The three front-runners did fine - but three others don't believe in evolution!
And now to the Republican debate on MSNBC last night, for which I want to give the same kind of performance analysis as I did for the Democratic debate last week - that is, how presidentially the candidates presented themselves, as distinct from whether or not I agree with their positions.…
Article comments
— go to most recent comments76 - Christopher Rose
Arch: You are far too sure of your own sense of what is right and wrong, so much so that it actually blinds you to the facts.
I haven't called for you or anybody else to be banned, as I clearly indicated in comment #48 above.
You're so busy condemning the collectivist action typical of socialism without ever considering what socialism actually is. Perhaps you could define it for us so we know exactly what it is that you dislike?
You appear to suggest that only rightist politics are ever correct and those on the left have never produced a single useful or positive policy ever.
If so, then you are surely no different from any kind of religious extremist, Christian, Jewish or Muslim, that insists that there view of the world is the only possible "right" way. That is bigotry, plain and simple.
77 - Christopher Rose
Oh yes, you also don't seem to understand the difference between tolerance of other people's points of view, as opposed to criminal activity.
78 - Christopher Rose
Finally, Arch, calling Hilary Clinton a cunt is not acceptable within the terms of a political debate.
It also does undermine women in general as, instead of dealing with this person's political views, you try to reduce her to a part of her anatomy.
By belittling her in that way, you also appear to be saying that it is indeed okay to refer to women that way, which does indeed demean all women.
79 - Christopher Rose
Clavos: I believe you are mistaken. The relevant parts of the comments policy say:-
Please think of the comments as a conversation between individuals and interact with civility.
We will edit/delete... unsupported accusations, personal attacks of any kind, and terms offensive to groups when used in a pejorative manner.
In addition, we reserve the right to edit/delete comments that are some combination of pointlessly vulgar, vile, cruel, without redeeming qualities, and an embarrassment to the site.
Subjective? Yes, but we know them when we see them and so do you.
We will also ban repeat or particularly egregious offenders.
...Thanks for your help and understanding.
So those specific parts of Archie's remarks are entirely outside of the comments policy and it is only because I am being tolerant that they have not been deleted or he banned.
80 - Clavos
Apparently I am mistaken, Christopher. It isn't the first time, nor will it be the last..
Funny, never in my wildest dreams did I ever imagine I would wind up agreeing with Shark...
81 - Dave Nalle
It's always been my understanding of the comments policy and the law in general that no attack against a public figure can be considered 'personal', so calling Clavos a name would be a no-no, but calling Hillary Clinton or George Bush one would be excusable - it certainly has been overlooked plenty in the past. That may not be the way CR interprets the policy, but it certainly should be.
Dave
82 - Clavos
I agree, Dave, but CR holds the power of enforcement and of interpretation, making the point moot, apparently.
83 - Christopher Rose
Tell you what, Clavos, go start your own blog and I'll come over there and be really irritating. Then you can have the fun of deciding what you want to do...
84 - Christopher Rose
As in all things, Dave's understanding is both partial and inaccurate.
Should either of you have any practical points to make, the right place to direct them is to the site owners and, in particular, Eric Olsen, who drafted the policy in the first place. I consider that highly unlikely...
85 - Dave Nalle
Chris, we're not objecting to the policy. But the policy as written and your enforcement of it are not always in sync. The policy certainly doesn't say anything about public figures being sacrosanct. Not a big deal as you generally do a fine job at work which is inherently thankless.
dave
86 - Zedd
Clavos / Dave
Does your political "wanna be(ness)" preclude you from having common sense. Simply because Hillary was the person who the deplorable term was attributed to, you become JR members of the ACLU.
Doesn't your pride prevent you from being so obvious? Let go of the partisanship. It is how the elite control you (us). Its meaningless.
Doesn't the FACT that the Republicans had power and there was no change, accept decline in all of the areas that they said they would stand for, tell you that its just a power grab. I would suggest that you strive to allow reason to dictate your ideas as opposed to some silly political doctrine which was made up by some guy (who is just like you).
87 - Paul Levinson
Dave: The policy certainly doesn't say anything about public figures being sacrosanct.
Not one said public figures are sacrosanct.
I and several others objected to use a term that is grossly insulting to a gender. (And I called for the banning of the person who used that term.)
