita et al. And, naturally, there’s that Communist Red China thingy still hanging out there. You remember them from Korea days, the communist/socialist billions holding trillions of Yankee Doodle IOUs, propping up western capitalism? Communism is the bastard child of capitalism, remember? Brush up on your Marx… both Karl and Groucho.
Next you’ll be crowing that Disney was a Democrat; Hitler was a lefty; McCarthy just had pink-eye; six snipers were on the Grassy Knoll and it was liberal Japanese militarists that pressed to attack Pearl Harbor.
1+1=2, not 11.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/3/2009 @ 7:35 pmj curtis, your comments are not getting more coherent lately …
Comment by SPQR — 1/3/2009 @ 5:20 pm
They couldn’t possibly. My comments were already the very embodiment of absolute coherency.
Here’s another interesting piece of history regarding the US/Bin Laden jihad against the Balkans Christians. I learned from reading the Congressional Record that there was one incident that aroused the Democrats in Congress into calling for military action against the Serbs and that was when Milosevich shut down George Soros’ propaganda operations in Serbia. The Democrats, led by Joe Biden, had handed our Voice of America operations in Europe to Soros just a couple of years previous to this.
Clinton then siezed the Trepca mining complex from the Serbs and handed it to Soros. We had to fight a war that has cost Americans trillions of dollars all for one person’s benefit.
Christiane Amanpour hasn’t informed you of this so I’m sure you’ll have a hard time believing it.
j curtis (6a1ffd) — 1/3/2009 @ 7:43 pmno one you know listed 11 for you right here. I know that you saw them, because you responded to his comment here.
I offered you a challenge. Are you capable of meeting that challenge, or are you incapable of honest, civil discourse?
If you are not, please go away.
Scott Jacobs (90ff96) — 1/3/2009 @ 7:46 pmI suppose jc has no problem with the fact that the Serbs were almost as bad as the earlier Fascists and Marxists they modeled themselves after?
AD (ad74e9) — 1/3/2009 @ 7:51 pmAnd, if you have a problem with the Dems re Soros, take it up with Nancy and Harry, not a bunch of libertarian/conservatives.
This has been an enjoyable thread to watch. DSCSA is a truly unpleasant, smug, sanctimonious, uncivil, tired, repetitive prick.
Jack Klompus (b0e238) — 1/3/2009 @ 8:01 pmDSCSA is a truly unpleasant, smug, sanctimonious, uncivil, tired, repetitive prick.
He is demented, in the medical sense. The simpleminded repetitiveness is a dead giveaway. In the early stages of Alzheimer’s, for example, a sufferer will tell you “You have a spot on your shirt”, and then the same thing a few minutes later, and then again after a few minutes, and so on. To him every event is a new experience and every phrase is a new creation.
nk (d08690) — 1/3/2009 @ 8:15 pm#149- My, you conservatives love ordering other around, dont you.
You seem incapable of drafting a list of ten. This should be a joyful exercise of pride for any red, white and true blue conservative. Yet only one has given it a go. (And I give her credit for trying.)
Wonder why?
You list of one, #144, has been duly ‘red’ and filed.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/3/2009 @ 8:17 pmDear Jack: who knows what the person is really like. This is all playing a Troll-Role. And the goal is to get people angry. The sneering condescension is likely a pose, since the poster is pretty sensitive to slights in other contexts.
Again, who knows what the person is like.
And Scott? Your challenge wont’ be accepted, nor will that poster go away. He or she is having too much fun playing games. Sigh.
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/3/2009 @ 8:19 pmYou were given a list. You acted later as if you hadn’t. You refuse a simple challenge.
You are incapable of acting in a civil manner. Simply admit to that fact.
Scott Jacobs (90ff96) — 1/3/2009 @ 8:20 pmHey nk, again, it’s just a game. Look at the fixation on spelling, when the poster makes many mistakes of spelling of his or her own.
Not a big deal, but part of the game.
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/3/2009 @ 8:21 pmComment by DCSCA — 1/3/2009 @ 8:17 pm
AD (ad74e9) — 1/3/2009 @ 8:22 pmSince you are neither a serious person, nor a serious commenter, your challenge is not considered AS serious, and will be ignored; just as one would ignore the constant, irritating flitting about of a gnat, until that magic moment when it is within reach and momentarily still –
SPLAT!
#155- You DO love ordering people about, don’t you. I read hers and responded accordingly. A for effort, D for content. You’ve posted zilch.
Listing TEN things conservatism has left as a positive legacy for the world over the past 150 years or so in short, declarative sentences should be a joyful, happy, even pride-filled experience for any child of Reagan redux, Buckley, Goldwater or Birch. Like penning the Ten Commandments. Or the Bill of Rights.
I wonder why this is so difficult for you.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/3/2009 @ 8:32 pmComment by DCSCA — 1/3/2009 @ 8:17 pm
*chuckles* Oh my, you are amusing.
To sum up: in response to a challenge by Scott, you claim “you conservatives” (stereotyping anyone?) love to “order” others around. Then you issue a challenge of your own and claim it means all kinds of things against all conservatives even after you get said list you demanded. (But you weren’t ordering anyone around, right?)
Then the very same person who met and exceeded your challenge asks you to reciprocate with a list of your own and you claim you’re being ordered around again.
“Truly, you have a dizzying intellect.” 🙂
This is getting pretty fun actually, watching DCSCA come up with excuses for not coming up with a list. Wonder what the next one will be?
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 1/3/2009 @ 8:34 pmOh, if only to read “I work here is done.”
Dare to dream, posters!
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/3/2009 @ 8:34 pmOh, if only to read “I work here is done.”
Dare to dream, posters!
Comment by Eric Blair — 1/3/2009 @ 8:34 pm
LOL
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 1/3/2009 @ 8:36 pmAgain, remember Teh Goal here!
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/3/2009 @ 8:40 pmHe has a dizzying intellect, much as does a whirling dervish:
AD (ad74e9) — 1/3/2009 @ 8:41 pmYou spin around a lot until you fall down.
DSCSA is a truly unpleasant, smug, sanctimonious, uncivil, tired, repetitive prick.
He is demented, in the medical sense. The simpleminded repetitiveness is a dead giveaway. In the early stages of Alzheimer’s, for example, a sufferer will tell you “You have a spot on your shirt”, and then the same thing a few minutes later, and then again after a few minutes, and so on. To him every event is a new experience and every phrase is a new creation.
Don’t forget ugly. Yes and I roll little steel balls and check for shirt tails hanging out and missing quarts of strawberries. Ah, conservatives, they fought me at every turn…
My. Detoxing from conservatism is harsh for you. Repetition is how we teach animals and children to learn and failure is not an option. I have hopes they can be redeemed.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/3/2009 @ 8:47 pmAgain, remember Teh Goal here!
Comment by Eric Blair — 1/3/2009 @ 8:40 pm
His or ours, good sir? I know what mine is … 😀
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 1/3/2009 @ 8:48 pmSay Goodnight, alphie.
AD (ad74e9) — 1/3/2009 @ 8:49 pm#150- “no one you know”, he has all the “grasp” of history of a Thalidomide baby.
I see. Using birth defects as a slur. Nice. How… conservative.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/3/2009 @ 8:50 pmAD, count up the repetitions! Trollbot 5000….
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/3/2009 @ 8:50 pmAll this noise, yet no list of ten.
Just one attempt.
Wonder why?
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/3/2009 @ 8:52 pmAll this noise, yet no list of ten.
Just one attempt.
Wonder why?
Because no one takes you seriously?
nk (d08690) — 1/3/2009 @ 8:55 pm#161- Are you ashamed of listing ten things that conservatism has given the world over the past 150 years? Or just shy?
A list of ten. With pride. C’mon. O’Reilly would be proud. Fox might even give you a show. Huckabee read the Ten Commandments with a rimshot and got a gig. Slots are opening up there. Then you can really go after MSNBC!
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/3/2009 @ 8:58 pm#174. Static. #176. More static.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/3/2009 @ 9:00 pmPWI, it seems to me.
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/3/2009 @ 9:02 pmThe static is due to the failure of your tinfoil mind-bending-ray shield. Try a heavier gauge. And it’s very important to ground it with a metal wire or chain that reaches the ground.
nk (d08690) — 1/3/2009 @ 9:03 pmAll this noise, yet no list of ten.
Just one attempt.
Wonder why?
Comment by DCSCA — 1/3/2009 @ 8:52 pm
You ask “why.” nk had a pretty good answer at 8:55, but may I also respectfully suggest, my dear DCSCA, to answer your own question, all you need to do is post your “simple declarative sentences” progressive list of eleven things.
I submit that you will then immediately see, when you see the responses to your list, why such a simplistic laundry list is possible for neither conservatism as a whole nor liberalism as a whole, given the long and complicated history of liberalism and conservatism (and the complicated nature of liberals and conservatives) in this country. In this whole thread you’ve either not grasped that point, or have purposely evaded it, and that is a pity.
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 1/3/2009 @ 9:05 pm#165- To sum up: in response to a challenge by Scott, you claim “you conservatives” (stereotyping anyone?) love to “order” others around. Then you issue a challenge of your own and claim it means all kinds of things against all conservatives even after you get said list you demanded. (But you weren’t ordering anyone around, right?)
My. Do you feel sterotyped? Very defense. A loss, the death of an era does that, I suppose.
Yes, Scotty does like to try to order people about, doesnt he. Very conservative of him.
As for the list, I ‘demand’ nothing. I give you high marks for trying to compile a list. T’aint easy, is it.
A little amazed no one was capable of zipping off ten crisp points with pride. Much verbal chaff… yet still no list of ten, aside from your honest effort.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/3/2009 @ 9:10 pmYes, Scotty does like to try to order people about, doesnt he. Very conservative of him.
Ah, more stereotyping (“conservatives like to order others about”), and no, you’re not hurting my feelings in the least. LOL I just think it’s funny that a progressive is so quick to stereotype – I’d thought many progressives pride themselves on being above that kind of thing.
And it’s me you also accused of ordering others around. (See your comment at 8:17 – you addressed comment # 149.) No, I’m not offended. Just getting more amused by the minute.
So – where’s your “attempt?” To paraphrase you, “not even one attempt. Why?”
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 1/3/2009 @ 9:17 pm#181- You have it backwards.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/3/2009 @ 9:19 pmHaving fun, NOYK?
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/3/2009 @ 9:20 pm#181- You have it backwards.
Comment by DCSCA — 1/3/2009 @ 9:19 pm
All right. Then educate me – by posting your list.
Where is it, dear sir or madam? 😉
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 1/3/2009 @ 9:22 pm#183- Ah, more stereotyping (”conservatives like to order others about”), and no, you’re not hurting my feelings in the least. LOL I just think it’s funny that a progressive is so quick to stereotype – I’d thought many progressives pride themselves on being above that kind of thing.
Is it? Am I?
I give you high marks for give the list a go and I responded. T’aint easy.
For true red, white and blue conservatives, a list would be a prideful posting worthy of tacking the Bill of Rights to the signpost of a Philadelphia tavern.
Yet aside from your noble effort, no list. Wonder why?
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/3/2009 @ 9:25 pmHaving fun, NOYK?
Comment by Eric Blair — 1/3/2009 @ 9:20 pm
*guilty smile* I hope I’m not supposed to be not having fun, cause boy I sure am…! 🙂 It’s fun watching trolls evade and squeak.
Ann Coulter says that eventually the [obnoxious kinds of liberals] usually punch themselves out and have to be taken back to their parents’ house. Sounds kind of like Levi, and bunches of other trolls that think they know where the limits are but one day they just can’t help themselves…
Its responses are beginning to bore me though. The posters above were right – the repetition is relentless and tiresome. Could it really be a Trollbot? No imagination – even the phrases are the same. LOL
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 1/3/2009 @ 9:31 pmChatterbots are pretty easy to suss out.
Posting while intoxicated, maybe?
I’m glad you are enjoying yourself, NOYK.
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/3/2009 @ 9:46 pmThe endless repetition of that stupid “1+1 = 2” line might possibly be the lamest part of its repertoire. They each seem to latch onto to this “tag line” or “trademark” and you can almost hear their masturbatory frenzy in praise of their own wit. The script seems pretty boilerplate overall, the substance of which is the condescending, smarter than thou, arrogance that just oozes off the screen and belies this astonishing insecurity. For masochistic laughs I usually try to imagine having to be in the actual presence of an insufferable douchebag on the level of this guy. I assume that there’s no way somebody could possibly be this much of a prick in person and they just have their internet muscles on. If indeed this is the true personality I can only imagine how many drinks in the face and ass kickings this miserable tool has suffered if he keeps company with anyone other than similar minded bores.
Jack Klompus (b0e238) — 1/3/2009 @ 9:51 pmPosting while intoxicated, maybe?
Comment by Eric Blair — 1/3/2009 @ 9:46 pm
Hmm, hadn’t thought of that. Possibility. Rawtha puts a different light on things, no? Not nice to be amused by a person not fully in control of his faculties. Thanks for the tip.
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 1/3/2009 @ 9:54 pm#190- My. You know yourself so well… don’t you.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/3/2009 @ 9:57 pmAre you wounded, Jack? That was quite the in-you-face.
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/3/2009 @ 9:59 pm#188 “Ann Coulter says…”
And here I had high hopes for you. When was her/his jaw unwired?
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/3/2009 @ 10:02 pmEric – just got back from a long trip to Philly. A delightful bastion of the successes of “progressive” leadership.
DC – bring it anytime, tool.
Jack Klompus (b0e238) — 1/3/2009 @ 10:07 pmHey, Jack, I am headed out to Philly for a conference this year. Anything I should definitely see? I haven’t been there in many years.
Yeah, the tough guy stuff is pretty silly, as is the “you’re another” business. You are spot on.
But what is Teh Goal, again?
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/3/2009 @ 10:11 pm#195…. so very, very well.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/3/2009 @ 10:12 pmWhen was her/his jaw unwired?
