Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 64,445
|
Post by Tennesseer on Aug 23, 2013 9:20:12 GMT -5
Is there anything to the right of Virgil? In fairness, I do not consider Virgil "to the right". Virgil happens to really zero in on an argument's "hot buttons" and able to discuss the issues in a rational manner, driving lefties to mass hysteria. The only issue he even comes close to being "to the right" is abortion issues, and even there he has the Supreme being on his side. I wish I could keep my emotions in check as well as he is able to when posting here. He is kind of like the computer Hal, in the classic movie, 2001 A Space Oddessy Unfortunately that is a bad analogy, because we know Hal had issues of his own, but darn, he carried on a good conversation And since Virgil is the computer geek here and has not made anyone from the far left disappear from the board through sleight of a few keystrokes, unlike some mods here, he cannot be that far to the right. Note: this is an observation, not a critique of moderation. You have a very odd definition of critique.
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Aug 23, 2013 9:29:12 GMT -5
Oh, for goodness' sake, Value Buy! I wasn't referring to Virgil's political stance! Virgil is a Canadian. Their politics have nothing to do with the US. There's nothing to anybody's "right" on this message board except the edge of their monitor! Did you fail to see the smilies? As to moderators making posters "disappear", that doesn't happen without the board owner's approval. If someone cannot obey the rules here, they may find themselves on the outside, looking in. The fault lies with that poster. Get over it.
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Aug 23, 2013 9:37:15 GMT -5
Oh, for goodness' sake, Value Buy! I wasn't referring to Virgil's political stance! Virgil is a Canadian. Their politics have nothing to do with the US. There's nothing to anybody's "right" on this message board except the edge of their monitor! Did you fail to see the smilies? As to moderators making posters "disappear", that doesn't happen without the board owner's approval. If someone cannot obey the rules here, they may find themselves on the outside, looking in. The fault lies with that poster. Get over it. Cmon, mmhmm, you and Tenn are reading too much into it. I know you were not referring to Virgil's political stance, as you said "anything to the right", not "anyone to the right" of Virgil. We all know that would be PBP And I am way over it. I only stated what I said about moderators to show there are objects way to the left of Virgil here, and I wanted everyone to know I was not critiqueing mods, which is verboten....maybe I should just throw in some allowed obscenities and let it go at that. (enough said on that issue ) I knew Tenn would comment either way I posted or not posted on the last sentence of my post.
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Aug 23, 2013 9:41:47 GMT -5
What I "read into" that, Value Buy, was exactly what you said. You turned my comment political. I did not. You're the one who mentioned Virgil's stance on abortion. I did not. Nice try, though.
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Aug 23, 2013 9:59:41 GMT -5
What I "read into" that, Value Buy, was exactly what you said. You turned my comment political. I did not. You're the one who mentioned Virgil's stance on abortion. I did not. Nice try, though. Upon further review, you are correct. I did mention Virgil's achille's heel, and interjected "values" but not necessarily "political view", imo Oh well, we have serious thread drift occurring. I think I have to find a rodeo somewhere Labor Day weekend, and see what political statements are being made out there in the Heartland.
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Aug 23, 2013 10:24:57 GMT -5
ROFL! Well, alrighty then!
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,449
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 23, 2013 11:56:53 GMT -5
really? the networks covered the body count? the only coverage i remember made the war look like a video game. I guess you never watched ABC news or their Sunday political morning shows. They read the name of soldiers lost in the war every week, with names on the screen i wasn't referring to our soldiers. but thanks for clearing that up.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Aug 23, 2013 11:56:55 GMT -5
What I "read into" that, Value Buy, was exactly what you said. You turned my comment political. I did not. You're the one who mentioned Virgil's stance on abortion. I did not. Nice try, though. I think I have to find a rodeo somewhere Labor Day weekend, and see what political statements are being made out there in the Heartland. I'm sorry, Value Buy. I can't let you do that.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Aug 23, 2013 12:03:30 GMT -5
Right, left? Conservative, liberal? Centrist? Independent? Collectivist, individualist? Communist, fascist, capitalist, socialist, Marxist? What do labels matter save for labeling things? As long as we don't allow our labels to feed back and hijack our opinions, they're mere contrivances of language. A wise sailor once said, "I am what I am and that's all that I am."
