On Neocons - Page 19 - Mercedes-Benz Forum

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #181 of 188 (permalink) Old 06-01-2005, 06:51 PM
BenzWorld Junior Member
 
Skeezix's Avatar
 
Date registered: May 2005
Vehicle: 300 SEL
Posts: 43
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
RE: On Neocons

Quote:
JimSmith - 5/31/2005 7:38 PM
This response will do double duty, it will provide a direct response and serve as an example of misinformation you offer. There was nothing ambiguous about my response concerning your apparent confusion reading this thread, which I attributed to the double and triple postings by some of us, which was done in error. Therefore it was not my confusion I was attempting to explain, I was offering you the opportunity to blame the apparent confusion you were experiencing following the sequence of posts on this error by others. For you to suggest my comments were an attempt to explain my confusion on the matter is purposeful misinterpretation of my post, and therefore falls into the category of you promulgating misinformation. Which means, you post "not facts" which will come up again.
Your inability to clearly state your meaning with the written word is not my failing. It is yours. When you write something that can be taken in more than one way, you should not be surprised when it happens.


Quote:
JimSmith
Ok, I will use one of your approved references for the definitin of "Ad Hominem" and we can go from there:
"Main Entry: 1ad ho·mi·nem
Pronunciation: (')ad-'hä-m&-"nem, -n&m
Function: adjective
Etymology: New Latin, literally, to the person
1 : appealing to feelings or prejudices rather than intellect
2 : marked by an attack on an opponent's character rather than by an answer to the contentions made "


Now, your post, that I made my Caligula comments in reference to, is posted below along with my comments:

Quote:
Skeezix - 5/25/2005 9:28 PM

Here...add this to yer pretty picture collection.

A post with little in terms of any contentions made, and mostly an appeal to feelings or prejudices rather than intellect. Which, seems like it might be kind of an "Ad Hominem" attack itself, by the definition of the reference you tout. Here was my comment:

Quote:
JimSmith - 5/27/2005 10:19 AM

Quote:
Skeezix - 5/25/2005 9:28 PM

Here...add this to yer pretty picture collection.


Let them hate, so long as they fear — Caligula
Quoting Caligula lays a solid base for your perspective being sound, based on understanding and honoring the Constitution of the USA, and being just plain reasonable. Like fisting grooms at weddings, and marrying your sister, after smothering the family head of state once you have killed off every other relative with a claim to the seat of power. Very Bush of you. Jim
Now, my response was neither an attack on Caligula's character as you suggested in a follow-up response, nor an attack on you, personally. It was a statement that your post was in-line with the revolting character of the person you quoted. The gory details of the deeds attributed to Caligula were merely added to underline what corrupt, decayed and brutal dictator he was. While the deeds we know about may differ, I find Caligula's "me first" approach to running a great and powerful dynasty into the ground remarkably similar to GWBush's. While my words were not an attack on you personally, I will say citing Caligula as a figure you admire speaks volumes.

Noting Caligula's character flaws, well documented in history, hardly qualifies as an "Ad Hominem" attack on Caligula. He was not making any contentions, since he did not post on this thread. Context. It seems to be an aspect of intellectual interaction that stymies you. Citing my words as an "Ad Hominem" attack on Caligula to avoid addressing your contention, embodied in your photoshop exercise qualifies as passing out misinformation. Your association with Caligula was a direct result of your action when you quoted him. I presume you quoted him not to suggest his point was invalid, but to the contrary, to proudly express your "oneness" with the spirit of that quote, and thoughts and mind that generated it. It is my opinion that Mr. GW Bush also finds this quote, and possibly many other thoughts of the originator, in harmony with many of his own. Therefore the comment, "very Bush of you."
My picture was in response to your pictures, which I will spare readers from reposting several times here. Further, writting a novella is counter-productive. When my eyes cross trying to follow your convoluted prose, I tend to tune out. Like this.
:snip:

Come back with a Cliff's Notes and I may reconsider.