Comment by DCSCA — 1/3/2009 @ 10:02 pm
Not a moment too soon for me. 😉 I love hearing her sense of humor on Fox News.
Off to bed. Have a nice evening all.
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 1/3/2009 @ 10:13 pmDowntown Philly is awesome. Great bars, great restaurants. Incredible walking city. Just go around downtown, look up, and see some of the most amazing architecture of every era concentrated into a region that is pleasant to stroll.
Jack Klompus (b0e238) — 1/3/2009 @ 10:16 pmGreat museums – Phila Museum of Art, Rodin Museum, Franklin Institute. University of Pennsylvania has a great campus and a great natural history museum.
Center City has attached to it some fun, hip, cool areas like Northern Liberties, Fairmount (where you can tour the historic Eastern State Penitentiary), and South Philly, Philly’s old Little Italy has great eats. Do NOT go to Pat’s or Geno’s for a cheesesteak. Go to Jim’s or Tony Luke’s.
#198 – “I’ll bet you do.” – Ken Mattingly, (Gary Sinise) Apollo 13, reel 6, 1995
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/3/2009 @ 10:24 pm(tosses keys on the counter)
DCSCA, lock up when you’re done. I’m going home.
Paul (creator of "Staunch Brayer") (43e430) — 1/3/2009 @ 10:40 pmWhich Paul, probably sounds like wild ecstatic victory!
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/3/2009 @ 10:52 pmDCSCA, I have been away for most of the day, but did notice you have been mocked quite badly.
Your movie quotes, sports quips, and inequality metaphors are entertaining, but provide ineffective shielding against your lack of knowledge. Vietnam comparisons, pipeline conspiracies, WIM, along with a belief that conservatism for the past 150 years is definable and convertible in today’s terms – all betray your unsound mental state.
I feel sorry for you and hope you can somehow come across true knowledge and build a foundation from which wisdom might be acquired.
Until then, I leave you with this movie quote (a language-form you seem to understand the most), and wish you well:
“You can’t handle the truth”
Pons Asinorum (5fa803) — 1/4/2009 @ 1:31 am— Colonel Nathan R. Jessep, (Jack Nicholson ) in A Few Good Men , 1992.
#203 Quoting the villain, no less. How… conservative.
“I feel sorry for you and hope you can somehow come across true knowledge and build a foundation from which wisdom might be acquired.”
I can understand how in your conservative bubble, where 1+1=11, you’d very much think that.
I could not possibly comment.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/4/2009 @ 1:49 am–make WIM into WIC 😉
Pons Asinorum (5fa803) — 1/4/2009 @ 1:50 amMisquoting the villain, no less. How… hypocritical.
Pons Asinorum (5fa803) — 1/4/2009 @ 2:00 am#203- Perhaps I will after all. A postscript.
Your movie quotes, sports quips, and inequality metaphors are entertaining,
but provide ineffective shielding against your lack of knowledge.
I see. Of course this presumes you have some vast quantity of your own to measure against. Quaint. I’m sure you’ll dispense it ‘right.’ Or extremely ‘right.’
Vietnam comparisons, pipeline conspiracies, WIM, along with a belief that conservatism for the past 150 years is definable and convertible in today’s terms – all betray your unsound mental state.
Yes, I’m rolling those little steel balls, spying shirt tails and looking for that missing quart of strawberries. Whose got that foodlocker key? You maybe?
Actually, it exposes your own shaky resistance to the real world where 1+1=2, not a conservative bubbleland where 1+1= 11. Understandable as y’all detox from that disintegrating universe. You’ll come around. Adapt. Or face extinction. Now run along and brush up on Marx. Preferably Groucho.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/4/2009 @ 2:09 am#206- Dean Wormer a villain? How… conservative.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/4/2009 @ 2:10 amYes, I already know that.
Good-bye, Captain Queeg
Pons Asinorum (5fa803) — 1/4/2009 @ 2:16 am#209- And goodnight, Mrs. Kalibash, ‘whoever’ you are.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/4/2009 @ 2:34 am#180 nk:
nk, you ought know better! If you really want to help, then you should be recommending Velostat®!”
Although, I confess that it’s likely the Troll du Jour© is an involuntary member of VHEMT, given its inability to communicate with others because of, as Pons Asinorum notes, its unsound mental state.
EW1(SG) (e27928) — 1/4/2009 @ 4:39 am#207 Comment by DCSCA — 1/4/2009 @ 2:09 am
Good morning DCSCA.
I knew your postscript would morph into at least three (perhaps I can get a fourth one now?).
Today, my time is limited, but I am enjoying this, so perhaps between study breaks…
So let’s see, back to postscript one:
Not at all, I refer to numerous writers in this thread (most of whom are brighter and more knowledgeable than myself), who brought forth logical and self-evident arguments that shredded yours. I enjoyed listening to them answer your questions, then upon challenging you to the same, watching you run and stumble. It was most enjoyable to listen too initially, then I began to feel sorry for you (after a time, I realized that perhaps we are picking on someone who is mentally ill-equipped).
I welcome something new that is logical and capable of changing my viewpoint. I enjoy examining the structure of given constructs and modifying my own when justified. You have nothing to offer in those terms.
Enjoy yourself as you set sail upon the oceans in your flat-earth world – be careful “there be dragons” or in your case “there be pipelines”. Enjoy also your new math (and keep repeating it every time someone proves you wrong or if you cannot answer the questions they put to you, lest you become enlightened).
Good luck DC.
Pons Asinorum (5fa803) — 1/4/2009 @ 11:13 amEnjoy yourself as you set sail upon the oceans in your flat-earth world – be careful “there be dragons” or in your case “there be pipelines”. Enjoy also your new math (and keep repeating it every time someone proves you wrong or if you cannot answer the questions they put to you, lest you become enlightened).
“Flat earth?” “Dragons?” No doubt in your mythical 1+1=11 conservative universe, these manifestations are terrors that make perfect sense to you. And routinely dodged. Dungeons, snakes, ladders and jolly green giants, too. You may even find reds under your bed. BOO!
Break time is over. Now scoot back to study hall and remember, no talking, no note passing, and no… 1+1=2, not 11.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/4/2009 @ 12:50 pm“1+1=2, not 11.”
Jack Klompus (b0e238) — 1/4/2009 @ 12:57 pmGet a new catch phrase, you colossal bore.
#214-
DCSCA: Jack, what makes a balloon go up?
JACK: Hot air.
DCSCA: What’s holding you down.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/4/2009 @ 1:08 pmHe can’t. His brain does not work that way. He has lost forever his “The ants have a space program. It’s the Empire State Building”.
Ignore him. He’s nuts.
nk (d08690) — 1/4/2009 @ 1:10 pmMy new year’s resolution is to stay substantive here; feeding posters like DCSCA, while entertaining, detracts from the otherwise stellar blog.
Then again, I said I was going on the wagon too 🙂
carlitos (34f76e) — 1/4/2009 @ 1:11 pmGood Morning, everyone.
AD (72058b) — 1/4/2009 @ 1:14 pmI see nothing has materially changed since last night – “Woody” is still boring everyone.
Well, have a nice day; I have to trim my toe-nails.
#216- Good memory. There’s hope for you yet.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/4/2009 @ 1:14 pmDCSCA,
2 + 2 = 4 not lebenteen.
nk (d08690) — 1/4/2009 @ 1:30 pmI suggest you familiarize yourself with bin laden’s Albanian al qaeda operation where he trained KLA forces before he handed them over to serve under the command of Wesley Clark.
Comment by j curtis
I would say you are about 10 years out of date. When was your last visit to Kosovo, by the way ?
I was hoping not to run into another troll so soon. Come up with a good argument and I’ll pay attention. Diss people like Totten and Yon who are there frequently and you sound trollish.
Come on. This can be fun when you try to be serious.
Mike K (2cf494) — 1/4/2009 @ 2:03 pmI find it highly offensive to suggest we of the right (as opposed to you of the wrong (DCSCA)) have no concern for the lives of our own. The surge in Iraq, along with time, proved it would work. Iraqi citizens have told our troops not to leave. The same is happening in Afghanistan. The citizens there don’t want us to leave and do want us to get rid of the problem. And that problem is the Taliban and their aiding and abetting Al Qaida. Just look at all the women who are suddenly allowed to actually have a job! Look at all the women who are suddenly allowed to speak to a man not related to them! Look at all the women who are suddenly allowed to give medical aid to a man!
Please, DCSCA, do not devalue my daughter’s life and service to this country with your inane intolerance.
John Hitchcock, proud of his deployed-to-Iraq daughter (fb941d) — 1/4/2009 @ 2:26 pmPay no attention to DCSCA, John. His utter ignorance ( typified by his #153 where he shows that he has no command of history at all, where he lists as “containing” Communism, Democratic leaders under whose tenure Communism expanded and even murdered more millions ) means that his comments should not bother you, nor those whose contributions are so much more meaningful than his, as your daughter would be an example.
SPQR (26be8b) — 1/4/2009 @ 2:56 pm#222- A father’s pride in his daughter is a given. A conservative father’s pride in his child securing a government job and overlooking the added burden on taxpayers said job imposes, is classic conservative 1+1=11 thinking. Tis’ better (and more secure) to be a private, than a foot soldier in the private sector these days, eh? Both pretty risky places to do battle these days.
“Iraqi citizens have told our troops not to leave.” Actually, their ‘government’ has. Must be a government of non-Iraqi citizens. We call them stooges in New York.
Tackling the Taliban is a noble duty; an endeavour fueled by the simmering resolve and emotions of retribution for 9/11. However, questioning the veracity of that effort, the tactics and motive there in, is the responsibility- indeed, the duty, of those who pay for it and send those souls into harm’s way.
Leaving Bin Laden alive, or the specter of him still being alive, is good for business, especially with the MIC boys. Dig up his corpse and Americans will chant, ‘mission accomplished’ again. Bad for business.
Only a fool would accept everything the U.S. government (and the assorted lackeys with interests to bear) says at face value about the Afghan operation. And you’re no fool, right? Or perhaps you are just very right, no matter what. Look to the history of that region over the ages and the ways and means those surviving there generate resources. The West will always be an intruder into that region. Be it poppys or pipelines, that will never change for a people who live in caves, drink from rain puddles, breed at will, eat garbage a goat wouldn’t stomach, yet are fond of satellite TV.
May God watch over your daughter and keep her safe.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/4/2009 @ 3:23 pm#223- You were tagged out at second in the fifth inning three days ago and you’re still running the bases. Game’s over. Hit the showers. Keep your soap on a rope, dope.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/4/2009 @ 3:28 pmThis is just head-shakenly stupid…
AD (6810a5) — 1/4/2009 @ 3:29 pmmaybe I should work on those bunions.
The insulting of a poster’s relationship with his daughter is almost to the level we see when trolls get banned.
Please keep it up.
I think you realized it and tried to mitigate your nastiness at the end of your post. But you just won’t be able to help yourself, I’d guess.
Better take a break before you lose your little platform.
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/4/2009 @ 3:33 pmActually, the Iraqi citizens have told our troops not to leave. Remember my daughter is one of those troops in Iraq. Understand further that I have traveled by plane to Army posts within the US. Army posts with their own airports. Understand further that I have personally spoken with many troops, enlisted and officer, who have been to Iraq and Afghanistan. They all say the same thing: the people there want us there and the people they’re fighting are not locals for the most part.
John Hitchcock, the personally informed (fb941d) — 1/4/2009 @ 3:34 pmDCSCA, you keep claiming victory where you have in fact abandoned the battlefield. Fabian tactics don’t work here.
SPQR (26be8b) — 1/4/2009 @ 3:34 pmJohn, DCSCA has avoided facts and understanding like the plague – and intentionally so.
SPQR (26be8b) — 1/4/2009 @ 3:35 pm#217- Might wanna resolve to drop 20 lbs., too. (switch off that laptop camera, okay?)
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/4/2009 @ 3:39 pm#228 “Claiming?” No towel-snapping. Shower up!
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/4/2009 @ 3:42 pmDCSCA, now you are calling people fat? Sheesh, all we get is junior high crap from you. Grow up.
SPQR (26be8b) — 1/4/2009 @ 3:45 pm#226- Strawman. Nice try, Scarecrow.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/4/2009 @ 3:46 pm#223- Are you?
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/4/2009 @ 3:48 pmPlease, John, don’t engage this troll. He or she won’t be able to help himself or herself from dealing out more personal insults, and my guess is that they will slop over onto your daughter and her service.
Look at all of her or his previous posts (and the sadly ironic business that other people have been rude to him or her). He or she is childish and clearly solely interested in being irritating. Eventually, he or she will go too far (again), and get banned (and I’m increasingly convinced—primarily by his or her increasing use of a thesaurus—that we have seen this poster before, under another name…though maybe not).
I don’t know your daughter’s name, but I just got through making a contribution to the charity “USA Cares” in honor of her service. I’m a father myself, and I wanted to honor her, and the way you have raised her.
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/4/2009 @ 3:49 pmI saw nothing “scarecrow” in #226, perhaps you could enlighten me?
John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 1/4/2009 @ 3:50 pmEdit, thinking too fast, saw nothing strawman
John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 1/4/2009 @ 3:50 pm#234- My error. Was intended for #227, not #226. Bunion pad sale at Walmart.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/4/2009 @ 3:55 pm#228- The troops are not the deciders in this. They go where- and when- they are told. The Iraqi government has voted and ‘asked’ Americans to leave. Currently the schedule is to have all withdrawn within 3 years. I believe the ‘Green Zone’ was turned over to the Iraqi jurisdiction a few days ago. And the residents, businesses and assorted local economies surrounding Oceanside, California along with much of the San Diego area, look forward to having troops back. Lots of empty homes, barber chairs and restaruants with’em gone.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/4/2009 @ 4:10 pmYou were tagged out at second in the fifth inning three days ago and you’re still running the bases.
