Guess I Won't Have Mama Moonbat to Kick Around Anymore

[priceyfatprude]

Originally Posted by craig johnston

no, that is not the choice. as i have pointed out, the world is not that simple. the choice is not between good and evil, moslems and christians, black and white. your arguments are not sophisticated enough for the issues involved. i will take the advice of other posters here and not respond unless you can make some points which are not based on puerile name calling, but rather on a considered and nuanced interpretation of the situation.

i expect a long wait.

*slow golf clap*

[kjh62]

Originally Posted by Audreyvgs

Kent,
you seem like a nice guy, but with your 6626 posts on the icq board, you seem to only be there to defend your friends. I found no great conversations, I found a lot of spam, like what your posts are appearing to be here.

I've been on ICQ for about 4 years, now. Yeah, there are many BS posts. But if you were to take the time to look further (I'm not suggesting that you do that, of course), you'd find a lot of great conversations.

The place is filled, wall to wall, with psychos of every manner. I stuck around mainly because there were also a few very intelligent posters. But I'll admit, I got caught up in the BS far too much. It became a way of letting off steam, I suppose.

[quote]So, whats your point. Everything there is to talk about on this board has already been hashed out on the your other board, so all you have left to do is defend uselessduke?[quote]

I don't really see it as defending Duke; more of knee-jerk re-action to your obnoxiousness. I would never defend Duke's political views, since I find them as odious as most of the members here do.

What's my point? No point, really. You just got on my nerves today.

He's a grown up, he can defend himself. If it bothers you so much, um

It doesn't bother me that much at all, quite frankly. It's just a message board.

[Random Logic]

Originally Posted by The Duke

You know thats just it , after reading back to some of the responses , it seems everyone here is upset about mere words .....it's actually totally ludicrous you know ...

It's not being upset about mere words which is ludicrous, it's being upset over certain mere words which is preposterous. For example, with some it's upsetting to see (or hear) the word "moonbat" however it's perfectly acceptable for them to use the word "Neocon" in the manner which they use it. Think on it for awhile and come up with other examples on your own and you will see that it's not the 'labelling' of groups which is wrong, it's whether the group you label is one you support or reject which makes the labelling wrong or right.

I mean to go bananas over the word "Islamofacist" is really kind of silly, I compare that to going bananas over the word Nazi or Communist.

I concur that there is such a thing as the "Islamofascist" however not every Moslem who disagrees with the western ways and beliefs a fascist. To be uspet by such a word is ridiculous, however to expect a person to support his or her claim that someone is an Islamofascist is reasonable.

Of course the deeds that go unoticed by the Liberal people who are extremely shocked about a mere wording only serves to compound the real issue .

Liberals have the tendency to be politically correct, at least to a point they do. The more liberal a person is seems directly related to how politically correct they are. On the other hand Conservatives may suffer from the same disease of political correctness but only on the opposite end of the spectrum.

It's stupid to argue over a word that refers to a religious sub-culture that wants to bring about the total destruction of Israel , and take over the entire world , instead we should be arguing over the premise of whether this is to be justifiable in terms of humanity , and whether we as free people are going to stand by and allow for it to take place.

I understand your intent, it is counterproductive to argue over a word, what is most important is trying to understand where someone is coming from and arguing the salient points of their arguments.

And When someone calls the people that perpatrate these acts by their deserved names these Liberals will get their panties in a bunch , say we're picking on Islam , and say that we are unjust and beastly while the real beasts get a pass every time.

On another forum I read the term "Flavor of the week" and developed a liking to the term. What was meanst by the term is "through-out the past someone always managed to choose a group to be favored and by anyone saying anything which didn't reflect that group in the best of light meant the favored group was being attacked unjustly. There was no room for outrage or misspeaking, whatever was said which was not liked had to be a biased and prejudicial attack upon an innocent people. The premise of the discussion was that the term "Flavor of the week" is still an active idealogy in the hearts and minds of many.

As seen from all the loving responses by obvious Liberals here, It's easy to

What good would it do to play "yes man" to a bunch of conservatives on some other conservative board anyway?

