(07-17-2019 02:59 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 02:48 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Catching up on some TV this afternoon.

Two black characters talking.

One says something, the other says "What kind of white people **** is that?"

What do you PC policemen think?

I reject the assertion that i am a "PC policeman" because I think that the casual insult towards kids with disabilities is wrong.

I guess I thought the insult was toward you.

But in any case, as a non PC Policeman, what do you think of the dialogue? Anything racist there?

(07-17-2019 03:41 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 03:06 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 12:39 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 12:14 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 11:44 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  OO - What is your point? What are you trying to defend here?

Are you seriously suggesting that my Uber driver, who was clearly complaining about the person cutting them off, used the word "gay" in a way that meant happy?

You go on this diatribe about how certain words that have dual meanings are never OK (like fairy tales), which just isn't true. Gay is an OK word to use to describe when someone is happy or is homosexual. It's not really an OK word to use when describing someone's actions that annoy you.

Just trying to inject a little humor into this little slap fight over word usage.

I find it funny that Dems get all upset about word usage, then turn around call whatever conservative they hate at the moment (approved) names like deplorable or Nazi or bitter clinger.

Taje Nazi for example. A perfectly good word, but often misapplied. Kind of like how your cabbie misapplied 'gay". Never heard you get upset about it, though.

Do they send you a list of what words can used, when, and how? The Language Board, I mean?

One of the reasons I oppose the left is that I don't want to live in a restrictive society that monitors my every thought and word. You apparently think that would Utopia. So you are a disciple of Rightthink. Or at least, rightverbalize.

What are the current and past countries that monitor speech? The short list would include Soviet Russia, Nazi Germany, North Korea, Cuba, China, and under President Harris, the USA.

Serious question. Did you leave him a tip? Another serious question. did you lecture him on his wrongthinking?

I think you may be acting deliberately clueless here, OO.

It's frustrating to see smart people throw their hands up in the air and act like figuring out which words are OK and which are not is completely befuddling.

I will grant you that there are extremists when it comes to PC-policing that can create confusion (It's not OK to call a black person "black"?).

But come on. There is some low-hanging fruit here which doesn't fall of the category of confusing. It isn't difficult to figure out that the use of the term "gay" in a pejorative sense is offensive. "Retard" and "short bus" as well.

But when you bounce around the issue and say that Trumps followers will lap up the comments, you meant nothing perjorative. Or smug. Or condescending. Got it.

Feel free to piss on my leg. Dont try and tell me its raining. And dont lecture about the impropriety of pissing on legs just a short time afterwards, my friend.

And least you aren't trying the pendantic bouncy house proffered from another the other day that went 'Well I said base, and distinctly did not include followers, and distinctly did not include supporters'. All the difference in light of the smug and condescending statement subject. All the difference.

--- kind of the same verbal bouncy house that went over so well with Hillary's "deplorables" comments. (well she only meant *half* of them).

This is like you all dont even listen to yourselves.

So what you are essentially saying is:

"Not sure if this will affect him negatively from a political standpoint. It seems that this type of language is appreciated by his base." is just as offensive as "You are a retard".

Got it. Sorry if I vehemently disagree.

Considering the obviously high esteem you seemingly exhibit for his base, I would say that condescending, smug non-sequitor of an add-on is in that ballpark, yes.

If you have/had any sort of respect for them, you would not have basically said 'Trump flings poo. Im sure his base doesnt mind' would you have?

Kind of nonsensical to impart any level of respect into that add on if it meant anything. Or do you just put empty as **** sentences into a paragraph to bolster the character count? Seems kind of an either-or there issue in that respect, doesnt it?

Dont tell me that you added the term 'im sure his base doesnt care' to make sure the world knows that you think them smart or sophisticated. As I said, dont piss on my leg and call it rain, my friend.

Tell me 93, do you have high esteem of the Trump base? Consider them erudite? Sophisticated? If so, in any way, why put them as lapping the act up?

Stop acting like you havent made that implication; you most assuredly have.

(07-17-2019 04:09 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 02:59 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 02:48 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Catching up on some TV this afternoon.

Two black characters talking.

One says something, the other says "What kind of white people **** is that?"

What do you PC policemen think?

I reject the assertion that i am a "PC policeman" because I think that the casual insult towards kids with disabilities is wrong.

I guess I thought the insult was toward you.

