|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#301
|
|||
|
|||
"Tom Sherman" wrote in message ... Freewheeling wrote: "Tom Sherman" wrote in message ... Freewheeling wrote: "Tom Sherman" wrote in message ... Freewheeling wrote: "Tom Sherman" wrote in message ... Freewheeling wrote: ... The reason I stopped listening to the left is that their judgment is so awful on the War on Terror that I figured it just couldn't be any good on these other issues. And it's not. They're still retooling the same old needs-based remedies they've always relied on. And they're still dead wrong on foreign policy and the misnamed "War on Terror.".... How can a war be fought against an abstract noun? Someone, please explain that. I see no credibility in those who can not even see the logical impossibility of this. That's not the issue. The issue is that terrorism is a mere tactic. It's a marker for totalitarian movements, however, so the misnomer really isn't as bad as all that. But basically we're in a century-long war against totalitarianism, and we no sooner defeat one form than it morphs into another. The most recent is Salafism/Qutbism. It's the social cancer and scourge that took over as the primary threat once we finally ended chattel slavery (against similar objections of a Democrat "peace movement," by the way). And gee, I though it was just a way to win election campaigns and implement creeping fascism domestically. ... If you want a phenomenal success story, just look at Chile.... Throwing people out of helicopters into the ocean? Packing them into stadiums so they can be more efficiently tortured? Henry Kissinger must be proud. Again with the Cold War stuff. I'm talking about Chile today, and naturally you want to talk about something else. Why wouldn't you? I like to remind people of atrocities committed with the consent and support of the right wing politicians and parties they support. Duh! If it annoys you, then it serves its purpose. Actually it's a useful way to illustrate how the left can't make a logical argument. To listen to them you'd think they believe that having done a bad thing in the past is reason enough not to do a good thing now. But the bottom line is that the world is a better place for what Reagan did. In fact, Chile is a better place for it's acceptance of the financial reforms proposed by the Chicago Boyz. In fact, except for a few neo-Marxist flirtations with disaster most of the southern cone is going that direction. More prosperous, more free, more secure. And if that annoys you, who gives a damn. Gee, so that is why the people in South America keep on electing governments who at least promise to oppose neo-liberalism and Bretton Woods imposed austerity measures. Income growth for most people on the continent almost stopped with the introduction of neo-liberal economic policy. But hey, it was good for exploitation by multi-national corporations, so who is complaining. Those is the US who do not have substantial inherited wealth are almost universally worse off for what Reagan did - but I suppose that makes you happy. Be honest, you just made that stuff up didn't you? Or are you really that unaware? No, I have just inoculated myself from right wing propaganda. It is well known that neo-liberal economic policies have been a disaster for all but a small economic elite. Not if you use any sort of unbiased welfare accounting. The literature on deregulation, for instance, is almost a consensus. -- Tom Sherman - ****ing Contest Hell |
Ads |
#302
|
|||
|
|||
"Tom Sherman" wrote in message ... Freewheeling wrote: "Tom Sherman" wrote in message ... Freewheeling wrote: "Tom Sherman" wrote in message ... skip wrote: "Mark Leuck" wrote in message ... "Tom Sherman" wrote in message ... No, you like most people are unwilling to see things as they are and how they could be. This is understandable, because the normal human brain is not capable of handling such a disconnect - to know than only a small handful of the six billion have the true freedom to pursue real opportunities, while the rest are held in servitude by economic or social restrictions will certainly lead to mental disorders. You can not handle the truth of how bad things are, so you create clever intellectual arguments to convince yourself that things are acceptable and getting better. It is why you refuse to see evil where it clearly exists. We are doomed to a miserable existence by greed and avarice. -- Tom Sherman - Earth Damn talk about being disconnected....I pity you Tom What you are seeing here is quintessential Tom Sherman. His contention that we are doomed to a miserable existence by greed and avarice is the cornerstone of his beliefs. You will never again have to wonder why he is miserable. Or wonder how he can think as he does. He just told you why. And he won't budge an inch from that belief. No one has had any success in moving him from that position. Why should I move from a position when I am right? I wish I could be a delusional lemming happily marching towards the