tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9138994904411225576.post1415608856589401115..comments2023-12-29T00:08:21.051-08:00Comments on fear of a red planet: From the US Embassy, DamascusGilman Grundyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06607416440240634159noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9138994904411225576.post-53503473415556503492011-12-06T22:42:50.124-08:002011-12-06T22:42:50.124-08:00I'll let it rest then on these two points:
1)...I'll let it rest then on these two points:<br /><br />1) People who turn nasty on me can expect to get it back twice as sharp and I have no sympathy for them.<br /><br />2) I am prepared to admit I am wrong if I can be shown to have made a mistake, and I assume the best in other people when I expect the same from them.Mike Faganhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08745281285031316740noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9138994904411225576.post-54577742361727787762011-12-06T13:56:57.560-08:002011-12-06T13:56:57.560-08:00Michael. Give it a rest. You say I was wrong on th...Michael. Give it a rest. You say I was wrong on the facts. I obviously didn't agree with that, not least because you didn't cite any facts in your arguments - at most you made your own guess as to what you believed the facts to be.<br /><br />Since I know what will now follow is an attempt to carry on the same argument on these pages, let me make it plain that if you want to do so you should not do so on this thread. I'll post your comments when they come up for moderation, but I'll not reply.Gilman Grundyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06607416440240634159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9138994904411225576.post-45420367403727302362011-12-05T21:29:00.139-08:002011-12-05T21:29:00.139-08:00"...your behavior within a discussion itself ...<i>"...your behavior within a discussion itself is embarrassing enough."</i><br /><br />Others started that negative tone, not me. Go read the thread again.<br /><br /><i>"Just this: it is very unlikely that a discussion which is driven by two or more different concepts will be "won" by anyone."</i><br /><br />JR... the debate was also about <i>facts</i>. Read it again. FOARP was wrong on the <i>facts</i>. On the one fact on which he was right, I conceded. On the major facts on which he was wrong, he didn't concede. Read it again.<br /><br /><i>"... but there are no rules of the game that would declare you a winner of anything."</i><br /><br />There are <i>facts</i>, goddamn you. I will have the two of you bound to the facts. Read it again.Mike Faganhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08745281285031316740noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9138994904411225576.post-15781446234034866132011-12-05T10:48:54.305-08:002011-12-05T10:48:54.305-08:00Mike: your behavior within a discussion itself is ...Mike: your behavior within a discussion itself is embarrassing enough. That you need to carry your peeves from somewhere else into yet another thread - it wasn't <i>by the way</i>, as you've put it here; it clearly kept you busy - doesn't make it look better, either.<br /><br />I'm not going to get into another discussion with you here - we've had many in the past. Just this: it is very <i>unlikely</i> that a discussion which is driven by two or more different concepts will be "won" by anyone. A debate between politicians may be won in that there will be opinion polls afterwards, and there may be at least some statistics to go by. Practice may be another way to learn about the value of a point in an argument, but the range of interpretation widens considerably there, compared to a poll after a debate. <br /><br />In a commenting thread, you may have the benefit of becoming aware of other views than your own, or of venting some steam, but in almost every case, that will be that.<br /><br />You may not like that, but there are no rules of the game that would declare you a winner of anything. If you want to win, try real life.justrecentlyhttp://justrecently.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9138994904411225576.post-58482673995006463802011-12-05T06:54:07.529-08:002011-12-05T06:54:07.529-08:00"...when opposed by someone who also does not...<i>"...when opposed by someone who also does not concede..."</i><br /><br />Not true: I conceded to you your initial point about prior criminal records, and I did so explicitly and without contrition. <br /><br />Other than that and the minor thing about you being a "conservative", you lost point after point to me, yet never had the deceny to concede a single one.Mike Faganhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08745281285031316740noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9138994904411225576.post-3502275057607396002011-12-04T13:32:19.315-08:002011-12-04T13:32:19.315-08:00Fagan, seriously, if you're arguing that peopl...Fagan, seriously, if you're arguing that people should just "concede - OR to continue defending [their] case" when opposed by someone who also does not concede, then you're basically saying that I should continue arguing forever. <br /><br />JB had the right angle on you.Gilman Grundyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06607416440240634159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9138994904411225576.post-25704735708021522492011-12-03T03:17:38.651-08:002011-12-03T03:17:38.651-08:00@JR
FOARP should have had the honesty and decenc...@JR <br /><br />FOARP should have had the honesty and decency to concede - OR to continue defending his case. He did neither. <br /><br />I might have to go out and make my arguments among enemies and other people who disagree with me wherever I can, and if that makes me an "inch pincher" then so be it. <br /><br />You however, can go divide by zero back in your echo chamber. Which by the way, does not seem to be attracting substantially more comments than my place.Mike Faganhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08745281285031316740noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9138994904411225576.post-28514542295029203382011-11-25T23:51:58.534-08:002011-11-25T23:51:58.534-08:00Take it easy, Foarp. Inch pinchers are best dealt ...Take it easy, Foarp. Inch pinchers are best dealt with by the Merlin's-evil-mother approach. Forget him, and he'll vanish like she did...justrecentlyhttp://justrecently.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9138994904411225576.post-72170676563701898292011-11-08T21:55:40.741-08:002011-11-08T21:55:40.741-08:00"Occupy Wall Street groups will not be allowe...<i>"Occupy Wall Street groups will not be allowed to destroy public or private property..."</i><br /><br />This is not true. One such group has even been encouraged to do so by a city mayor, for heaven's sake! See the case of Oakland under mayor <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/282260/disorganizer-chief-patrick-brennan" rel="nofollow">Jean Quan</a>. <br /><br /><i>"Speaking as someone of a relatively conservative political out-look, I am rarely sympathetic to public protests, especially when they appear to be directed to changing policies already decided on through a democratic process."</i><br /><br />So you're a "conservative" in favour of the legislature being used to shape society. <br /><br /><i>"... I find myself sympathetic to the Occupy Wall Street movement."</i><br /><br />Which is dominated by plastic, middle-class students in the hands of crusty old commies. So of course it is only natural that a genuine "conservative" would be sympathetic to such people.<br /><br /><i>"So far, rather than be directed against specific government policy, they appear to directed against issues that policy has failed to address. The parallel is, to my way of thinking, to the UK Uncut protests against corporations failing to pay their UK taxes."</i><br /><br />In other words, they're advocates of different and further government action to reduce income inequality and such like. Which, as a "conservative", naturally attracts your sympathy. <br /><br />And by the way, you could have had the deceny to admit you lost the argument in the firearms debate at J.M. Cole's place. That is, if you weren't such a "conservative".Mike Faganhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08745281285031316740noreply@blogger.com