You really don't see a difference between even the most caustic criticism of a public figure, and criticism that uses language that insults 50% of the world's population?
Here's an example, in case you don't:
Someone in the discussion above called John Edwards "bottom feeding scum," or words close to that effect. I think such an insult is incorrect, and further, shows a mentality that obviously is not very strong in either capacity to reason or capacity to communicate. But the insult targets no one other than John Edwards, and pond scum.
Do you see no difference, Dave, between that kind of insult, and what was said about Hillary Clinton?
88 - bliffle
#55 " May 5, 2007 @ 06:37AM " STM
...
The worship of beer. Welcome to Australia. Mass is twice daily, for an extended period."
Sounds like a deity that even I could worship. Think I'll move to Hobart. But wait! What about wine? No Dionysian eden is complete without wine! Do I really have to endure the 30 hour flight to Sud Ouest or Val du Loire to replenish my wine component? Will I be arrested if the blood level in my booze-stream gets too high?
Please tell me there are better wines in OwstrIlia than the Lindemans at the grocery store! And at prices like the $5 Cahors, Beaunes, Corbieres, etc., I was buying in Saumur last week. I bought a Pommard for $10!
Ah, Saumur! Is there a provincial capital anywhere so beautiful, mild of climate, inexpensive and pleasant to idle in?
89 - troll
Paul - would you raise hell if I called Cheney a dick - ?
90 - Paul Levinson
troll: Paul - would you raise hell if I called Cheney a dick?
No, and because there are at least three important ways that that term is very different from what Arch called Hillary:
1. It's a much milder insult.
2. It's a double-entendre - i.e., not one of George Carlin's seven dirty words.
3. It's also the man's name (this is actually a special case of #2 above), so use of that insult has a modicum of humor.
So, no, I wouldn't raise hell about that at all.
But I certainly would if anyone insulted the Vice President's wife with the language Arch used.
91 - Dave Nalle
Zedd, comment #96 is moronic, because I apply the same standard to free speech regardless of who the target of the insult might be. Since your comment is nonsensical and baseless it amounts to the equivalent of a personal attack on me. But I don't care.
So I'll respond to Paul who at least makes some sense in a kind of fascist way.
I and several others objected to use a term that is grossly insulting to a gender. (And I called for the banning of the person who used that term.)
Firmly declaring yourself as an opponent of free speech.
You really don't see a difference between even the most caustic criticism of a public figure, and criticism that uses language that insults 50% of the world's population?
I see the difference, but I don't care. I think it's good that Archie shows the world that he's a sexist, partisan idiot. It's not like his comments do anyone any real harm.
As for the 'contrast' between the Edwards insult and the Clinton insult, all I see is a difference of degree. The Clinton insult was ruder. I don't see how it applies to anyone beyond the person it was specifically addressed to.
As for the use of the word in question, take a stroll over to the Duke de Mondo's site sometime.
Dave
92 - Paul Levinson
Dave wrote: So I'll respond to Paul who at least makes some sense in a kind of fascist way
:) Well, I can understand how anyone who makes any sense at all would seem "fascist" to you, Dave...
93 - Clavos
Sigh.
It's a good fight, Dave, but you're not going to get any further than the conservative kids do on most "university" campuses these days -- we're not PC, dude.
And Chris, the only way I start my own blog is for money (up front). If that happens, you're welcome to come over and say whatever you want to.
94 - Zedd
Clavos / Dave
You cant be serious. This is your cause? On these boards you two rarely stand for anything in particular other than supporting the shadows of your ideology. The ONE time that you actually stand for something is THIS????
Clavos I don't consider you to be disingenuous in any way. I often regard your statements to be a parroting of ideas. You come across as a romantic and a person who is sold on the world being a certain way and feel as if the more you say it, the more it will be.
Dave, I do believe to be disingenuous. It seems as if you want to create your world, one that you know doesn't exist by convincing others that it does. Your statements are often intended to be manipulative and obviously so to people who are perceptive, imo. However it seems that in this case you have taken on a real cause.
With that being said, I am still amazed that you both have made this none issue to be your Alamo. Sigh indeed Clavos.
95 - Clavos
Thanks for the pop psychoanalysis, Zedd!
Does the Texas Board of Medical Examiners know you're practicing without a license, and interstate to boot?
