A Discussion Across The Aisle

Since this blog is seeing so many visitors from both sides of the aisle, I wanted to switch the focus to a constructive debate on the pressing issues of the day. Please feel free to use this post or any other on this blog to post your thoughts. I will be happy to try to respond.

 

This entry was posted in Media, Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

70 Responses to A Discussion Across The Aisle

  1. elendil says:

    Sir! Message from base confirmed:
    http://www.spittleandink.com/simpleblog/default.asp?view=plink&id=361
    I’m afraid sir, I must ask you for the key and the recall code…

  2. Catrina says:

    I think it’s safe to say as a Christian that God works in mysterious ways. You reap what you sow and the pay back in a fo’mo-er…

    She may think twice about throwing people’s email adresses, physical addresses and phone numbers up in the future, but I am not counting on it knowing her all too well…

  3. James says:

    In all fairness, reasonable discourse will not work on people like: Malkin, Coulter, Hannity, Savage, O’Reilly, etc. Why? Because these people are not sane, nor are they reasonable.

    They are pathological liars who relish the fact they can say whatever they want with no fear of confrontation.

    People like this do not deserve reasonable discourse as they do not respect those who they knowingly lie to.

    If someone lies to your face, and keeps doing it, even when you confront them over it, that means they have no respect for you.

    I see no reason to show someone respect who obviously does not respect me.

  4. Catrina says:

    Thank you James, you are 100% correcto with this bunch.

  5. usnjay says:

    James/Catrina:
    Good thinking. That way, you don’t even have to listen to opposing ideas, much less respond in a rational manner.

    Don’t forget that anyone who disagrees with you is not just a liar, but probably downright evil.
    usnjay

  6. James says:

    usnjay writes:

    “Good thinking. That way, you don’t even have to listen to opposing ideas, much less respond in a rational manner.”

    Umm, so a blatant lie is a legitimate “opposing” idea? So basically you consider stating something that is blatantly false, is okay, as it “opposes” the truth?

    Also you go on:

    Don’t forget that anyone who disagrees with you is not just a liar, but probably downright evil.

    First of all, that is a strawman argument. I never said anything about disagreeing, nor did I say they were evil. I merely pointed out the fact that they are desrepectful, pathological liars with clear anti-social personality disorders.

    Jay, you are not very good at debating or basic logic. I suggest you keep swabbing the deck. With geniuses like you leading our armed forces, no wonder we are doing so well in Iraq. 🙂

  7. Tjones says:

    “Its easy to incite violence – much harder to contain it afterwards. We blame the mullahs in the Middle East for inciting hate – look at what we are doing.”

    Yeah, no difference there…except for that whole suicide bombing thing…but let’s not split hairs here.

  8. James says:

    Tjones says:

    “Yeah, no difference there…except for that whole suicide bombing thing…but let’s not split hairs here.”

    Yeah. Instead, the US lies and invades a nation claiming they are a threat when they are clearly not.

    Because suidice bombings are not the same as carpet bombing 3rd world nations.

    Brilliant.

  9. usnjay says:

    James:
    Calling someone a liar is an ad hominem attack. By resorting to name calling we attempt to shut-down discourse, rather than encourage it. Even worse is the tendency this has to de-humanize others, which makes us more likely to resort to physical or verbal force. We saw this during the 2004 elections when both Democrats and Republican campaign workers resorted to such things as slashing tires & jamming phone lines to win the election.
    These were normally law-abiding people, but b/c they were certain they were right and the people who disagreed with them must be stupid, liars, right-wing dictators or left-wing Stalinists that they convinced themselves that illegal action was justifiable.
    It’s a dangerous road to go down, and it starts with attacking the person, rather than the ideas.

  10. Mash says:

    Folks, I don’t censor comments on this site. I would however appreciate it if we kept things civil. We have much to learn from one another and please lets not shout each other down.

