On Wed, 23 Oct 2013 19:40:22 -0700, Patrick Elliott wrote:

> On 10/23/2013 11:57 AM, Shay wrote:
>> Patrick Elliott <kag### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>>
>>> And, of course, there is the lies you tell, because you can't imagine
>>> that someone could be apposed to any of those things themselves, yet
>>> still believe in government.
>>
>> Of course I can imagine it; I see it every day, a religion like any
>> other. When your god is displeased, he kills off a few-hundred-thousand
>> people. When he's happy, he gives alms to the poor ... or to
>> billionaires. Mysterious are the ways of your god.
>>
>> Best not question him or you may end up in the sights of his predator
>> drones.
>>
> Wow... Yeah, that is pretty much a conversation ender, even if the last
> post by you wasn't. Since you refuse to stop putting words in my mouth,
> claiming I support things, just because you are paranoid about them and
> can't see the difference, and insist on lying about what you "know"
> about me, and my position, based on that paranoia... yeah, the surest
> sign of a religion, since you bring that up, is an absolute, unshakable,
> certainty in your own position, to the extent that you imagine that
> everyone else who disagrees with you must support your enemies.
> 
> We are done here.

That's why I got out of the discussion, Patrick.  When confronted with 
extreme "either you're with me or you're with the bad guys" logic, that's 
a red flag to me that no serious discussion is going to take place.  The 
world isn't that black and white, and people who refuse to acknowledge 
that are extremists of one type or another.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

> That's why I got out of the discussion, Patrick.  When confronted with
> extreme "either you're with me or you're with the bad guys" logic, that's
> a red flag to me that no serious discussion is going to take place.

It was the extreme right nature of the posts that stopped me reading 
them all - start a new post guys please, my "subject" column width 
cannot cope!

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:

> That's why I got out of the discussion, Patrick.  When confronted with
> extreme "either you're with me or you're with the bad guys" logic, that's a
> red flag to me that no serious discussion is going to take place.  The world
> isn't that black and white, and people who refuse to acknowledge that are
> extremists of one type or another.
>
> Jim

Wasn't much of a discussion, unfortunately. You, as per usual, almost
immediately attempted to prevent discussion by feigning injury. I may not know
all the characters from Patrick's Batman analogy, but I do know a "Gambit" when
I see one.

Patrick is a better sport, but he doesn't have much to work with (see, I can be
passive aggressive too. ha). His answer for the millions slain by centralized
government? to accuse the opposition of *gasp* hyperbole when discussing a new
paper currency. Oh yes, and to levy a so-feeble accusation of "racist
association" that it could only have come from the Internet or some Dickensien
courtroom.

But this "discussion" has been a chance for the oh-so-unfashionable case for
limited government to be not only read, but vigorously studied (by, obviously,
more than just Patrick--who, I fear, may get all his information from wherever
he acquired his embarrassing "union funding" delusion). And your latest volley
of dismissive responses are yet another opportunity for me to re-state a
position in language so plain as to penetrate all but the most pugnacious
fervors of totalitarian zeal:

I am not placing you "with the bad guys."

I am placing you with the results of the near-total authority you wish to
exercise. Not with prognostications, not with asserted historical analogs, but
with the documented record of the actual animal you wish to continue feeding.

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 24 Oct 2013 11:19:13 -0400, Shay wrote:

> You, as per usual, almost immediately attempted to prevent discussion by
> feigning injury.

No, I just got sick and tired of the personal attacks and assumptions 
that if I didn't agree with you, I must somehow be a bad person.

> I am not placing you "with the bad guys."
> 
> I am placing you with the results of the near-total authority you wish
> to exercise.

You consider authoritarianism to be a bad thing.  You then paint my 
position as authoritarian (even though I don't consider it to be), and 
debate that, which paints me as the "bad guy".

That's a very dirty debate tactic, and I refuse to debate someone who 
resorts to those kinds of tactics.

But thanks for playing.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On 25/10/13 01:39, Jim Henderson wrote:
> But thanks for playing.
> 
> Jim
> 
This thread started 2 months ago, so please, all of you, can it.
Enough is enough.
BTW Jim this ain't personal. I tend to agree with most of what you write.

John
-- 
Protect the Earth
It was not given to you by your parents
You hold it in trust for your children

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 25 Oct 2013 06:52:45 +0100, Doctor John wrote:

> BTW Jim this ain't personal. I tend to agree with most of what you
> write.

Not taking it personally, either, John.  I hadn't intended to write 
anything further, but did want Patrick to know he wasn't alone.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Doctor John <j.g### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> On 25/10/13 01:39, Jim Henderson wrote:
> > But thanks for playing.
> >
> > Jim
> >
> This thread started 2 months ago, so please, all of you, can it.
> Enough is enough.
> BTW Jim this ain't personal. I tend to agree with most of what you write.
>
> John

It looks like the weather is taking a turn for the worse.
I am glad that I will be traveling on the Eurostar this Monday, not flying.

Post a reply to this message

On 10/24/2013 10:54 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Oct 2013 06:52:45 +0100, Doctor John wrote:
>
>> BTW Jim this ain't personal. I tend to agree with most of what you
>> write.
>
> Not taking it personally, either, John.  I hadn't intended to write
> anything further, but did want Patrick to know he wasn't alone.
>
> Jim
>
Unfortunately, I am of the mind that a person should be given every 
chance to try to understand another person's position, including my own. 
As such I have often been quite critical of the instant jumping on some 
people on certain blogs, when they show up and start either repeating 
the same things, over and over, as though, if said enough times, they 
might turn out to be true, or copy and pasting things from their 
favorite "this is true because I read it on the internet!", websites. 
Sometimes.. such people have simply spent so much time in an echo 
chamber of their own positions, that they have never been challenged.

Unfortunately, I am too kind, and.. there is no less kind moderator, to 
say, "Come back when you have fact, not just accusations and libel, or.. 
next time, you won't be coming back."

Post a reply to this message

On 25/10/13 07:51, Stephen wrote:
> 
> It looks like the weather is taking a turn for the worse.
> I am glad that I will be traveling on the Eurostar this Monday, not flying.
> 

Nice gambit, Steve :-)
Indeed, the forecast looks horrible. Batten down the hatches, reef the
mainsail and other nautical sayings.

John
-- 
Protect the Earth
It was not given to you by your parents
You hold it in trust for your children

Post a reply to this message

Doctor John <j.g### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> On 25/10/13 07:51, Stephen wrote:
> >
> > It looks like the weather is taking a turn for the worse.
> > I am glad that I will be traveling on the Eurostar this Monday, not flying.
> >
>
> Nice gambit, Steve :-)
> Indeed, the forecast looks horrible. Batten down the hatches, reef the
> mainsail and other nautical sayings.
>

Splice the mainbrace, is the one that I will go for, me hearties.

Now let's see if the hint has been taken.

Post a reply to this message