It has now used the same mnemonic device in every post it makes, numerous times. This one has been used at least twice now, along with the Cheetoes references, the two obscure film references, Wal -Mart, and a host of others. Not just a stunning lack of creativity or original thought, it suggests a serious pschological problem, which would be alleviated perhaps via a prescribed dose of Lithium.
Dmac (eb0dd0) — 1/4/2009 @ 4:12 pmDmac, it sounds less and less like a grown man, and more and more like an adolescent. There have been times when he or she posted things (though I disagreed) that seemed more about the topic than insulting others.
But mostly? Chatterbot time, with a limited number of responses. Maybe it is a sign that he or she is getting tired of this kind of thing?
I keep waiting for the triumphant “I work here is done.”
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/4/2009 @ 4:14 pmDmac, I think I overestimated his emotional age when I referenced junior high.
SPQR (26be8b) — 1/4/2009 @ 4:16 pmDear Jack Klompus: thanks for the Philly recommendations! I haven’t had a cheese steak in a lot of years, and Lord knows they aren’t good for anyone. But if you are going to have one, it should be a superb one, true?
I’ll be sure to visit the Rodin Museum!
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/4/2009 @ 4:17 pm#242- Reads better and better every time.
Oh “It“… Where is thy sting.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/4/2009 @ 4:26 pmPWI, clearly.
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/4/2009 @ 4:28 pmEric – anytime. Agreed on the cheesesteak. Pat’s and Geno’s are the quintessential tourist trap versions of that artery clogging delicacy, but the neighborhood is great for its culinary variety. Italian, Vietnamese, and Mexican are all done quite well in that bustling area that was once most well-known for strictly pasta and La Cosa Nostra.
John – all the best to your daughter.
Jack Klompus (b0e238) — 1/4/2009 @ 4:30 pmJack, when in Rome…
Anyway, it is like going to New Orleans and ordering a salad. I was in New Orleans last year, and it was almost back to normal in the Quarter.
Talk about artery clogging food. At least a few oysters on the half shell aren’t so bad. Relatively speaking.
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/4/2009 @ 4:32 pmDCSCA, methinks thou doest protest too much, yet invaritably thou shalt protest overmuch further, regaling thyself with thine own oft-inflated valuation of thine own worth.
the poetic John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 1/4/2009 @ 4:34 pm#242– I keep waiting for the triumphant “I work here is done.”
Funny, I keep waiting for your list of ten positive things conservatism has legacied to the world over the past 150 years.
Should be a quick, fun task for any pride-filled right winger.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/4/2009 @ 4:38 pm#249- Methinks thou should catch up with the papers (not the LATimes) and see when the troops are scheduled for redeployment home from Iraq by way of Afghanistan. May God watch over your daughter.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/4/2009 @ 4:41 pmJohn, it takes me back to Shakespeare: “As You Like It”, Act 5 scene 1.
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/4/2009 @ 4:44 pmLies. Obama told us he would bring them all right home.
Scott Jacobs (90ff96) — 1/4/2009 @ 4:45 pmI know it is tough to keep track of who you have insulted and challenged, but that wasn’t me.
Discussing anything at all with you is a waste of time—at least for now. You have demonstrated that over and over again.
Just. A. Troll.
And do keep your normal and demonstrated inclinations in check. On second thought, yes, do keep edging toward insulting servicemen and servicewomen.
Then your work would indeed be done.
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/4/2009 @ 4:47 pmScott, you know that “hope and change” means very different things to different people!
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/4/2009 @ 4:49 pmComment by John Hitchcock, proud of his deployed-to-Iraq daughter — 1/4/2009 @ 2:26 pm
You must be very proud of your daughter. We’re thankful for her service too, and prayers for her safety.
I haven’t had a cheese steak in a lot of years, and Lord knows they aren’t good for anyone.
Comment by Eric Blair — 1/4/2009 @ 4:17 pm
Them’s fightin’ words, Eric. Cheesesteaks are one of the four food groups, guy!
Comment by DCSCA — 1/4/2009 @ 4:38 pm
Sorry, dear DCSCA. It’s your turn to do a list for the liberals. And since you’ve said that you believe a list should be in “short, declarative sentences,” then liberalism’s list should be easy for you, I’d think.
Unable to do it, even after a day to think about it? Pity.
By the way, anything further you address to me will be met with another request for that list, and another pointing-out that you aren’t willing to do what you demand of others, even after they do it.
Other posters here who know me know that I always do what I say I will. So…I suggest you ignore me unless you care to post that list… 😉
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 1/4/2009 @ 4:55 pmI keep waiting for the triumphant “I work here is done.”
Comment by Eric Blair — 1/4/2009 @ 4:14 pm
That line will go down in the annals of awesome troll self-pwnage. LOL
Delighted to see it being used here to give the current troll the mockout he/she has richly earned.
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 1/4/2009 @ 4:57 pmActually, no one you know, I gave him a single item, and his pathetic attempt at refuting it ( found at #153 above ) showed only his utter ignorance of 20th century history.
SPQR (26be8b) — 1/4/2009 @ 4:58 pmActually, no one you know, I gave him a single item, and his pathetic attempt at refuting it ( found at #153 above ) showed only his utter ignorance of 20th century history.
Comment by SPQR — 1/4/2009 @ 4:58 pm
That is very true, and actually your point about communism was one of the clearest and best examples of conservatism’s contributions to the world. Was very glad to see you remembering that when I hadn’t.
It’s a shame more people don’t know history BTW. It would save people boatloads of trouble they get themselves repeating old errors, as the old saw says. (We’d have lots more conservatives too, IMO. 😉 )
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 1/4/2009 @ 5:03 pmBut, SPQR, answering you is not the point. It is a game, and not one I associate with adults. Seriously, look at the responses, with or without using the thesaurus function in Microsoft Word.
I do see this kind of behavior among undergraduates early on. So I honestly hope that this person is actually getting ready to start a term term….rather than being a grown up.
NOYK, no disrespect intended. But blood chemistry dictates changes in the food groups used by many of us.
When I lived in LA, there was a great place called Phillipe’s French Dipped Sandwich. Again, not so good for your arteries, but good for the soul.
Perhaps cheesesteaks are the same way?
As for self-pwning, most trolls eventually create their own “posting epitaph.” They get too carried away with their own brilliance…and….
A new phrase is born!
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/4/2009 @ 5:04 pmIndeed, Eric, there is nothing adult about his behavior.
SPQR (26be8b) — 1/4/2009 @ 5:06 pmIf more people based their opinions and actions on facts and truth instead of stereotypes, insinuations and self-indulgences, the world would be a much safer place to live and conservative viewpoints would be in much greater abundance. But that will never happen, so long as MSM and the Dems have any say in the matter.
the poetic John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 1/4/2009 @ 5:08 pmOops, still getting the hang of the Dana sig.
John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 1/4/2009 @ 5:09 pmI think my favorite “epitaph” was, “I’ve gotten A’s on tests I’ve taken and papers I’ve written on books I never read.”
Speaking of those guilty pleasures, when I got back into Austin last night I went to one of my favorite taquieras and had the “tripas” taco. Wow, so good yet so bad. Oh well, I’m enjoying those pleasures until Thursday which is “ship out” day.
Jack Klompus (b0e238) — 1/4/2009 @ 5:11 pmNOYK, I teach at a small liberal arts college, where the average entering freshmen has an SAT of around 1350. When I first started teaching (even though I am in the sciences) I would ask my advising section the following questions during orientation:
You can guess how sad I became pretty quickly.
I honestly don’t mind all the multicultural history material. What I mind is a lack of common, basic information—that the multicultural information can be added to, building a sense of history and its context.
But what can be done? It’s all about Teh Narrative these days.
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/4/2009 @ 5:14 pmI think my favorite “epitaph” was, “I’ve gotten A’s on tests I’ve taken and papers I’ve written on books I never read.”
Comment by Jack Klompus — 1/4/2009 @ 5:11 pm
That was hilarious. That was Levi, wasn’t it? He…[trying to think of something nice to say] had really good spelling skills, as I remember.
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 1/4/2009 @ 5:14 pmBy the way, I meant “new term” but wrote “term term.”
If I made it “terminal term” it might even be more accurate!
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/4/2009 @ 5:16 pmWhat I mind is a lack of common, basic information—that the multicultural information can be added to, building a sense of history and its context.
Comment by Eric Blair — 1/4/2009 @ 5:14 pm
Well said. Basic knowledge isn’t optional if you want the right building blocks.
Re: your questions, I read an article not too long ago re: college freshman or something who (among several other surprising results) couldn’t even put the Civil War within the correct half of the 19th century, much less the right decade. Yeesh.
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 1/4/2009 @ 5:19 pmAnd it is true, NOYK. I used to have a poster of Winston Churchill in my office, a reproduction from WWII. There Winnie stands, glowering, with the caption “Demand Victory.” A good thing for students struggling with organic chemistry to see, I thought.
I can’t tell you the number of students who looked at the poster, and asked “So who is the bald guy?”
Heck, I have met tenured English professors who didn’t know that my pseudonym was George Orwell’s given name.
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/4/2009 @ 5:23 pmWhen I was teaching a constitutional law course to community college students, and discussing the context of the 13th and 14th Amendments, I actually had the entire class tell me that the Republican Party supported slavery around the time of the Civil War. And a delegation tramped off to the department chair to complain that I was lying to them in class.
SPQR (26be8b) — 1/4/2009 @ 5:23 pmFor all I know, DCSCA was one of those students …
SPQR (26be8b) — 1/4/2009 @ 5:24 pmBut didn’t you know, SPQR? Republicans are all racists! Haven’t you read it on various threads here?
In Huxley’s “Brave New World” there is a good discussion of how history (or its absence) can be used to shape convictions and attitudes.
Furthermore, many Department Chairs would use the “yes, but…” business to support the students’ statements….
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/4/2009 @ 5:25 pmIsn’t repeating the narrative of history being nothing but a series of events of bad, powerful people oppressing pristine, flawless people close enough as long as you pepper your analysis with a lot of -isms?
Jack Klompus (b0e238) — 1/4/2009 @ 5:26 pmHeck, I have met tenured English professors who didn’t know that my pseudonym was George Orwell’s given name.
Comment by Eric Blair — 1/4/2009 @ 5:23 pm
*scoffs* Why should they know that? That’s “Dead White Male literature.” But they knew all the minor characters in The Color Purple and The Satanic Verses, I’d be willing to bet.
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 1/4/2009 @ 5:28 pmI actually had the entire class tell me that the Republican Party supported slavery around the time of the Civil War. And a delegation tramped off to the department chair to complain that I was lying to them in class.
Comment by SPQR — 1/4/2009 @ 5:23 pm
What did they say when they found out the truth?
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 1/4/2009 @ 5:30 pmno one you know, they seemed to hold the opinion throughout the term that the department chair and I were conspiring to lie to them. It was a bizarre term.
SPQR (26be8b) — 1/4/2009 @ 5:32 pmI taught at all college where folks (not in the sciences) would teach every single class with a narrow PC focus. There was one fellow teaching in a Religion department where every single course he taught dealt with Black issues and religion. Mind you, this guy never taught an intro Religion course.
Nice guy. Don’t get me wrong. But having the context, the framework, on which one can add the “modern sensibilities” would seem a better course. And professors could still propagandize their students. They would just provide some broad education in the bargain.
Oh well.
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/4/2009 @ 5:34 pmEric, SPQR…
AD (f0604d) — 1/4/2009 @ 5:42 pmReading this discourse on the the condition of academic thought might lead a less than rational person to believe that Pol Pot was correct in his treatment of intellectuals…
Repeated use of the now basically trademarked term “the Other” (not the enjoyable thriller novel by Thomas Tryon)and lots of references to Michel Foucault seemed to be a one way ticket to tenure for a lot of history professors I encountered.
Jack Klompus (b0e238) — 1/4/2009 @ 5:48 pmComment by Jack Klompus — 1/4/2009 @ 5:48 pm
Hey, jargon works, apparently. Remember this guy from a few years back? That was fun to read about.
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 1/4/2009 @ 5:52 pmI loved that scandal. Watching the pretentious postmodernists try to weasel their way out of their punk’n was great!
Jack Klompus (b0e238) — 1/4/2009 @ 5:57 pmAD, a few years ago, I had an interview at a well known small liberal arts college in the Midwest. I was picked up at the airport by a person in the interviewing department, and her dwarf partner (and I am not being rude).
That’s right: a dwarf lesbian story.
And that’s fine. I’m glad they are happy and it had nothing to do with anything involving the job. The problem was they wanted to talk about how accepting the environment was, how their own partnership was celebrated, the entire hour long drive to campus. Again, fine. But remember that it is essentially illegal to ask a candidate about their orientation or marital status.
I realized after a few minutes that they were trying to say that the Midwest was not parochial. Okay. You would think that my eyesight and ears would have given me that impression.
Five members of the department took me out to dinner the next night and started carrying on about how awful GW Bush was, complete with f-bombs in the restaurant, and not in low tones.
I have done many interviews on both sides of the equation, and I think that discussing politics is a very bad idea. It has utterly nothing to do with the job.
My point is that, even in the sciences, academia has gotten to be very, very aggressively monolithic.
So I tell myself that the research and the students make it worthwhile.
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/4/2009 @ 6:06 pmI wonder if the same academics will now sit around the restaurant talking about how f’n amazing Obama is once he takes office. That will be kind of a sticky situation for people who fancy themselves as dissidents now sucking up to the system with such fervor.
Jack Klompus (b0e238) — 1/4/2009 @ 6:22 pmme: I suggest you familiarize yourself with bin laden’s Albanian al qaeda operation where he trained KLA forces before he handed them over to serve under the command of Wesley Clark.
Mike K: I would say you are about 10 years out of date. When was your last visit to Kosovo, by the way ?