96 - rivernet
I'm loving it. Any time the neocon nuts start attacking each other, that has to be a good thing for America, freedom, the world, and all living things. I hope Romney does get the nomination. The Christian neo-nuts will stay home on election day, especially after we remind them Mormons think their underware is magic, and the economic deep thinkers, (haha) who managed to wade through Milton Freedman, won't have enough horse power to put another nut case in the White House, not even with the devoted help of the Aryan Nation folks. I'm loving it.
97 - Zedd
Clavos
Your welcome. Anytime!!
98 - STM
Bliffle, the place is awash in cheap, high-quality locally grown wines. Hundreds of labels and NOT the Lindemans - no one drinks that here. There is a wine glut at the moment, and good bottles are cheap. I reckon they are better than French wines, and come in a lot more variety than Californian wines.
My wife drinks a good-quality Pino Grigio that costs between A$12-15 a bottle (about US$9-$12). But there are good cheaper ones.
Beer is still the drink of choice among blokes, though.
99 - Arch Conservative
Paul...your selective outrage at liberals being slandered but not conservatives is all too transparent.
Hillary deserves every awful name people want to call her. [Personal attack deleted]
Rivernet... when faced with Romney who happens to be a mormon, or hillary who happens to be a far left, power hungry, maniacal, tax raising, baby killing, talking like a god dman amos and andy show because she thinks it will somehoow resonate with black voters, self absorbed shill of a human being they will have no problem voting for Romany. Trust me on that one sparky. All of the deluded leftist moonbats are in for a shock come November 2008 if they insist on nominating that carpetbagging joke.
HOw anyone believes this woman will ever be president is byond me. I'm having non-stop laughs watching the moonbats talk about it.
100 - Dave Nalle
It's a good fight, Dave, but you're not going to get any further than the conservative kids do on most "university" campuses these days -- we're not PC, dude.
At least on the university campuses they have their 10x10 'free speech zone' hidden in some parking lot behidn the student union.
You cant be serious. This is your cause? On these boards you two rarely stand for anything in particular other than supporting the shadows of your ideology. The ONE time that you actually stand for something is THIS????
Free expression IS my ideology, Zedd.
Dave, I do believe to be disingenuous. It seems as if you want to create your world, one that you know doesn't exist by convincing others that it does. Your statements are often intended to be manipulative and obviously so to people who are perceptive, imo.
Yes Zedd, 99% of what I say is tinged with sarcasm. No other way to go through the maelstrom of idiocy and self-righteousness and retain my sanity.
However it seems that in this case you have taken on a real cause
It's not a major cause and it's certainly not my 'alamo', but I do think that if you let people be heard it's better in the long run than silencing them. I don't much care about anything Archie has to say, but I do dislike the idea of silencing him just because he holds unpopular opinions. I think that in the natural course of things his own behavior will render him irrelvant.
Dave
101 - Dr Dreadful
Arch Conservative, comment #102 et ad nauseam:
Not that you should set too much store by opinion polls, especially at this early stage, but oh dear, Archie.
102 - Dr Dreadful
STM: I reckon [Australian wines] are better than French wines, and come in a lot more variety than Californian wines.
When we did our obligatory Hunter Valley tour, one of the winery guides frankly admitted to us that most of the wine Australia exports is not top notch - you keep the good stuff for yourselves.
I'm with you on the California wines, although some excellent ones can be had if you hunt for them. I spent a most enjoyable afternoon last summer exploring the Paso Robles wine-growing region on the Central Coast.
The common denominator with wine from any country is that you won't find good quality on the supermarket shelves.
I still think France produces the world's best wines, but Australia is not far behind.
...How did we get here from the Republican debate? It's like the Vietnam discussion that came from nowhere on that other thread...
103 - STM
Hello Doc ... yes, you're right about the bizarre dancing about on the threads. I think it happens when the whole thing gets too fraught.
One thing about Aussie wines, as you've pointed out, is the middle-range good stuff, some of which is really bloody good, doesn't go to export and you can pick them up here at the liquor marts and bottle-shops for a song. A $10 bottle here can be as a good a wine as you'll get anywhere. They are much better than most of the Frenchies that end up down under - even the champagnes are really nice, although as you say, it is hard to beat the froggies when you're in France. Thank God I'm not!
