The Al Realpolitik Institute of Sulfur Mining & Extraction

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Certainly some southerners hunt, but I'd agree with you that it's more of a midwestern/western thing.  Hunting is very big around here (dear, turkey, pheasant) and it was kind of big in suburban St.Louis where I grew up (mostly just dear).  Dear in the south tend to be smaller 'cause of the heat.

...and every kind of person goes camping.

Wonderful burn.

[Badger]

Anyway, this is a predictably dismal thread. The idea that Islam is uniquely violent - or that the forms of violence associated with the Islamic world are unique to it - is bogus and bigoted, but the well-intended defences of Islam that tend to get wheeled out (and have been here) are pathetically weak and all too often rely on bad history.

Yet another high handed judgement without feeling the need to elaborate and exemplify his critique or engage in a debate. Basically just: "I am so smart and you are all so  stupid."

Hits too close to home?

Is that a good burn? Its a standard line you can always fall back on if you have nothing really clever to say.

OK, I'll elaborate. You are exactly the kind of know-nothing unapologetically Islamaphobic bigot whom Al referred to, so it's not surprising you would offer a substanceless generic retort to his rather insightful observation.

Nonstandard enough for you?

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

interesting moderating strategy you have there, Badger.

[Badger]

interesting moderating strategy you have there, Badger.

I started off subtle, but then was asked for elaboration, which I gave.

I don't (or at least rarely) don't post things I'd infract, and don't infract things I might post.

[politicus]

OK, I'll elaborate. You are exactly the kind of know-nothing unapologetically Islamaphobic bigot whom Al referred to, so it's not surprising you would offer a substanceless generic retort to his rather insightful observation.

Nonstandard enough for you?

That is incorrect, if you look at the thread Al's answer was:

Anyway, this is a predictably dismal thread. The idea that Islam is uniquely violent - or that the forms of violence associated with the Islamic world are unique to it - is bogus and bigoted, but the well-intended defences of Islam that tend to get wheeled out (and have been here) are pathetically weak and all too often rely on bad history.

Quote from: politicus on October 04, 2014, 11:49:35 am
Quote from: Sibboleth on October 04, 2014, 11:23:14 am
..but the well-intended defences of Islam that tend to get wheeled out (and have been here) are pathetically weak and all too often rely on bad history.

Me: "Saying Islam has a complex history and exists in various shapes is neither a defense, nor a display of "weak history". Its just a warning against the simplistic arguments made by many in this thread."

Al: "That's not what I was getting at."


And while I am not an expert on the topic I am not a know-nothing on the Islamic world, especially not the history of Islam.

Also, if you look at my two comments in that thread prior to Al's post it is pretty clear that if I was covered by Al's critique I could only be among "the well intended people trying to defend Islam".

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

interesting moderating strategy you have there, Badger.

I started off subtle, but then was asked for elaboration, which I gave.

I don't (or at least rarely) don't post things I'd infract, and don't infract things I might post.

You just really seem to enjoy spamming the troll mines lately.

[Keystone Phil]

interesting moderating strategy you have there, Badger.

Yeah, he has zero business moderating. There really isn't even room for debate on the subject.

[they don't love you like i love you]

Most importantly, dealing with mental illness does not take away from your value as a human being. Too many posts here - most of them Bushie's - imply otherwise.

I've followed this saga closely for the past few months and I'm increasingly angry at Bushie for this reason. His attitude is insulting to millions of Americans who seek help from psychiatrists for the purposes of treating their DSM-diagnosed pathologies but still manage to pursue successful careers, raise children and contribute to society. These people don't deserve to be implicitly denigrated by an obese moron who is blind to reality.

I'm past the point of wishing Bushie well so that he can get the help he needs. If he participates in the perpetuation of prejudicial attitudes towards the mentally unwell, he hardly deserves treatment or help.

[politicus]

interesting moderating strategy you have there, Badger.

I started off subtle, but then was asked for elaboration, which I gave.

I don't (or at least rarely) don't post things I'd infract, and don't infract things I might post.

False. I questioned the quality of the burn, I never asked for an elaboration of your motivation for nominating it.

As evidenced by your endless feuding with Phil you are just the kind of person that don't like to let your opponents have the last word (which would generally be the proper approach for a mod that is supposed to secure a good debating climate, not escalate conflicts). Even if you somehow felt the need to give a comeback you could easily have given a non-escalating reply such as "Yes, I think it was a good burn, because it was accurate and to the point", but instead you chose to go on the attack, as you also do every single time Phil provokes you.

I am a belligerent type myself, so I certainly understand you, but if you are the sort of person that just can't handle to let your opponents have the last word, then you should realize that you probably aren't the right kind of man to moderate a political internet forum and act accordingly.