"If everyone is thinking alike, someone isn't thinking." They need to learn who the good guy really is in this and stop way laying the good people on this earth who step up to the line and try to put a stop to the Intolerance , and Death .

It would do no good to simply surround oneself with like thinkers for it limits their ability to think things through properly. There is a problem in the mid-east and it's a serious problem which needs to be rectified and it will take more than just Isreal, the US and the UK to resolve the issues.

[Audreyvgs]

Originally Posted by kjh62

What's my point? No point, really. You just got on my nerves today.



It doesn't bother me that much at all, quite frankly. It's just a message board.

We are talkin major brain trust, here. Goin to all that trouble cause you have pms. gezus.

[kjh62]

Originally Posted by Audreyvgs

We are talkin major brain trust, here. Goin to all that trouble cause you have pms. gezus.

Heh! And what's your excuse?

I received 3 PMs from uptight members who got their panties in a wad simply because I used the dread A-word. That was pretty amusing. Don't most children's programs allow that word now?

The richest one was from priceyfatprude who had the cahonas to type this sentence:

Also, have something substantial to say in a thread, rather than fanning a flame war.

HAHA! I wonder, did he/she get up on the Church Lady pulpit and send you the same warning? Christ, his last post in this thread was about as substantial as 2 beers for breakfast.

I'm just having fun, here. Don't mind me.

[kjh62]

Originally Posted by priceyfatprude

*slow golf clap*

Now there's a substantial contribution to the thread.

[Audreyvgs]

He just wants to have fun. When i do what i do, its called an AHole that annoys him with cutesy remarks and imagery. Ok, have at it, Kent, post away, at least your general philosopy is more in sync with this board, than others who have more of an icq rant going than substance. Nobodys got anything against people coming over here from there, but don't expect it to be like the other board, and for goddsake don't try to make it into that. It is what it is, and it morphs on its own. Don't tell me what to post, and I won't tell you. Play offense rather than defense, and I'll listen. If you had a bad day, tell me up front. (if you're talking to me) There's room here, i'll scoot over a tad.

[kjh62]

Fair enough. There is quite a bit of hypocrisy and irony flowing from both sides of this meaningless sparring.

I can see you're a pretty reasonable sort.

[The Duke]

Originally Posted by kjh62

You're right. Duke isn't likely to get it. I've tried for a very long time to get across the point of view you and others are expressing, here, to no avail. He believes thoroughly in what he posts.

Basically, you have two choices: You can attempt to discuss the issues with Duke, or you can leave the threads alone. I've seen some respectful responses from other members, if somewhat frustrated. But so far, I don't see any reasonable content coming from you -- just cutesy remarks and imagery.

In other words, trolling.

That was appreciated , thanks , I think Audrey should just grow up and either debate it , or not ...but so far as I can tell she does seem to be the board troll here .

Yes Kent I do actually believe in what I say , Seeing is believing !

[The Duke]

Originally Posted by Random Logic

It's not being upset about mere words which is ludicrous, it's being upset over certain mere words which is preposterous. For example, with some it's upsetting to see (or hear) the word "moonbat" however it's perfectly acceptable for them to use the word "Neocon" in the manner which they use it. Think on it for awhile and come up with other examples on your own and you will see that it's not the 'labelling' of groups which is wrong, it's whether the group you label is one you support or reject which makes the labelling wrong or right.

I concur that there is such a thing as the "Islamofascist" however not every Moslem who disagrees with the western ways and beliefs a fascist. To be uspet by such a word is ridiculous, however to expect a person to support his or her claim that someone is an Islamofascist is reasonable.

Liberals have the tendency to be politically correct, at least to a point they do. The more liberal a person is seems directly related to how politically correct they are. On the other hand Conservatives may suffer from the same disease of political correctness but only on the opposite end of the spectrum.

I understand your intent, it is counterproductive to argue over a word, what is most important is trying to understand where someone is coming from and arguing the salient points of their arguments.

On another forum I read the term "Flavor of the week" and developed a liking to the term. What was meanst by the term is "through-out the past someone always managed to choose a group to be favored and by anyone saying anything which didn't reflect that group in the best of light meant the favored group was being attacked unjustly. There was no room for outrage or misspeaking, whatever was said which was not liked had to be a biased and prejudicial attack upon an innocent people. The premise of the discussion was that the term "Flavor of the week" is still an active idealogy in the hearts and minds of many.