cliff, but it is my great misfortune to have gained true understanding of the dark side of human group behavior. I could happily ignore the situation and discuss recumbents, but then some right wing blowhard has to crap on the group, ending the illusion. At that point, I am willing to fling poo well after the bovines have returned to their agricultural structure abode. Again, according to simple empiricism the trend is moving in the opposite direction from what you claim, and has been for more than a century. People are better educated, better fed, better entertained, more free, more secure, and according to IQ tests actually smarter, than they ever have been before. There is less poverty and misery with each passing year, not more, except in those places where the left still has its totalitarian demonstration projects. We will all be better off with the ecological damage from resource overuse and global warming (not a myth, but something that is already happening, unless you are in denial). Enjoy seeing billions suffer. Again, making it up aren't you? There is near universal agreement among climatologists about global warming, with most of the dissenters being on the payroll of the hydrocarbon extraction industry. Giving them credence is like giving the Flat Earth Society credence in a discussion about astronomy. The same is true about resource overuse. Do you just uncritically buy everything those with a corporatist, neo-feudal agenda say? Or do you have a vested interest in promoting their policies? Why do you want to argue this in a recumbent bicycle forum anyhow? I really don't, but I am happy to **** off those who do. Last I heard there was close to a consensus that the climate shift that has taken place since the beginning of industrialization is well within the bounds of natural climate change. This isn't tough to verify. By the way, is Owsley on the corporate payroll? Heh. http://www.thebear.org/essays2.html#anchor506010 -- Tom Sherman - ****ing Contest Hell |
#303
|
|||
|
|||
"Tom Sherman" wrote in message ... Freewheeling wrote: "Tom Sherman" wrote in message ... Freewheeling wrote: "Tom Sherman" wrote in message ... skip wrote: "Mark Leuck" wrote in message ... "Tom Sherman" wrote in message ... No, you like most people are unwilling to see things as they are and how they could be. This is understandable, because the normal human brain is not capable of handling such a disconnect - to know than only a small handful of the six billion have the true freedom to pursue real opportunities, while the rest are held in servitude by economic or social restrictions will certainly lead to mental disorders. You can not handle the truth of how bad things are, so you create clever intellectual arguments to convince yourself that things are acceptable and getting better. It is why you refuse to see evil where it clearly exists. We are doomed to a miserable existence by greed and avarice. -- Tom Sherman - Earth Damn talk about being disconnected....I pity you Tom What you are seeing here is quintessential Tom Sherman. His contention that we are doomed to a miserable existence by greed and avarice is the cornerstone of his beliefs. You will never again have to wonder why he is miserable. Or wonder how he can think as he does. He just told you why. And he won't budge an inch from that belief. No one has had any success in moving him from that position. Why should I move from a position when I am right? I wish I could be a delusional lemming happily marching towards the cliff, but it is my great misfortune to have gained true understanding of the dark side of human group behavior. I could happily ignore the situation and discuss recumbents, but then some right wing blowhard has to crap on the group, ending the illusion. At that point, I am willing to fling poo well after the bovines have returned to their agricultural structure abode. Again, according to simple empiricism the trend is moving in the opposite direction from what you claim, and has been for more than a century. People are better educated, better fed, better entertained, more free, more secure, and according to IQ tests actually smarter, than they ever have been before. There is less poverty and misery with each passing year, not more, except in those places where the left still has its totalitarian demonstration projects. We will all be better off with the ecological damage from resource overuse and global warming (not a myth, but something that is already happening, unless you are in denial). Enjoy seeing billions suffer. Again, making it up aren't you? There is near universal agreement among climatologists about global warming, with most of the dissenters being on the payroll of the hydrocarbon extraction industry. Giving them credence is like giving the Flat Earth Society credence in a discussion about astronomy. The same is true about resource overuse. Do you just uncritically buy everything those with a corporatist, neo-feudal agenda say? Or do you have a vested interest in promoting their