Let them hate, so long as they fear — Caligula
Skeezix is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #182 of 188 (permalink) Old 06-01-2005, 11:52 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
tcp_ML500's Avatar
 
Date registered: Aug 2002
Vehicle: C 111 Nardo
Location: Exiled
Posts: 9,402
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 86 Post(s)
re: your "Imagine a world without liberals" avatar

Quote:
Skeezix - 6/1/2005 7:35 PM
And I suggest that when you choose an alternate meaning for a word, that you be prepared to supply said definition. Just what does 'sarcasm' mean in your world?
I am surely missing something here but was it not you who supplied the definition, you could have had the decency of reading it. I read it, and you are attributing to me a thought process I did not follow as, after carefully reading my quotes, I failed to see how I redefined the word. (BTW, this is tedious and most likely boring to everyone here, and I apologize.)

Your insistence to uncover my understanding of the word sarcasm is troublesome. We both understand the word to mean the same thing, my comment was a sarcastic commentary directed at your avatar. Moreover, it was meant to be funny, not a personal attack. You should not care in the least that I might find you despicable, and I certainly don't care to express it here. In retrospect, though, I regret it was not directed to you, and vehemently so. Maybe that explains the weakness you perceive in my earlier argument.

Quote:
Skeezix - 6/1/2005 7:35 PM
I can't answer this until you tell me what 'sarcasm' means in your world. While you're at it...what color is the sky there?
No doubt the most casual observer understands the argumentative power of this statement of yours.
At present, the sky is deep blue almost black, mostly grey during the day, patches of blue intermitently.

Quote:
Skeezix - 6/1/2005 7:35 PM
Is this more of that 'nuance' stuff? Or is it sarcasm?
If I were to grade your "paper", I'd comment on the repetitious nature of your writing. However, I'll focus on the meaning, not the form.

Nuance is important. Being able to abstract a meaning, a concept from oral or written communication is important. Sometimes (I often like to do so), focusing on an incorrect meaning contributes to creating a comical effect, hilarity resulting from derision or absurdity. But to find it really funny, you have to put it in context of the real or intended meaning.

Let's take a hypothetical case whereby I would be calling you a cunt (for the sake of the argument). In doing so, a reader might portray you as labia, fully formed vulva, with legs, and might start laughing. That would be a valid, albeit literal interpretation of my words. My meaning, however, would most certainly not have been that of labia stuck on a pair of legs, but that you might just be a prick (bear with me, I am still speaking hypothetically). By prick, I would not have meant masculine appendage stuck on a pair of legs, rather, I could probably have meant a dick head, again, if I ever had had the intention of calling you a dick head, you'd have to take this figuratively, not literally.

Quote:
Skeezix - 6/1/2005 7:35 PM
Do you also chastise posters who erroneously throw around 'Nazi', 'Fascist', and 'Hitler'?
Have you not the capacity to find that for yourself? What is my word worth to you on any subject.
<a href="http://www.benzworld.org/forums/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=1211322&posts=11&fid=46">Interestingl y, you'll find that I have called myself a presumptuous shit, and insulted myself by calling me a "fucking cunt", and since I could not bear that insult, I felt compelled to reply back to myself with a "facist"</a>

If anything, that should teach you that one is not supposed to take oneself seriously at all times.

Quote:
Skeezix - 6/1/2005 7:35 PM
Sorry, Sparky...I'm not into BDSM.
Nor was your Lord and Savior, a reference you might have missed. Although, the question you have raised here is a valid one, is God into BDSM for letting 1/3 of Himself get nailed?

Quote:
Skeezix - 6/1/2005 7:35 PM
What makes you think that? I believe that we as a nation are rich enough that nobody needs to go without food, clothing, or shelter. What I object to is buying Cadillacs, color TVs, and Nikes for folks who won't work.
1) We are a rich enough nation to do it
2) We don't do it
3) I believe that pretending that we do buy Cadillacs, etc... to folks who won't work is factually incorrect, an exageration on your part, or, maybe even sarcastic?

Quote:
Skeezix - 6/1/2005 7:35 PM
The same thing that happened to blacksmiths and stagecoach drivers. Times change. Change with them, or get left behind. Anyone in this country can take advantage of the educational opportunities available and go as far as their effort and skill will take them. Those in a shrinking market can re-train in a new field.
Very deep. Well thought through and through. Are you of the opinion that ineer city kids have the same educational opportunities as kids from the burbs? Not everyone can take advantage of the educational opportunities you describe. Displacing manufacturing abroad is one thing (when a whole section of industry disappears, you'll retrain people who can't, financially, relocate and then what?), are you not threatened with the perspective of outsourcing even R&D to China, Asia, India, Eastern Europe. Is re-training really the answer? That'll work well, people with masters, PhDs, etc told that they need to further their education, but abandon their field of expertise...