As seen from all the loving responses by obvious Liberals here, It's easy to


It would do no good to simply surround oneself with like thinkers for it limits their ability to think things through properly. There is a problem in the mid-east and it's a serious problem which needs to be rectified and it will take more than just Isreal, the US and the UK to resolve the issues.

I understand your point also , stereotyping all Muslims as Islamofacists is not what I'm about anyway , and I agree that it is totally wrong to do so ....We both know there are many different kinds of Muslims , for example Sufists, who are the most tolerant and free of all in the religion , thefact they are mostly labeled as infidels by the hardline Islamonazis precedes them .

When I say Islamofacist , I mean the guys from Al Qaida and Hizb'alah who prromote the kind of random death to innocent unsuspecting people that is so despicable that the extent of their immorality is almost impossible to describe.

My Flavor of the Week is always gonna be the Islamonazis ,I dislike them for their cruel inhuman actions and I bash em every chance I get , I call em S'plodeydopes ,and I want to see them all driven out of their secret caves and hidy holes with their hands high in the air saying to the world " We Surender , and quit making Holy war , as Alah always intended "

[madasacutsnake]

Yay! Finally Godwin says its over!

[The Duke]

Originally Posted by madasacutsnake

Duke, I hardly went bananas. I just pointed out what I believed to be the most glaringly obvious of the basic errors in your argument in the hope of having some sort of reasonable debate.

I always find being labelled (unsure if you meant me personally?) "liberal" as if it were some sort of insult, a particularly lazy and american habit to fall back on in an argument. I am in fact first and foremost, an Australian, and a swinging voter at that.

What I do have and which is unfortunately clear that you don't, is more than a superficial understanding of Middle Eastern affairs. I don't intend this as an insult, I am just pointing out that this makes it hard to have the sort of interesting debate which I like.

Very Soon now I expect , whenever someone calls someone else "a person" , it too may be considered hate speech .

I was using the term "Liberals" in general , besides as I had Stated : I think most of the people who call themselves Liberal are everything but Liberal ....everything except conservative and Liberal that is .....

Real liberals don't go over to anarchy

[The Duke]

Originally Posted by craig johnston

no, that is not the choice. as i have pointed out, the world is not that simple. the choice is not between good and evil, moslems and christians, black and white. your arguments are not sophisticated enough for the issues involved. i will take the advice of other posters here and not respond unless you can make some points which are not based on puerile name calling, but rather on a considered and nuanced interpretation of the situation.

i expect a long wait.

Want Nuance? I just gave you the alternative to a hypothetical situation that you supplied , and you want Nuance ?


Okay Craig , just call me unsophisticated then , but like I said I will boldly resist every temptation to enter into name calling with you ......by that I mean all three of them lol

[The Duke]

Originally Posted by kjh62

No flies on you.

I'll be honest, I think Duke is crazy. I've had more harsh words with him than you can imagine. But I do respect his right to express his opinion.


I think I made a very valid point. You and Audry are just being cliquish assholes.

Oops , there you go Kent , you have to refrain from calling these people names ......Oops I just said the word people ...are they angry at me yet ?

Well let me ask you seriously Kent , don't you think it's also quite crazy to stalk someone on a message board ?

nuff said !

[Coffee]

So...Duke...(if that is your real name), you seem, experienced, with "names". Please answer this question regarding names:

"What would you name someone who enters another person's home/residence/hang-out without permission...whether it be a private residence or a public residence with an established communal population...and then proceeds to make him/herself at home pissing on the residence and existing population by engaging in what amounts to "name calling" and "offensive banter" (offensive as defined by the established population of course), without bothering to find out if their personal "idom" is acceptable to the established population, and who furthermore defends his "offensiveness" using the same "offensive idiom" despite the established population letting the as yet to be named (by you) person know that their behaviour/idom is inappropriate to the residence and to the established population?

*Awaits your learned response.*








(ps...many on this board would most probably answer; "TROLL")