“you sure picked a funny example with Art.”
when i said “mindless” i didn’t mean without intelligence. art is a good foot-soldier for his army. a really good propagandist is not unintelligent, he’s just unchangeable, that is, his mind’s made up and the win is what’s important.
art’s team is all for providing examples. accordingly, i’m open to see where art has had his mind changed through the application of a winning contrarian argument.
art’s team is all for providing examples. accordingly, i’m open to see where art has had his mind changed through the application of a winning contrarian argument.
Do your own search, you lazy bastard.
While you’re doing that, you can carry out a search for all the other posters who are so open minded that they have changed their minds in the face of a superior argument. Sisyphus has an easier job.
While both are “cut and paste” jobs, one major difference is that startmeup routinely failed to post a link, credit the source or even use quotations to clearly distinguish as non-original or borrowed.
And yet, here is the “New Forum Rule”, which does not posting copyrighted material even with attribution. Apparently, there is to be retribution even with attribution.
you can’t reprint copyrighted material here or, for that matter, anything that you’re just cutting and pasting here. you can’t simply lift a story off a left-, right-, center-wing propaganda site and paste it here and have that be your post.
Do you kiss the bishop’s ring with that mouth?
.
art is a good foot-soldier for his army
I actually agree with Vitus here. Art is really not a lock step follow the Pres/Repub party no matter what type of guy. There are most definately instances where he publically and quite vocally (well I guess it would textually here) disagress with “republican administration” views.
Art seems to know where he stands on issues and isn’t afraid to talk about why he feels that way. That’s a lot better than the typical American who doesn’t even know who their senators are or what the major issues are in any election.
when i said “mindless” i didn’t mean without intelligence. art is a good foot-soldier for his army. a really good propagandist is not unintelligent, he’s just unchangeable, that is, his mind’s made up and the win is what’s important.
That’s a pretty good description, of Bush.
Nah, Art saw that word on the National Spelling Bee.
“Apparently, there is to be retribution even with attribution.”
yup.
**art’s team is all for providing examples. accordingly, i’m open to see where art has had his mind changed through the application of a winning contrarian argument. **
I will agree that Art has often posted responses against his normal stance. An example is his opposition to the fiscal policies of the current administration. I can’t think of a case where he has changed his mind (I can’t think of anyone else who has either by the way) but he has accepted people’s arguments as reasonable even if they are opposed to his views.
I would say there are many (if not most) on here that tow their party line much more strictly than Art.
(I can’t think of anyone else who has either by the way)
Just check out your sig 
.
You’re right.
I guess you don’t have to worry about getting banned.
Dan,
Isn’t it the posting of cut/paste (with or without attribution) WITHOUT some original insight/analysis/commentary that you are objecting to?
I mean, if I cut/paste a quote from some source, and then append a paragraph or six that tells what I think about the snippet or its author or whatever, is that OK?
It seems some folks are interpreting your rule to say “no pasting outside stuff at all” … I’m not so sure that’s what you’re saying…
Clarify, please?
Dan, you never give examples. I am still waiting two years now for a single example of a lie told by the Swift Boat Vets. I am still laughing at your characterization of the NSA surveillance as being both a violation of the Fourth Amendment and able to be authorized by an appropriate law of Congress.
News flash, Congress can’t modify the Fourth Amendment. The guy who ran the program just got promoted by the Senate 78-15.
When you accuse people of lying, when you accuse people of spouting mindless propaganda, and when you accuse those protecting us of flagrently breaking the law, you ought to expect to be called on it. If you chose not to reply, as is your right, expect your nonresponse to be taken as your reply. Process Matters.
This would be a good time to apologize to the Swift Boat Veterans, those in our Intelligence Services and to me.
Or not.
Gimme a break Art. You really want to arbitarily assign more substantive weight to a bunch of guys who were organized by a hit man originally employed to chase John Kerry by Richard Nixon in 1973. The fact that little to none of their assertions are corroborated by the documentary evidence released by the Navy, including testimony by then SecNavy John Warner. Add to this that one of those nimrods was complaining about a battle he says never occurred, despite the fact that he actually won a Bronze Star in said “nonexistent” battle. Doesn’t this strike you as all a bit convenient? Or does it fit so nicely in your world view that John Kerry/any Democratic military vet must a traitor in disguise and that we need more brave groups like the SBVT to uncover it? And your justification for believing them is nobody has “proven” their assertions untrue? The fact that the documentary evidence and the guys on his boat have testified, not to mention one of the founders of SBVT has come over seems to lend no weight to it. Obviously, short of Rush Limbaugh admitting it publicly, it just becomes another “fact” that you choose to believe. Obviously, it would be nearly impossible to convince you of something that you didn’t already want to believe in the first place.