Quote:
Skeezix - 6/1/2005 7:35 PM
Quote:
tcp_ML500
I'll be proudest when our poorest is well fed, well educated, healthy, productive.
Pipe Dream of the Week. There are people out there who wouldn't take a job at $100.00/hour taking inventory for a blind liquor store owner.
My dream nonetheless. I bet there are more many people who would take the job you describe, especially at the remuneration indicated by you. Your examples are confounding. Such exagerations rarely do serve to make a point, although a sympathetic crowd is rarely hungry for facts if what is presented fits its views, or if the said crowd is constituted of individuals who lack integrity, curiosity, and intelligence.

I have a friend with cancer who cannot get treatment. She left the corporate world years ago to start her own business, got medical insurance from BCBS, her meager benefits have been exceeded before her fourth chemo treatment, she will need a bone marrow transplant she can't get. She does not live in an area where there is a hospital caring for people without insurance. Until her and I talked about it a couple months back, I though this stuff was urban legend, that there were decent docs whose hipocratic oath meant something, who were in to help as much as to make a living. I can't say that I'm proud of our society in that context.

Quote:
Skeezix - 6/1/2005 7:35 PM
I'm well-aware that there many things about which I know little or nothing...or even know stuff that ain't so. There are also things that I've chosen to avoid. Things like 'nuance' or 'subtlety', for example.
It might be the best choice for you! There are people able to prosper and be happy without any sort of education. You might be one of them.

Quote:
Skeezix - 6/1/2005 7:35 PM
I think you're taking the internet waaaaay too seriously.
From this last statement, it occured to me that you might have a perfect understanding of the word irony. At the risk of infuriating you, I won't post the definitions of this word, nor will I indicate which meaning I attach to it in my statement. I fear that if you do indeed understand my meaning, you might be offended by my posting out of m-w.com or other, possibly taking umbrage that I might imply that you are (hypothetically) ignorant.

Note to the reader:
In the interest of the well being of all members and guests, I hereby concede my defeat by Skeezix. I do not do so simply in order to avoid continued and boring exchanges with Skeezix, I do so because I believe in the superiority of his intellect, as evidenced in the current thread. You have before you a broken man, a man's whose only purpose in life was to shine in front of a virtual crowd. Skeezix exposed me, crushed me with his adroit questioning, incomparable depth of reflection, always factual, perfect in his argumentative verve.
Cruel world the virtual world!

I'll be back, but first, I need to go to the bathroom...

I feel so miserable without you; its almost like having you here.
-- Stephen Bishop
tcp_ML500 is offline  
post #183 of 188 (permalink) Old 06-02-2005, 09:22 AM
BenzWorld Elite
 
old300D's Avatar
 
Date registered: Jul 2003
Vehicle: '83 240D
Location: Denver
Posts: 3,774
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
re: your "Imagine a world without liberals" avatar

Wow! Congratulations Skeezix! Champion!

OBK #35

old300D is offline  
post #184 of 188 (permalink) Old 06-02-2005, 09:11 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 2014 E250 Bluetec 4-Matic, 1983 240D 4-Speed
Location: USA
Posts: 9,257
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Quoted: 256 Post(s)
RE: On Neocons

Quote:
Skeezix - 6/1/2005 8:51 PM

Your inability to clearly state your meaning with the written word is not my failing. It is yours. When you write something that can be taken in more than one way, you should not be surprised when it happens.


My picture was in response to your pictures, which I will spare readers from reposting several times here. Further, writting a novella is counter-productive. When my eyes cross trying to follow your convoluted prose, I tend to tune out. Like this.
:snip:

Come back with a Cliff's Notes and I may reconsider.
Like I said, your posts are fraught with misinformation, and, given the fact that this has been very specifically brought to your attention and you continue to post misinformation suggests it is purposeful. We all know what that means.

For example, I did not post any pics.