But in any case, as a non PC Policeman, what do you think of the dialogue/ Anything racist there?

As a nitpick, not all are kids. But perhaps you didnt type that. Remeber, I donnt reed wehl.

Nice try on the somewhat false add-on to gain 'he is bad' points.

You all are really going to town on the stereotypes of progressives today.

(07-17-2019 04:17 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 04:09 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 02:59 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 02:48 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Catching up on some TV this afternoon.

Two black characters talking.

One says something, the other says "What kind of white people **** is that?"

What do you PC policemen think?

I reject the assertion that i am a "PC policeman" because I think that the casual insult towards kids with disabilities is wrong.

I guess I thought the insult was toward you.

But in any case, as a non PC Policeman, what do you think of the dialogue/ Anything racist there?

As a nitpick, not all are kids. But perhaps you didnt type that. Remeber, I donnt reed wehl.

Nice try on the somewhat false add-on to gain 'he is bad' points.

You all are really going to town on the stereotypes of progressives today.

Next time, call him average. Or normal.

Or special. he seems OK with that.

(07-17-2019 04:17 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 04:09 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 02:59 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 02:48 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Catching up on some TV this afternoon.

Two black characters talking.

One says something, the other says "What kind of white people **** is that?"

What do you PC policemen think?

I reject the assertion that i am a "PC policeman" because I think that the casual insult towards kids with disabilities is wrong.

I guess I thought the insult was toward you.

But in any case, as a non PC Policeman, what do you think of the dialogue/ Anything racist there?

As a nitpick, not all are kids. But perhaps you didnt type that. Remeber, I donnt reed wehl.

Nice try on the somewhat false add-on to gain 'he is bad' points.

You all are really going to town on the stereotypes of progressives today.

Perhaps... can we agree that you guys are really living up to the stereotypes of right-wingers today?

(07-17-2019 04:25 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 04:17 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 04:09 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 02:59 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 02:48 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Catching up on some TV this afternoon.

Two black characters talking.

One says something, the other says "What kind of white people **** is that?"

What do you PC policemen think?

I reject the assertion that i am a "PC policeman" because I think that the casual insult towards kids with disabilities is wrong.

I guess I thought the insult was toward you.

But in any case, as a non PC Policeman, what do you think of the dialogue/ Anything racist there?

As a nitpick, not all are kids. But perhaps you didnt type that. Remeber, I donnt reed wehl.

Nice try on the somewhat false add-on to gain 'he is bad' points.

You all are really going to town on the stereotypes of progressives today.

Perhaps... can we agree that you guys are really living up to the stereotypes of right-wingers today?

Funny you dont bother to defend you inclusion of kids in your barb. Kneejerk reaction to bring kids into the mix?

Nor do you bother to explain why you added the comment about Trumps base lapping it up after your first sentence of Trump is flinging poo.

Why did you 93? Not a rhetorical question here 93, a straight dead serious one. What do you feel that add-on brought forth? What did it add in your mind?

(07-17-2019 04:17 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 04:09 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 02:59 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 02:48 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Catching up on some TV this afternoon.

Two black characters talking.

One says something, the other says "What kind of white people **** is that?"

What do you PC policemen think?

I reject the assertion that i am a "PC policeman" because I think that the casual insult towards kids with disabilities is wrong.

I guess I thought the insult was toward you.

But in any case, as a non PC Policeman, what do you think of the dialogue/ Anything racist there?

As a nitpick, not all are kids. But perhaps you didnt type that. Remeber, I donnt reed wehl.

Nice try on the somewhat false add-on to gain 'he is bad' points.

You are (as usual it seems lately) reaching REALLY hard here, Tanq.

(07-17-2019 04:25 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 04:17 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 04:09 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 02:59 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 02:48 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Catching up on some TV this afternoon.

Two black characters talking.

One says something, the other says "What kind of white people **** is that?"

What do you PC policemen think?

I reject the assertion that i am a "PC policeman" because I think that the casual insult towards kids with disabilities is wrong.

I guess I thought the insult was toward you.

But in any case, as a non PC Policeman, what do you think of the dialogue/ Anything racist there?

As a nitpick, not all are kids. But perhaps you didnt type that. Remeber, I donnt reed wehl.

Nice try on the somewhat false add-on to gain 'he is bad' points.

You all are really going to town on the stereotypes of progressives today.

Perhaps... can we agree that you guys are really living up to the stereotypes of right-wingers today?

