Why Are Republicans WRONG about EVERYTHING?

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List

This thread has been locked

Messages 1821 - 1840 of total 1997 in this topic

<< First | < Previous | Show All | Next > | Last >>

Craig Fry

Trad climber

So Cal.

Mar 13, 2015 - 10:15am PT

I asked nicely for Locker to Not post objectionable Manips of me

He would not abide by my wishes

TGT has Never complained, so he must not mind, maybe he likes the attention.

See, that't the difference that you seem not to get

and since I'm not fat, I thought it was objectionable.
You think it's OK for someone to do something anyway after you ask them nicely Not to do it.
Are you a NAZI?

or another new Troll to rage against me?

6'2" and 190 lbs is Fat?

Go troll someone else you lying loser.

rottingjohnny

Sport climber

mammoth lakes ca

Mar 13, 2015 - 10:16am PT

Awesome TGT manips...good job glue boi...

ElbowHornet

Boulder climber

Mar 13, 2015 - 10:20am PT

Hey there say...your not fat? Right, and you never whine either.

*Reality-check and a dreamcatcher to aisle 5*

Craig Fry

Trad climber

So Cal.

Mar 13, 2015 - 10:26am PT

There are no crybabies here
Just trolls looking to make trouble by bullying others with lies and BS.

If you respond to defend yourself, you get labeled a crybaby
That's a sick way to view a debate forum

ElbowHornet

Boulder climber

Mar 13, 2015 - 10:29am PT

Hey there say crag fried,

you don't just respond you respond like baby

"Is this realy happening????"

how old are you anyway 13?

crankster

Trad climber

Mar 13, 2015 - 10:33am PT

Any of you wingNuts have a rebuttal to any of Craig's arguments?
Go ahead, give it a shot.

Craig Fry

Trad climber

So Cal.

Mar 13, 2015 - 10:34am PT

Angry loser Troll on aisle 5

Clean up required

ElbowHornet

Boulder climber

Mar 13, 2015 - 10:39am PT

Hey There say frybaby,

its good to see all the edits to your posts, seems like fat is leaving your neurons and settling around middle. go sit on a cactus

EdwardT

Trad climber

Retired

Mar 13, 2015 - 10:39am PT

Craig Fry

Trad climber
So Cal.

Mar 13, 2015 - 10:26am PT
There are no crybabies here
Just trolls looking to make trouble by bullying others with lies and BS.

If you respond to defend yourself, you get labeled a crybaby
That's a sick way to view a debate forum

Doood! You're on fire. Keep 'em coming.

rottingjohnny

Sport climber

mammoth lakes ca

Mar 13, 2015 - 10:48am PT

Says the thin-skinned Sketch...

ElbowHornet

Boulder climber

Mar 13, 2015 - 10:49am PT

hey there say is edwardt sketch?

thats nice to know that guy is a real buffoon.

peace/love!

EdwardT

Trad climber

Retired

Mar 13, 2015 - 10:56am PT

Says the thin-skinned Sketch...

What matters is you care.

Peace.

ElbowHornet

Boulder climber

Mar 13, 2015 - 10:59am PT

Hey there say sketch

"Look at me! I'm from Virgina Im an idot!"

JEleazarian

Trad climber

Fresno CA

Mar 13, 2015 - 11:01am PT

Craig, about the only thing I can say with real confidence on this thread is that if you post on it, someone will think you're an idiot and say so, often in rather mean fashion.

I try to respond to criticisms of my arguments, but for the (thankfully rare) personal attacks, I learned almost 60 years ago to refrain from a defensive response (or usually, any response at all). If someone makes fun of me (as opposed to my arguments) at least one of two things is usually true:

1. I deserve it, in which case my best response is self-effacement; and/or

2. They, not I, come across as jerks, in which case my best response is silence.

When I respond to a personal attack defensively, I just leave myself open to more attacks.

I must admit, though. Locker's photoshopped posts on the previous page struck me as hilarious.

John

TGT

Social climber

So Cal

Mar 13, 2015 - 11:17am PT

[Click to View YouTube Video]

apogee

climber

Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy

Mar 13, 2015 - 11:19am PT

Sage advice, John.

dirtbag

climber

Topic Author's Reply - Mar 13, 2015 - 11:27am PT

John, I have several issues with you (see below).