You have proven that paying attention to your contributions here, no matter how short and "Cliff's Notes" like in writing style, is most likely a waste of what little time it may require. Purposefully concocted, but concise, misinformation is of no value. Jim
JimSmith is offline  
post #185 of 188 (permalink) Old 06-05-2005, 04:38 PM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 95 E300
Location: Inside my head
Posts: 36,850
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 392 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
RE: On Neocons

Have a nice plate of neocon? Here's some of the ringleaders speaking aloud of what they want. There are specific points that it might be fun to explore.
Botnst


American foreign and defense policy is adrift. Conservatives have criticized the incoherent policies of the Clinton Administration. They have also resisted isolationist impulses from within their own ranks. But conservatives have not confidently advanced a strategic vision of America's role in the world. They have not set forth guiding principles for American foreign policy. They have allowed differences over tactics to obscure potential agreement on strategic objectives. And they have not fought for a defense budget that would maintain American security and advance American interests in the new century.

We aim to change this. We aim to make the case and rally support for American global leadership.

As the 20th century draws to a close, the United States stands as the world's preeminent power. Having led the West to victory in the Cold War, America faces an opportunity and a challenge: Does the United States have the vision to build upon the achievements of past decades? Does the United States have the resolve to shape a new century favorable to American principles and interests?

We are in danger of squandering the opportunity and failing the challenge. We are living off the capital -- both the military investments and the foreign policy achievements -- built up by past administrations. Cuts in foreign affairs and defense spending, inattention to the tools of statecraft, and inconstant leadership are making it increasingly difficult to sustain American influence around the world. And the promise of short-term commercial benefits threatens to override strategic considerations. As a consequence, we are jeopardizing the nation's ability to meet present threats and to deal with potentially greater challenges that lie ahead.

We seem to have forgotten the essential elements of the Reagan Administration's success: a military that is strong and ready to meet both present and future challenges; a foreign policy that boldly and purposefully promotes American principles abroad; and national leadership that accepts the United States' global responsibilities.

Of course, the United States must be prudent in how it exercises its power. But we cannot safely avoid the responsibilities of global leadership or the costs that are associated with its exercise. America has a vital role in maintaining peace and security in Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. If we shirk our responsibilities, we invite challenges to our fundamental interests. The history of the 20th century should have taught us that it is important to shape circumstances before crises emerge, and to meet threats before they become dire. The history of this century should have taught us to embrace the cause of American leadership.

Our aim is to remind Americans of these lessons and to draw their consequences for today. Here are four consequences:

• we need to increase defense spending significantly if we are to carry out our global responsibilities today and modernize our armed forces for the future;

• we need to strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values;

• we need to promote the cause of political and economic freedom abroad;

• we need to accept responsibility for America's unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles.

Such a Reaganite policy of military strength and moral clarity may not be fashionable today. But it is necessary if the United States is to build on the successes of this past century and to ensure our security and our greatness in the next.

Elliott Abrams Â*Â*
Gary Bauer Â*Â*
William J. Bennett Â*Â*
Jeb Bush
Dick Cheney
Eliot A. Cohen
Midge Decter
Paula Dobriansky
Steve Forbes
Aaron Friedberg Â*Â*
Francis Fukuyama Â*Â*
Frank Gaffney Â*Â*
Fred C. Ikle
Donald Kagan
Zalmay Khalilzad
I. Lewis Libby
Norman Podhoretz
Dan Quayle
Peter W. Rodman
Stephen P. Rosen
Henry S. Rowen
Donald Rumsfeld Â*Â*
Vin Weber Â*Â*
George Weigel Â*Â*
Paul Wolfowitz
Botnst is offline  
post #186 of 188 (permalink) Old 06-05-2005, 05:37 PM
Cruise Control
 
Zeitgeist's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: '87 300TD/'90 300D/'94 Quattro/'89 Vanagon TDI/'01 EV Weekender VR6
Location: Cascadia
Posts: 51,730
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Quoted: 1426 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
RE: On Neocons

Reads like a list of Nuremburg war criminals
Zeitgeist is offline  
post #187 of 188 (permalink) Old 06-05-2005, 07:01 PM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 95 E300
Location: Inside my head
Posts: 36,850
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 392 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
RE: On Neocons

Quote:
Zeitgeist - 6/5/2005 7:37 PM

Reads like a list of Nuremburg war criminals
Oh I'm sorry I missed that. Which of these folks ordered the extermination of 6 million Jewish civilians?

