Article

2004-05-06 -Short Attention Span Theater-

Rules for civil, well-reasoned discourse

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Mike 2004-05-06 12:30|| || Front Page|| [11137 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Right on Mike. Any moron can call names. If you've got a point, articulate it, defend it, and think it through by debating it.

Posted by sludj 2004-05-06 12:35:18 PM|| 2004-05-06 12:35:18 PM|| Front Page Top

#2 DO back up your statement with facts when necessary.
DON'T punch the other person through the chest, pull out his heart, and show it to him before he dies when you feel run into a corner. That's usually a non-sequitur to the debate... unless the debate is whether you can actually pull someone's heart out and show it to him before he dies.

as Frank G, I have to agree with Frank J on this one...plus it's soooo messy

Posted by Frank G 2004-05-06 12:39:37 PM|| 2004-05-06 12:39:37 PM|| Front Page Top

#3 Gosh, common courtesy. What a concept! Sadly, the virtues of proper forensic engagement do not seem quite so popular these days. It must be supposed that formulating original ideas in a concise and objective manner is too much to ask of some people.

I wonder how many who read this will realize that hitting other people over the head with one's own views in an ill dignified and personally insulting manner is precisely one of those things being fought against elsewhere with so much loss of life.

It brings to mind individuals like Patrick Tillman, who had sufficient courage of his convictions to forego great wealth and ended up giving his life for what he considered most important in this world.

I thought about it a lot at his memorial service last Monday.

Posted by Zenster 2004-05-06 1:50:14 PM|| 2004-05-06 1:50:14 PM|| Front Page Top

#4 Awww... You're no fun anymore!

I prefer to rip their spine out through their ass anyway, Frank...

Posted by mojo 2004-05-06 2:02:39 PM|| 2004-05-06 2:02:39 PM|| Front Page Top

#5 name calling isa not good debate!

Posted by muck4doo 2004-05-06 2:08:27 PM|| [http://petaenespanol.com/cinco/] 2004-05-06 2:08:27 PM|| Front Page Top

#6 Yes, Zenny, it's common courtesy for an American citizen to refer to our President as President Bush; not "Shrub," not pResident, not "selected not elected."
Similarly, it's also courteous and civil to refer to him that way at a forum where the majority of the posters also respect the President properly.

Posted by Jen 2004-05-06 2:08:42 PM|| [http://www.greatestjeneration.com] 2004-05-06 2:08:42 PM|| Front Page Top

#7 It's also common courtesy to show an even greater respect for a well known precept called "Freedom of Speech." While you might quail at the thought of doing so, I would fearlessly defend your right to it. Fortunately, this site's staff and a majority of the intelligent posters here demonstrate sufficient understanding of this fundamental constitutional right. Even one who so often mangles our beautiful language like muck4doo seems to have no problem grasping such an elementary concept. The opprobrium of impaired individuals long ago ceased to be of any importance to me.

Posted by Zenster 2004-05-06 2:27:10 PM|| 2004-05-06 2:27:10 PM|| Front Page Top

#8 Easy Ms. Jen -
You make typos when you really get ticked off.

Besides, after the recent Doctor's statement, do we now get to call a certain Mass. Senator, "Lt. Ricochet"?

No, I guess not. That would not be civil.

Posted by BigEd 2004-05-06 2:31:51 PM|| 2004-05-06 2:31:51 PM|| Front Page Top

#9 Sure, Zipperhead, the Constitution guarantees Freedom of Speech but Fred Pruitt, the private owner of Rantburg, doesn't have to!

And Ed, you're referring to "pResident" as a typo?
The wags over at DUH.com use this to refer to Bush.
They make the "p" lower case so that it reads "Resident" because to genii like Zipper, Bush was "selected not elected" as their President, so he's only the "resident" of the White House.
Get it? Clever, huh?