We can agree we are living up to YOUR stereotype of right-wingers, just as you are living up to my stereotype of left-wing rigidity and self-righteousness. You remind me of a Baptist preacher I once knew.

Trying to discuss this in a rational manner with somebody who refuses to listen is frustrating. Your faith is strong, my child.

Now stop dodging my question.

(07-17-2019 04:29 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 04:25 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 04:17 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 04:09 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 02:59 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  I reject the assertion that i am a "PC policeman" because I think that the casual insult towards kids with disabilities is wrong.

I guess I thought the insult was toward you.

But in any case, as a non PC Policeman, what do you think of the dialogue/ Anything racist there?

As a nitpick, not all are kids. But perhaps you didnt type that. Remeber, I donnt reed wehl.

Nice try on the somewhat false add-on to gain 'he is bad' points.

You all are really going to town on the stereotypes of progressives today.

Perhaps... can we agree that you guys are really living up to the stereotypes of right-wingers today?

Funny you dont bother to defend you inclusion of kids in your barb. Kneejerk reaction to bring kids into the mix?

When I think of the "short bus" that you referenced, I general think of children with special needs. You're right, sometimes there are special needs adults now that you bring it up. Guess what? Still not any better, Tanq!

Quote:Nor do you bother to explain why you added the comment about Trumps base lapping it up after your first sentence of Trump is flinging poo.


Why did you 93? Not a rhetorical question here 93, a straight dead serious one. What do you feel that add-on brought forth? What did it add in your mind?

I'm not understanding the "add-on"? Why did I make the comment in the first place? Because I thought that maybe his base wouldn't have a problem with his tweets. I'm pretty sure that I'm right. It looks like even most Republican congressmen and women don't have a problem with those tweets. I believe that Trump's base is OK with a lot of Trump behavior that I personally find very questionable. Is this belief the same as you calling somebody a "retard"? I don't think the two ideas are especially related.

(07-17-2019 04:31 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 04:17 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 04:09 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 02:59 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 02:48 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Catching up on some TV this afternoon.

Two black characters talking.

One says something, the other says "What kind of white people **** is that?"

What do you PC policemen think?

I reject the assertion that i am a "PC policeman" because I think that the casual insult towards kids with disabilities is wrong.

I guess I thought the insult was toward you.

But in any case, as a non PC Policeman, what do you think of the dialogue/ Anything racist there?

As a nitpick, not all are kids. But perhaps you didnt type that. Remeber, I donnt reed wehl.

Nice try on the somewhat false add-on to gain 'he is bad' points.

You are (as usual it seems lately) reaching REALLY hard here, Tanq.

A non-answer, good. Then *why* did you knee jerk include kids in that group 93? ***** and giggles? You either did that intentionally, or instinctively, care to answer which? Shouldnt be hard....

But let me also repeat the *real* question on the table that you avoided:

Care to explain why you added the comment about Trumps base lapping it up after your first sentence of 'Trump is flinging poo'?

Why did you 93? Not a rhetorical question here 93, a straight dead serious one. What do you feel that add-on brought forth? What did it add in your mind?

(07-17-2019 04:39 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  I believe that Trump's base is OK with a lot of Trump behavior that I personally find very questionable.

Maybe so. But probably a lot, like me, think the behavior is secondary to results. Probably a lot, like me, think the alternatives presented are worse. Probably a lot, like me, care more about the state of the country than proper form.

Democrats, OTOH, seem to care more about form than results. I think most Democrats would be perfectly fine with a President that is very PC (in public, anyway) and leads the country into ruin.

A look at their candidates seems to support that position, as well as a look at the Dems in congress.

Kind of telling you have no problems with his results, just his behavior.

(07-17-2019 04:41 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 04:31 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 04:17 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 04:09 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 02:59 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  I reject the assertion that i am a "PC policeman" because I think that the casual insult towards kids with disabilities is wrong.

I guess I thought the insult was toward you.

But in any case, as a non PC Policeman, what do you think of the dialogue/ Anything racist there?

As a nitpick, not all are kids. But perhaps you didnt type that. Remeber, I donnt reed wehl.

Nice try on the somewhat false add-on to gain 'he is bad' points.

You are (as usual it seems lately) reaching REALLY hard here, Tanq.

A non-answer, good. Then *why* did you knee jerk include kids in that group 93? ***** and giggles? You either did that intentionally, or instinctively, care to answer which? Shouldnt be hard....