My complaint about Mr. John Eleazarian

The furor over opportunism has been an acutely frustrating cultural phenomenon: pregnant with great possibility, touching on vital and fascinating issues, yet initially formulated in a one-sided and uncontrollable manner that will rob, steal, cheat, and murder in the coming days. What's important to note, however, is that Mr. John Eleazarian's plans for the future share many of the same characteristics. I realize that some of you may not know the particular background details of the events I'm referring to. I'm not going to go into those details here, but you can read up on them elsewhere.

If John successfully prevents us from acknowledging and respecting the essential humanity of all of Earth's people, we will rise up again, stronger, firmer, mightier. We will think outside the box. We will ensure that everyone knows that I shall be blamed by ignorant persons when I say that ignorance of the law does not excuse John from the consequences of violating it. Cruel as that maxim may appear, his long-term goal is to sully my reputation. I hate to break it to him, but down that path lies only heartache and tears. That's why I insist on mentioning that John keeps trying to borrow money and spend it on programs that rewrite history to reflect or magnify an imaginary “victimhood”. And if we don't remain eternally vigilant, he will indeed succeed. No one that I speak with or correspond with is happy about this situation. Of course, I don't speak or correspond with nocent quacks, John's serfs, or anyone else who fails to realize that John proclaims that his ethics will universally benefit all mankind. In reality, his ethics will benefit only those stuporous segregationists who alter, rewrite, or ignore past events to make them consistent with John's current “reality”. As I like to say, you cannot link arms under a universalist banner when you can't find your own name on it. By that I mean that I definitely have no appetite for ensuring that there can never in the future be accord, unity, or a common, agreed-upon destiny among the citizens of this once-great nation. Many repressive John Eleazarian clones, however, do. That's why I want them all to read this letter and others like it and discover for themselves that I shall not argue that John's newsgroup postings are an authentic map of his plan to bowdlerize all unfavorable descriptions of his objectives. Read them and see for yourself.

What John is incapable of seeing is that he has come up with proven methods to hasten society's quiescence to moral pluralism and epistemological uncertainty. All you have to do is let your guard down. I insist I know why he has been creating some abysmal, pseudo-psychological profile of me to discredit my opinions. He considers it an interesting sociological experiment for determining whether people can be influenced to transform our little community into a global crucible of terror and gore.

While some of John's paroxysms are very attractive on the surface and are decidedly entertaining, they ultimately serve to obliterate our sense of identity. If you ever ask John to do something, you can bet that your request will get lost in the shuffle, unaddressed, ignored, and rebuffed. I wouldn't waste my time trying to uplift individuals and communities on a global scale to punish him for his crazy initiatives if his inclinations weren't parroted by so many cuckoo, contumelious wastrels. It's also true that John is a lifelong member of the Church of Quisquilious Stalinism, but that'll have to be a subject for another letter.

It's really not bloody-mindedness that compels me to tell John how wrong he is. It's my sense of responsibility to you, the reader. In a John-led society, people who analyze John's methods of interpretation in the manner of sociological studies of mass communication and persuasion will be suppressed, vilified, hated, imprisoned, exiled, and killed. But it doesn't stop there.

Let me try to put this in perspective: There are some troubling issues here, even putting aside the basic question of whether or not the issues surrounding obscurantism are more complex and embedded than John will admit. For instance, there are few certainties in life. I myself have counted only three: death, taxes, and John doing some frowsy thing every few weeks. For your benefit, I quote word-for-word something he once said: “The purpose of education is not to produce independent thinkers but submissive state subjects.” The significance of this otiose statement is that engaging John in intelligent debate is far from easy. The last time I saw someone try, furious hatred, frenzied personal attacks, emotionalism, and defiance of reason and fact were all on display in spades, and they were all directed at this one, poor, frightened person. I wish John would more calmly accept the fact that his possession-obsessed, sick annunciations have caused dysfunctional porn stars to descend upon us like a swarm of locusts, agitating for indoctrination programs in local schools. I used to agree completely with those who claimed that gangsterism, as a social philosophy, is hubristic. Interestingly, my views on this have changed slightly as I have learned more about human motivation and human behavior. Now I believe that John has somehow managed to get the media to pay rapt attention to his brown-nosing morals. I don't know what sort of Jedi mind control he's been using to pull that off, but I do know that I once managed to get John to agree that he, in his infinite wisdom, has decided to add insult to injury. Unfortunately, a few minutes later, he did a volte-face and denied that he had ever said that.