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,449
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 23, 2013 12:16:21 GMT -5
Right, left? Conservative, liberal? Centrist? Independent? Collectivist, individualist? Communist, fascist, capitalist, socialist, Marxist? What do labels matter save for labeling things? the Western Mind makes sense of the universe by creating dichotomies. there is another way to do things, but it is not really useful to fight it, Virgil.As long as we don't allow our labels to feed back and hijack our opinions, they're mere contrivances of language. A wise sailor once said, "I am what I am and that's all that I am." this is a very interesting position, considering what you think of the term "liberal", which has been hijacked for over half a century.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Aug 23, 2013 15:35:52 GMT -5
Right, left? Conservative, liberal? Centrist? Independent? Collectivist, individualist? Communist, fascist, capitalist, socialist, Marxist? What do labels matter save for labeling things? the Western Mind makes sense of the universe by creating dichotomies. there is another way to do things, but it is not really useful to fight it, Virgil.As long as we don't allow our labels to feed back and hijack our opinions, they're mere contrivances of language. A wise sailor once said, "I am what I am and that's all that I am." this is a very interesting position, considering what you think of the term "liberal", which has been hijacked for over half a century. It's precisely why I accepted the hijacked definition. The few ideas and individuals I call "liberal" fully conform to the label. They come as a package, so to speak. It's not surprising that values and ideals come in packages. We all have our friends and our adversaries on these boards. All of us (myself included) are more inclined to go after our adversaries and spare our friends. It tends to polarize us into two camps. And certain research suggests that "conservative" versus "liberal" depends on how people prioritize values. Since stances on individual issues are largely determined by the highest priority value, it's not surprising that we should find strong correlations. Still, I do endeavour to step outside the conservative "group" on issues where I don't agree with the majority conservative position. On these boards, that means I'm at odds with most conservatives about public healthcare, optimal levels of taxation, war, and a variety of other issues. Socially I'm well to the right, but that's the only place worth being.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,449
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 23, 2013 15:44:22 GMT -5
this is a very interesting position, considering what you think of the term "liberal", which has been hijacked for over half a century. It's precisely why I accepted the hijacked definition. oh, dear lord. i give up.
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Aug 23, 2013 15:49:57 GMT -5
Right, left? Conservative, liberal? Centrist? Independent? Collectivist, individualist? Communist, fascist, capitalist, socialist, Marxist? What do labels matter save for labeling things? As long as we don't allow our labels to feed back and hijack our opinions, they're mere contrivances of language. A wise sailor once said, "I am what I am and that's all that I am." That's "I yam", not "I am", Virgil. Get it right!
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Aug 23, 2013 16:46:51 GMT -5
It's precisely why I accepted the hijacked definition. oh, dear lord. i give up. When I gave you the contemporary definition of "liberal" and asked you to provide a more appropriate term that I could use instead, you responded with (and I quote) "big government republican with liberal religious positions". I told you then that you were off your nut if you thought I was going to type that out (along with the disclaimer that republican ≠ Republican) rather than use the hijacked definition. If you've since come up with a term that comprises my definition of modern liberalism, I'd welcome it. Note that I already suggested "malprogressivism" as an alternative, which you didn't care for.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,449
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 23, 2013 16:49:17 GMT -5
oh, dear lord. i give up. When I gave you the contemporary definition of "liberal" the contemporary definition of the word liberal is in the dictionary, Virgil. the dictionary is an index of USAGE, after all. edit: www.merriam-webster.com/help/faq/words_in.htm
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,449
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 23, 2013 16:50:46 GMT -5
If you've since come up with a term that comprises my definition of modern liberalism, I'd welcome it. Note that I already suggested "malprogressivism" as an alternative, which you didn't care for. i don't remember you offering that term. but whether you did or not, that one is fine by me.
|
|
NoNamePerson
Distinguished Associate
Is There Anybody OUT There?