But let me also repeat the *real* question on the table that you avoided:

Care to explain why you added the comment about Trumps base lapping it up after your first sentence of 'Trump is flinging poo'?

Why did you 93? Not a rhetorical question here 93, a straight dead serious one. What do you feel that add-on brought forth? What did it add in your mind?

The post referenced Trump's recent tweets which I found objectionable. I guessed that many people would find them objectionable and I asked myself if there would be serious political blowback for Trump. I then surmised that his base would probably be OK with the tweets. To use your phrase, it seems that Trump's base is OK with him "flinging poo".

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/...fad9da0e10

Some snippets:


'Yet Trump appears committed to a base strategy for his reelection, and his provocations are widely viewed as efforts to fire up conservatives.'

'Jonathan M. Metzl, a Vanderbilt University sociology professor who has researched how conservative voters support policies that harm their interests, said Trump’s critics routinely underestimate the potency of his message — even one that is outright racist — to his core supporters.

It plays into an ‘us versus them’ formulation in which people are out to ‘take what’s ours’ — that’s the message, really,” said Metzl, author of “Dying of Whiteness: How the Politics of Racial Resentment is Killing America’s Heartland.”

“When Trump frames it that way, it reaffirms that formulation: We’re under attack and I’m defending you,” Metzl said. He added: “I hate to use the word savvy, but that’s probably what it is. The more we talk about his outrageous behavior, the more it evacuates the middle ground” as Democrats move further left to counter Trump.

During Trump’s South Lawn appearance, a reporter asked if he was concerned that “many people saw your tweet as racist” and that white-nationalist groups were finding common cause with him.

“It doesn’t concern me,” Trump replied, “because many people agree with me.”'

(07-17-2019 04:41 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 04:31 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 04:17 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 04:09 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 02:59 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  I reject the assertion that i am a "PC policeman" because I think that the casual insult towards kids with disabilities is wrong.

I guess I thought the insult was toward you.

But in any case, as a non PC Policeman, what do you think of the dialogue/ Anything racist there?

As a nitpick, not all are kids. But perhaps you didnt type that. Remeber, I donnt reed wehl.

Nice try on the somewhat false add-on to gain 'he is bad' points.

You are (as usual it seems lately) reaching REALLY hard here, Tanq.

A non-answer, good. Then *why* did you knee jerk include kids in that group 93? ***** and giggles? You either did that intentionally, or instinctively, care to answer which? Shouldnt be hard....

But let me also repeat the *real* question on the table that you avoided:

Care to explain why you added the comment about Trumps base lapping it up after your first sentence of 'Trump is flinging poo'?

Why did you 93? Not a rhetorical question here 93, a straight dead serious one. What do you feel that add-on brought forth? What did it add in your mind?

He probably "knee-jerked" to kids because the term used was "short bus," which references the shorter school buses that were traditionally used to transport special needs kids to their school.

(07-17-2019 04:39 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 04:29 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 04:25 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 04:17 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 04:09 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I guess I thought the insult was toward you.

But in any case, as a non PC Policeman, what do you think of the dialogue/ Anything racist there?

As a nitpick, not all are kids. But perhaps you didnt type that. Remeber, I donnt reed wehl.

Nice try on the somewhat false add-on to gain 'he is bad' points.

You all are really going to town on the stereotypes of progressives today.

Perhaps... can we agree that you guys are really living up to the stereotypes of right-wingers today?

Funny you dont bother to defend you inclusion of kids in your barb. Kneejerk reaction to bring kids into the mix?

When I think of the "short bus" that you referenced, I general think of children with special needs. You're right, sometimes there are special needs adults now that you bring it up. Guess what? Still not any better, Tanq!

Quote:Nor do you bother to explain why you added the comment about Trumps base lapping it up after your first sentence of Trump is flinging poo.


Why did you 93? Not a rhetorical question here 93, a straight dead serious one. What do you feel that add-on brought forth? What did it add in your mind?

I'm not understanding the "add-on"? Why did I make the comment in the first place? Because I thought that maybe his base wouldn't have a problem with his tweets. I'm pretty sure that I'm right. It looks like even most Republican congressmen and women don't have a problem with those tweets. I believe that Trump's base is OK with a lot of Trump behavior that I personally find very questionable. Is this belief the same as you calling somebody a "retard"? I don't think the two ideas are especially related.