How is that even sequitur in your mind? You are demonstrating a new kind of stupidity, or mental defect, that I haven’t previously encountered.
j curtis (6a5583) — 1/4/2009 @ 6:27 pmDCSCA,
You say you want 10 examples of conservative contributions to America that are similar to your liberal examples of a 40-hour work week and the women’s right to vote. Of course, the problem with your challenge is that, unlike liberals/progressives, conservatives don’t value sweeping change. Conservatives believe in transparency, incremental reform and balance. But over time, conservatives have contributed many important values to society:
1. A belief in the individual’s right to own private property.
2. Support for the institutions of law and order (police, courts, military) that make our society and citizens safe.
3. Commitment to a predictable system of laws and governance, e.g., the incremental change of conservative Supreme Court decisions.
4. Resistance to sweeping change that undermines our social institutions, most notably the decline of our schools during the past 40 years of progressive social engineering.
5. Support for free markets that have enabled the U.S. economy to dominate in innovation and productivity.
6. Commitment to small government that is less intrusive and burdensome for the average citizen. Giving more power to government results in abuse of that power, regardless of party or ideology.
7. A belief in individual accountability rather than compulsory mandates or excessive reliance on government.
For family reasons, I’ve been absent in the past days and I will be gone for more time in the future. However, I hope Patterico finds this thread and has time to read what you’ve written. Your comments don’t strike me as those of a person who is sincere about wanting an honest debate, and I would vote to ban you.
DRJ (2be0dd) — 1/4/2009 @ 6:28 pmDon’t you have Ban powers?
I’ve even gioven him a challenge, and his insults me for it.
Please, Get rid of him.
Scott Jacobs (90ff96) — 1/4/2009 @ 6:35 pmDCSCA,
By the way, regarding women’s suffrage, take a look at the New York Times 6/5/1919 edition:
DRJ (2be0dd) — 1/4/2009 @ 6:39 pmScott,
I know how to ban a commenter but I’ve never done it alone because this is Patterico’s website and he should decide whether someone should be banned. If you feel a ban is appropriate, make your case and DCSCA is certainly free to respond.
DRJ (2be0dd) — 1/4/2009 @ 6:47 pmme: I suggest you familiarize yourself with bin laden’s Albanian al qaeda operation where he trained KLA forces before he handed them over to serve under the command of Wesley Clark.
Mike K: I would say you are about 10 years out of date. When was your last visit to Kosovo, by the way ?
How is that even sequitur in your mind? You are demonstrating a new kind of stupidity, or mental defect, that I haven’t previously encountered.
Comment by j curtis
I guess you are a troll, after all. I’m kind of sorry that we cannot have a dialog with the left but it seems impossible.
You dismiss Michael Totten, a highly respected journalist, then make an assertion that is not supported by facts. What else am I supposed to think ?
Mike K (2cf494) — 1/4/2009 @ 6:58 pmDear DRJ:
The most important thing is your family and work situation, of course.
But this person has been acting like quite the archetypical troll…and it is clearly some kind of game, with many needless insults (and accusations, oddly, that other people have wronged him or her).
If this person was civil and Leftward leaning, fine. No problem. It’s the rudeness that is so off-putting.
I suspect that he or she realized that she or he is skirting on the edge of banning. Some of the comments toward John Hitchcock were edging that way, and I think that he or she realized it and started to moderate the usual childish insults.
If you and Patterico decide to ban, I don’t see a problem.
But it is your house. Your rules.
I’m glad this blog is here. If nothing else, I got some good recommendations for things to do in Philadelphia. Trolls don’t help the environment. And that has nothing to do with D versus R.
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/4/2009 @ 7:02 pmlove2008,
If you are still reading this, here’s my suggestion for your new name:
DRJ (2be0dd) — 1/4/2009 @ 7:03 pmAwfully close to hopenchange, DRJ.
And I think that love2008 is sincere much of the time. He (or she; sorry I don’t know) needs a new name.
fingerscrossed2009?
Doesn’t sing, does it?
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/4/2009 @ 7:09 pmDRJ – I would also suggest that SCSCA’s claim abou the 40 hour work week is somewhat dubious. The Fair Labor Standards Act was passed in 1938 after a very long and contentious legislative history, but it was very much a labor promoted issue as opposed to party promoted issue. Unions had been pursuing a state strategy on limited working hours for almost 100 years prior to the federal legislation and there were deep divisions within the Democratic party over the legislation up until the end. Even Roosevelt was not in favor of rocking the boat at some points prior to 1938.
As usual, when DCSCA makes claims or assertions clear enough to be examined, puffery is present. Most of his comments are pure jello and lacking any substance enough for examination.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 1/4/2009 @ 7:22 pmYou dismiss Michael Totten, a highly respected journalist, then make an assertion that is not supported by facts. What else am I supposed to think ?
Comment by Mike K — 1/4/2009 @ 6:58 pm
I didn’t dismiss Michael Totten in the least. I pointed out that Michael Totten can’t do what you apparently think he can do which is to change history after it has already been made.
j curtis (6a5583) — 1/4/2009 @ 7:24 pmDRJ: I third your vote to ban DSCSCA.
I also second your suggestion that Love2008 change his/her name to Hope2009. Maybe by ’10 he/she will be fed up with Obama and become Change10.
Xrlq (62cad4) — 1/4/2009 @ 7:24 pmDaley, I think that the problem is common when folks begin thinking about a topic with “partisan goggles” on….
Remember Nancy Pelosi insisting (three times) that natural gas was not a fossil fuel?
That was because she was so wrapped up with oil prices, and needed to demonize her opponents.
But then, if both sides are listening to one another, it is tougher to raise money for both the DNC and RNC. Just ask Barack Obama…who started out sounding conciliatory, and then got very nasty—to drum up more donations. Now he is making Clinton style appointments, after criticizing a Clinton in detail.
And remember Joe Biden insisting that Barack Obama was not ready to be President?
I don’t have a good solution. And the “mindset differences” between progressive and conservative should be heartily debated. But the current climate is poisonous in the extreme.
Although my brother insists I should read some of the Hearst paper editorials from the late 19th century for perspective.
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/4/2009 @ 7:30 pmEric Blair asked:
I know that you meant no irony, but in my district and state I could easily go 1/4 or even 0/4, given the legal proceedings in Springfield and Congressional fiat in DC. What a crazy world we live in. Probably Blago, probably Danny Davis, 90% sure Durbin is safe, and for second senator – ¿quien sabe? 🙂
PS, the troll’s ‘fat’ quip was directed at me, and was either very juvenile (nyah nyah), or just creepy (the remark about me having a webcam). Yikes.
carlitos (34f76e) — 1/4/2009 @ 8:26 pmI didn’t dismiss Michael Totten in the least. I pointed out that Michael Totten can’t do what you apparently think he can do which is to change history after it has already been made.
Comment by j curtis
Your history is your own opinion unless you can cite sources. There was a militant movement in Bosnia for a while and the Kosovo Liberation Army was a transient phenomenon. That is all gone. It was 10 years ago.
If you believe what you said, you are a Serb. They have problems with the truth, I’ve found
MIke K (2cf494) — 1/4/2009 @ 8:40 pmOh, sure, carlitos. But you know what I mean about basic knowledge about government…especially from people on my campus who carry on about how “poorly” government is run, and the “assault” on the Constitution (when you know full well they could not describe that document).
As for trolls and webcams—you bet that is creepy. But more likely an attempt to flail out with an insult.
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/4/2009 @ 8:53 pmYeah, I know. Good points, all. ‘night!
carlitos (34f76e) — 1/4/2009 @ 9:00 pm298
you are a Serb
LOL, I was called a Jew on another website today for defending Israel’s fight against Hamas terrorists. I guess there is no way to prove that I’m not an Israeli or Serb so I’ll just leave that alone.
j curtis (376491) — 1/4/2009 @ 9:20 pm#242 Eric Blair:
I know that you originally had some hope of worthwhile conversation with the Troll du Jour©, but it hoist itself with its own petard here, and quite convincingly as well.
In very few turns of phrase, it managed to show that it has no first hand knowledge of engineers, nor space programs: in fact, its google skilz are unremarkable at best. Coupled with the absolute pretentiousness of youth (which I got to see a fair amount of in my younger sailors, before they became wiser sailors), I’d peg its age at early twenties tops.
What with the constant clamor for attention, not a particularly well adjusted twentysomething, at that. But the deliciously vulgar etymology of Shakespeare’s turn of phrase does, er, blow it wide open.
EW1(SG) (e27928) — 1/4/2009 @ 9:32 pmFor me, EW1(SG), it was the barrage of quite childish insults, oft repeated, that gave the game away. The hypocrisy (claiming to have posted something in Wikipedia, then sneering at Wikipedia; there are other examples as well) was jarring, as well, as if the poster wasn’t keeping track of what she or he posted with time.
It was a just a game, I think. A safe way to act all tough without having to back anything up.
I sure hope that this person is a kid in college or high school. If this is a person in his or her 50s, what a head case!
But maybe the poster has left. I hope so—or, at least, if the person comes back, I hope that they start posting with civility and maturity.
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/4/2009 @ 10:40 pmAnd by the way, who precisely teaches kids to be all snotty and pretentious, these days?
I once had a run in with a student over a grade. He became more and more nasty. Finally, I suggested that he tone it down a bit.
“What do you want me to do,” he sneered. “Kiss your ass?”
“No,” I replied. “I want you to treat me with the respect I am giving you during this discussion.”
About then, he seemed to remember that I wielded the Evil Red Pen of Permanent Grades.
That fellow’s parents needed to be slapped for teaching him those kinds of counterproductive habits. Because if their child pulled that in the real world, in many workplaces he would be fired. And over what? His opinion?
Paychecks are more fundamental.
Oh well.
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/4/2009 @ 10:44 pmI don’t know, but by God no child of mine would act in such a manner.
The kid bitches about it, I could just ship him or her off to live with my dad…
“Fine, you hate it here? You’re going to see Grandpa Asshole. Enjoy learning why your father is so screwed up.”
Scott Jacobs (90ff96) — 1/4/2009 @ 10:47 pmScott, call it “The Nuclear Option.”
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/4/2009 @ 10:58 pmI hope that they start posting with civility and maturity.
This being the year of hope ‘n change, I hope you are not holding your breath EB.
Stu707 (7fb2e7) — 1/4/2009 @ 11:42 pmOh, I don’t know, Stu707. Some people are apparently chastened a bit.
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/5/2009 @ 12:22 am#253- Obama was going to slash NASA to the bone last summer, too. He modified his position as events changed. Inflexibility and stubborn rigidity is a distinctly conservative trait.
As of yesterday, Obama is looking to use existing military missiles (a cheaper and time saving alternative) to accelerate development of the Orion/Constellation program (shades of Redstone, Atlas and Titan for the Mercury and Gemini days). This would also open up manned launching capabilities from Vandenberg as well as the Cape. And the military has had a larger space budget than NASA for years.
Lori Garver, an ex-NASA/AdAstra type who worked with von Braun’s NSS in its infancy, is advising. NASA administrator Griffin is resisting on engineering, contractual and turf battles (fearing, most likely, NASA assets may get absorbed into the MIC.) It’s a red flag for the civilian agency for sure. But the 5-year developmental lag between mothballing shuttle in 2010 and getting Orion/Constellation up and running seen as unacceptable to Obama given Red China’s plans. His proposal seems fiscally wise and strategically sound. I support it.
Smart fellow this Obama guy, considering the vacuum on space left by W and his pappy. He’ll be an exceptionally fine president.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/5/2009 @ 12:49 am#259- Nonsense. If this was a 1+1=11 world I’m sure it would. Always a great laugh when conservatives claim they freed the world and won the Cold War. Waiting for that lead-into-gold trick soon from Paulson as well.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/5/2009 @ 12:56 am#302 Comment by EW1(SG) — 1/4/2009 @ 9:32 pm
Not sure EW.
I feel bad for DCSCA, as I think he is not an adolescent, but an older person who is interested in the world but unable to make sense of it (without resorting to conspiracies).
His choice in movie references such as “the Battle of Britain” and “the Caine Mutiny” do not strike me as choices that would be made by an adolescent (no idea but best guess). Even his insults are not caustic (more often they are silly).
For a person interested in the world, but lacking an accurate knowledge of history, the world is a truly terrifying place. As such, convenient explanations find fertile soil to restore a sense of rationality to the world. The simplest (and therefore most common) is that some sort of “power structure” is the cause of the world’s problems (such “power structures” might include: a corporation, or the world industrial complex, or conservatives, or the CIA, or the illuminati, or President Bush, or a specific group of people, or Harvard grads, or communists and so on). Present facts contrary to his world-view and we become part of the problem.
Silly, predictable, but harmless.
Pons Asinorum (5fa803) — 1/5/2009 @ 1:19 am#265- Interesting quiz.
I have a nephew currently contemplating scholarship packages with CalTech, MIT or Harvard. (Harvard asked him to apply.) Bio-sciences and genetic engineering are his preference so he’s leaning toward CalTech and wants to turn the Boston schools down. The kid is frightenly smart. Truly. Was asked to do lab work with the pros at Scripps in LaJolla over the summer. But here’s the thing, which, as a ‘claimed’ educator, may intrigue you. He’ll discuss perpetual motion, black holes, gene splicing, stem-cell research (which he supports) and the BlackEyed Peas over a hot dog while tuning his guitar, but, akin to your list, has little interest digging deeper into the facts and dates regarding such mundane things as listed on your quiz. ‘They’re in an old book; I can google it if needed or catch a History Channel block’ is the response. He sees little relevance or practical use for that kind of ‘knowledge base’ in today’s world, unless he was planning to be a contestant on ‘Jeopardy.’
Could be a mind set of that generation, but if you’re an educator as you claim, it’s probably presents a frustrating challenge to you with the students you encounter.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/5/2009 @ 1:34 am#312- typo- frighteningly. I’m sure you’ll red pencil it anyway.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/5/2009 @ 1:46 amI appreciate the lack of a large number of childish insults…but you still can’t help yourself with the generalizations, designed to get people to react to you with “slap backs.”
And yes, I am a college professor, and have taught genetics for many years.
So please relax a bit and try to be civil. Remember, you even got DRJ a bit irritated with you.