    We can leave the name calling to other sites. Thanks 🙂

  11. Catrina says:

    Usujay –

    I am really not available to listen to lies and garbage from some young Neo-Con that thinks they have the answers to all of God’s best kept secrets.

    And having a discussion about erroneous information is a waste of time in my book – it’s moot.

    I wouldn’t call you downright evil – “you know not what you do” is a more appropriate description. You believe what you are saying which is fine – but don’t expect me or the others posting here to act like lemmings and join the pilgrimage to the kool-aid sea…

  12. James says:

    usnjay says:

    “Calling someone a liar is an ad hominem attack. By resorting to name calling we attempt to shut-down discourse, rather than encourage it.”

    First of all, an ad hom attack is when you attack the person, not the argument. I pointed out that they lie. Constantly. I attacked the fact they argue by lying. Over and over. So, again, get a basic book on logical fallacies. I suggest Copi.

    And again, civil discourse is NOT possible with people who disrespect you by lying to you and attacking you for pointing out that they lie.

    I think you and Tom need to go back to the mothership.

    Oh and PS, when people tell a lie, that makes them liars. FYI.

  13. James says:

    Oh and USNJAY.

    Me pointing out the aforementioned individuals knowingly lie, with someone who slashes tires, etc, is a fallacy of equivication. So far you have committed 3. Go for a record!!

  14. Catrina says:

    Bravo James, well said!

  15. Mash says:

    James, I meant reasonable discourse here. Michelle Malkin is beyond help 🙂

    Don’t forget that between truth and lies lies truthiness!

  16. James says:

    Truthiness is next to godliness. And godliness equals smoothiness and as we all know, smoothiness is delicisous.

  17. Proximity1 says:

    I may regret this question but, WHO , please, is Michelle Malkin ??? Never heard of her? Is she “somebody” ?

    P.

  18. James says:

    Proximity1 Says:

    “I may regret this question but, WHO , please, is Michelle Malkin ??? Never heard of her? Is she “somebody” ?”

    To rightwing nuts and immature morons, she is their poster child for hate and idiocy. She is a trashy bimbo who has the intellectual might of skid marked underwear, but hides all this under the false cloak of “commentary journalism”. Oh and she is a pathological liar as well.

    I hope this answers your question.

  19. Catrina says:

    Malkin is a well known troublemaker, the primary purpose of her blog and her blogging is to whine and bitch with the intentions to incite a riot throughout the blogosphere.

    She’s horrible, common, has no manners and is a knuckle-dragging polemicist trapped by her own self invovement and internalized self hatred.

    Let’s face it, she is a tortured monster that hasn’t had a good night’s sleep since somewhere between the wheel and fire…some day she will “get it”, but not anytime soon, she has allot of emotional growing up to do. And the fact that Jesse writes most of that blog and influences her is even scarier. He eggs her on…

    She’s like the type that only changes after something drastic happens and either someone gets hurt due to her careless actions or she herself suffers a near-death experience to make her wise up and mend her ways.

  20. unclesmrgol says:

    Sorry, finally got back here. No, I’m not Malkin — I have serious differences with her, but I am a conservative and a guy who, above all, hates spam. I only use one pseudonym, so you could probably find out who I really am without too much trouble, just as I found out who your ISP was without too much trouble.

    I tried your e-mail malkin link and it did nothing other than apparently activate some cgi on your server. It did not have a a mailto: URL and therefore did not display anything for me to submit should I have chosen to do so. I came over here to see if her rant was correct, and, from the evidence, it was. That’s why I left you the warning; I have killed any number of godaddy spammer accounts that sent me no more than a single e-mail just by complaining. If you have written a CGI or JSP (or whatever) so that someone clicking on a link causes an e-mail from you to be generated, and routed through your mailserver (or, rather, godaddy’s server) to her, that’s spamming. I clicked your “malkin” button three times — did I send three e-mails to malkin? If someone’s cat hits that button, is it the cat or your server that godaddy will blame?

Comments are closed.