So you dont think that "Trump flings poo. Trump supporters dont care" isnt talking badly about Trump supporters. Interesting point of view.

I mean you (and the lad) go absolutely ape **** if any reference is made in any tangential way about one of about a thousand classifications (or sub-classifications to about the 10th degree), and you dont understand that your 'add on' comment doesnt come across as smug and condescending.

That is a very interesting type of myopy there, my friend.

I mean, the topic was *solely* Trump's comments to that point. You were the one that tacked on that comment about his followers. Why feel the absolute urge to include his followers (supporters, base, whatever the fk you want to call the group on this bounce house jump) in your comment? Not that you *did* include them, but why the need to include that obvious non-sequitor of a sentence? Just because?

Obviously not your deep and unbridled respect for them, but why include them in the conversation *at all*? That is if not to go off on a self preening moral judgement of them, I mean. I am sure that was never the case, but there is a reason that you feel the overriding urge to 'drop them into the action'. What is it?

(07-17-2019 04:52 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 04:39 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 04:29 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 04:25 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 04:17 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  As a nitpick, not all are kids. But perhaps you didnt type that. Remeber, I donnt reed wehl.

Nice try on the somewhat false add-on to gain 'he is bad' points.

You all are really going to town on the stereotypes of progressives today.

Perhaps... can we agree that you guys are really living up to the stereotypes of right-wingers today?

Funny you dont bother to defend you inclusion of kids in your barb. Kneejerk reaction to bring kids into the mix?

When I think of the "short bus" that you referenced, I general think of children with special needs. You're right, sometimes there are special needs adults now that you bring it up. Guess what? Still not any better, Tanq!

Quote:Nor do you bother to explain why you added the comment about Trumps base lapping it up after your first sentence of Trump is flinging poo.


Why did you 93? Not a rhetorical question here 93, a straight dead serious one. What do you feel that add-on brought forth? What did it add in your mind?

I'm not understanding the "add-on"? Why did I make the comment in the first place? Because I thought that maybe his base wouldn't have a problem with his tweets. I'm pretty sure that I'm right. It looks like even most Republican congressmen and women don't have a problem with those tweets. I believe that Trump's base is OK with a lot of Trump behavior that I personally find very questionable. Is this belief the same as you calling somebody a "retard"? I don't think the two ideas are especially related.

So you dont think that "Trump flings poo. Trump supporters dont care" isnt talking badly about Trump supporters. Interesting point of view.

I mean you (and the lad) go absolutely ape **** if any reference is made in any tangential way about one of about a thousand classifications (or sub-classifications to about the 10th degree), and you dont understand that your 'add on' comment doesnt come across as smug and condescending.

That is a very interesting type of myopy there, my friend.

I mean, the topic was *solely* Trump's comments to that point. You were the one that tacked on that comment about his followers. Why feel the absolute urge to include his followers (supporters, base, whatever the fk you want to call the group on this bounce house jump) in your comment? Not that you *did* include them, but why the need to include that obvious non-sequitor of a sentence? Just because?

Obviously not your deep and unbridled respect for them, but why include them in the conversation *at all*? That is if not to go off on a self preening moral judgement of them, I mean. I am sure that was never the case, but there is a reason that you feel the overriding urge to 'drop them into the action'. What is it?

Of course it's talking badly about the Trump base! I disagree with their politics and I have the right to talk badly about them. You guys go to town on leftists and that's just fine by me.

Talking badly (to use your term) doesn't equate to calling them "retards"! Your contortions over this are tiring me out.

(07-17-2019 03:06 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 12:39 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 12:14 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 11:44 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 11:28 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  My senior year in HS, I was talking with a girl in class when the teacher asked, "(OO), what are you and Karen being so gay about". The class erupted in laughter. Apparently the Teacher and I were the only ones who did not know the new meaning of gay.

I kind of miss the old days, when words meant what they were supposed to mean. As a kid, I enjoyed fairy tales. But my grandkids could not, as it is Un-PC to call them that.

So Lad, when you have kids, will you read them fairy tales? Will history talk about Gay Paree and the Gay 90's? Or will language be so restricted that those words will need permission from some Language Suitability Board?

I agree, Tanq should not have called you 'retard" or anything like that. You clearly have a high IQ. (I hope is OK to call you a genius). But sometimes, you get so obstinate in persisting in your wrongheadedness***, I can understand his frustration.