policies? Why do you want to argue this in a recumbent bicycle forum anyhow? I really don't, but I am happy to **** off those who do. Oh BS. You know, I could hardly believe that you would be this disingenuous, so I had to go back and check to see who it was that actually brought up ecology (since it's not a topic I generally discuss very much). Sure enough it wasn't I who raised the topic, but YOU! You raised it in the context of our discussion about whether things were getting better or worse, and it was apparently the only thing you could think of where you might conceivably have an empirical advantage, in the following incompetently ironic statement: "We will all be better off with the ecological damage from resource overuse and global warming (not a myth, but something that is already happening, unless you are in denial)." You're some piece of work, Tom. You and Markos "Screw 'em" Zunida (Daily Kos) share a common ethical tradition, apparently. |
#304
|
|||
|
|||
"Freewheeling" wrote
"Tom Sherman" wrote in message Why do you want to argue this in a recumbent bicycle forum anyhow? I really don't, but I am happy to **** off those who do. Oh BS. You know, I could hardly believe that you would be this disingenuous, so I had to go back and check to see who it was that actually brought up ecology Consider "argue this" in a broader context encompassing the general content and ongoing nature of this thread (and others before and likely to come). You're some piece of work, Tom. You and Markos "Screw 'em" Zunida (Daily Kos) share a common ethical tradition, apparently. Apparently you're both sufficiently interested in trolling with "this" bait in ARBR to continue posting. Jon Meinecke net.subtle-apteryx |
#305
|
|||
|
|||
"Freewheeling" wrote in message news:Yy2Vd.52949$EL5.20319@trnddc05... You're some piece of work, Tom. You and Markos "Screw 'em" Zunida (Daily Kos) share a common ethical tradition, apparently. I wouldn't go that far, Markos is a true nutcase (to anyone who doesn't know who Markos is see http://littlegreenfootballs.com/webl...10440&only=yes |
#306
|
|||
|
|||
"Jon Meinecke" wrote in message news:1109703203.a1fd4175711185d9237dd1a722257ec7@t eranews... "Freewheeling" wrote "Tom Sherman" wrote in message Why do you want to argue this in a recumbent bicycle forum anyhow? I really don't, but I am happy to **** off those who do. Oh BS. You know, I could hardly believe that you would be this disingenuous, so I had to go back and check to see who it was that actually brought up ecology Consider "argue this" in a broader context encompassing the general content and ongoing nature of this thread (and others before and likely to come). You're some piece of work, Tom. You and Markos "Screw 'em" Zunida (Daily Kos) share a common ethical tradition, apparently. I have a hunch this is a valuable comment, but I can't quite make out what it means. Apparently you're both sufficiently interested in trolling with "this" bait in ARBR to continue posting. Pretty much constrained to this thread, and to about 3 participants, until you joined. Jon Meinecke net.subtle-apteryx |
#307
|
|||
|
|||
"Mark Leuck" wrote in message ... "Freewheeling" wrote in message news:Yy2Vd.52949$EL5.20319@trnddc05... You're some piece of work, Tom. You and Markos "Screw 'em" Zunida (Daily Kos) share a common ethical tradition, apparently. I wouldn't go that far, Markos is a true nutcase OK, I may have gone too far. (to anyone who doesn't know who Markos is see http://littlegreenfootballs.com/webl...10440&only=yes |
#308
|
|||
|
|||
Freewheeling wrote:
"Tom Sherman" wrote in message ... Freewheeling wrote: "Tom Sherman" wrote in message ... Freewheeling wrote: "Tom Sherman" wrote in message ... Freewheeling wrote: "Tom Sherman" wrote in message ... Freewheeling wrote: ... The reason I stopped listening to the left is that their judgment is so awful on the War on Terror that I figured it just couldn't be any good on these other issues. And it's not. They're still retooling the same old needs-based remedies they've always relied on. And they're still dead wrong on foreign policy and the misnamed "War on Terror.".... How can a war be fought against an abstract noun? Someone, please explain that. I see no credibility in those who can not even see the logical impossibility of this. That's not the issue. The issue is that terrorism is a mere tactic. It's a marker for totalitarian movements, however, so the misnomer really isn't as bad as all that. But basically we're in a century-long war against totalitarianism, and we no sooner defeat one form than it morphs into another. The most recent is Salafism/Qutbism. It's the social cancer and scourge that took over as the primary threat once we finally ended chattel slavery (against similar objections of a Democrat "peace movement," by the way). And gee, I though it was just a way to win election campaigns and implement creeping fascism domestically. ... If you want a phenomenal success story, just look at Chile.... Throwing people out of helicopters