Anyone who takes even a cursory glance at this letter will quickly discover that John keeps stating over and over again that the rest of us are an inferior group of people, fit only to be enslaved, beaten, and butchered at the whim of our betters. This drumbeat refrain is clearly not consistent with the facts on the ground—facts such as that John proclaims at every opportunity that he'd never compromise the free and open nature of public discourse. The gentleman doth protest too much, methinks. Although theoretical differences can be drawn between his sullen roorbacks and puerile interventionism, these are distinctions without a difference. This is a suitable place in the letter to explain how by using bombastic language and selective quotation, John is able to boss others around. Unfortunately, I'll have to skip that rather intersting discussion because I have bigger fish to fry. In particular, I need to tell you that John's excuses have merged with metagrobolism in several interesting ways. Both spring from the same kind of reality-denying mentality. Both destroy our youths' ability to relax, reflect, study, and meditate. And both create a factitious demand for his quarrelsome apologues.

We must make some changes here. If we fail in this, we are not failing someone else; we are not disrupting some interest separate from ourselves. Rather, it is we who suffer when we neglect to observe that rather than attempting to work out his disagreements with others, John commonly turns to his friends tapinosis and meiosis, calling his opponents “viperine prima donnas”, “nasty gits”, or even “uncouth soi-disant do-gooders”. I find that rather sad, primarily because John's yes-men, who are legion, often reverse the normal process of interpretation. That is, they value the unsaid over the said, the obscure over the clear. My purpose here is not to induce John to perceive his errors of perception and judgment and make him realize that his harangues are based on some deep-rooted personality disorder. Well, okay, it is. But I should point out that his perspective is that his wrongheaded psychobabble is based upon a firm and vivid grasp of the concrete truths of life itself. My perspective, in contrast, is that John is planning to instigate acrimony and discord. This does not bode well for the future because people who agree with his jibes are either stupid, drunk, on drugs, paid off by John, or are disdainful traitors. To pretend otherwise is nothing but hypocrisy and unwillingness to face the more unpleasant realities of life.

Idle hands are the devil's tools. That's why John spends his leisure time devising ever more impulsive ways to grant peccable moochers the keys to the kingdom. For his shallow plans to succeed, John needs to dumb down our society. An uninformed populace is easier to control and manipulate than an educated populace. Faster than you can say “philodestructiveness”, schoolchildren will stop being required to learn the meanings of words like “hexosemonophosphoric” and “indistinguishability”. They will be incapable of comprehending that I have one itsy-bitsy problem with John's practices. Videlicet, they poison the relationship between teacher and student. And that's saying nothing about how when one actually reads his rambling communiqués, which I recommend one do, it's hard to tell whether John is disagreeing with me or making my point. In any event, I stick with my own view, which is that the television-addicted, drone inhabitants of John's rotting empire of clericalism uniformly believe that prisons exist not for punitive or rehabilitative purposes but rather to carry out a surly political agenda against minorities and the poor. Well, I have news for such yellow-bellied, narrow-minded chawbacons: Many scholars have already concluded that John's effusions are highly manipulative. Nevertheless, it's still worth reexamining them in the light of new information, new research, and new insights. Doing so is sure to reveal that John sees no reason why he shouldn't concoct labels for people, objects, and behaviors in order to manipulate the public's opinion of them. It is only through an enlightened, outraged citizenry that such moral turpitude, corruption, and degradation of the law can be brought to a halt. So, let me enlighten and outrage you by stating that if John doesn't like it here, then perhaps he should go elsewhere.

We all need to be aware of each other's existence as intelligent, feeling, human beings, even if some of us are cranky hooligans. John is neither morally nor intellectually consistent. If he were, he wouldn't first drag everything that is truly great into the gutter then afterwards decry my observation that he yearns for the Oriental despotisms of pre-Hellenic times, the neolithic culture that preceded the rise of self-consciousness and egoism. By the same token, John abhors the current era, in which people are free to lead the way to the future, not to the past. I would like to go on, but I do have to keep this letter short. So I'll wrap it up by saying that most of us warrant that Mr. John Eleazarian is extremely effrontive.

apogee

climber

Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy

Mar 13, 2015 - 11:29am PT

Yay!

The return of the text generator!

Edit:
"While some of John's paroxysms are very attractive on the surface and are decidedly entertaining, they ultimately serve to obliterate our sense of identity. "

John, I've been meaning to tell you this.