I like Californian wines, but in the US I found it hard to track down the really good stuff at a decent price. It always seemed way overpriced to me, but it was a few years back. There's no doubt though that many "New World" wines can be as good as French wines.
I think people outside Oz don't realise the huge quantities of quality wine produced here - which might not be a bad thing, really!
More for us ... 'cause there's only so much beer a bloke can drink.
104 - Paul Levinson
Dave wrote: I don't much care about anything Archie has to say, but I do dislike the idea of silencing him just because he holds unpopular opinions.
Again, not unpopular opinions, Dave - rather, abusive language (abusive to women).
Poor Marshall McLuhan, who spent a lifetime trying to point out the difference between medium and content, must be rolling over in his grave...
105 - Christopher Rose
Clavos, you can start a blog for free on either Blogger or WordPress.
You can then add Google AdSense or any other potential income generating material you care to. That way you will earn the income you deserve - and all for free!
106 - Christopher Rose
Actually, you can get good to great Spanish wines in most supermarkets here. I've bought hugely drinkable wines for as little as 2USD and rarely spend more than 10 or 15 dollars.
Before I came to Spain, my favourites regions were Ribera del Duero and Rioja but I've now learned that the wines from Navarra are just as good.
The nearest village to me is called Mollina and there they make almost 80% of the wine made in the province of Málaga. Most of them are the traditional sweet white wines but I tend to prefer dry white or red varieties.
107 - Paul Levinson
Those sound delicious. And few pleasures are as sweet as a wine that's cheap as well as delicious...
108 - Clavos
@#105:
You must have missed the parenthetical phrase in my comment.
109 - RJ
"abuse to genders, races, and class of people has no place in civilized discourse."
Tell that to the class warriors on the Left, who hate the "rich" (and hate women and minorities who are conservative).
110 - RJ
"But in a publication or a forum, editors are entitled to make decisions about limits."
So how do you feel about anonymous cyber-stalkers who make the same basic personal attack against the same people on the same forum almost every day for over three years?
111 - RJ
Finally, Arch, calling Hilary Clinton a cunt is not acceptable within the terms of a political debate.
It also does undermine women in general as, instead of dealing with this person's political views, you try to reduce her to a part of her anatomy.
By belittling her in that way, you also appear to be saying that it is indeed okay to refer to women that way, which does indeed demean all women.
So...no more calling the Vice President "Dick" then, eh? :-/
112 - RJ
"As in all things, Dave's understanding is both partial and inaccurate."
Sounds like a personal attack to me...
CHRIS! Please delete this violation of the comments policy immediately! :-/
113 - Dave Nalle
Again, not unpopular opinions, Dave - rather, abusive language (abusive to women).
Sorry Paul, that's bullshit. Causing a specific woman a rude name is merely stating a negative opinion about that one woman, it is not abusive about women in general and you can't make it so. In fact, it suggests that the woman in question is different from other women because that rude name is being applied to her and not to others. And ultimately it's still just expressing a personal opinion about a public figure.
I called Don Imus a 'dick' recently and wasn't edited for it, plus no one suggested that by calling Imus a 'dick' I was denigrating men in general.
Dave
114 - Paul Levinson
Dave wrote: Sorry Paul, that's bullshit. Causing a specific woman a rude name is merely stating a negative opinion about that one woman, it is not abusive about women in general and you can't make it so. In fact, it suggests that the woman in question is different from other women because that rude name is being applied to her and not to others. And ultimately it's still just expressing a personal opinion about a public figure.
I called Don Imus a 'dick' recently and wasn't edited for it, plus no one suggested that by calling Imus a 'dick' I was denigrating men in general.
Don't be sorry, Dave, because your statement does nothing. You can say that a vile word does no damage to a group of people all you want, but that doesn't change the fact that it does. I bet if you took a poll, you'd find that a majority of women would rather not be called that.
As for dick, I already addressed that point in the question someone posed about our VP. You and I and everyone knows that the term is mild, to say the least. And, like bitch, it's a double-entendre, which also mitigates its impact.
So, to sum up: I think Arch's language was and is grossly unacceptable in civil discourse, which I take these comment-conversations to by and large be. It's beyond my power to do anything more than say I have no use for him, and I think he should be banned - but that's obviously not my decision to make, as I'm only a guest here.