Um. And Lori Garver was born in 1961. Sure you want to stick with her having “…worked with von Braun’s NSS in its infancy..“? The NSS was founded in 1987. I suspect you are referring to the National Space Institute, which WvB did found, around 1974 – 1975—when Lori Garver was 13 or 14 years old. Gerry O’Neill’s L-5 society merged with the NSI about 1987, creating the NSS.
Perhaps you are writing about that. But von Braun had been dead a decade by then.
Regardless, Lori Garver has been involved in space policy work for some time, though she has become a ver partisan individual.
I like space issues, too, despite your earlier frequent insults toward me on the subject, and try to keep up with issues (and the history of the space program). You really shouldn’t fight with someone who wants to see more and better space exploration. That isn’t about D versus R.
Lori Garver, like most NASA types (current and former), is a political animal (and they come, again, with both Ds or Rs after their names). You seem very certain that she and her Democratic friends can change things for the better. I hope you are correct. Though I am bemused why it is not considered to be militaristic to link NASA and the military more directly, as President-Elect Obama’s people have suggested—I’m certain it would be described as militaristic and provocative if a John McCain had suggested that route.
Don’t get me wrong: I’m a fan of NASC being revived, as the President-elect has pledged. And the history of NASC isn’t quite as partisan as you suggest,incidentally. The real enemy is bureaucracy and ego. If you will put aside your need to be insulting, I’ll bet you will agree with that.
I don’t see what other options exist; most of the approaches lack both vision and innovation. I don’t think Musk’s company will be able to make the Falcon 9 man-rated, though I wish they could. I’m all for trying many approaches, but bureaucracy is the enemy of innovation, currently, and in far more than this topic.
You surely know the old rocketeer joke: it is time to launch when the mass of the paperwork equals the mass of the booster.
I wish the space program well, and nothing would please me more than seeing a string of wonderful successes. But it is a source of bemusement how easily very cynical people become very idealistic over a person with a different letter in front of their names.
Bureaucracy and institutional inertia are not partisan problems.
Well, enough about that. I have watched the space program all of my life, from the glory days to the current thumb-twiddling. Hence my enthusiasm.
I wish your nephew well. Those are nice scholarship offers and were offered VERY early in the college admissions game (and please note that, unlike you, I am not sniping “…if true…” multiple times). I have to say that Caltech is a great place for PhD students and postdocs; not so good for undergraduates, especially in the biological sciences (great for engineering, naturally). MIT is surprisingly good for undergraduate work, as is Harvard, of course. But “fit” is more fundamental. Your nephew should visit each campus and talk to the students. They are much better sources of information than the admissions folk or professors.
The “perpetual motion” business is a red flag, but he is probably messing with you; his physics teacher in high school taught him better. And students today don’t call it “gene splicing” anymore, but people in my generation do.
I used to work at UCSD as a postdoc, so I know the Scripps folk pretty well. He has been trained well, I’m sure.
But the “old book” comment is a sad one. It’s good that he is looking at MIT and Caltech, which have much less of a liberal arts emphasis than Harvard. That entire “google it” business seems to lead to the current issues seem on many campuses, including my own, regarding plagiarism. I have seen very smart students flush their careers down the proverbial toilet because they shrug off things with that attitude; I hope sincerely that your nephew is wiser than those smart students. Truly. It is in the nature of 18 year olds to think that they are smarter and quicker than the fogies around them. Not on this kind of subject. Again, it sounds like your nephew is off to a good start, and will avoid those kinds of potholes.
But do try to get him to read some history. I’m a scientist, and I avoided those classes in college, but my older brother insisted I read widely, and it helped me a great deal. The history of science is particularly interesting…and relevant, as new ideas and challenges emerge. I’m afraid to recommend some titles because of a presumed snarky response, but I can promise you that reading outside his comfort zone will help your nephew in ways he will not expect. History is not mundane. Santayana has the last word on that.
You are a proud uncle, and that is nice to see.
Enough. Time to grab a few hours and get cracking.
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/5/2009 @ 2:09 am#311– I feel bad for DCSCA, as I think he is not an adolescent, but an older person who is interested in the world but unable to make sense of it (without resorting to conspiracies).
Feeling bad? Lay off the tacos in the student cafeteria. My. Now age discrimination surfaces. Can sexism, racism conservativsm, communism and socialism be far behind? Having seen a fair piece of ‘the world’ already, you have some catching up to do. [Note to self, must have passports framed.]
“His choice in movie references such as “the Battle of Britain” …” Surprise! I’ll give you one. I watched them film it. You haven’t ‘made sense of the world’ until you sense the majesty of a Spitfire doing a victory roll over Westminister Abbey as a smoking Heinkel limps by, worldly one.
Conspiracies?? Ever sat in a room with the CEOs of several top oil firms prepping to go meet and vote on bumping off a head of state with CIA blessing? Now there’s a heapin’ helpin’ of con-sp-ir-acy theory. M-I-C-K-E-Y, M-O- whoops, there’s that age thing again.
Here’s a fresh lesson, kid. Go outside. Look up at the stars. Around the equatorial band. See that fast moving, unblinking light passing from west to east? Do ya?? Now wave at it. I’ll wave back on the next rev.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/5/2009 @ 2:20 am#269- A fresh scab for you to pick at to go with your Winnie poster- Lady Churchill lived caddy corner to our flat in London. WC had passed in ’65. My younger brother, not knowing any better, tried to interview the ailing old gal for the school paper but she graciously declined. We’d see her walking on occasion in the garden, alone. Rather serene sight knowing the history she experienced.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/5/2009 @ 2:31 amDCSCA, whining about age discrimination is particularly rich. You’ve behaved like a bratty kid for practically every comment you’ve spammed on this site, and now it’s “age discrimination” if someone speculates as to whether you really are a bratty juvenile, or an older individual who really ought to know better?
Color me unsympathetic.
Xrlq (62cad4) — 1/5/2009 @ 3:58 am#317 Xrlq:
Surely a better fate than being a lying crapweasel.
EW1(SG) (e27928) — 1/5/2009 @ 4:10 am#314- “Uh,” Lori Garver worked at the National Space Society, or perhaps it was NSI then, started by Von Braun, in 1976, before he died. I was a charter member and visited it in Washington in 1977. But that’s neither here nor there. We’re on the same page and I dont think about the 70s much anymore. I was fortunate to be around for the space program’s birth with Sputniks and Echos passing over head and manged to catch every launch since Shepard’s first pop. I agree with your assessment of her status, though. Totally. Never was a favorite of mine. Lobbiest-supreme. But using existing assets, getting them man-rated, and engineering spacecraft and support facilities to use existng boosters makes good sense and not necessarily a military problem unless they encroach on NASA’s turf. Its a contractor thing and yes, bureaucracy. I think they’d like to be able to get crews up out of Vandenberg.
Agreed that it is neither D or R issue anymore but history has shown R has not been a friend of S-pace, particulary since Nixon. Comercialization fever in the Reagan days was a disaster.
McCain was the wrong man for this era. Painfully evident. 2000 was his time. I preferred him over W then. I preferred cold coffee and stale bread to W. My late father did some oil work with Pappy Bush in the 70s and some of his stories on them were revealing. Very poor president, W. And a very bad man. Enuf said. My opinion.
As for ‘lectures’ on ‘civility,’ let’s allow, given the tone of some of your own barbed wires directed my way, this is not worth quibbling over. ‘It’. ‘Troll’. Self-rightous calls for banning. Childish for a college professor. Very. But shows effectiveness. Rewarding for adman. Conservatives are dour these days. Let’s bury the hatchet, and start fresh. I can handle attacks from many sides with glib and witty ease, alone, without being multi-teamed or reaching for the crutch of another poster. I’m an old hand at this and Patterico/DRJ know what’s what. Especially regarding the Pellicano matter, a posting on which I congenially redirect you to read. I remain in P & DRJ’s debt for honoring the victims of that bastard by elevating my interpretation of their pain to its stand-alone level for others to absorb. And I know at least one of those who suffered at his hand is grateful.
However, this does not change my firm conviction that conservatism is a vile cancer, with little positive legacy to show for its ascension, particularly over the past 30 years. Having been raised in a household with a parent who was a rabid ‘Goldwater-girl’ let’s allow I know some of what I speak first hand. She abandoned the GOP with glee and voted for Obama this round. ‘I don’t recognize these people anymore…’ she says. And at 78, earned the right and displayed the wisdom having seen the tumor in the dregs of the Bircher days and the wilderness years.
Yes, the nephew has made the trips to all. MIT’s nuclear reactor impressed him. Kids. 😉 CalTech is his comfort zone and he’ll be a lab rat until the Nobel people come calling one day. I fully expect it and with little surprise.
The student thing is quite perplexing and I used my terms in posting (example-gene splicing) as his terms were quite involved. ‘A Is For Atom’ is a cartoon, literally, for him, to chuckle at. Example, I’d cart him out to do the Estes bit. Camaroc for the kiddies. As a child, rather than saying ‘this is fun,’,he’d ask, ‘how does this work?’ Speaks volumes. He’s not kidding about perpetual motion. Physics a breeze to him; numbers a game. Several class years ahead. He sees PM as a challenge of some kind to chew on. Yet minimal interest in the ‘context’ history can provide. I dont quite get it beyond the ease with which facts figures and data can be accessed via laptops now. A book is a curiosity to him. Although a budding hobby is thumbing through old ‘newspapers’ from 70 years ago. I gather kids dont see much of them in classrooms now.
I dont envy your burden as you’re doing the chore that should have been done in the high schools. You have to prep’em to start to learn. As you deal with this first hand, I dont know how you’d cajole interest in a generation to value even a passing interest in history, literature or anything else. It’s quite disposable– (and, given my profession, partly my fault.) Fortunately for me, in my younger days, history was a living thing; places, not just pages in a book and we had no distractions like cars or football games. Amusingly, Thatcher was our MP in Finchley. Miserable town, Finchley. 😉 Stratford a bus ride north. The British Museum a place to cut through on the way home, the Magna Carta displayed next to moon rocks. Walking the beaches of Normandy, the fields at Waterloo, Red Square… a tube, train, hovercraft or Aeroflot trip away atvery low cost.
Perhaps getting your students to see these places first hand might help (although I think I’ve toured ever damn catheral on the continent of Europe— ( seen one flying buttress, you’re seen them all. No wisecracks.). Webcams dont make it. Books just seem to be too slow a method of processing information for them today. Bulky, and heavy, too. Even a CD is obsolete to these kids now- MP3 is it. 1000 songs in a Bic lighter.
Plagerism. I caught one red-handed at CBS. We’d have been sued for sure. It is unforgivable laziness.
It’s late, or early. I’m tired. Good night. Will continue at a later time.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/5/2009 @ 4:40 am#285- No. I posed a general question to list ten things conservatism has left as a positive legacy to the world over the past 150 years or so.
An easy exercise which seems hard for conservatives to compile. I had deferred from offering up any formal list other than a two general examples. As to your efforted ‘list,’ which omits the rest of the world and focuses on the United States, I’ll comment as follows.
1. A belief in the individuals right to own private property.
Where do you derive this ‘belief’ is a unique legacy of conservatism? Did FDR give away Hyde Park while alive? It’s a preposterous contention that conservatism can lay claim to this as a legacy that’s their ‘private property’ alone.
2. Support for the institutions of law and order (police, courts, military) that make our society and citizens safe.
How do you possibly conclude that this is uniquely a conservative legacy? So every liberal who ran a raffle at the fire station, or fell to their deaths with the WTC who wasn’t a conservative didn’t hold these values dear? Which uniquely conservative struggle bestowed this to our world? It’s nonsense.
3. Commitment to a predictable system of laws and governance, e.g., the incremental change of conservative Supreme Court decisions.
I see. Well, as you’ve narrowed conservatism to America, it’s an odd ‘commitment’ as the United States Constitution (Supreme Court et al) is a very progressive document penned by the radicals of their time, designed to be amended as times and circumstances changed. Hardly a charter unique to conservatism alone. Not a unique legacy at all.
4. Resistance to sweeping change that undermines our social institutions, most notably the decline of our schools during the past 40 years of progressive social engineering.
Resistance to change? A characteristic of conservatism most assuredly but relative to the times at hand. My God, conservatives resisted rock ‘n’ roll; long pants for boys, women attending the Citadel and the forward pass. And as schools are ‘principally’ a local matter for the most part, hardly a conservative legacy matter of global import. It’s absurd.
5. Support for free markets that have enabled the U.S. economy to dominate in innovation and productivity.
So everyone who isn’t a conservative doesn’t? This is a unique legacy of conservatives? Say,in 1931— or last month when Wall St and Detroit were bailed out? And given the recent collapse of unregulated free market capitalism, its need to borrow funds from Communist China, and the socialist medicine used to keep it alive, it’s a global legacy conservatives would disown at 50 cents on the dollar of late or gladly share with progressives at any time.
6. Commitment to small government that is less intrusive and burdensome for the average citizen. Giving more power to government results in abuse of that power, regardless of party or ideology.
This in not as legacy at all. Or one you’d even want to claim. Government has grown massively under the guise of conservatism — and progressivism, liberalism, republican and democrat, dixiecrat or moonbat.
7. A belief in individual accountability rather than compulsory mandates or excessive reliance on government.
This is a philosophical rant, not a hard legacy. Per the U.S., I suggest you take this up with government contractors, city, county, state and Federal workers of one of the largest employers in the America-the government.
No where is it suggested that conservatism is unique to the United States. Nor is it unique to Republicans, Democrats or any persuasion in between here or in other lands at other times. I have offered up no formal ‘liberal’ list as it were, other than two simple phrases to get spark some response. And if I were to, I’d begin with a general base of 12, not 10– to build on. The Bill of Rights. A highly progressive document, not crafted solely in the minds of conservatives, but penned by progressives of their time and certainly shared by all today. A liberal legacy.