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 17:03:17 GMT -5
Posts: 26,199
Location: WITNESS PROTECTION
|
Post by NoNamePerson on Aug 23, 2013 16:54:09 GMT -5
Right, left? Conservative, liberal? Centrist? Independent? Collectivist, individualist? Communist, fascist, capitalist, socialist, Marxist? What do labels matter save for labeling things? As long as we don't allow our labels to feed back and hijack our opinions, they're mere contrivances of language. A wise sailor once said, "I am what I am and that's all that I am." That's "I yam", not "I am", Virgil. Get it right! I love Yams And yes I know this is P&M thread - pissing and moaning contest!!!
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Aug 23, 2013 18:30:14 GMT -5
When I gave you the contemporary definition of "liberal" the contemporary definition of the word liberal is in the dictionary, Virgil. the dictionary is an index of USAGE, after all. edit: www.merriam-webster.com/help/faq/words_in.htmAnd we have twice argued at length whether the dictionary definition is an anachronism. My answer is still "yes". Six months from now it will still be "yes". You're going to be banging your head for a good long while if you're expecting me to come onside. ETA: Incidentally, my problem with the dictionaries isn't that I disagree with their definitions. I often use "liberal" in the sense(s) in which they define it. My problem with the dictionaries is that they fail to include the contemporary definition as an additional definition. It is my strong suspicion that they do so because the contemporary definition is a pejorative. This is what I consider anachronistic about them. And yes, I realize you live in a world where Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and thirteen other people, most of which curiously happen to reside on this message board, are the only ones who use "liberal" in the pejorative sense.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Aug 23, 2013 19:04:53 GMT -5
Right, left? Conservative, liberal? Centrist? Independent? Collectivist, individualist? Communist, fascist, capitalist, socialist, Marxist? What do labels matter save for labeling things? As long as we don't allow our labels to feed back and hijack our opinions, they're mere contrivances of language. A wise sailor once said, "I am what I am and that's all that I am." The entirety of all communication in life is a contrivance of language.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Aug 23, 2013 19:06:28 GMT -5
And we have twice argued at length whether the dictionary definition is an anachronism. My answer is still "yes". Six months from now it will still be "yes". You're going to be banging your head for a good long while if you're expecting me to come onside. ETA: Incidentally, my problem with the dictionaries isn't that I disagree with their definitions. I often use "liberal" in the sense(s) in which they define it. My problem with the dictionaries is that they fail to include the contemporary definition as an additional definition. It is my strong suspicion that they do so because the contemporary definition is a pejorative. This is what I consider anachronistic about them. And yes, I realize you live in a world where Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and thirteen other people, most of which curiously happen to reside on this message board, are the only ones who use "liberal" in the pejorative sense. It wasn't a pejorative when liberals hijacked it. That's why they hijacked it.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,449
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 23, 2013 19:33:24 GMT -5
Right, left? Conservative, liberal? Centrist? Independent? Collectivist, individualist? Communist, fascist, capitalist, socialist, Marxist? What do labels matter save for labeling things? As long as we don't allow our labels to feed back and hijack our opinions, they're mere contrivances of language. A wise sailor once said, "I am what I am and that's all that I am." The entirety of all communication in life is a contrivance of language. words have meaning. otherwise, you sound like a Kurt Schwitters recording:
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,449
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 23, 2013 19:35:26 GMT -5
And we have twice argued at length whether the dictionary definition is an anachronism. My answer is still "yes". Six months from now it will still be "yes".. the dictionary is reviewed over twice a year. in fact, it is reviewed continuously. this might call into question the objectivity of your "reality". if you were interested in such things it would, anyway.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,449
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 23, 2013 19:45:58 GMT -5
ETA: Incidentally, my problem with the dictionaries isn't that I disagree with their definitions. I often use "liberal" in the sense(s) in which they define it. My problem with the dictionaries is that they fail to include the contemporary definition as an additional definition. It is my strong suspicion that they do so because the contemporary definition is a pejorative. well that would certainly give you the moral fortitude to carry on in your silly crusade if you actually believed that. of course, in order to believe that you would have to believe that there was a mass conspiracy to preserve the positive meaning of the word liberal, and that this coordinated effort spread across many private companies, in competition with one another, on different continents. you would also have to believe that public commentary over the new "proper use" of this word would not reach said publications in a way that influenced them, or that their editors turned a blind eye to such criticism. or, you would have to believe (which apparently you don't, judging by your use of the term anachronism) that the people that wrote dictionaries were like constitutional "originalists", unbending to popular trends in meaning in order to "preserve" language. are you familiar with the term "Occam's Razor"?