into the ocean? Packing them into stadiums so they can be more efficiently tortured? Henry Kissinger must be proud. Again with the Cold War stuff. I'm talking about Chile today, and naturally you want to talk about something else. Why wouldn't you? I like to remind people of atrocities committed with the consent and support of the right wing politicians and parties they support. Duh! If it annoys you, then it serves its purpose. Actually it's a useful way to illustrate how the left can't make a logical argument. To listen to them you'd think they believe that having done a bad thing in the past is reason enough not to do a good thing now. But the bottom line is that the world is a better place for what Reagan did. In fact, Chile is a better place for it's acceptance of the financial reforms proposed by the Chicago Boyz. In fact, except for a few neo-Marxist flirtations with disaster most of the southern cone is going that direction. More prosperous, more free, more secure. And if that annoys you, who gives a damn. Gee, so that is why the people in South America keep on electing governments who at least promise to oppose neo-liberalism and Bretton Woods imposed austerity measures. Income growth for most people on the continent almost stopped with the introduction of neo-liberal economic policy. But hey, it was good for exploitation by multi-national corporations, so who is complaining. Those is the US who do not have substantial inherited wealth are almost universally worse off for what Reagan did - but I suppose that makes you happy. Be honest, you just made that stuff up didn't you? Or are you really that unaware? No, I have just inoculated myself from right wing propaganda. It is well known that neo-liberal economic policies have been a disaster for all but a small economic elite. Not if you use any sort of unbiased welfare accounting. The literature on deregulation, for instance, is almost a consensus. Whatever. [Yawn] |
#309
|
|||
|
|||
Freewheeling wrote:
"Tom Sherman" wrote in message ... Freewheeling wrote: "Tom Sherman" wrote in message ... Freewheeling wrote: "Tom Sherman" wrote in message ... skip wrote: "Mark Leuck" wrote in message ... "Tom Sherman" wrote in message ... No, you like most people are unwilling to see things as they are and how they could be. This is understandable, because the normal human brain is not capable of handling such a disconnect - to know than only a small handful of the six billion have the true freedom to pursue real opportunities, while the rest are held in servitude by economic or social restrictions will certainly lead to mental disorders. You can not handle the truth of how bad things are, so you create clever intellectual arguments to convince yourself that things are acceptable and getting better. It is why you refuse to see evil where it clearly exists. We are doomed to a miserable existence by greed and avarice. -- Tom Sherman - Earth Damn talk about being disconnected....I pity you Tom What you are seeing here is quintessential Tom Sherman. His contention that we are doomed to a miserable existence by greed and avarice is the cornerstone of his beliefs. You will never again have to wonder why he is miserable. Or wonder how he can think as he does. He just told you why. And he won't budge an inch from that belief. No one has had any success in moving him from that position. Why should I move from a position when I am right? I wish I could be a delusional lemming happily marching towards the cliff, but it is my great misfortune to have gained true understanding of the dark side of human group behavior. I could happily ignore the situation and discuss recumbents, but then some right wing blowhard has to crap on the group, ending the illusion. At that point, I am willing to fling poo well after the bovines have returned to their agricultural structure abode. Again, according to simple empiricism the trend is moving in the opposite direction from what you claim, and has been for more than a century. People are better educated, better fed, better entertained, more free, more secure, and according to IQ tests actually smarter, than they ever have been before. There is less poverty and misery with each passing year, not more, except in those places where the left still has its totalitarian demonstration projects. We will all be better off with the ecological damage from resource overuse and global warming (not a myth, but something that is already happening, unless you are in denial). Enjoy seeing billions suffer. Again, making it up aren't you? There is near universal agreement among climatologists about global warming, with most of the dissenters being on the payroll of the hydrocarbon extraction industry. Giving them credence is like giving the Flat Earth Society credence in a discussion about astronomy. The same is true about resource overuse. Do you just uncritically buy everything those with a corporatist, neo-feudal agenda say? Or do you have a vested interest in promoting their policies? Why do you want to argue this in a recumbent bicycle forum anyhow? I really don't, but I am happy to **** off those who do. Last I heard there was close to a consensus that the climate shift that has taken place since the beginning of industrialization is well within the bounds of natural climate change. This isn't tough to verify. Have you had your hearing checked? |