Bot


American foreign and defense policy is adrift. Conservatives have criticized the incoherent policies of the Clinton Administration. They have also resisted isolationist impulses from within their own ranks. But conservatives have not confidently advanced a strategic vision of America's role in the world. They have not set forth guiding principles for American foreign policy. They have allowed differences over tactics to obscure potential agreement on strategic objectives. And they have not fought for a defense budget that would maintain American security and advance American interests in the new century.

We aim to change this. We aim to make the case and rally support for American global leadership.

As the 20th century draws to a close, the United States stands as the world's preeminent power. Having led the West to victory in the Cold War, America faces an opportunity and a challenge: Does the United States have the vision to build upon the achievements of past decades? Does the United States have the resolve to shape a new century favorable to American principles and interests?

We are in danger of squandering the opportunity and failing the challenge. We are living off the capital -- both the military investments and the foreign policy achievements -- built up by past administrations. Cuts in foreign affairs and defense spending, inattention to the tools of statecraft, and inconstant leadership are making it increasingly difficult to sustain American influence around the world. And the promise of short-term commercial benefits threatens to override strategic considerations. As a consequence, we are jeopardizing the nation's ability to meet present threats and to deal with potentially greater challenges that lie ahead.

We seem to have forgotten the essential elements of the Reagan Administration's success: a military that is strong and ready to meet both present and future challenges; a foreign policy that boldly and purposefully promotes American principles abroad; and national leadership that accepts the United States' global responsibilities.

Of course, the United States must be prudent in how it exercises its power. But we cannot safely avoid the responsibilities of global leadership or the costs that are associated with its exercise. America has a vital role in maintaining peace and security in Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. If we shirk our responsibilities, we invite challenges to our fundamental interests. The history of the 20th century should have taught us that it is important to shape circumstances before crises emerge, and to meet threats before they become dire. The history of this century should have taught us to embrace the cause of American leadership.

Our aim is to remind Americans of these lessons and to draw their consequences for today. Here are four consequences:

• we need to increase defense spending significantly if we are to carry out our global responsibilities today and modernize our armed forces for the future;

• we need to strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values;

• we need to promote the cause of political and economic freedom abroad;

• we need to accept responsibility for America's unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles.

Such a Reaganite policy of military strength and moral clarity may not be fashionable today. But it is necessary if the United States is to build on the successes of this past century and to ensure our security and our greatness in the next.

Elliott Abrams Â*Â*
Gary Bauer Â*Â*
William J. Bennett Â*Â*
Jeb Bush
Dick Cheney
Eliot A. Cohen
Midge Decter
Paula Dobriansky
Steve Forbes
Aaron Friedberg Â*Â*
Francis Fukuyama Â*Â*
Frank Gaffney Â*Â*
Fred C. Ikle
Donald Kagan
Zalmay Khalilzad
I. Lewis Libby
Norman Podhoretz
Dan Quayle
Peter W. Rodman
Stephen P. Rosen
Henry S. Rowen
Donald Rumsfeld Â*Â*
Vin Weber Â*Â*
George Weigel Â*Â*
Paul Wolfowitz
Botnst is offline  
post #188 of 188 (permalink) Old 06-05-2005, 07:52 PM
Cruise Control
 
Zeitgeist's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: '87 300TD/'90 300D/'94 Quattro/'89 Vanagon TDI/'01 EV Weekender VR6
Location: Cascadia
Posts: 51,730
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Quoted: 1426 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
RE: On Neocons

...the operative phrase would be "war criminals". Nuremburg was added for proper effect, alluding to their fascistic tendencies.
Zeitgeist is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

  Mercedes-Benz Forum > General Mercedes-Benz Forums > Off-Topic

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Mercedes-Benz Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











  • Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
     
    Thread Tools
    Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
    Email this Page Email this Page
    Display Modes
    Linear Mode Linear Mode



    Posting Rules  
    You may post new threads
    You may post replies
    You may not post attachments
    You may not edit your posts

    BB code is On
    Smilies are On
    [IMG] code is On
    HTML code is Off
    Trackbacks are On
    Pingbacks are On
    Refbacks are On

     

    Title goes here

    close
    video goes here
    description goes here. Read Full Story
    For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome