Max,

Firstly, I thought I was the most liberal. I'm insulted. :-)

Secondly, Doug hardly ever insults anyone, and certainly never insults
people with the vitrol of many, many others.

Is it possible that something on a "far left" website could be correct?

The current administration is filled with corrupt officials. Same goes with
Congress. Many are Republicans and many are Democrats.

There's a big difference between a conservative and a neocon.

I don't recall many instances of Doug attacking you personally. As I recall,
you plonked me because you disagreed with my political viewpoint. Yet, you
don't plonk Doug. What's up with that?

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Maxprop" wrote in message
nk.net...

"DSK" wrote in message
.. .
You put yourself there with your behavior. If you don't like it, then
change the way you act.

(which was an ad hominem attack to my discussion of a principle)


Maxprop wrote:
Are you so blind to your own behavior that you believe yourself to be
any different, albeit at the opposite end of the political spectrum?


1- I am not at the "opposite end of the political spectrum" except
possibly with regard to principle

Clearly a matter of opinion. I tend to believe you are among the most
liberal of posters herein, only slightly to the right of Bubbles. You, of
course, are in constant verbal denial of this, but the facts speak for
themselves: you've supported one of the most liberal of democrats ever to
run for president, and you have regurgitated much of the same dogma that I
see on the far left websites. You've branded any of the current
conservative players in the political mess to be corrupt, illicit, and
without morality. You call them all "neocons," as if this is an
abberation of your brand of "conservatism." None of the conservatives I
know personally have any of these viewpoints.

2- My behavior is very considerably different. You and Dave are the only
ones who think I insult others for disagreeing, and then only some of the
time. Everybody knows that you do it all the time.

No one in the NG is lilly white w/r/t ad hominems, but both Dave and I
tend to discuss principles without attacking you. You, OTOH, seldom
debate an issue without attacking me personally, and I suspect you attack
Dave as well, although I really don't read enough of your and his posts to
know for sure. It's a suspicion based upon your behavior with me.

So it isn't really a question of "belief" now is it?

Right. It's more a question of denial: yours.

Max

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
Max,

Firstly, I thought I was the most liberal. I'm insulted. :-)

Sorry, Jon--I didn't intend to omit you. Yes, you're right up there.


Secondly, Doug hardly ever insults anyone, and certainly never insults
people with the vitrol of many, many others.

I only ask that you watch his posts to me. Seldom does he make a point
without a personal jibe at the very least.

Is it possible that something on a "far left" website could be correct?

Highly doubtful, just the same as with something on a far right website.
Neither side give much credence to fact, only to hyperbole and dogma.

The current administration is filled with corrupt officials. Same goes
with Congress. Many are Republicans and many are Democrats.

Every administration is filled with corrupt individuals to some degree.
This one, however, has certainly distinguished itself as the penultimate, if
not the ultimate, in corruption.

There's a big difference between a conservative and a neocon.

Only in the minds of those making the distinction. Left wingers think every
conservative today is a neocon. Most conservatives believe themselves to be
correctly described by the classic definition. I'm a fiscal conservative
and a social moderate, but Doug has spared no opportunity to brand me a
right wing wacko and/or a neocon.


I don't recall many instances of Doug attacking you personally.

Pay better attention to his responses to my posts.

As I recall, you plonked me because you disagreed with my political
viewpoint. Yet, you don't plonk Doug. What's up with that?

I didn't killfile you because I disagreed with your politics--I did so
because you became so vehemently personal in your attacks. I'm gratified to
see how radically you've changed in that regard. I suspect you're a decent
sort, but your earlier (election period) posts were pretty rabid. I never
****can anyone because I disagree with them. I've done so if their attacks
become mostly personal (eg--Neal), or if they crosspost to the flonkers
(well over 100 so far).

Max

"Maxprop" wrote in message
k.net...

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
Max,

Firstly, I thought I was the most liberal. I'm insulted. :-)

Sorry, Jon--I didn't intend to omit you. Yes, you're right up there.

I'm sorry, but once I'm offended, it's really too late.


Secondly, Doug hardly ever insults anyone, and certainly never insults
people with the vitrol of many, many others.

I only ask that you watch his posts to me. Seldom does he make a point
without a personal jibe at the very least.

I have. He's not nearly in the same league as that psycho who posts under
various aliases.

Is it possible that something on a "far left" website could be correct?

Highly doubtful, just the same as with something on a far right website.
Neither side give much credence to fact, only to hyperbole and dogma.

Well, there are lots of things that Rush says that are factually correct. Of
course, you're deciding what's far left, so I guess you can pick what you
want.

The current administration is filled with corrupt officials. Same goes
with Congress. Many are Republicans and many are Democrats.

Every administration is filled with corrupt individuals to some degree.
This one, however, has certainly distinguished itself as the penultimate,
if not the ultimate, in corruption.

No argument here.

There's a big difference between a conservative and a neocon.

Only in the minds of those making the distinction. Left wingers think
every conservative today is a neocon. Most conservatives believe
themselves to be correctly described by the classic definition. I'm a
fiscal conservative and a social moderate, but Doug has spared no
opportunity to brand me a right wing wacko and/or a neocon.

The neocons have been self-labeled. Erum... this is my favorite definition:

Conservative - A contaminant that moves with the same velocity as water.


I don't recall many instances of Doug attacking you personally.

Pay better attention to his responses to my posts.

Did he insult someone is your family? Did he claim you have fleas? I don't
recall anything like this.

As I recall, you plonked me because you disagreed with my political
viewpoint. Yet, you don't plonk Doug. What's up with that?

I didn't killfile you because I disagreed with your politics--I did so
because you became so vehemently personal in your attacks. I'm gratified
to see how radically you've changed in that regard. I suspect you're a
decent sort, but your earlier (election period) posts were pretty rabid.
I never ****can anyone because I disagree with them. I've done so if
their attacks become mostly personal (eg--Neal), or if they crosspost to
the flonkers (well over 100 so far).