Posted by Jen 2004-05-06 2:40:38 PM|| [http://www.greatestjeneration.com] 2004-05-06 2:40:38 PM|| Front Page Top

#10 Oh no, more opprobrium! How dreadful, I think I'm getting a case of the vapors.

In this particular case, you're right (for a change). Fred Pruitt has absolutely no obligation to let me post a single d@mned thing at this site (ain't freedom grand?). I think it speaks rather well of his sensibilities that he hasn't demonstrated any reservations about my participation here. That is something I respect about him (and the staff) immensely.

Their clear philosophic vision has served to both provide me with vital insights not found elsewhere and a newfound respect for conservatives who are not bound hand and foot by accepted doctrine or dogma.

Posted by Zenster 2004-05-06 3:03:58 PM|| 2004-05-06 3:03:58 PM|| Front Page Top

#11 Of course, you don't respect him...just like you don't respect the President and for the same reasons.
You just want to see how much of your spew you can get away with and are working it against the day.
But your day will come.

Posted by Jen 2004-05-06 3:09:46 PM|| [http://www.greatestjeneration.com] 2004-05-06 3:09:46 PM|| Front Page Top

#12 You just want to see how much of your spew you can get away with ...

Pot -> Kettle -> Black

Posted by Zenster 2004-05-06 3:19:50 PM|| 2004-05-06 3:19:50 PM|| Front Page Top

#13 Zenster, IMO, your history of past posts shows that you probably have ulterior motives -- you voice strong support (to the point of utter overkill) for positions obviously near and dear to many who visit this blog -- and then (here and there, thrown in as if afterthoughts) mock Bush and the validity of his presidency, without any proof to back up the slander. Just because you sound pro-military doesnât mean youâre not some DU operative (or equivalent) out to slam Bush. The lack of realism to the gung ho, âpro-militaryâ solutions you frequently spout makes me question your sincerity. Please persuade me otherwise, if you think Iâm wrong.

Posted by cingold 2004-05-06 3:24:31 PM|| 2004-05-06 3:24:31 PM|| Front Page Top

#14 Clever, Jen?
You give the spongoencephalites too much credit!!!

Posted by BigEd 2004-05-06 3:27:08 PM|| 2004-05-06 3:27:08 PM|| Front Page Top

#15 cingold, it's your privilege to think whatever you wish. I can only speculate regarding what you consider to be my "ulterior motives." My personal belief is that those who are not forthright about their intentions are ethically bankrupt. I value transparency above much else.

I would think the unvarnished nature of my opinions should make that more than clear to you. If this is not apparent, you may be sufficiently opaque to where an exchange of ideas is not possible. Again, that's your privilege. If you ever find me toning things down in a politically correct fashion, please feel free to call me on it.

Posted by Zenster 2004-05-06 3:39:11 PM|| 2004-05-06 3:39:11 PM|| Front Page Top

#16 Okay, okay, okay, okay ...

Jen and Zenster:

Back to your respective corners. You each get a standing eight-count. Yeah, yeah, she/he didn't lay a glove on ya. To your corners anyways.

C'mon already. Each comment like this eats up bandwidth and slows page loading. Enough.

Posted by Steve White 2004-05-06 4:27:29 PM|| 2004-05-06 4:27:29 PM|| Front Page Top

#17 If there was a "golden rule" for Internet discussion it should be this: Never write anything anonymously (or pseudonymously, I guess) to another person that you wouldn't say to his or her face.

Posted by 11A5S 2004-05-06 4:27:54 PM|| 2004-05-06 4:27:54 PM|| Front Page Top

#18 Hmmm, I'll try to cut out the fat and get to the gist. #15 cingold . . . My personal belief is that those who are not forthright about their intentions are ethically bankrupt. I value transparency above much else. Thatâs good to hear. Thatâs what more than one person here has asked you about -- how do you square your âkill them all, let God sort them outâ rhetoric with your âBush is a crookâ rhetoric? Do you have someone better able to handle the WOT in mind?