Whatever it is you’re smoking, it must be awfully good.
“I would say there are many (if not most) on here that tow their party line much more strictly than Art.”
this is an interesting point, because i don’t know what’s art’s party line is, if you mean the line held by the republican party. that seems a moving target, and the union of strange bedfellows – fiscal conservatives; tax-cutters-at-all-costs; and religious conservatives – appears to be coming apart at the seams. i confess i don’t know where art falls in all this, and where art or any republican goes for comfort these days.
when it came to republicanism, i admired andrew sullivan throughout the late 90s and into the early part of this decade. then he had his own personal crisis with the party when it turned out that gays were elbowed off the bus, regardless of what they had going for them apart from their gayness.
as related in another thread, i’m taking another look at art. it may be that i’ve grossly misunderstood the man, and that there’s a thoughtful, introspective art-in-progress beneath the surface.
**i’m taking another look at art. it may be that i’ve grossly misunderstood the man, and that there’s a thoughtful, introspective art-in-progress beneath the surface. **
I wouldn’t go that far:)
Art’s kind of like Darth Vader. I can sense good in him.
“Isn’t it the posting of cut/paste (with or without attribution) WITHOUT some original insight/analysis/commentary that you are objecting to?”
let me bottom line it:
i’m nervous about the sheer quantity of cut-and-paste that was going on, because at some point those who generate this content might take offense to that.
if your entire post consists of nothing but a cut-and-paste, that shows a lack of respect for those who actually take the time to type thoughtful posts here.
so just use judgment. i’m not banning the pasting of any and all unoriginal material here. i’m just saying use judgment. cut-and-paste as an occasional thing is okay.
“swift boat vets: you’re right, it’s been two years. kerry still has the same number of purple hearts (3) awarded audie murphy in WWII. one assumes by now the swifties would’ve gained traction with their truthful arguments and gotten the pentagon to take another look at medals wrongfully awarded.”
Again you refuse to engage by trying to revise history by implicitly assuming in your response that the goal of the Swift Boat Vets was to get the award of 30 year old medals reveresed. Funny, I could have thought it was to provoke an examination of the man who wanted to be president of the United States. Take a memo: They did and Kerry didn’t.
Kerry doesn’t have them anyway. He threw them over the Whitehouse fence, except, of course, for those that he didn’t.
You also refuse to engage by specifying any of the lies you accuse them of in your drive by slander. Two years, and I am still waiting.
I don’t know what happened in that gunboat. I wasn’t there, and I don’t really care since Kerry gets an A in my book for ever being in that boat despite the fact it was only for a three month tour and despite the fact he tried mightly to avoid it.
I do know four things though. Kerry lied passionately about Christmas in Cambodia. The Swift Boat Vets accusations caused Kerry’s biographer to make substantial changes to Kerry’s biography and the author refuses to discuss his own book to this day. Kerry has refused to release his military records, despite his promises to do so. Kerry refuses to release his personal journal from that time, even those entries involving the days in dispute. You don’t need a badly thinking propagandist to take an educated guess as to who is being truthful here.
The Fourth Amendment just can’t be any simpler. No warrant shall issue without probable cause. If you start from the obvious point that national intelligence is not done on the criminal basis of probable cause, you immediately get to the obvious conclusion from Article I that no law Congress can pass is going to authorize warrants absent probable cause. Congress simply does not have that authority.
If you want to whine about the NSA surveillance, you are going to need an intelligent argument, of which there are many by the way, other than this one. Hayden got promoted by a large bipartisan majority for a reason. If your simplistic reasoning held any water whatever, the vote would not have been 78-15.
“i’m open to see where art has had his mind changed through the application of a winning contrarian argument.”
Actually, I have been on a rough patch here of late and just finished a rather groveling apology to slowguy.
I think it was just yesterday that I characterized Hastert as being on my shit list. I even defended Reid’s boxing tickets.
I did compliment that whack job mayor of London, Livingston a few months ago, and got thoroughly pummelled. I won’t do that again. Ouch.
I just did a search on my posts and came up with 11 pages of posts with the word sorry. Ouch.
Brings back bad memories. I got totally smoked on LNG terminal construction, by Fatmouse I think. Ouch.
“Again you refuse to engage… If you want to whine… If your simplistic reasoning…”
i’d be happy to engage you, except you’re the very same demeaning asshole now that you were 2yr ago. i don’t think i know you in real life but, god, i hope you’re different in person.