JMHO.

***Wrongheadedness was approved usage by the Language Suitability Board, a subdivision of the PC board. It is neither racial or sexual in nature, and has no religious component. We did not touch.

OO - What is your point? What are you trying to defend here?

Are you seriously suggesting that my Uber driver, who was clearly complaining about the person cutting them off, used the word "gay" in a way that meant happy?

You go on this diatribe about how certain words that have dual meanings are never OK (like fairy tales), which just isn't true. Gay is an OK word to use to describe when someone is happy or is homosexual. It's not really an OK word to use when describing someone's actions that annoy you.

Just trying to inject a little humor into this little slap fight over word usage.

I find it funny that Dems get all upset about word usage, then turn around call whatever conservative they hate at the moment (approved) names like deplorable or Nazi or bitter clinger.

Taje Nazi for example. A perfectly good word, but often misapplied. Kind of like how your cabbie misapplied 'gay". Never heard you get upset about it, though.

Do they send you a list of what words can used, when, and how? The Language Board, I mean?

One of the reasons I oppose the left is that I don't want to live in a restrictive society that monitors my every thought and word. You apparently think that would Utopia. So you are a disciple of Rightthink. Or at least, rightverbalize.

What are the current and past countries that monitor speech? The short list would include Soviet Russia, Nazi Germany, North Korea, Cuba, China, and under President Harris, the USA.

Serious question. Did you leave him a tip? Another serious question. did you lecture him on his wrongthinking?

I think you may be acting deliberately clueless here, OO.

It's frustrating to see smart people throw their hands up in the air and act like figuring out which words are OK and which are not is completely befuddling.

I will grant you that there are extremists when it comes to PC-policing that can create confusion (It's not OK to call a black person "black"?).

But come on. There is some low-hanging fruit here which doesn't fall of the category of confusing. It isn't difficult to figure out that the use of the term "gay" in a pejorative sense is offensive. "Retard" and "short bus" as well.

But when you bounce around the issue and say that Trumps followers will lap up the comments, you meant nothing perjorative. Or smug. Or condescending. Got it.

Feel free to piss on my leg. Dont try and tell me its raining. And dont lecture about the impropriety of pissing on legs just a short time afterwards, my friend.

And least you aren't trying the pendantic bouncy house proffered from another the other day that went 'Well I said base, and distinctly did not include followers, and distinctly did not include supporters'. All the difference in light of the smug and condescending statement subject. All the difference.

--- kind of the same verbal bouncy house that went over so well with Hillary's "deplorables" comments. (well she only meant *half* of them).

This is like you all dont even listen to yourselves.

It's hilarious that you take such umbrage over using specific language to mean something specific. It's as if you think all words are interchangeable and mean the exact same thing... I even specifically said, multiple times, that I would not include all people who voted for or supported Trump, in his base, because many of those people actually do criticize the POTUS and find things he does disagreeable.

You do realize that others on the board backed up my assertion, right? Now some tried to argue that I was overestimating his base, regardless of the fact that I never even commented on how many people fall into that category...

(07-17-2019 04:52 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 04:39 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 04:29 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 04:25 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 04:17 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  As a nitpick, not all are kids. But perhaps you didnt type that. Remeber, I donnt reed wehl.

Nice try on the somewhat false add-on to gain 'he is bad' points.

You all are really going to town on the stereotypes of progressives today.

Perhaps... can we agree that you guys are really living up to the stereotypes of right-wingers today?

Funny you dont bother to defend you inclusion of kids in your barb. Kneejerk reaction to bring kids into the mix?

When I think of the "short bus" that you referenced, I general think of children with special needs. You're right, sometimes there are special needs adults now that you bring it up. Guess what? Still not any better, Tanq!

Quote:Nor do you bother to explain why you added the comment about Trumps base lapping it up after your first sentence of Trump is flinging poo.


Why did you 93? Not a rhetorical question here 93, a straight dead serious one. What do you feel that add-on brought forth? What did it add in your mind?

I'm not understanding the "add-on"? Why did I make the comment in the first place? Because I thought that maybe his base wouldn't have a problem with his tweets. I'm pretty sure that I'm right. It looks like even most Republican congressmen and women don't have a problem with those tweets. I believe that Trump's base is OK with a lot of Trump behavior that I personally find very questionable. Is this belief the same as you calling somebody a "retard"? I don't think the two ideas are especially related.

