Nonsensical comments, abuse, baiting, ranting and leftist stupidity will not be tolerated.
Interesting, the kind of mutual, online masturbation in which Grod and the Pollutionary engage.
I'll buy a bottle of Scotch for anyone who can publish their photos (complete with captions implying pedophilia) and home addresses.
You know, if you love dogs more than cats, you are Hitler.
You know, John, I know you like to claim that you joined various Nazi groups as a means of researching them, but what puzzles me is that an association with Nazis over many years should only result in one chatty little article. I would have thought you'd have lots of material.
Where did he claim that he joined various Nazi groups?
And of course, we never hear of the loathsome lefties who belonged to such groups as the Socialist Worker's Collective or the International for Peace and Solidarity, etc do we?
A guy called Trevor Loudon here in NZ has a blog where he details the communist affiliations of NZ leftists, especially the current crop in power and it's a real eye-opener.
But according to the left,some genocidal maniacs are acceptable.
"I rather enjoyed writing the above."
I didn't enjoy reading it - too long. I'll give you the tip - cut the length of your posts by about three quarters. Nobody with a life has time to read them.
I can offer gratuitous advice to my betters because I'm a teacher you know.
And hanging around here sniping and carping about the length of posts proves I have a life.
Don't encourage that piece of rat droppings guys.
What's amazing is that this sack of lying, poisonous, filthy leftist crap is accusing someone who publishes his name online of dishonesty and whatever else.
Only a brain-dead leftist could do that without any shame. Name yourself thr you cowardly sack of leftist excrement instead of hurling abuse and accusations from behind trees and bushes.
If you don't, this'll be the last time i'll leave your comment untouched, you'll never get oxygen here, you'll always be the sick, perverted, animal-raper i suspect you are.
"I didn't enjoy reading it - too long."
Oh dear, the target audience was missed.
I suppose you prefer bullet points and multiple choice, Teach?
jr - pls list your degrees. Purely out of interest.
"I didn't enjoy reading it - too long."
Then why did you bother?
"I'll give you the tip - cut the length of your posts by about three quarters."
I'll give you a tip - cut yours by four quarters (precisely).
"I would have thought you'd have lots of material."
Deke's speaking from experience, of course.
His long association with mindless morons has provided him with endless inspiration to write similarly - so much so that he feels compelled to share a good deal of it with us. . .
Aren't we lucky?
OMG - I've just noticed that Andrew Bolt's moderators down in Melbourne have cut a 'Teach' comment from a comment thread: http://blogs.news.com.au/heralds...olen_tasmanian/
Of course, the problem has to be us, right, Teach?
You're so 'right-headed', after all.
PS: for the record, 'Teach', Bolt is an opinion writer - you might want to look that up some time. I do find amusing, however, how obvious was your identification with some of his descriptions (and to which you took such offence). For example:
". . .the Pinata Left are hypocrites.”
If you think the cap fits, then by all means. . .
Why is it that when there is a post pointing out that leftists don't use cogent and logical arguments, but instead resort to ad hominem attacks, some leftist will leave a comment that proves the point?
At least, one of the inadvertently acknowledged that they don’t have an attention span long enough to get through a discussion of any length. This is probably a very insightful observation by the lefty. Leftists are lazy when it comes to thought and reason. This may be due to the emphasis they put on feelings. Or perhaps its wanting to get something for nothing (welfare). But when people when people are unwilling to develop a valid argument, all they can do is resort to the type of comments we see here. They don’t even bother to stop to consider that they are doing exactly what they have been accused of.
"Leftists have so poisoned discussion of race and racism by decades of hysterical shrieks about it that any mention of race or racism is now seen as highly suspect -- unless of course you are praising some minority or asserting how justly they are aggrieved."
There is no way I could better say this, or your original point about the ad hominem statements I see all the time.
1735099 you're only embarrassing yourself you silly twit.
Panday
You may find this post has some rather alarming "admissions" from Scott "the editor" Bridges. that have more substance than the crap his blog pals write about John Ray all words attributed to Scott come from his blog, it is good for a laugh... Cheers
Sorry here is the link
http://beingnice.wordpress.com/2...1/03/ask-scott/
I'm a sour wannabe french animal-raping commie with a useless blog that nobody wants to visit, so i'm just here acting like a weak and cowardly wanker trying to get your attention in the hope that you might visit my blog. if that happens maybe we can exchange details, and you know, i could like shake it for you.
For a while i used to post stupid, irritating comments here as Deke, they thought he was just another loser, but it was me pretending to be someone else, i don't know what the big deal is, i was just being a lying sack of shit. i like being deke, my ex-boyfriend used to be called that, it reminds me of him, at night i go by many other names, so many men to please...
You really are a fool of a creature, aren't you, Deke.
What did i tell you numbskull? It seems numbskull will only learn the hard way folks, or just keep getting kicked in the teeth.