None of these are hard legacies at all and one could ask again why listing even four or five seems such a challenge. It’s as if conservative sense a hidden trap or trick to it. I’d genunely like to read a list of even three. As far as I can tell, there are none to be found. All I get is bark and ban-ter talk in return.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/5/2009 @ 6:56 amYou’ve been given a list of twelve. Eleven by one commenter, and an additional one by another.
You, on the other hand, are unable to compile any list at all.
I really hope you don’t wonder why we don’t take you seriously.
Scott Jacobs (a1c284) — 1/5/2009 @ 7:29 amAnd this has to do with the surge in Afghanistan how exactly?
carlitos (34f76e) — 1/5/2009 @ 7:39 amIf you are still reading this, here’s my suggestion for your new name:
hope2009
Comment by DRJ — 1/4/2009 @ 7:03 pm
love2008 who wants a new name for '09 (1b037c) — 1/5/2009 @ 7:44 amHey DRJ, thank you for the offer. Hope2009. Hmmm….ok. I like it. I guess I will have to pass it through the senate for confirmation. 🙂
Hey, carlitos, that is my fault too.
My bad, as those crazy hepcat kids say.
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/5/2009 @ 7:52 amAmerican conservatives are the heirs of the Founders. That the Founders were “progressive” then does not mean they’d be what passes for “progressive” now.
Your failure to comprehend what conservatism means in the American context, coupled with your unwillingness to attempt to understand it and your blatant rudeness makes it clear you’re not really interested in a discussion. What a pity.
Rob Crawford (04f50f) — 1/5/2009 @ 7:52 amNow that DCSCA has added “No True Scotsman” to his list of logical fallacies which he has committed, the list is complete.
SPQR (72771e) — 1/5/2009 @ 7:56 amDCSCA,
I haven’t had time to read through these comments and don’t care to, but I saw DRJ saying she would vote to ban you. That’s unusual and it’s almost determinative. But I want to give you a fair shake.
I suggest that if you’re insulting people, you immediately stop doing so and discontinue doing so in the future. I’ll ask people to do the same for you as long as you are complying with that request.
In the meantime, if someone who wants this fellow banned wants to point me to particular comments that they feel justifies it, go ahead.
Patterico (738d19) — 1/5/2009 @ 8:00 amI’d say the first paragraph of this comment crosses the line, but I have a notoriously low threshold for banning fools.
Rob Crawford (04f50f) — 1/5/2009 @ 8:19 amDear Patterico….
The issue is one we have all seen before. A person will be very abusive and insulting, and claim that someone else treated them that way first.
I have been trying to be polite and to engage the person in question with civility recently. It is true that I have referred to that person as a troll, but when someone calls conservatism a “virulent cancer” and attacks my own honesty multiple times, it is hard not to do so. It’s frustrating when other posters try to be civil and get insults in reply.
I think that the person is trying to toe the line as of yesterday. For example, there is little evidence of the childish one-liner insults. Also, there have been a few posts on other threads that aren’t the typical swaggering snarkfest. I think that subsequent posts will tell the tale.
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/5/2009 @ 8:20 amComment by Patterico — 1/5/2009 @ 8:00 am
love2008 who wants Patterico to show mercy. (1b037c) — 1/5/2009 @ 8:37 amAs much as I would like to see him go, I think you should not ban him. He is not the worst we have seen…..yet. But I suspect this guy may be Levi. They sound alike.
Patterico,
This one I think is fairly over the top, especially considering he was targeting Love, who’s not exactly our most conservative commenter.
Scott Jacobs (a1c284) — 1/5/2009 @ 8:39 amI don’t think he’s Levi, love2008. Levi was crude, and couldn’t assemble a decent sentence if his life depended on it.
DCSCA, however, engages in misdirection, constantly repeats his theme of “x+x=y”, and quotes movies and musicals ad nauseam, all the while taunting conservatives.
In short, he’s a great deal more like David Ehrenstein than Levi.
Patterico, I vote to not ban him. If DCSCA hijacks threads and doesn’t engage in honest debate, then let’s not engage him. Eventually, he’ll go away bored or get so provocative he’ll end up getting banned for much better reasons. Right now, however, he’s merely an annoyance.
Steverino (69d941) — 1/5/2009 @ 8:58 amI wonder if he likes horses.
nk (d08690) — 1/5/2009 @ 9:01 am#315 Comment by DCSCA — 1/5/2009 @ 2:20 am
Feeling bad? Lay off the tacos in the student cafeteria. My. Now age discrimination surfaces. Can sexism, racism conservativsm, communism and socialism be far behind? Having seen a fair piece of ‘the world’ already, you have some catching up to do. [Note to self, must have passports framed.]
Sorry if I hurt your feelings (I did not mean to hit the mark dead-on and so bluntly). I am an older person myself (just lately acquiring my Bachelors Degree), now addicted to studying math on my own at the library or office during lunch.
I am also a world traveler (although most of it was in the military).
Surprise! I’ll give you one. I watched them film it. You haven’t ‘made sense of the world’ until you sense the majesty of a Spitfire doing a victory roll over Westminister Abbey as a smoking Heinkel limps by, worldly one.
And I will give you that one! What a sight that must have been.
Conspiracies?? Ever sat in a room with the CEOs of several top oil firms prepping to go meet and vote on bumping off a head of state with CIA blessing? Now there’s a heapin’ helpin’ of con-sp-ir-acy theory. M-I-C-K-E-Y, M-O- whoops, there’s that age thing again.
So they supported the Soviets, which led to the Invasion of Afghanistan, which led to the Taliban, which led to bin Laden, which led to 911, which led to our presence in Afghanistan so that we could secure territory, so that they could construct a pipeline that would put zillions of dollars in their pocket so that they could control the world for their puppet masters — the [fill in the blank].
Thanks for clearing that up for me.
Here’s a fresh lesson, kid. Go outside. Look up at the stars. Around the equatorial band. See that fast moving, unblinking light passing from west to east? Do ya?? Now wave at it. I’ll wave back on the next rev.
Not sure what you mean exactly (are we suppose to wave at each other every month?), but if you did indeed see the Spitfire as you described, you are my elder and I’ll just chalk it up to some sort of slang from before my time (and no worries, I take no offense at the “kid” reference, although some of the thin-skinned variety might cry “Age Discrimination”).
No matter what, I would hope that we are together on supporting our troops, wherever they are. That we can Respect their Sacrifice, and Honor their memory – you did it once before, when the Spitfires and Hurricanes did their victory rolls (and when they fell out of the skies in smoke and flame), surely you can do it for our troops today?
Okay DC, that’s it for this week, gotta go back to work, thanks for the memories, have fun–
Pons Asinorum (5fa803) — 1/5/2009 @ 9:37 amOops, I mucked that up, let me try again:
Sorry if I hurt your feelings (I did not mean to hit the mark dead-on and so bluntly). I am an older person myself (just lately acquiring my Bachelors Degree), now addicted to studying math on my own at the library or office during lunch.
I am also a world traveler (although most of it was in the military).
And I will give you that one! What a sight that must have been.
So they supported the Soviets, which led to the Invasion of Afghanistan, which led to the Taliban, which led to bin Laden, which led to 911, which led to our presence in Afghanistan so that we could secure territory, so that they could construct a pipeline that would put zillions of dollars in their pocket so that they could control the world for their puppet masters — the [fill in the blank].
Thanks for clearing that up for me.
Not sure what you mean exactly (are we suppose to wave at each other every month?), but if you did indeed see the Spitfire as you described, you are my elder and I’ll just chalk it up to some sort of slang from before my time (and no worries, I take no offense at the “kid” reference, although some of the thin-skinned variety might cry “Age Discrimination”).
No matter what, I would hope that we are together on supporting our troops, wherever they are. That we can Respect their Sacrifice, and Honor their memory – you did it once before, when the Spitfires and Hurricanes did their victory rolls (and when they fell out of the skies in smoke and flame), surely you can do it for our troops today?
Okay DC, that’s it for now, gotta go back to work, have fun–
Pons Asinorum (5fa803) — 1/5/2009 @ 9:42 amPons Asinorum:
First, never apologize for getting your degree later in life. My father got his B.A. degree when he was 53, while working fulltime, and I remain very proud of him. He always wanted to go to college, but family responsibilities got in the way. I’ll never forget him actually acting in “Our Town” on stage while he was taking classes at my hometown state college campus. I would never have dreamed it, when I was a kid.
As for the other thing…
You know, I once had a student in my lab who was telling the other students that he knew a student who was so great that UCLA recruited her as an undergraduate and gave her her own lab.
Obviously untrue. I took the student aside, and we talked about it.
It turns out that the student he knew had a friend whose father was a PI (principle investigator) running a lab at UCLA, and he had encouraged her to transfer so she could work in his lab, for the experience in cancer research.
So why the exaggeration to the point of lying? Effect? Self-importance? The student I am discussing was and is a good person. It was mysterious, really.
I think that some of the things that DCSCA has written are for effect (snark and partisan bashing), and other things are very true and sincerely meant. I’m hopeful that, with more time, we’ll see more of the latter and less of the former.
I think that the DRJ business made that poster stop and think. Also, the amount of time spent with back and forth insults—a waste of time all around.
Time will tell.
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/5/2009 @ 9:56 am#321- None of which are legacies…. and none I might add, from you. My, you DO like to bark orders, doncha. I already noted 12 as a base. Yet still, nuttin’ from you.
Here’s some direction:
1. Find a lamp cord.
2. Then an outlet.
3. Keep plugging.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/5/2009 @ 11:32 amAnother non-responsive troll comment.
SPQR (72771e) — 1/5/2009 @ 11:33 amHere we go again. It’s like the poster can’t help it.
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/5/2009 @ 11:35 am#325- “American conservatives are the heirs of the Founders.” My God, the arrogance. Stunning. And you’ve leased the original thirteen colonies to us as well, I suppose. that private property thing.
Next it will be your God is better than my God.
Your failure to comprehend what conservatism means in the American context, coupled with your unwillingness to attempt to understand it and your blatant rudeness makes it clear you’re not really interested in a discussion. What a pity.
It’s understood all too well, which makes it all the more the blessing it is in remission, or dead.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/5/2009 @ 11:43 amC’mon, DCSCA. You are just trolling.
Do you really and truly want to accuse anyone else of arrogance in their posts? Honestly?
I think you just post those things to get other people to slap at you so you can slap back.
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/5/2009 @ 11:46 amWow. Not sure if I am happy or sad I missed DSCSA puking all over the threads. Not nearly as much fun as David Petranos Esp, MDKP, AnnTM, and Mr. Ed, and their frogmen, beef slicers, boats captains, and snipers.
JD (61086e) — 1/5/2009 @ 11:58 amI do think that once somebody declares you to be a virulent cancer, regardless of what follows, it is an easy assumption that the writer is a complete asshat.
JD (61086e) — 1/5/2009 @ 12:00 pmJD, that term “asshat” always makes me laugh. Someone needs to design and market them.
Good to see you around.
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/5/2009 @ 12:02 pmGorelick always makes me laugh. Out loud.
JD (61086e) — 1/5/2009 @ 12:06 pmDon’t let it get to you. He made like one or 2 cogent comments (with which some disagree and some agree) and he was already calling names back at the top of the thread. Then came nonsense, talking points and movie quotes. Deep breath. Put mouse down. Go make lunch.
carlitos (34f76e) — 1/5/2009 @ 12:08 pmThe pompous, arrogant, smug, smarmy, pseudo-clever, tired, lame, posturing douche-itude of DCSCA is a marvelous feat.
Jack Klompus (b0e238) — 1/5/2009 @ 12:11 pmdouche-itude is to nouns what mendoucheous is to adjectives
carlitos (34f76e) — 1/5/2009 @ 12:14 pmThe class clown that repeats the same stupid joke/catch-phrase over and over and over and is convinced that they are a fountain of wit and insight, e.g. “1+1=2 not 11”, displays tremendous douche-itude.
Jack Klompus (b0e238) — 1/5/2009 @ 12:16 pm“Douche-itude“? I nearly geysered my coffee, Jack. Mad props.
All we need is Noel Coward playing piano in the background.
Seriously, it is just a game. Remember that fake sports cable channel ad, where it showed the Bulgarian sport of competitive face slapping? It’s like that.
Speaking of that, here is a good video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bn1-M5Ze0p8&eurl=http://baratsandbereta.com/videos.html
Oh, and as for your new term, from those same guys:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fad6eZTDikA
Apologies.
Thanks again for the recommendations about Philly, Jack.
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/5/2009 @ 12:24 pm#338- I listed twelve as a base to reference. You’ve penned an erroneous one.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/5/2009 @ 12:25 pmI wasn’t advocating banning but the incoherent trollery is a good reason.
SPQR (72771e) — 1/5/2009 @ 12:30 pm#341- Are you tenured?
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/5/2009 @ 12:30 pmDouche-itutde is an excellent word, on par with mendoucheous, both of which are entirely applicable to this DSCSA clown. And I do not like clowns …
JD (61086e) — 1/5/2009 @ 12:31 pmI do not advocate banning either, but anyone that suggests that DRJ is dishonest is practically begging to be banned. I do wish that wordpress could figure out a way to stop it from posting the same drivel over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over …
JD (61086e) — 1/5/2009 @ 12:33 pmAnd none of it is necessary.
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/5/2009 @ 12:37 pm#343- Yet you recognized and acknowledged it. Seriously, the country rejected you. And today’s economic news from President-Elect Obama mapped some of the wreckage left by the right.
What do conservatives propose to use to guide themselves out of the wilderness? The Nat’l Review or Weekly Standard? Kristol? Goldberg? Limbaugh? Coulter? Inghram? Sean and Billy-O? Krauthammer? Malkin, et al? Birch redux, perhaps?
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/5/2009 @ 12:47 pmDSCSA – The douche-itude you have displayed, coupled with your unwavering mendoucheous style led me to the inevitable conclusion that you are as asshat. I will be pleased to be proven wrong.