I would think . . . you may be sufficiently opaque . . . My guts are largely opaque, but my skin is mostly translucent . . . What are you talking about? The main question is: How do you square your âkill them all, let God sort them outâ rhetoric with your âBush is a crookâ rhetoric?

Posted by cingold 2004-05-06 4:37:08 PM|| 2004-05-06 4:37:08 PM|| Front Page Top

#19 i know this isn't part of this post but i have to..
zenster - Bush was duly elected by a majority of electoral votes. this is how we've elected presidents for decades. it so happens your man wasn't elected so then there is a problem. now that is hypocrisy..and if you are not a citizen of the United States then your opinion does not count in the overall scheme of our politics.

as a historical note JFK (Kennedy not the fake) lost the popular vote but won the electoral vote and went on to be one of the most popular presidents.

Posted by Dan 2004-05-06 5:37:48 PM|| 2004-05-06 5:37:48 PM|| Front Page Top

#20 cingold, don't look now, but I think I hear...crickets!

Posted by Jen 2004-05-06 5:39:50 PM|| [http://www.greatestjeneration.com] 2004-05-06 5:39:50 PM|| Front Page Top

#21 Oops! My bad. It was chickens.
(This is too rich, BTW:
"My personal belief is that those who are not forthright about their intentions are ethically bankrupt."
Don't look now, Zen Boy, but your assets are lower than zero!)

Posted by Jen 2004-05-06 5:51:54 PM|| [http://www.greatestjeneration.com] 2004-05-06 5:51:54 PM|| Front Page Top

#22 Zenster is actually Comic Book Guy, just not as comical.

Posted by Meester Feester 2004-05-06 6:57:37 PM|| 2004-05-06 6:57:37 PM|| Front Page Top

#23 PCBurg. Hmmmm - loses something in the transition. So many names, so few IP addresses, eh cingold? Lol - Bro, I know you get it! And you nailed it - added to the infamous "ethicality" we have hypocrisy of the highest order. He was quick - it only took him about 48 hours to figure out that if he kept his mouth shut about [mumble] and [mumble] then he could hang out and dazzle us with puffery and buffoonery and share his deep understanding of many many miracles he's acquired at second hand. If only Jen and Phil_B and I had not been there to see his highness up close and personal spewing upon arrival at the RB RR Station.

Hmmmm, the common decency of Rantburgarians becomes a weakness... Now where have I seen this pattern, before?

Traveller, where'd you go Bro? Room for another?

Posted by .com 2004-05-06 9:36:52 PM|| 2004-05-06 9:36:52 PM|| Front Page Top

#24 DotCom. I've been holding my breath all day, just waiting for Zenster to answer this one little question: How do you square your âkill them all, let God sort them outâ rhetoric with your âBush is a crookâ rhetoric? Waiting, waiting . . .

Posted by cingold 2004-05-06 9:50:16 PM|| 2004-05-06 9:50:16 PM|| Front Page Top

#25 cingold - Better let it go - you're turning blue, bro!

Posted by .com 2004-05-06 9:54:56 PM|| 2004-05-06 9:54:56 PM|| Front Page Top

#26 Gasp . . . ahhhh . . . gasp! Wheeze. Whoa, thanks there. That was close. : )

Posted by cingold 2004-05-06 10:02:08 PM|| 2004-05-06 10:02:08 PM|| Front Page Top

#27 Dotcom and cingold, you know what's really pathetic and sad?
I think Zipperhead's so cerebrally-challenged that he doesn't understand why there's such cognitive dissonance between his opinions ( or whatever you call his "views").

Posted by Jen 2004-05-06 10:11:33 PM|| [http://www.greatestjeneration.com] 2004-05-06 10:11:33 PM|| Front Page Top

#28 The opprobrium of impaired individuals long ago ceased to be of any importance to me.

I'd call that a confession. Zipster doesn't buy his own crap.

Posted by Phil_B 2004-05-06 10:12:44 PM|| 2004-05-06 10:12:44 PM|| Front Page Top