115 - Clavos
RJ:
So...no more calling the Vice President "Dick" then, eh? :-/
You can call me "dick" all you want, as long as, in keeping with full disclosure, you precede it with "horse".
116 - MCH
"So...no more calling the Vice President "Dick" then, eh? :-/"
- RJ Elliott
Um, how about a "Draft-dodging Dick"...?
117 - Clavos
emmy:
You really can't blame cheney -- ever get a draft on your dick?...oh sorry, didn't mean to embarrass you, it wasn't cold in Hawaii, was it?
118 - Dave Nalle
You can say that a vile word does no damage to a group of people all you want, but that doesn't change the fact that it does. I bet if you took a poll, you'd find that a majority of women would rather not be called that.
But Arch DID NOT call a majority of women that, nor did he call any group that, nor did he call women in general that. He used the term ONLY in referring to a specific woman with no suggestion that it was merited by her being a woman rather than her specific individual behavior.
And as for the vileness of the term, in other English-speaking cultures it's used much more commonly than in the US - as Christopher should know - and with a level of offensiveness roughly equivalent to our use of 'dick'.
Dave
119 - Paul Levinson
Dave wrote: And as for the vileness of the term, in other English-speaking cultures it's used much more commonly than in the US - as Christopher should know - and with a level of offensiveness roughly equivalent to our use of 'dick'.
And? ... last time I checked, we were conversing in this English-speaking culture.
120 - Dr Dreadful
in other English-speaking cultures it's used much more commonly than in the US - as Christopher should know - and with a level of offensiveness roughly equivalent to our use of 'dick'.
Absolutely wrong, Dave. In Britain it's just about the worst name you can call anyone - male or female.
121 - STM
"And as for the vileness of the term, in other English-speaking cultures it's used much more commonly than in the US - as Christopher should know - and with a level of offensiveness roughly equivalent to our use of 'dick'."
I'll put it this way Dave: I wouldn't use it in mixed company, and I'd be careful if I ever used it in male company, but I'd have no hestitation calling someone a "dick" in female company, as it really means nothing if used inoffensively.
And in male company, the yardstick for offence in regards to the C-word is: it depends greatly on how it's used. I suppose you could use it as a throw-away word in the pub, if it wasn't directed at anyone in particular, but more often than not it's directed at someone you REALLY, REALLY don't like - and can cost you a good smack in the mouth if not careful. I wouldn't suggest Archie be banned for using it, but I reckon he should be mindful.
There are better, far more descriptive and less offensive ways of slandering Hillary.
122 - MCH
"emmy:
You really can't blame cheney -- ever get a draft on your dick?...oh sorry, didn't mean to embarrass you, it wasn't cold in Hawaii, was it?"
- Clavvy
Colder than Texas, Alabama and Florida.
123 - Dave Nalle
I stand corrected on the cheapening of the offensiveness of the 'C' word. Duke de Mondo uses it so freely I figured everyone did. Maybe it's an Irish thing.
There are better, far more descriptive and less offensive ways of slandering Hillary.
Yes, but we're dealing with Archie here. Imagination isn't his strong suit. When he tries to think all he gets is a screensaver of aborted fetuses.
Dave
124 - STM
Dave wrote: "Yes, but we're dealing with Archie here. Imagination isn't his strong suit. When he tries to think all he gets is a screensaver of aborted fetuses."
Lol. And on the Irish use of the word:
A primary school teacher in Dublin asks her 10-year-olds to give an example of how to use the word contagious ...
Little Johnny: "Ooh, Miss! My mum said I shouldn't come to school with a cold because I'd be contagious."
Little Sarah: "Ooh, Miss! ... my pet goldfish had a virus, and all the other fish died because it was contagious".
Little Sean: "Ooh, Miss! The next-door neighbour is painting his house with a three-inch brush, and me dad says it'll take the contagious."
125 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Gee, reading the comments on this list only makes me grateful and very glad that no
christ-killing, well poisoning, money grubbing kike that drinks a Christian's bloodJew is running for office for the top spot in your country.And how come nobody is going after Obama Barak for being a Moslem? Has he at least distanced himself from CAIR, the way Rep. Ellison (DFL-MN) hasn't?