Life was so much easier when stereotypes would pass for fact, and winning meant never having to say you're sorry.
Contained in the notes of Dr. James McHenry, one of Maryland’s delegates to the Constitutional Convention and the namesake of Fort McHenry, there is a report of a famous anecdotal conversation between a "Mrs. Powel" of Philadelphia and Benjamin Franklin. In response to Mrs. Powel's question as to the nature of the government produced by the Convention, Franklin is alleged to have replied, "A Republic - if you can keep it."…
Article comments
— go to most recent comments26 - Clavos
Or, your reading comprehension in English is somewhat deficient.
Given the number of times you've completely misinterpreted other people's posts on these threads, this is most likely the case.
27 - roger nowosielski
And Mark,
Your remark that "I fear that bourgeois ideology has rendered me a hopeless individualist" doesn't quite stand scrutiny when examined in terms of what you seem to practice.
If you were an individualist, then at least you'd grant me the right to think for myself rather than at every turn, so it seems, trying to have me subscribe to your meanings, thoughts, and opinions.
28 - M ark
Rog, you have every right to your bizarre linguistic turns.
I merely felt that your accusation of stereotyping was unfair given the clear alternative interpretation.
29 - Dan(Miller)
MIWASP probably means "Mostly Insignificant Wrongly Abusive Scary Paranoids."
Oh well. Acronyms can be such fun.
Dan(Miller)
30 - roger nowosielski
It wasn't an accusation but an open question. Joanne has a perfect right to respond, and I would very much welcome her to do so. In part, the question - and I repeat, the question - was put in the first place in light of some of her past writings. And no, I don't buy into the idea that we're all authentic speakers. If anything, I suspect that precisely the opposite is the case.
And BTW, I really these kinds of interventions don't do much good IMO to foster communication between people - in this case, between myself and Joanne - but have the effect, rather, of making the situation more antagonistic to the point that all discussion breaks down. I'm not saying that such was your intention; nonetheless, I'm just pointing this out so you might consider it in the future.
No hard feelings,
Roger
31 - roger nowosielski
To reduce it to a one-liner, Mark, in case you fail to understand my drift:
I COULD give Joanne's remark a sympathetic reading. For reasons of my own - which you may or may not question, and that's beside the point really - I choose not to!
32 - Baronius
But in actual practice, Roger, nearly every attempt you've made to tease out a possible contrary meaning in a comment has ended badly. There's been no breakthrough or improvement in communication. Frequently, people don't even respond because they're not sure how you're reading their comments. (It took me a while to figure out how you interpreted "transcend".) When you consider this thread, more than half of the comments have been confused responses to your query. That's not communication; it's the opposite.
33 - M ark
No problem, Rog. And I'll feel free to choose to give you my interpretation when I think that you've misread something.
34 - zingzing
doug hunter: "Another childish name calling hate filled racist rant by a leftist. It's sad that this is all you got."
you're kidding, must be. all the left has got left?
35 - roger nowosielski
Baronius,
Whatever the case, and it's your opinion, that's my strategy, and your or anybody else's interference only obfuscates the issue.
As a matter of fact, you are wrong. If you check out the thread on recent Khan's article, you'll see that this is not the case. And that it was only as a result of my persistent questioning, despite the usual "well-meaning" opposition, that Khan owned up (as it were) and provided additional information.
But whatever, I don't really understand either the point of or the motivation behind your remark, other than perhaps you're just eager to jump on the bandwagon.
Whatever suits you.
36 - roger nowosielski
Mark,
It works both ways, Mark, and I for one have no problem with that - so long as both you and I realize that no one has a monopoly on meanings. Fair enough?
Besides, I wish you would really get away from the simplistic model whereby all uses of language are descriptive. It is, really, a tool box, and the uses of it are multifarious - depending of course on the intention of the speaker. So it would help a great deal if you were somewhat mindful of that rather than try to reduce the seeming controversy to the most simple of terms.
Peace
Roger
37 - Clavos
Obfuscate, obfuscate, obfuscate...
38 - zingzing
love, love, love...
39 - roger nowosielski
I you want to keep on perpetuating the impression of being a buffoon - and it's beyond me why an intelligent person such as you would care to do that - be my guest.