So you dont think that "Trump flings poo. Trump supporters dont care" isnt talking badly about Trump supporters. Interesting point of view.

I mean you (and the lad) go absolutely ape **** if any reference is made in any tangential way about one of about a thousand classifications (or sub-classifications to about the 10th degree), and you dont understand that your 'add on' comment doesnt come across as smug and condescending.

That is a very interesting type of myopy there, my friend.

I mean, the topic was *solely* Trump's comments to that point. You were the one that tacked on that comment about his followers. Why feel the absolute urge to include his followers (supporters, base, whatever the fk you want to call the group on this bounce house jump) in your comment? Not that you *did* include them, but why the need to include that obvious non-sequitor of a sentence? Just because?

Obviously not your deep and unbridled respect for them, but why include them in the conversation *at all*? That is if not to go off on a self preening moral judgement of them, I mean. I am sure that was never the case, but there is a reason that you feel the overriding urge to 'drop them into the action'. What is it?

OMG are you even reading my posts, Tanq? I wondered out loud about the political blowback for Trump in reference to those tweets!

(07-17-2019 04:48 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 04:41 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 04:31 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 04:17 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 04:09 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I guess I thought the insult was toward you.

But in any case, as a non PC Policeman, what do you think of the dialogue/ Anything racist there?

As a nitpick, not all are kids. But perhaps you didnt type that. Remeber, I donnt reed wehl.

Nice try on the somewhat false add-on to gain 'he is bad' points.

You are (as usual it seems lately) reaching REALLY hard here, Tanq.

A non-answer, good. Then *why* did you knee jerk include kids in that group 93? ***** and giggles? You either did that intentionally, or instinctively, care to answer which? Shouldnt be hard....

But let me also repeat the *real* question on the table that you avoided:

Care to explain why you added the comment about Trumps base lapping it up after your first sentence of 'Trump is flinging poo'?

Why did you 93? Not a rhetorical question here 93, a straight dead serious one. What do you feel that add-on brought forth? What did it add in your mind?

The post referenced Trump's recent tweets which I found objectionable. I guessed that many people would find them objectionable and I asked myself if there would be serious political blowback for Trump. I then surmised that his base would probably be OK with the tweets. To use your phrase, it seems that Trump's base is OK with him "flinging poo".

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/...fad9da0e10

Some snippets:


'Yet Trump appears committed to a base strategy for his reelection, and his provocations are widely viewed as efforts to fire up conservatives.'

'Jonathan M. Metzl, a Vanderbilt University sociology professor who has researched how conservative voters support policies that harm their interests, said Trump’s critics routinely underestimate the potency of his message — even one that is outright racist — to his core supporters.

It plays into an ‘us versus them’ formulation in which people are out to ‘take what’s ours’ — that’s the message, really,” said Metzl, author of “Dying of Whiteness: How the Politics of Racial Resentment is Killing America’s Heartland.”

“When Trump frames it that way, it reaffirms that formulation: We’re under attack and I’m defending you,” Metzl said. He added: “I hate to use the word savvy, but that’s probably what it is. The more we talk about his outrageous behavior, the more it evacuates the middle ground” as Democrats move further left to counter Trump.

During Trump’s South Lawn appearance, a reporter asked if he was concerned that “many people saw your tweet as racist” and that white-nationalist groups were finding common cause with him.

“It doesn’t concern me,” Trump replied, “because many people agree with me.”'

I get it, because they are obviously "conservative voters [who] support policies that harm their interests", according to your source above (direct quote there sparkles).

Kind of sounds like your reasoning to include that is that you want to preen about how ignorant they are, doesnt it? And you are opining because they are so ignorant they wont care. Yes, we are certainly making some progress here.

And the other catch here is that "Trump’s critics routinely underestimate the potency of his message — even one that is outright racist — to his core supporters."

Okey dokey, now you are using as your backing that well, his core supporters are so ignorant that they either agree with racist comments, or they dont care.

Do you agree with those findings there 93? Is that why you are so antsy to make a comment about Trump's base (followers, bounce, supporters, bounce, voters)?

SO you realize that your reasoning of wanting to include Trump supporters in the flinging of poo comment is now evidenced by your specific reference to those same people being so fing stupid that they 'vote against their interests' and 'dont seem to be smart enough to realize that they are racists.'