I'm a sour wannabe french animal-raping commie with a useless blog that nobody wants to visit, so i'm just here acting like a weak and cowardly wanker trying to get your attention in the hope that you might visit my blog. if that happens maybe we can exchange details, and you know, i could like shake it for you.
For a while i used to post stupid, irritating comments here as Deke, they thought he was just another loser, but it was me pretending to be someone else, i don't know what the big deal is, i was just being a lying sack of shit. i like being deke, my ex-boyfriend used to be called that, it reminds me of him, at night i go by many other names, so many men to please...
"My fixation with promiscuous homosexuality, for instance. . ."
There's absolutely nothing wrong with being gay, Deke. The bestiality stuff is another question. I'd really lay off the animal fiddling, if I were you.
"Rich pickings for a psycho-analyst in that little lot."
You can talk.
ignore my earlier post - click the home page and presto - cheers
Thanks for that link Iain, i was wondering what the fellow looks like.
Not pretty, was it, Matt.
I didn't address you in the thread 17... others did and obviously that's too much for you, so you pick on those who didn't. You'll get the boot too then old chap.
Teach is pretty selective, I've noticed, Mat.
And I actually wouldn't give a rats about it, if I were you.
I'm trying to work out why the irritating little shit hangs around here in the first place.
It's the irritation factor guys, like ringing the doorbell and fleeing into the night giggling like small girls. Lefties are on the intellectual level.
Sometime i wish i had the time to give them a bit of their own medicine, but i ain't a crackhead on the dole or something, so the boot will have to do, they keep typin, i keep kickin, makes my day i tells ya.. 
"Hitler liked dogs
Hitler was evil
Therefore liking dogs is wrong"
That's a faulty syllogism, "Dr" Ray. Specifically, the fallacy of the undistributed middle.
Not an "ad hominem".
Sorry, a link to help the good "Dr" out:
Fallacy of the undistributed middle.
Ad hominem.
If you need to hurriedly tidy up the post and pretend it was never otherwise, I underestand.
Sorry - "links" and "understand".
I bet the good "Dr" can type!
Hitler was a vegetarian
Hitler was evil
Therefore being a vegetarian is wrong
Sound familiar?
Inheretence is evil (according to Jeremy Sear)
He comes from a "well off family" and stands to inhereit.
will he be a rich hypocrite when his folks die?
A question For You Jeremy, will you be declining any inheritance from your parents?
Because if inheritance is evil as you claim then you must, to be morally consistent, decline any inheritance that you would be due when your folks kark it. I bet that you would grab the money with both hands and rip the throat out of any one who tries to take it away from you.
Right Fageme, and where is the undistributed middle?
You, explaining what you mean douche bag?
Elijah,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Fal...tributed_middle
There are diagrams.
Greg
Ah i see jezza is back again, after promising never to return, how many times again? Can't stay away eh? He must be tiring of his leftie sycophants.
"...my writing had to be "waterproof" to be passed for publication."
In that way has the leftist dominance in the media and academia been a two-edged sword. The leftists get easy passes with sloppy thinking. It is no surprise that they struggle against a real opponent.
Because i have no life and am a born loser, I make sniping comments about the men at AWH because they have big balls that i'd love to wrap my lips around. My current booyfriends aren't that well hung you know and just between you and me, they're also losers because all they ever do is sit around jerking off and whining like small girls about what those men at AWH and CR are talking about.
Otherwise I masturbate furiously over pictures of women in Nazi uniforms when i'm on the komputer in my mother's basement, are you surprised?
The Editor's Bitch.
They are a bunch of wankers at that Grods site.
Ant, you can probably get the medication free, if you'd just book yourself into a mental institution--that way you won't be allowed near a keyboard unsupervised and we'd be spared the drivel.
It's win/win.
So i'm told Dolph, apparently they blog about us all the time, madness i tell you, us causing so much consternation over on the left.
It's incredible that lefties always bitch and moan that they were silenced during the Howard years when they were not, but never hesitate to call homeone sexist racist or homophobic when they disagree with them.
If they want to see the bigots, some of them should look in the mirror.
I know I'm probably going to upset those of the left side of the divide, but this comment thread is cracking me up.
Ant, please come back to posting reasonable arguments, and Jeremy, thanks for the note about the syllogism. I was trying to think of the word this morning.
I'm not sure whether to feel sorry for those who get their comments hacked to pieces by the bosses, but it's not like you're unaware of the possibility.
What fun - a lefty swarm - but I missed it!
MrLefty, I will take issue with your version of ad hominem (too narrow).
Example:
". . .appealing to one's prejudices, emotions, or special interests rather than to one's intellect or reason."
Given the company, I think JR's example was entirely apposite.
Which is, I suspect, why he chose the words that he did.
It is a faulty syllogism, but it is also an example of ad hominem attack in that it demonstrates how it is illogical to ignore an argument because someone, eg Hitler happens to hold that point of view.
You sure comments are being hacked, Nilk? Those leftards are pretty sick puppies, you know.