40 - Clavos
Love's overrated, zing...
41 - zingzing
oh, i don't think it's overrated. i've got ambivalent feelings about it, really. sucks rules sucks rules sucks rules.
42 - Ruvy
I have vivid memories of America living under the rule of the WASPS, ignorant or otherwise, and their gradual downfall.
Unfortunately, what replaced the WASPS was a pathetic mellow merde "guilty liberalism" that allowed plutocrats in America to still steal and steal America's patrimony from right out of their pockets. Obama and Bush are identical in this respect - both either allowed or are allowing plutocrats to impoverish Americans - more quickly under the Blessed of Hussein, but nevertheless the game remains the same.
And apparently, even blacks in America are beginning to wake up to the piece of shit they stuck in the White House. The tragedy is that it does not matter whether Americans had elected McCain or Obama - both are shit and both are doing the same things under different labels.
43 - roger nowosielski
This is just pure venom, Ruvy, "the piece of shit they stuck in the White House." It's below the level of any intelligent discussion.
I'm sorry to hear that you're being so activated by your emotion.
44 - Ruvy
Roger, I calls it as I sees it. Obama is a piece of shit, and nothing better. Bush was also a piece of shit - I don't want you to get the wrong idea - and so would McCain have been.
All you have to govern your once great country is second rate garbage. Roger, at this point, you'd be better off in Poland - people there aren't being kicked out of their homes as the government prepares a dictatorship for you to live under.
The US of A is a fuckin' joke. And it ain't funny, Roger. It's tragic.
45 - roger nowosielski
We sow what we reap.
46 - Cindy
ummmm, we do???
sorry! lol
47 - Clavos
Heh...
48 - Ruvy
Roger,
We sow what we reap.
You really should stop sucking on your toes so you can enjoy your wine. If you want to wag you self-righteousness at me, at least do it right.
"We reap what we sow."
Of course tailors have different rules to live by. Because they generally don't know any better, they tend to sew what they reap. Pulling the stitches out of Wheaties or kashe-varnishkes can be very time consuming.
49 - roger nowosielski
Whatever, Ruvy. I don't edit my comments.
But yours, on the nature of "Obama is a piece of shit, and nothing better," is not a matter of simple editing but as far as I'm concerned, expression of your soul. And I'm not an Obama lover, so don't misunderstand me.
So stay well. I really can't relate to you any longer.
50 - Cindy
2 down
51 - roger nowosielski
The Princess has spoken. I suggest she minds her own business. Or would you rather call me again and apologize?
52 - roger nowosielski
Or shall I reveal the contents of email communications to some such effect?
Just keep on pushing.
53 - Cindy
Actually Roger, when I called you for help with my article, it was very tiring. Since you never let a person talk or really care at all what they're saying. It's not much pleasure having to actually ask someone to be allowed a chance to speak so many times.
But, still, you sounded like a nice person. Not at all like one that would do what you are trying to do now.
Christopher said it best when he said your transmit works fine but
54 - Cindy
...your receive doesn't work so well.
I can't imagine Blocritics will put up with threatening posters because they remark on your comments.
55 - roger nowosielski
I am not about to do any of that. Just don't like snotty comments from anyone. If you keep your distance, so will I.
56 - Cindy
There is nothing in any e-mail that I wouldn't want seen by anyone. That your making threats and insinuations is scary. I think you have a real problem.
57 - Cindy
I have a right to say anything I want, just as you do, as long as it accords with the policy. If you don't like it you can ignore it.
58 - roger nowosielski
Other BC members are not subject of this conversation. That's strictly between you and me, so don't be hiding behind the crowd.
59 - roger nowosielski
You do, and so do I.
60 - roger nowosielski
Question is, why do you want to resume the argument? I would think the reasonable thing would be to just let go. Never mind me, and I'll do likewise.
61 - Dr Dreadful
Roger,
The rest of us became 'subject to this conversation' the moment you threatened to reveal private communications on a public website.
I would suggest you take a few minutes to reacquaint yourself with the BC comments policy. You have arguably crossed or come close to the line on several occasions recently, and there is a limit to the tolerance and patience of Chris and myself.