Not that #357 was substantive, but I am quite sure the increasing taxes on the actual taxpayers, and redistributing my tax dollars to others is not the solution.
JD (61086e) — 1/5/2009 @ 12:50 pmNope, not at all insulting. And this isn’t the first time, nor in response to anyone calling DCSCA names.
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/5/2009 @ 12:51 pm#347/#349– very, very well.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/5/2009 @ 12:53 pmSince “Woody” is not a conservative, and does not have the best interests of conservatives as a goal, it would be inappropriate to respond to his question (or demand) that we tell him what we would propose to guide ourselves out of the wilderness (of his mind).
For one brief period, he/she/it almost seemed that it desired a colloquy, but it has now returned to its’ roots, and is just another fountain of insult and arrogance.
This has become so tiresome.
I vote BAN!
AD (748b7c) — 1/5/2009 @ 12:55 pmEspecially when everyone knows 1 + 1 = 10.
Rob Crawford (04f50f) — 1/5/2009 @ 12:57 pmCome on guys. Who cares if some anonymous stranger you’ll never talk to again just called you a name? Liberals and conservatives shouldn’t have to pretend to like one another if they don’t, should they? I mean realize how you’re communicating here. We have to run the internet like it’s second grade?
Sarlberid (b989f8) — 1/5/2009 @ 1:03 pmBSCSCA is a tremendous bore. perhaps we could get the poster’s name at the top of the comment and save us all a bit of time.
Pablo (99243e) — 1/5/2009 @ 1:04 pm#329– It is true that I have referred to that person as a troll, but when someone calls conservatism a “virulent cancer” and attacks my own honesty multiple times, it is hard not to do so.
Of course you did not assult my honesty. But why go over old ground. As penned, hatchet buried.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/5/2009 @ 1:04 pmTrue, Rob, there at 10 kinds of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don’t.
SPQR (72771e) — 1/5/2009 @ 1:04 pmEspecially when everyone knows 1 + 1 = 10.
Comment by Rob Crawford — 1/5/2009 @ 12:57 pm
I always thought it was 21; I mean, it is two ones, right?
AD (748b7c) — 1/5/2009 @ 1:05 pmDoes this comment make me look fat?
carlitos (34f76e) — 1/5/2009 @ 1:09 pm#335- Re Spitfire/Heinkel. It was. The papers ran a story for pensioners in town to alert ’em not to fear the sight of German planes over the city again. Permission was granted for filming on just one day. The trauma of their cities endlessly bombed remained very real to them. But then the IRA was at work then as well.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/5/2009 @ 1:10 pmAnyhoo, how ’bout that surge in Afghanistan. Should we suggest to our leaders that whichever anonymous internet poster wins the “what philosophy best served the globe over the past 150 years – list X Y and Z” debate gets to go fight, or should we maybe just let the administration and military handle things, along with our NATO allies?
Hey, you know what – Obama is an ‘armchair general’ !
carlitos (34f76e) — 1/5/2009 @ 1:12 pmThere are 10 kinds of people in the world… Those who understand binary, and those who don’t…
Scott Jacobs (a1c284) — 1/5/2009 @ 1:12 pm#368. No. Bold, perhaps.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/5/2009 @ 1:45 pm#359– Are you tenured?
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/5/2009 @ 1:51 pmDCSCA #373 – trying to threaten people now?
SPQR (72771e) — 1/5/2009 @ 2:08 pmDCSCA #353 & #373:
You’ve asked Eric Blair twice if he’s tenured. Why?
DRJ (345e40) — 1/5/2009 @ 2:16 pm“What do conservatives propose to use to guide themselves out of the wilderness?”
WOW!!!
I’m in the wilderness?
Along with 47% of the rest of America?
I did not know that!
So much for unity, I guess.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 1/5/2009 @ 2:30 pmI’ve changed my mind about Senor One Plate Short of a Combo Platter – ban him.
Dmac (eb0dd0) — 1/5/2009 @ 2:46 pmMan, I just looked here again What a waste of electrons !
I don’t think we need DCSA. DCSA, is your real name Max ?
Just asking.
Mike K (531ff4) — 1/5/2009 @ 3:01 pmHeh.
Dmac (eb0dd0) — 1/5/2009 @ 3:21 pmMax headroom?
carlitos (34f76e) — 1/5/2009 @ 3:36 pm#375- We were discussing schools and universities last evening and earlier on. The caliber of students entering universities came up, given his quiz. Its a shared concern. I have a nephew who’s fairly advanced and in the process of choosing schools; CalTech, MIT, Harvard and the like and he had mentioned visiting several campuses. Why? Seems a fairly benign question to ask a college professor.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/5/2009 @ 3:40 pm#374- What?!?! No, I did not ask him in HUAC-style if was now or had ever been a member of the Communist Party. Jeez.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/5/2009 @ 3:44 pmDCSCA, we’ve seen enough history of people attempting intimidation through work contacts to be suspicious of that kind of inquiry.
SPQR (72771e) — 1/5/2009 @ 4:02 pm#336 Comment by Eric Blair — 1/5/2009 @ 9:56 am
Thank you for the kind words Prof Blair. What a touching story about your father. Thank you for that.
Pons Asinorum (5fa803) — 1/5/2009 @ 4:07 pmHe started it!
(just kidding) – You are correct on all points; well said.
Pons Asinorum (5fa803) — 1/5/2009 @ 4:11 pmYou look great my friend, it is my monitor that is too narrow.
Pons Asinorum (5fa803) — 1/5/2009 @ 4:14 pmDCSCA:
What do you do for a living and where? Contact info for your employer, please.
If you don’t want to provide it, fine. Please stop asking questions of others that sound like implied threats. Why the fuck do you care if Eric Blair is tenured. Because of your nephew???
Straighten up and fly right or go into moderation. I won’t have my commenters intimidated. Tread lightly or don’t tread at all.
Patterico (f5c812) — 1/5/2009 @ 4:44 pmNo, it’s all that fat that makes you look fat… 😀
Oh, like you didn’t see that coming from somewhere… 🙂
Scott Jacobs (90ff96) — 1/5/2009 @ 4:47 pmAlso, I predict the response to Patterico will be along the lines of “How dare you try to intimidate me, you sure like to order people around, 1+1=2”
Scott Jacobs (90ff96) — 1/5/2009 @ 4:50 pmWow.
Geez, what a thread.
Paul (creator of "Staunch Brayer") (43e430) — 1/5/2009 @ 5:15 pmDCSCA,
Kudos to your nephew. I’m sure he will be happy at any of those fine institutions. Our neighbor’s son is a junior at MIT (he was highly recruited, too) and is very happy with his choice, as were the children of family friends who attended other elite institutions like Harvard, Princeton, and Yale.
However, like others here, I encourage your nephew to broaden his horizons beyond his current love for the sciences. Most people want to branch out when they get older and feel secure in their careers. It will be helpful to have a base of knowledge, particularly with the resources available at those universities. In addition, well-rounded knowledge will make your nephew a better friend, husband and parent. Someday he may find himself interested in people with other interests, and he will undoubtedly want to be prepared to discuss issues at their level.
On a different topic, like Patterico with Foo Bar on another thread, I want to make every effort to reach out to you even though I still doubt your sincerity in this debate. It seems you will only be satisfied with a simplified list of conservative “accomplishments.” Perhaps you’re keeping a scorecard that you plan to tally at the end of the day. 1+1=11, right?
In no particular order, here is my list of conservative/Republican accomplishments:
1. Banned partial birth abortion.
2. Prevented significant terrorist attacks on U.S. soil after 9/11.
3. Consistently support tax cuts for Americans.
4. Building a fence on the southern border, in part to prevent illegal immigration by criminals, terrorists, and smugglers.
5. Defeated Communism.
6. Convinced Libya’s Qaddafi to disarm his chemical, nuclear and biological WMD’s without bribes or bloodshed.
7. Instrumental in passing women’s suffrage.
8. Eliminated the IRS marriage penalty.
9. Abolished slavery.
10. Support increases in military expenditures.
DRJ (345e40) — 1/5/2009 @ 6:06 pmDRJ, it’s not going to work. For each item in the list, he’ll either say that it’s not a legacy, or that it was really the work of progressives.
It’s easy for him to play the game when he makes the rules up as he goes along.
Steverino (b12c49) — 1/5/2009 @ 6:36 pmAn unpleasant thread.
Anyone who is aware of the current situation on college campuses knows full well the shenanigans about politics that goes on there. Looking over FIRE (www.thefire.org) gives some idea. They are absolutely nonpartisan, by the way, and a great and deserving charity.
There is a good reason I choose the ‘nym I do, and it is an appropriate one. I have been threatened before by internet posters, in fact. Generally speaking, people who just wish to know more about one another do so with civility.
Patterico’s point is spot on. I’m no one important here, but I appreciate his point of view. I told another troll (and he was a straight up troll) that I trusted Patterico 100%. And now you all can see an illustration why.
As for me, I am done engaging that person.
DRJ is a saint.
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/5/2009 @ 6:44 pmI think that’s wise, Eric Blair. I returned because I’m unhappy with the tenure questions and I want to keep an eye on things.
DRJ (345e40) — 1/5/2009 @ 6:50 pmI have told Patterico to feel free to share my contact information with you. I would like to thank you personally, if you care to do so. There is definitely something I didn’t care for in that interaction.
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/5/2009 @ 6:54 pmWell, DRJ, that was a poorly constructed post, but I hope you know what I meant: I appreciate your concern and admire your actions here.
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/5/2009 @ 7:31 pm#393 Eric Blair:
Indeed.
EW1(SG) (e27928) — 1/5/2009 @ 7:35 pmComment by DRJ — 1/5/2009 @ 6:06 pm
Not one list but two. Even more than our resident, um, critic asked for. Thank you, DRJ. Not that it’ll satisfy him/her…
There is a good reason I choose the ‘nym I do, and it is an appropriate one. I have been threatened before by internet posters, in fact. Generally speaking, people who just wish to know more about one another do so with civility.
Comment by Eric Blair — 1/5/2009 @ 6:44 pm
Heh – no kidding. No one who’s just making conversation about someone’s employment asks, and twice, in the manner our resident troll did. (Shouldn’t have been I guess, but I was, amused at the way DRJ got the rather wide eyed and polite plausible deniability answer –“what? Who me?”–while SPQR got the rude reply to the very same question.) It’s interesting how consistently trolls on sites brag openly about how smart they think they are while assuming everyone around them is really stupid.
They wouldn’t be trolls if they didn’t I guess. *sigh* Wonder how long this one is going to last before he/she just can’t help him/herself and crosses that banworthy line.
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 1/5/2009 @ 7:39 pm#391 Good try. I give you an A for effort but C for content. These are more transient policy positions than solid a legacy like the progressive Bill of Rights.
1. Banned partial birth abortion.
This is a policy dispute. Not a really a legacy. And primarily a woman’s rights issue (and a man’s I suppose) and restricting rights and freedoms seems counter to the conservative cause, doesn’t it?
2. Prevented significant terrorist attacks on U.S. soil after 9/11.
Of course the caveat is to have prevented 9/11 happening in the first place. Conservatives dont want to claim that swing and a miss as it happened on on their watch. Cheney does crow about preventing another 9/11 a lot. But this is known as ‘Challenger logic.’ No point in explaining it further other than to say it can happen again tomorrow or 500 tomorrow’s from now. Ending terrorism. Now THAT, would indeed be a legacy matter, especially if freedoms weren’t lost in the process.
3. Consistently support tax cuts for Americans.
Odd choice. And actually, in the mind set of fiscal responsibility, paying your way and not leaving the bill to your grandkids is the conservative way yet that’s exactly what conservatism has been doing since the Reagan days. Running up deficits.
4. Building a fence on the southern border, in part to prevent illegal immigration by criminals, terrorists, and smugglers.
Well, that is a problem. Freedom draws flies. Still conservative communists built a ‘wall’ through Berlin and curtain across Europe. That worked well, didn’t it.
5. Defeated Communism.
I see. Your reference is to ‘Soviet communism’ I expect. Truman, JFK, LBJ and Carter had nothing to do with maintaining Cold War policy and defeating this? That’s just wrong-headed and probably the weakest point on your list. Even Reagan or Buckley, if alive, would concede that legacy isn’t unique to conservatives. Pretty much a teamed effort there, allied and all. And reform-minded communist progressives like Gorbachev played a big part in ending the USSR. Cuba and North Korea aside, there’s the largest communist country on Earth to consider-Communist Red China– the people propping up western capitalism with loans. Hardly ‘defeated’ — in fact, blossoming.
6. Convinced Libya’s Qaddafi to disarm his chemical, nuclear and biological WMD’s without bribes or bloodshed.
Well, I have some personal knowledge on this and family who’ve experienced Mr. Kadaffi’s ‘hospitality’ at gunpoint first hand so I won’t discuss the more pragmatic reasons the good colonel traded dirty old weapons for fresh new infrastructure systems. Those war materials are messy and costly to keep stored safely. It was good timing and a smart deal for him to make. Some are are spinning in their graves over it. But then, business is business. But if you wanna claim commerce with a terrorist state as the sole province of conservatism I’ll give it to you. But this, again is a policy issue, not so much a legacy item you’d want to grab.
7. Instrumental in passing women’s suffrage.
I won’t touch this progressive act with a ten foot poll. But it’s not a uniquely conservative legacy.
8. Eliminated the IRS marriage penalty.
Again, tax codes and such…this is more a transient policy decision, not a legacy. in a national emergency, if revenue was needed, it could be reinstituted with a stroke of a pen.
9. Abolished slavery.
The abolition of slavery in 1863 was highly progressive act. Conservatives of the era, particularly in the Confederacy, fought hard against it even after they lost the Civil War.
10. Support increases in military expenditures.
I see. Yet conservatives like Harding and Coolidge didn’t while progressive FDR did. Truman’s Marshall Plan wasnt strictly hardcore military yet did have a strategic military purpose. Still Ike was prudent and even warned of it getting out of control. JFK pumped money into the MIC and LBJ spent billions on that Vietnam thing. Great days for Dow Chemical and Bell Aircraft. Not really a legacy matter unique to conservatives. Although your mind set may be focused on procurement of one kind of weapons system over another. Carter kills the B-1; Reagan revives it. Again a policy issue.