(this is a test Badger - let's see if you can handle not replying to this post..)

[Badger]

interesting moderating strategy you have there, Badger.

Yeah, he has zero business moderating. There really isn't even room for debate on the subject.

Hi Phil! Should I run and report this for trolling or whine about your obsession with me now?

Oh wait, I'm not you.

[Keystone Phil]

interesting moderating strategy you have there, Badger.

Yeah, he has zero business moderating. There really isn't even room for debate on the subject.

Hi Phil! Should I run and report this for trolling or whine about your obsession with me now?

Oh wait, I'm not you.

I actually never even post about you or in response to you unless it's a rebuttal to whatever you're whining about regarding my behavior. I only posted it because you started up again elsewhere. It's like every three weeks, you'll appear and start nonsense. Objectively, you have no business being a moderator and it's not just your interactions with me.

[windjammer]

You can vote? I thought you were like twelve.

[Badger]

interesting moderating strategy you have there, Badger.

I started off subtle, but then was asked for elaboration, which I gave.

I don't (or at least rarely) don't post things I'd infract, and don't infract things I might post.

False. I questioned the quality of the burn, I never asked for an elaboration of your motivation for nominating it.

As evidenced by your endless feuding with Phil you are just the kind of person that don't like to let your opponents have the last word (which would generally be the proper approach for a mod that is supposed to secure a good debating climate, not escalate conflicts). Even if you somehow felt the need to give a comeback you could easily have given a non-escalating reply such as "Yes, I think it was a good burn, because it was accurate and to the point", but instead you chose to go on the attack, as you also do every single time Phil provokes you.

I am a belligerent type myself, so I certainly understand you, but if you are the sort of person that just can't handle to let your opponents have the last word, then you should realize that you probably aren't the right kind of man to moderate a political internet forum and act accordingly.

(this is a test Badger - let's see if you can handle not replying to this post..)

Well, I guess I failed your test then.

I will say that I overreached some in the term "know nothing", which you clearly aren't. That said, your response to Al's post, to which I responded, was more than a tad aggressive and unfounded itself. In context of both that initial post and your reply to me, IMHO my post was....well, at least less over the top.

While on the one hand my characterization wasn't entirely out of left field considering your posting history including such gems as:

Its not racist to dislike Islam.

I actually somewhat agree with your analysis here:

On the one hand Islam never had a reformation (and the following counterreformation) or an Age of Enlightenment, and it's a Law Religion with detailed prescriptions of behaviour, but on the other hand it also changed over the centuries. In the Middle East Islam became markedly more reactionary and narrowminded in the 18th century and AFAIK the reason exactly why this happened is not clear.

Regarding Islam's potential for change and coexistence with Western values it is worth noticing that Judaism is also a law religion and it has produced liberal versions - especially in the US - so why shouldn't Islam be able to do this under the right circumstances? Euro-Islam is already under development as a version adapted to the West. Also fx Turkish Alavism and versions of Sufism are far more liberal in many ways than mainstream Sunism or Shiism.

While IMO you are willing to paint Islam with far too broadly a brush (albeit not universally), you clearly have at least some basis and depth to your views.

So if my offering a partial retraction of my post (albeit mixed with a partial defense) is (mis)interpreted as a sign of my simply "having to get the last word", well, so be it.

[Pessimistic Antineutrino]

Let me let you in on a secret. Sawx is a bit of a hack

Never mind that I've said that Gardner would win if he could cover up his more socially conservative views (which he does have, for the record) from the moment he entered the race. Never mind that Beauprez said the exact same comments as Mitt Romney did in his infamous 47% video, got embarrassed by Bill Ritter eight years ago, and that he essentially said that he didn't believe Obama was born here. Never mind that Gardner has proven himself to actually have the discipline to portray himself as socially moderate, probably would have won by more than 11 in his old district had the Constitution Party not run another candidate, and never mind that he can actually shut the f**k up unlike Beauprez, I'm a hack because THE POLLS SAID SO. Even though Quinnipiac has a shoddy track record in Colorado, and polls usually come around to the Democrats again.

You know what? People like you are why this section of the board is an utter sh*tshow that's only saving grace is that it's not The Great Atlas Hillaryjerk (better known as the 2016 board). You have the hacks (from both sides, might I add) on both sides, but as far as elections goes, you're so divorced from reality that you make Oldiesfreak look like a moderate hero. Maybe if you think everyone who disagrees with you is a hack, you should take some time to stop masturbating to Paul Ryan's workout pictures and take a good look at yourself.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Not a burn, but a great rebuttal.

Mondale at the time, Gus Hall in retrospect.

Voting for the CP after 1932 is basically voting Democratic anyway, so its not like it would be a real big difference.

Moral of the story is to not vote for candidates because the party name sounds nice.