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Aug 23, 2013 19:53:13 GMT -5
How is "Dictionary editors don't want to royally peeve 50% of their potential readership over one lousy, heavily disputed word definition." not sufficiently simple for you?
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,449
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 23, 2013 19:53:33 GMT -5
And we have twice argued at length whether the dictionary definition is an anachronism. My answer is still "yes". Six months from now it will still be "yes". You're going to be banging your head for a good long while if you're expecting me to come onside. ETA: Incidentally, my problem with the dictionaries isn't that I disagree with their definitions. I often use "liberal" in the sense(s) in which they define it. My problem with the dictionaries is that they fail to include the contemporary definition as an additional definition. It is my strong suspicion that they do so because the contemporary definition is a pejorative. This is what I consider anachronistic about them. And yes, I realize you live in a world where Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and thirteen other people, most of which curiously happen to reside on this message board, are the only ones who use "liberal" in the pejorative sense. It wasn't a pejorative when liberals hijacked it. That's why they hijacked it. that is verifiably false. liberals never hijacked the term, and you know it. if you dredge up that old quote that you are so fond of, it was made by a communist, not a liberal. and he plainly states that since liberalism has a positive sheen to it, that communism could ride it's coattails. and he said so KNOWING that the two philosophies were incompatible, or it would not have been much to chuckle about. it didn't really turn out that way. communism went the same way as fascism after the war. but moreover, once the red scare started, liberals and communists got lumped in together by the right, anyway. the fact that liberals flirted with Marxism is no surprise, really. Lincoln flirted with Marxism, including having several Marxists in his cabinet. the love affair was largely over by the Cold War, however. but right wing lunatics have been playing the card as if it weren't ever since. there was a major rift in "the left" in the 60's and 70's. the old left kept on with the same collectivism that fell out of favor. the new left moved on. i am sure that, as a conservative, none of that interests you.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Aug 23, 2013 20:02:02 GMT -5
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,449
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 23, 2013 20:02:54 GMT -5
How is "Dictionary editors don't want to royally peeve 50% of their potential readership over one lousy, heavily disputed word definition." not sufficiently simple for you? you just made two scurrilous presumptions: 1) that 50% of their readership would give a crap. 2) that the other 50% that presumably hate liberals would not make up for it with enthusiastic fervor.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,449
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 23, 2013 20:06:47 GMT -5
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,449
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 23, 2013 20:11:10 GMT -5
Virgil: just out of curiosity, what do you think that the RESPONSE of 50% of dictionary readers would be if they did NOT like definition "X"?
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Aug 23, 2013 20:14:58 GMT -5
How is "Dictionary editors don't want to royally peeve 50% of their potential readership over one lousy, heavily disputed word definition." not sufficiently simple for you? you just made two scurrilous presumptions: 1) that 50% of their readership would give a crap. 2) that the other 50% that presumably hate liberals would not make up for it with enthusiastic fervor. "Scurrilous" assumptions? They're running around with the maid or something? As for the UD definition, I picked the one I figured you'd agree with. Have a good weekend, sir.
|
|