I am not seeking to pile on Tartarin, or pick sides.
But, her last few postings are incredibly one-sided, as if people who agree with conservative viewpoints and policies were all born with some deficiency.
You must know it is foolish to try and brand a large group of people with inherent inferiorities. Isn't that the definition of bias and prejudice? Isn't it transparent to everyone that what Tartarin accuses conservatives of; she shows evidence of in herself?
When you throw up knee-jerk sentiments such as she has here--instead of addressing the issues, you lose credibility. Tartarin and other liberals may have valid arguments with some conservative issues, but wild, biased statements just make her/their assertions seem less credible and based on prejudice, rather than ideas.
This is why there is no thoughtful political debate here. It has developed into a liberal Amen Corner. I have watched the political threads and see the liberals frenzy feeding on rather mild conservative posts, as though no conservative statement can be tolerated. This, from the ones who proclaim a higher value on tolerance.
I give liberals credit for coming upon their ideology through matters of conscience. They should do the same for people with more conservative ideologies.
Yeah Tartarin, you scalawag - be decent!
snood, would you find it acceptable to stereotype a race, for example, based on "well at least the X I know are nice and all the X i know are not"?
Whatever your opinion on my perceived self importance you must at least have an opinion on gerenarlized insuts and their intellectual value.
dys--
I was careful to speak in generalities. Because, I have been very fortunate that you are here.
You are an example of how people can disagree, but be very kind personally.
I always value your considerate comments; especially your missives in the midst of my lynchings. You are a model of how it should be done to all of us, IMO, and I respect you for that. I have also had kind words from other liberals.
I hope my post was general enough. Didn't intend a broad swipe. I was taking issue with a few of Tartarin's statements. It wasn't even a broad swipe against Tartarin...
I'm probably wrong again but i see quite a wide variety of both conservatives and liberals on this forum. Generalizations about generalizations seems just a bit silly here.
Craven and Sofia, you've lost my respect, at least for the time being. Of course there are decent, nice, thoughtful, intelligent conservatives. I know a few of them and they are just as distressed at the current cooption of the Republican party by thugs as I am. With a couple of conservative friends I've had a recurring conversation about the idiocy of Homeland Security, the outrageous tax bill, the naked grab for power through the courts and Patriot Act. They have counterparts on the Hill -- see Olympia Snow, for example, a person who deserves and gets tremendous respect. But you two are no Olympia Snowe! This is a game for you and it's nasty, tasteless, inconsiderate, humorless in the extreme, and very, very arrogant.
We sometimes, I think, forget that the terms 'conservative' and 'liberal' actually mean something, and aren't just abritrary nomen like 'skins' and 'shirts'.
"Liberal", of course, is from the root 'lib' and means 'to be free from the constraints of morals and community responsibility' (as in 'libido', for example).
"Conservative", on the other hand, from the allied roots 'con', meaning 'love of truth' and 'servo', meaning 'to act on the behest of God and His chosen Representative while here in the best of all possible nations'
IMO, the main problem in Conservative-to-Liberal discourse is the culture of discussion. I visited the Web site of
Rush Limbaugh, and I was unpleasantly surprised with the following:
Quote:where so much of that so-called Iraqi culture was lost forever
Iraqi dictator was a SOB, his removal was IMO absolutely justified, but this does not deprive Mesopotamia of the title of the cradle of the human civilization.
The same lack of good taste may be found on the extreme liberal Web sites as well (people that frequently visit the latter may find examples themselves).
Doesn't this just prove that a middle ground is the only option?
Good taste?! To label Iraq's culture as 'so called'??! It isn't a matter of taste, for Christs sake, like being polite or putting out cookies for guests. It is a matter of deeply insufficient education and idiot level nationalism.
I do not think that Mr. Limbaugh did not study in a college: it is virtually impossible to find a decent job in the USA without college degree. Good taste he lacks, education, IMO, is quite OK.
At the urging of his father, Limbaugh attended Southeast Missouri State University but dropped out after three semesters.
That really is a problem, Blatham, the labelling. I remember on Abuzz, among a group of mutually supportive liberals, finding that any variation on the theme was not liked at all. My own beliefs seem to come from both the "far left" and the "centrist right" (which is why Howard Dean is such a favorite at this point). The conspiracy theorists believe (or so they've been saying on their radio show lately) that it serves the powers that be that we divide ourselves into two, but not more than two, groups, which can be played off each other and manipulated more easily. I think there's something in that: there was an interesting critique of the NYTimes back around 1999 opining that the NYTimes writes as though it wants a single, slightly alternating, but basically the same power group. Sure reads that way to me.
Tartarin wrote:Craven and Sofia, you've lost my respect, at least for the time being.
tartarin,
If your respect is contingient on me accepting your ratiocination when I find it intellectually bankrupt your disrespect for me will not be temporary. This was not a game, I find your rationale on this thread devoid of reason and your bias untoward.
This is a game for you and it's nasty, tasteless, inconsiderate, humorless in the extreme, and very, very arrogant.
-------------------------------------------------
Provide proof of anything I have said that supports your accusation above. You seem to have gone off the deep end.
Well, Limbaugh has probably heard about the female orgasm too, but that doesn't mean he has any familiarity with the subject.
I should add here that my etymologies on the previous page (for 'liberal' and 'conservative') were false.
Tartarin
Yes. As if there were but two options for matters as complex as governance of a sophisticated modern society. You might recall, some months ago I related anthropologist Claude Levis Strauss's notion that we tend to form our thinking on a structure of binary opposites (at a basic level, though more sophisticated differentiations can occur beyond that). It's a notion I find completely compelling.
So I guess my take on things would be that those who wish to manipulate will use whatever weaknesses we display (greed, fear, discomfort with complexity).
I wanted to add also that you have written some remarkable posts recently, and I take my hat off to you.