I was personal? I think I called you maxipad, which I wasn't the first to
do.

Max

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...

I'm sorry, but once I'm offended, it's really too late.

Then I rescind my apology. :-)

I have. He's not nearly in the same league as that psycho who posts under
various aliases.

I know this sounds disingenuous, but that's a horse of a different color.
We all expect BB and some others to be in a league by themselves, but we
seldom discuss issues with those folks either. Doug discusses issues, and
cogently, but he can't refrain from ad hominems, for some reason. It
denigrates his argument. "If you can't debate the issue, attack the
debater."

Well, there are lots of things that Rush says that are factually correct.
Of course, you're deciding what's far left, so I guess you can pick what
you want.

Not exclusively. I also decide what constitutes far right as well, at least
IMO.

Did he insult someone is your family? Did he claim you have fleas? I don't
recall anything like this.

See below. A fairly typical example, actually.

I was personal? I think I called you maxipad, which I wasn't the first to
do.

That never bothered me in the least.

Why didn't you respond to my final question, about Doug's most recent attack
in this thread?

Max

No problem with the apology. I forgive you. :-)

I didn't see the personal attack from him. Would you like to repeat it...
then, I'll pass judgement upon him.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Maxprop" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...

I'm sorry, but once I'm offended, it's really too late.

Then I rescind my apology. :-)

I have. He's not nearly in the same league as that psycho who posts under
various aliases.

I know this sounds disingenuous, but that's a horse of a different color.
We all expect BB and some others to be in a league by themselves, but we
seldom discuss issues with those folks either. Doug discusses issues, and
cogently, but he can't refrain from ad hominems, for some reason. It
denigrates his argument. "If you can't debate the issue, attack the
debater."

Well, there are lots of things that Rush says that are factually correct.
Of course, you're deciding what's far left, so I guess you can pick what
you want.

Not exclusively. I also decide what constitutes far right as well, at
least IMO.

Did he insult someone is your family? Did he claim you have fleas? I
don't recall anything like this.

See below. A fairly typical example, actually.

I was personal? I think I called you maxipad, which I wasn't the first to
do.

That never bothered me in the least.

Why didn't you respond to my final question, about Doug's most recent
attack in this thread?

Max

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
No problem with the apology. I forgive you. :-)

I didn't see the personal attack from him. Would you like to repeat it...
then, I'll pass judgement upon him.

Below is the last part of that post.

Max
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++++++
So far, it looks like your ad-hominem attacks are merely a pattern of
far-right-wing hate-mongering and peurile fantasy. Maybe you shouldn't be
so hard on Bubbles, really you're quite a bit like him.

Doug: in all seriousness, re-read your paragraph above and tell me honestly
that:
1) that's not a very personal, derogatory attack,
2) that you've not labeled me as a far-right, hate-monger,
3) that you've stuck to the issues at hand rather than simply allowing your
emotions to lash out in anger,
4) that in any of my paragraphs above I've been either as hateful or
derogatory as you were in this last paragraph.

Of course you can't. You simply are unable to abstain from personal
attacks.

Jon: is this evidence enough for you?

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++++

Seems pretty mild to me, although it is "derogatory" for sure. I've
certainly endured much worse without coming unglued. Perhaps a chill-pill is
in order?

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Maxprop" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
No problem with the apology. I forgive you. :-)

I didn't see the personal attack from him. Would you like to repeat it...
then, I'll pass judgement upon him.

Below is the last part of that post.

Max
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++++++
So far, it looks like your ad-hominem attacks are merely a pattern of
far-right-wing hate-mongering and peurile fantasy. Maybe you shouldn't be
so hard on Bubbles, really you're quite a bit like him.

Doug: in all seriousness, re-read your paragraph above and tell me
honestly
that:
1) that's not a very personal, derogatory attack,
2) that you've not labeled me as a far-right, hate-monger,
3) that you've stuck to the issues at hand rather than simply allowing
your
emotions to lash out in anger,
4) that in any of my paragraphs above I've been either as hateful or
derogatory as you were in this last paragraph.

Of course you can't. You simply are unable to abstain from personal
attacks.

Jon: is this evidence enough for you?

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++++

Maxprop wrote:
Doug: in all seriousness, re-read your paragraph above and tell me honestly
that:
1) that's not a very personal, derogatory attack,
2) that you've not labeled me as a far-right, hate-monger,
3) that you've stuck to the issues at hand rather than simply allowing your
emotions to lash out in anger,
4) that in any of my paragraphs above I've been either as hateful or
derogatory as you were in this last paragraph.

Of course you can't. You simply are unable to abstain from personal
attacks.


1- Is it a "personal attack" if it is completely truthful?

2- (just a single example) You think John Kerry is "the most
dangerously liberal Presidential candidate in history" which
is a confabulation of the far-right-wing hate-mongers like
Rush Limbaugh. That isn't to say that *you* are a
far-right-wing hate-monger yourself, merely that you give
more credence to them than to the evidence of the world
around you (I could give far more examples of the same
behavior from you).

3- that *is* an issue at hand, especially when you justify
your vociferously-expressed political opinions on #2 above.

4- Shall I google up a few of your comments for you? And add
to the fact that you are constantly calling me a liberal,
which you believe to be a terrible insult?

In other words, go work on a Laser. And when you're done,
try to not post about politics if you can't stick to the facts.

DSK

"Capt. JG" wrote:

Secondly, Doug hardly ever insults anyone, and certainly never insults
people with the vitrol of many, many others.

I don't know what group Ganz has been reading, but I see Doug insult Dave
and Maxprop in almost every post as of late.

LP