#310
|
|||
|
|||
Freewheeling wrote:
"Tom Sherman" wrote in message ... Freewheeling wrote: "Tom Sherman" wrote in message ... Freewheeling wrote: "Tom Sherman" wrote in message ... skip wrote: "Mark Leuck" wrote in message ... "Tom Sherman" wrote in message ... No, you like most people are unwilling to see things as they are and how they could be. This is understandable, because the normal human brain is not capable of handling such a disconnect - to know than only a small handful of the six billion have the true freedom to pursue real opportunities, while the rest are held in servitude by economic or social restrictions will certainly lead to mental disorders. You can not handle the truth of how bad things are, so you create clever intellectual arguments to convince yourself that things are acceptable and getting better. It is why you refuse to see evil where it clearly exists. We are doomed to a miserable existence by greed and avarice. -- Tom Sherman - Earth Damn talk about being disconnected....I pity you Tom What you are seeing here is quintessential Tom Sherman. His contention that we are doomed to a miserable existence by greed and avarice is the cornerstone of his beliefs. You will never again have to wonder why he is miserable. Or wonder how he can think as he does. He just told you why. And he won't budge an inch from that belief. No one has had any success in moving him from that position. Why should I move from a position when I am right? I wish I could be a delusional lemming happily marching towards the cliff, but it is my great misfortune to have gained true understanding of the dark side of human group behavior. I could happily ignore the situation and discuss recumbents, but then some right wing blowhard has to crap on the group, ending the illusion. At that point, I am willing to fling poo well after the bovines have returned to their agricultural structure abode. Again, according to simple empiricism the trend is moving in the opposite direction from what you claim, and has been for more than a century. People are better educated, better fed, better entertained, more free, more secure, and according to IQ tests actually smarter, than they ever have been before. There is less poverty and misery with each passing year, not more, except in those places where the left still has its totalitarian demonstration projects. We will all be better off with the ecological damage from resource overuse and global warming (not a myth, but something that is already happening, unless you are in denial). Enjoy seeing billions suffer. Again, making it up aren't you? There is near universal agreement among climatologists about global warming, with most of the dissenters being on the payroll of the hydrocarbon extraction industry. Giving them credence is like giving the Flat Earth Society credence in a discussion about astronomy. The same is true about resource overuse. Do you just uncritically buy everything those with a corporatist, neo-feudal agenda say? Or do you have a vested interest in promoting their policies? Why do you want to argue this in a recumbent bicycle forum anyhow? I really don't, but I am happy to **** off those who do. Oh BS. You know, I could hardly believe that you would be this disingenuous, so I had to go back and check to see who it was that actually brought up ecology (since it's not a topic I generally discuss very much). Sure enough it wasn't I who raised the topic, but YOU! You raised it in the context of our discussion about whether things were getting better or worse, and it was apparently the only thing you could think of where you might conceivably have an empirical advantage, in the following incompetently ironic statement: "We will all be better off with the ecological damage from resource overuse and global warming (not a myth, but something that is already happening, unless you are in denial)." You're some piece of work, Tom. You and Markos "Screw 'em" Zunida (Daily Kos) share a common ethical tradition, apparently. Death is good. Without death, life would have no meaning. Death to the hominids! Death to ALL! |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Ed Dolan tells A.R.B.R. my head is up Jim McNamaras ass | Edward Dolan | Recumbent Biking | 10 | February 15th 05 01:13 AM |
Bear on a unicycle, Dead Leprechaun in a Tire-Swing | [email protected] | Unicycling | 0 | December 21st 04 08:21 PM |
Dead Leprechauns down your chimney!!! | [email protected] | General | 2 | December 7th 04 10:11 PM |
Revitalizing A.R.B.R - suggested methods | War On Error | Recumbent Biking | 43 | November 15th 04 09:24 PM |
Headset Dead Spot | marc | UK | 4 | August 26th 03 04:58 PM |