"an association with Nazis over many years should only result in one chatty little article."
There were actually three.
Many academics would work for many years on just one!
My degrees are B.A. (hons); M.A. (hons) and Ph.D.
Note well, lefties - MrLefty goes unmolested (hands off, 'Deke', he's straight 'homo sapiens', not 'bestia lemmeatit').
Now, why do you think that is?
Was that the seared one who commented about the form of the pseudo-syllogism I put up?
He is talking about the form of the argument
I was talking about its content
An ad hominem argument is any argumnent that judges a statement by the one who uttered it
I DID point out that there are various forms of such argumentation
But one cannt expect a Leftist to read what he criticizes, of course.
Hmmmm
Haloscan seems to have eaten my comment about the pseudo-syllogism I put up. So again:
The superficial Lefty was talking about its form
I was talking about its content.
An ad hominem argument is any argument that judges a statement by its utterer
I DID point out that such argumentation could take various forms
But one cannot expect a Leftist to read what he criticizes, of course
But one cannt expect a Leftist to read what he criticizes, of course.
That's an ad hominem right there if I'm not mistaken, Dr Tingtong -- albeit a poorly spelled one.
James - I can't comment here from home, because you've banned me, god knows for what. So it's not exactly a "hands off" policy.
And Hall - if you weren't such a dimwit, and were capable of reading the post you're attempting to criticise, you'd see that your fatuous attempt at a gotcha is in fact answered in the post itself.
Oh and Ray - now that you've noticed that the
1. Hitler was X
2. Lefties believe X
3. Therefore lefties are fascists
argument simply doesn't follow, care to withdraw your many articles which rely on it to allege same?
eg
1. Mussolini, a fascist, claimed to be opposed to capitalism
2. Lefties claim to be opposed to fascism
3. Therefore lefties are fascists.
Sorry, that should be:
1. Mussolini, a fascist, claimed to be opposed to capitalism
2. Lefties claim to be opposed to capitalism
3. Therefore lefties are fascists.
Ray's still running that line, and variants of it, in several articles.
(Sucks not being able to edit a comment if you stuff it up!)
Leftard, the argument is thus:
1. Mussolini, a fascist, claimed to be opposed to capitalism
2. Lefties claim to be opposed to capitalism
3. Therefore fascists are lefties.
Fuckwit. How many people you locked up this week?
Here's a question for you Jeremy.
Given, in many instances, 'we over here' can espouse fairly extreme laissez-faire views, which, depending on who you speak to, often move further and further toward a state of minimal Government intervention (apart from law enforcement and defence) - and, if taken to the extreme, arguably no government at all - where do you think this mindset sits in the scheme of things, in terms of your view of extreme left and extreme right (and all the bits in between)?
Note - the definition I hear most often has both extremes exhibiting totalitarianism.
My definition of an extreme righty, however, is someone with strong sympathies for virtual (if not total) anarchy.
"depending on who you speak to, often move further and further toward a state of minimal Government intervention (apart from law enforcement and defence)"
Since the last part is the one most critically aligned with totalitarianism - their massive government powers in the areas of "law enforcement" (security apparatus) and "defence" (military) - the answer to your question is that the closest western political "side" to these traits is the right, not the left.
We favour government regulation of markets, sure, but we don't favour things like the Patriot Act.
The flaw with Ray's "lefties are fascists" or "fascists are lefties" argument is that the things he identifies that some fascists had in common with the modern left (Hitler was a vegetarian! He (early on) argued for a reduction in corporate control of the economy!) are NOT the things over which we went to war with them.
And the things over which we went to war with them - invading other countries, for example - are traits they have in common with the modern RIGHT, not the modern LEFT.
AR - your version of the syllogism is still faulty.
"James - I can't comment here from home, because you've banned me, god knows for what..."
No, that was me, a while back you kept deriding the folks here and kept threatening never to come back, so i thought i'd do you a favor and just kick your ass to the kerb, that way you can't come back. None the less, it's no surprise to me that you've slithered back here, no wait... you never left in the first place.
It's not faulty - but it could be tidied up a little. There is some implied knowledge required, ie that lefty is a more general designation than fascist. OK then,
- Mussolini, a Fascist, hates capitalism.
- Lefties hate capitalism.
- Fascists and Lefties have more in common than they'd ever care to admit.
"Since the last part is the one most critically aligned with totalitarianism"
These are tools, not deciders. And it is the mindset guiding those tools that decides the critical alignment, hence my qualifier: 'minimal Government intervention' (with all that implies).
Referring to 'massive government powers' becomes a contradiction, in terms of the question I've just framed.
Elijah,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Fal...tributed_middle
There are diagrams.
Greg
I well aware of the fallacy but of course you haven't explain how middle is undistributed in this instance...
http://awesternheart.blogspot.co...s-
question.html
I can't guarantee a poke-in-the-eye-free session, but I have asked.
Commenting by HaloScan