Cool it. Please.
62 - roger nowosielski
Doc,
A question. What's inappropriate about my making public whatever I wish. Number one, I already stated that I wouldn't, And how would that violate BC policy? If anything, it would be a violation of my moral code, nothing else.
Besides, I could alert you to an instance or two where precisely this very thing has been done, and by none other than your own staff. Again, I won't because it's water under the bridge. Yet, neither you nor Chris have chosen to intervene on my behalf when the shoe was on the other foot.
So perhaps you can enlighten me about what aspects of BC comments policy I was in danger of violating.
63 - roger nowosielski
Forget it. I'll just ignore whatever comes out of her mouth.
64 - Cindy
Realist,
I loved your analysis in this article (and your acronym). It had a lot of things I hadn't thought about, like Thomas Edison and his patent. But also I have never heard of the plot to overthrow the Whitehouse. Aside from the actual plot, some of the things Butler said are revealing:
Book review of The Plot to Seize the Whitehouse
August 21, 1931, Butler spoke to an American Legion convention in New Britain CT. Looking back, he reflected on his career. His remarks stunned the audience. Few papers dared report even part of the speech:
"I spent 33 years...being a high-class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer for capitalism....
"I helped purify Nicaragua for the international banking house of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1916. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City [Bank] boys to collect revenue in. I helped in the rape of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street....
"In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went its way unmolested....I had...a swell racket. I was rewarded with honors, medals, promotions....I might have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate a racket in three cities. The Marines operated on three continents..." (p 118).
65 - Dave Nalle
So, which Tea Party did you attend, Realist? Oh wait, you're just repeating the talking points from DU and Huffpo or whatever moronic leftist site you get your delusional BS from.
I was at a Tea Party. The crowd was young, more female than male, clearly well educated and professional in character. And the keynote speaker at the event was a black man.
Sure doesn't sound like anything you were talking about. Perhaps where you have your head stuffed it's too dark and foetid for you to observe what's really going on.
Dave
66 - Realist
Dave! I've missed you and your poor reading skills!
For your re-education: "Based on the anecdotal reporting of friends and family regarding yesterday's 'Tea parties'", they were observing said tribal gatherings in Rancho Cucamonga and Ontario CA. I had to work and support the economic recovery of your deflated portfolio or I would have gone myself. Now go back to sleep and let Roger continue arguing with everyone.
67 - Cindy
I'm not sure where anyone gets that Realist said it's all white males at tea parties?
I just reread again and I'm pretty sure I didn't read anything like that.
68 - roger nowosielski
"Now go back to sleep and let Roger continue arguing with everyone."
Don't be obnoxious now. If you have something to say to me personally, do so!
69 - Dan(Miller)
Not again, saith the poor bowl of petunias.
Dan(Miller)
70 - Dave Nalle
Realist, I give your articles as close a reading as they deserve. Given where your 'anecdotal' reports came from I'm not surprised that the character of the tea parties there was different. As we've discussed before, that part of California is dominated by JBS wackos and nativist nuts. It's hardly a representative sampling on which to judge a movement.
Dave
71 - roger nowosielski
I just had it for breakfast, only a few petals, mind you, with cereal.
Delicious!
72 - bliffle
Although Cindy and Rogers little Lovers Spats may seem tedious and irrelevant to us onlookers, I'm sure that they enjoy them. I think it was La Rochefoucauld who said "lovers are never bored in their own company because the conversation is always about themselves".
73 - roger nowosielski
You may have something there, Bliffle.
It's an unconsummated love affair, in fear of petering out. So we do our best, I guess, to keep it from becoming extinguished.
Human folly!
74 - Cindy
So what do Roger's arguments with everyone else in sight mean then?
(Sometimes men really piss me off, not usually you though bliffle, I guess nobody's perfect...)
Yeah, yeah...I know...I'm just a mean old rotten stereotyper. Oh well. Nobody's perfect.
75 - roger nowosielski
Oh well, my name is mentioned again, if only in passing. Good to know I'm not all forgotten.
So now poor ole Bliffle gets the brunt for speaking his mind.
The plot thickens, I say.