[Grumpier Than Thou]

Not a burn, but a great rebuttal.

Mondale at the time, Gus Hall in retrospect.

Voting for the CP after 1932 is basically voting Democratic anyway, so its not like it would be a real big difference.

Moral of the story is to not vote for candidates because the party name sounds nice.

When it's a protest vote because both of the major party candidates are terrible, it doesn't really matter who you go with, which was my thought process in choosing Hall.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Not a burn, but a great rebuttal.

Mondale at the time, Gus Hall in retrospect.

Voting for the CP after 1932 is basically voting Democratic anyway, so its not like it would be a real big difference.

Moral of the story is to not vote for candidates because the party name sounds nice.

When it's a protest vote because both of the major party candidates are terrible, it doesn't really matter who you go with, which was my thought process in choosing Hall.

Why not vote for the New Alliance or the SWP, legitimate socialist parties....?

[Grumpier Than Thou]

Why not vote for the New Alliance or the SWP, legitimate socialist parties....?

Again, if it's a protest vote, I could literally vote for a Libertarian. It's more about the protest element, at least for me.

[traininthedistance]

The problem with Obama is that he doesn't want to play the political game. Would closing the border actually do anything to solve the problem? No. But it's the optics that count here. You gotta make the people feel like something is being done, even if it's all theater.

Thank you, Leaf

So you're willing to admit you care more about the theater than actually doing something worthwhile?

Appearances do matter.

Indeed they do. You, for example, do a very convincing job of making yourself appear even more brainless than you probably are.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Another BRTD parody thread.

Thank goodness we have you around to help explain these things.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Context:

Friendly reminder that you're a grown man.

[SPC]

PPP is very good in Colorado so yeah, not a good poll for Udall. Hickenlooper is in much better shape

I'm glad you've come around my good man, it was not long ago you were posting stuff like this:

It turns out "bactored" means bacterial feed supplement for the use in aquaculture.

http://www.innovus.co.za/pdf_licensing_opportunities.php?pdf=783

Well Mr. Bacterial Feed Supplement, what say we have a wager, you and I.

I'm betting that BOTH Udall and Hickenlooper will win. In order for me to win, both have to win. If both or just one of them loses, you are a victor. Sounds good, no?

If I win

- You must change the color of your avatar from blue to red.
- You must admit you are retarded when it comes to Colorado politics
- You must have a picture of Mark Udall's face in your sig.

If you win

- I change the color of my avatar from red to blue
- I admit I'm retarded when it comes to Colorado politics
- I put a picture of Zooey Deschanel's face in my sig.

Come on big guy, what do you say?

[Chance92]

Cory Gardner is dominating with white voters.

Yes yes yes, we know. We know how much you love white voters and that you think they're the ultimate arbiters of everything right with the world. We know.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

have you been taking typing lessons from dead0man?

[Antonio the Sixth]

Cross-posted:

Waiting for confirmation from a credible firm, but this seems reasonable.

You guys are unbelievable.  If it's a joke firm, it's a joke firm.  And its results are crap and not reason for optimism or pessimism.

The Complete Idiot's Guide to X's Previous Post in This Thread

This post is dedicated to Rockefeller GOP!  Wherever you are Rocky, know that without your lack of reading comprehension skills, none of this would be necessary.


Introduction: Sometimes my posts in this thread can be confusing, some have even called them "unbelievable."  Fortunately, help is one the way  Whether you're mystified by complex phrases like "this seems reasonable" or baffled by fancy five-dollar words like "confirmation" and "waiting," after reading this post, you too will be able to understand a very short post I made in this thread.  Prepare to believe the "unbelievable!"

Part 1: In my previous post, the phrase "Waiting for confirmation..." meant that I am not going to read too much into this poll until there is more evidence to support its findings.

Part 2: In my previous post, the phrase "...from a credible firm" meant that I do not consider Rasmussen a remotely reliable polling company and that the evidence supporting this poll which I mentioned in Part 1 would need to come from a more reliable polling company.  Note: Some readers may need to refer back to Part 1 for reference."

Part 3: In my previous post, the word "but" was being used to link the final part of the sentence fragment to the part discussed in Part 1 and Part 2.

Part 4: In my previous post, the phrase "this seems reasonable" meant that I found the results of this poll believable and thought that they made sense, despite coming from Rasmussen.

See what critics are saying about The Complete Idiot's Guide to X's Previous Post in This Thread:

- Rockefeller GOP says its "unbelievable" and "...a reason for optimism"
- Read the post Krazen calls "Dominating!"
- "Ken Buck, Ken Buck?  Colorado.  Ken Buck.  KEN BUCK.  2010.  Ken Buck" writes Keystone Phil
- "Why does everyone hate me?" asks kitten whiskers