That doesnt seem to a really good point in your favor about why you want to tie Trump (supporters, followers, base) to that sentence.

All your evidence you bring up simply states abuot what utter ignorant people they are. Funny that, isnt it.

I am sure you have an endless depth of respect for Trump (supporters, followers, base). It is just that you have a hard time expressing it, right?

Man that rain feels awesome on the side of my leg there, 93.

And yes 93, I would have found what you posted that Trump said objectionable.

But you really didnt give us what he posted, did you?

And yes, if the 4 know how to fix their shithole places of origin, in my mind they should definitely fix those in their view of how the world should be, come back, and tell us how to get to the promised land.

I told a person on the other side of another corporate restructure to do that today. Heavy stuff. Edgy, even. Lucky if she doesnt get her mob to go make fun of my followers in a condescending, smug as **** manner like you seem so much of a man on mission to do so.

(07-17-2019 05:07 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 04:48 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 04:41 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 04:31 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 04:17 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  As a nitpick, not all are kids. But perhaps you didnt type that. Remeber, I donnt reed wehl.

Nice try on the somewhat false add-on to gain 'he is bad' points.

You are (as usual it seems lately) reaching REALLY hard here, Tanq.

A non-answer, good. Then *why* did you knee jerk include kids in that group 93? ***** and giggles? You either did that intentionally, or instinctively, care to answer which? Shouldnt be hard....

But let me also repeat the *real* question on the table that you avoided:

Care to explain why you added the comment about Trumps base lapping it up after your first sentence of 'Trump is flinging poo'?

Why did you 93? Not a rhetorical question here 93, a straight dead serious one. What do you feel that add-on brought forth? What did it add in your mind?

The post referenced Trump's recent tweets which I found objectionable. I guessed that many people would find them objectionable and I asked myself if there would be serious political blowback for Trump. I then surmised that his base would probably be OK with the tweets. To use your phrase, it seems that Trump's base is OK with him "flinging poo".

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/...fad9da0e10

Some snippets:


'Yet Trump appears committed to a base strategy for his reelection, and his provocations are widely viewed as efforts to fire up conservatives.'

'Jonathan M. Metzl, a Vanderbilt University sociology professor who has researched how conservative voters support policies that harm their interests, said Trump’s critics routinely underestimate the potency of his message — even one that is outright racist — to his core supporters.

It plays into an ‘us versus them’ formulation in which people are out to ‘take what’s ours’ — that’s the message, really,” said Metzl, author of “Dying of Whiteness: How the Politics of Racial Resentment is Killing America’s Heartland.”

“When Trump frames it that way, it reaffirms that formulation: We’re under attack and I’m defending you,” Metzl said. He added: “I hate to use the word savvy, but that’s probably what it is. The more we talk about his outrageous behavior, the more it evacuates the middle ground” as Democrats move further left to counter Trump.

During Trump’s South Lawn appearance, a reporter asked if he was concerned that “many people saw your tweet as racist” and that white-nationalist groups were finding common cause with him.

“It doesn’t concern me,” Trump replied, “because many people agree with me.”'

I get it, because they are obviously "conservative voters [who] support policies that harm their interests", according to your source above (direct quote there sparkles).

Kind of sounds like your reasoning to include that is that you want to preen about how ignorant they are, doesnt it? And you are opining because they are so ignorant they wont care. Yes, we are certainly making some progress here.

And the other catch here is that "Trump’s critics routinely underestimate the potency of his message — even one that is outright racist — to his core supporters."

Okey dokey, now you are using as your backing that well, his core supporters are so ignorant that they either agree with racist comments, or they dont care.

Do you agree with those findings there 93? Is that why you are so antsy to make a comment about Trump's base (followers, bounce, supporters, bounce, voters)?

SO you realize that your reasoning of wanting to include Trump supporters in the flinging of poo comment is now evidenced by your specific reference to those same people being so fing stupid that they 'vote against their interests' and 'dont seem to be smart enough to realize that they are racists.'

That doesnt seem to a really good point in your favor about why you want to tie Trump (supporters, followers, base) to that sentence.

All your evidence you bring up simply states abuot what utter ignorant people they are. Funny that, isnt it.

I am sure you have an endless depth of respect for Trump (supporters, followers, base). It is just that you have a hard time expressing it, right?

Man that rain feels awesome on the side of my leg there, 93.

This is your argument in defense of your right to use the term "retard" and "short bus"? I'm confused.