I get the sense you mix conservatism with party and its not unique to any of them or this country. You’re getting better though. I’m asking for hard legacies, not policy decisions. Those are transients. A very good try. It is hard to crystallize a list.
As for the nephew- his bent is CalTech. The Eastern schools seemed ‘old’ to him although the reactor at MIT caught his fancy. Harvard didn’t appeal to his science side. He’s well-rounded enough. Guitars, a jazz band and lab coat. My common concern, shared with ‘teacher Blair’ was the apparent lack of interest in facts, figures, dates and such kids seem to have probed by his little quiz. Essentially he has to prep then to teach them and that is really what high scholl should do. Books seems to be curiosity to these kids. With a laptop and a link, a kid can pull up today’s weather on Mars with a current picture of same or find all the facts and figures on anything in seconds. Then prepare a report/presentation in Powerpoint and email it in, worthy of any business presentation today. No books. Memorizing dates and times for historical reference seem to only matter if they want to be on a quiz show. And no newspapers at all. Again, the tenure comment was just in passing as he’d mention teaching different subjects at several schools and visiting several campuses, including my own. Nothing sinister about it. Strange reaction, though. Apparently it’s a touchy topic these days.
Thanks for the pleasant effort and taking time to response.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/6/2009 @ 1:40 am#391- Postscript.
I still doubt your sincerity in this debate.
Don’t doubt it. I was raised by a Goldwater Girl so I’ve expeienced both sides of this debate. What passes for ‘conservatism’ today, and especially over the past 30 years, is alien to her- and me.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/6/2009 @ 1:48 am#387 “Why the fuck do you care…”
Patterico:
Excuse me?!? Watch your language. I don’t deserve any less respect from you then you ask I show others. Profanity isn’t necessary.
I would have contacted you privately before this public posting of yours but here’s the bottom line: I popped in to peruse this virtual paradise of yours a while back on the suggetion of a friend victimzed in a crime. Never seen or heard of it before. I penned a quick, honest piece for a pal on Pellicano out of sympathy for the victims and to my surprise, you elevated it to a level which shared the angst experienced and honored the victims — and I acknowledged great appreciation at that, not for me but for them. I had no idea this site even existed a month ago and could continue through life forgetting it.
Still, I’ve been lucky to have worked in the media and genuinely admire, respect and completely support your position crusading against the corrupt and now bankrupt Los Angeles Times. There is something seriously wrong with that newspaper. And LA could easily survive without it given its expansive geography and diverse neighborhoods.
Certainly no malace was intended asking about colleges, tenure and the like. I have a smart nephew shopping for good schools and the party in question said he was a professor. End of story. Dont look for secret plots or agendas that simply arent there. I’ve had some interesting experiences both chanced and earned (as do we all) and I certainly dont have time to waste posting puffery or lies about them and dont take kindly at all to being accused of same. There’s no conspiracy, no thought police or ‘Walter Mitty’ at work here. Jeez.
What I did discovered was this site of yours is a fascinating core sampling into the mantle of modern conservativsm; an ideology I was raised in but currently, to this writer, is on shaky ground. These kitty cats madly chase each others ‘tales’ around in a frenzied circle. I was blissfully unaware of the virulence, hostility, and obvious fear festering in the virtual air of this ‘blogosphere.’ Until now.
I suggest you look closer at some of the ‘jocular’ commentary your regulars post. Then think about curbing your conservatives posters as well when it come to civility and ‘flying right’– or ‘left.’ It’s no skin off my nose as to no ban or ban– I’ll roll on. Pun intended.
It’s your sandbox. And just a blog at that.
Best to you.
DCSCA
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/6/2009 @ 3:01 amWell I am tenured. So?
love2008 who is tenured. (0c8c2c) — 1/6/2009 @ 3:19 am#402- Cute.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/6/2009 @ 3:25 am#401:
Au contraire. When you come into somebody else’s house and shit all over the rug, you then demand respect from the homeowner?
I move to ban the lying crapweasel.
EW1(SG) (e27928) — 1/6/2009 @ 3:37 amI think it’s past time to put this troll out of our misery. An overwhelming majority of the time, it doesn’t even try to offer anything of substance, merely to entertain itself with its lame attempts at mathematical witticism. Even on the very rare occasion where it does try to contribute something of substance, it does so in way that is so knee-jerk as to be downright predictable.
If this were Usenet, it would have been in my killfile for some time. Unfortunately, blog discussions don’t work that way; all we have is a group kill file, so to speak. Here’s my request to those who still oppose banning it. Please complete either this sentence:
or this one:
I submit that if you can’t finish either of those sentences with a straight face, then there is no reason on God’s green earth why this troll should NOT be banned.
Xrlq (62cad4) — 1/6/2009 @ 4:13 amComment by Xrlq — 1/6/2009 @ 4:13 am
DSCSCA enhances the quality of discussions at Patterico’s Pontifications by ____________________.
love2008 who is tenured. (0c8c2c) — 1/6/2009 @ 5:39 amTurning this into the longest, boring and most annoying thread.
If DCSCA were banned from posting at Patterico’s Pontifications, the overall quality of discussions there would suffer because ______________.
Then we wouldn’t have someone to remind us that 1+1=eleventy-one!!!!!
By the way, does “D” in DCSCA stand for “Dyslexia”?
All fine and good, but you generally don’t get to get away with treating others like utter shit and then crying to mommy when daddy tells you that you’re being an ass.
You might get some level of civility paid to you, if you were able to demonstrate even the most basic capacity for such civility yourself. You have acted like a tremendous ass since your arrival.
When I offer a challenge, you call it a demand – and then lay forth your very own demand, which others were kind enough to meet on my behalf. you then proceeded to mock me for not being the one to jump at your whim.
Amazingly, such hostility rarely existed here, only appearing for such loathsome creature as Levi and the Screwballs from FL (I’m not naming them, I don’t care if they were banned – I shall tempt fate not).
The non-Left is not the side that loudly, and proudly, speaks of the horrors they wished heaped upon people who merely agree with them. The virulent hate and bile spewed over the passing of Tony Snow, or William F Buckley Jr, are the thing you see on YOUR side. When Ted Kennedy had his health spill, to almost the man we wished him – a man with whom few of us agree about anything – quick recovery, and thoughts for his family. Those few who spoke otherwise were roundly criticized and harped upon, for being both uncivil and ghoulish.
Such reactions do not occur on the Left. Were you to speak about how you hoped someone would kill Bush 43 on DKos, you would not be demonized, but lionized. You would see comment after comment not only agreeing with you, but offering suggestion as to how such an act should be performed.
You speak of respect? Sir, you nor your side ever show it to someone with whom they disagree. You expect us to magically treat you like a prince merely because Patterico tells YOU to behave?
Did you not notice who he was talking to? YOU!
YOUR behavior has been, frankly, shit. And to suggest that you demand equal respect?
Brother, you’re GETTING equal respect. You are getting respect equal to what you have shown any of us.
Scott Jacobs (a1c284) — 1/6/2009 @ 5:50 amDCSCA,
Sorry for the profanity.
I don’t read most of these comments but I skim them at times and I have read some of yours where it seems like you’re just harassing/insulting people. For sure, people have insulted you and it’s tough to know where it all started.
But I also know that respectful lefties can get a hearing here without insults. And when I can tell they’re being respectful, I do indeed step in to stop insults towards them lobbed by the conservatives.
I’ve had more than one person alert me that you seemed to be quasi-threatening Eric Blair, a long-time and valued commenter. In addition, reading the thread, I saw that DRJ was concerned about your behavior. I implicitly trust DRJ; if you’ve done something to get on her bad side, it’s 99 percent certain you’ve transgressed somehow.
Again, I haven’t read the comments and don’t really intend to. It’s not worth my time. But you’re rubbing the wrong people the wrong way and I have certainly seen more than one example of your seeming to antagonize others, seemingly for sport.
I’m fine with you sticking around, but not if you’re going to make my most valued commenters feel like they’re being threatened. And sorry, I can’t begin to see how Eric Blair’s tenure status has the slightest possible relevance to your nephew’s search for a school.
Patterico (cc3b34) — 1/6/2009 @ 6:25 amSo, in other words, I’d just leave stuff like that alone. Just leave off insults or anything that could possibly be interpreted as trying to stalk or harm someone. Fair enough?
Patterico (cc3b34) — 1/6/2009 @ 6:33 amI know I shouldn’t, but I have 20 minutes to kill before an appointment.
Tell you what – I’m going to take an ice pick and stick it into the back of your head. Then, I’m going to suck your brains out with a shop vac. Don’t worry though; this won’t affect your rights. It’s just a policy dispute.
Well gee, your 2-item list included what – women’s suffrage and the 40-hour work week, right? So, “progressives” have to admit that, under previous “progressive” governments, somehow women did not have the right to vote, and workers had few rights, right?
Now, eliminating work, THAT would indeed be a legacy matter.
My grandkids will be fine, thanks. You are right about defacits, although it’s a non-partisan problem.
“Conservative” communists built a wall to keep people in. You know that, right?
carlitos (34f76e) — 1/6/2009 @ 6:53 amComment by Patterico — 1/6/2009 @ 6:33 am
love2008 who is tenured. (1b037c) — 1/6/2009 @ 6:53 amWell said. Spoken like a true elder.
#409- Patterico-
Fair enough.
#404, #405, #406, #407. Hostile. I rest my case.
I don’t read most of these comments but I skim them…
Again, I haven’t read the comments and don’t really intend to. It’s not worth my time.
A friendly suggestion: start. Your name is on the product. Chrysler doesnt blame Goodyear for cars not selling.
We can agree to disagree on value. It’s relative. One man’s trash is another man’s treasure. If you’d bothered to read through the commentary, the party in question taught several subjects at several schools in several regions. May have been helpful. Some guys like to do that. Some guys want to teach Latin at Eton for 30 years. And I offered an olive branch on the entire matter. End of story and end of matter as far as I’m concerned. Way too much angst and time wasted.
I’ve had more than one person alert me that you seemed to be quasi-threatening…
I’m not surprised given the environment. Again, cats chasing their ‘tales.’ I understand what’s going on. Al Franken is a quasi-threat; so is Global Warming, hot fudge sundaes… and Toto, too.
As I said, it’s your sandbox. And only a blog. Best to you in your crusade against the LAT.
Cheers
DCSCA
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/6/2009 @ 1:48 pmThe fact that I listed my reasons are, obviously, lost on you. It’s always someone else’s fault. Never are you to blame for the reactions others have to your insulting presence. Blameless you are, free of taint from the consequences for your own words and actions.
Your olive branches are offered with insult attached, and you are surprised when they are ignored.
Act and treat others as you would have us act and treat you, and eventually you may find us willing to not treat you like the foul thing you have demonstrated yourself to be.
Leviticus was once almost like you, though never as bad. He’s now (when he’s able to comment) a pleasure to debate with – this coming from one of the people he butted heads with the most.
He found the capacity for civility, and in doing so found us far more willing to listen to his words and consider them.
I suspect such personal growth is well beyond your feeble mind and meager grasp.
Scott Jacobs (a1c284) — 1/6/2009 @ 1:55 pmI have to admit, DCSCA is an EPIC troll, if he’s just trying to gin up as much reaction as possible.
Back on topic, I think Afghanistan is proof that Iraq was the right place to wage a prolonged war with terrorism. Afghanistan is so tough to build up into a nice place, and so hard to fight in. In Iraq, the prolonged war drained the terrorists in many ways.
I hope Bush implements a great strategy, but I fear what will happen when we win in Afghanistan as we have in Iraq. Will we go in to Pakistan? And if not, where? If we stop warring against terrorists in the middle east, we will have to war with them in the USA.
Joco (4cdfb7) — 1/6/2009 @ 2:05 pmBest to you in your crusade against the LAT.
Is that a “see you later”, or a “Good-bye”?
Curious minds want to know?
AD (4f3c82) — 1/6/2009 @ 2:07 pmI’ve seen a couple of reasonable posts from DCSCA but that was a while ago and he/she/it seems to have gotten a lot more hostile. I am not going to read 413 comments when half are by a troll who seems to be playing “Look at me” instead of contributing. It’s your blog Patrick but I would put him on moderation and see if he can be civil.
Mike K (8df289) — 1/6/2009 @ 2:13 pmComment by Joco — 1/6/2009 @ 2:05 pm
It was remarked by some (Steven den Beste, and Bill Whittle come to mind) back in the run-up to OIF, that Iraq was a fertile ground for change due to its’ educated, somewhat urbane society (in distinct contrast to most Arab societies), and that it would provide a useful base of operations for future change in the ME.
AD (4f3c82) — 1/6/2009 @ 2:15 pmAfghanistan had none of that going for it. It is still mired in the 19th-Century once you leave Kabul and Khandahar. Meaningful change there is going to take decades, and will truly be “the long war”.
#413- Scott:
Respectfully:
“… do not squander time; for that is the stuff life is made of.” — Benj. Franklin
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/6/2009 @ 2:20 pmDoes #412 contain inflammatory derogatory remarks, or is it just me? And others have already “come to my rescue” regarding inflammatory personal attacks coming from DCSCA. I do not believe the person has a “righteously indignant” leg to stand on.
John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 1/6/2009 @ 2:22 pmI absolutely doubt you even know the actual meaning of that word.
Scott Jacobs (a1c284) — 1/6/2009 @ 2:31 pm#419- It’s you.
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/6/2009 @ 2:32 pm#420:
“… do not squander time; for that is the stuff life is made of.” — Benj. Franklin
DCSCA (d8da01) — 1/6/2009 @ 2:34 pm#422 – “Begone troll” – SPQR
SPQR (72771e) — 1/6/2009 @ 2:47 pm