The Nubby Nitty Gritty
JoeUser Forums
From a reply in a thread @ HotAir on the just-released Finance Committee Healthcare Reform Bill:
I do admit I may have jumped the gun - but - my point still stands, why do you fucking bash people who are liberals? What is the point in such bullshit? It's that type of crap that screws everyone over.
That being said...you know, after reading this and then re-reading this, you've taught me something that I should've remembered. People just don't fucking give a damn about others, and they will do whatever they want, civility be damned. People like you and others are just going to keep bashing things, and implying that people are this and that (then back track and say that you're not, when it's pretty obvious). So, you know, have a great day, go enjoy your ridiculous actions. I find that I no longer enjoy discussing things here, it only annoys and frustrates me.
~AJ
I am confused.. what exactly are you two going on about? And what does it have to do wth the debate about good vs evil in politics or ideologies? I find that issue more interesting than you guys snarling at each other. Even though there is an entertainment value to it, maybe I should get popcorn for the next time I check JU lol. Cheers
For me, it comes down to the fact that it pisses me off to no end (call it a pet peeve) when people make snide comments. Nitro, and damn near all here make childish and snide comments at people just because they have a different ideology. Wtf? How is that mature? How is that civil?
But like I said, whatever. Nitro's probably going to give his two cents and claim I'm a many number of things. 
~AJ
As far as I recall, that is par for the course while talking about politics in the US - the making fun of each other and ridiculing and making snide comments. Every talk radio show, every anchor man or woman, breakfast TV, talkshow host etc. does it. I think it is immature but it is the way it is, and it is normal for you guys. I think I've stated it somewhere else that emotions get in the way of debating an issue sincerely most of the times and that it is a dangerous road to use emotions and aggrevating each other as a campaign strategy because emotions always blur things - but it is the american way.
Just make fun back and get a laugh instead of having wounded feelings, you'll avoid having an ulcer and save healthcare costs 
Personally, I find the american way of talking about politics ridiculous, using adjectives like good and evil and for some, comparing Obama to Hitler etc.. honestly, that is really bizarre for me. I like humanities and philosophy, getting down to the principles of ethics and morals and what it means to be human. People make fun of that mostly because they forgot where the things they took for granted came from, eg. natural sciences evolved from nature philosophists like Schelling and Fichte and many others that wanted to explain the world with their models but discovered (to their horror) that their model of the world didn't hold up to all they discovered. Because of that they had to expand, and that was the birth of natural science. People like Alexander von Humboldt who was a philosopher turned scientist.
But even if todays advocates of science scoff at the notion of philosophy having any meaningful contribution to anything (just people doing nuthing but sitting on their asses and calling that work, right lol), they're just ignorant fools who lack the basics.
It's alive and well here on JU
I think I've stated it somewhere else that emotions get in the way of debating an issue sincerely most of the times and that it is a dangerous road to use emotions and aggrevating each other as a campaign strategy because emotions always blur things - but it is the american way.
You're kidding, right? I mean, you do know you're in Joeuser land?
We need to break out the shovels cause the flames are starting to kindle. 
hahah yeah.. illegal immigrant so to speak
No honestly I have fun at this site, even if I have a total different oppinion sometimes. I enjoy debates and mostly just want to know why someone thinks the way they do.
Because he listens to people like Glenn Beck.
Amen.
Makes me want to move.
Beck is a Libertarian, the exact party AJ claims affiliation to.So let's be sensitive to his feelings. Glad to see you post Infidel, you must have finished your spell checking duties.
Not as long as you're still here.
Beck is to Libertarianism as Oreos are to health food; his actions (the repeated criticizing, bashing, slandering, etc.) of Barr/Paul, his followers, and most libertarians tends to cast a large shadow on his claim. Then again, some conservatives do reform. 
Dude, you're way too sensitive. You comment on something that didn't require you input (notice nobody else had said a word up to that point?) and you wonder why you get your fingers slapped when you stick your nose in. Infidel's and my exchange were off topic, and you felt compelled to put yourself into it, and put yourself off topic as well.
Bashing, now that's a laugh. Isn't that a bit melodramatic? I think you're looking for Barney's (the purple dinosaur) website ( for a little I love you, you love me time). Why don't you write an article and ask the folks if they believe they are getting "screwed over" by me or anyone else on this site. That's news to me. Maybe you should find a place more suited to your taste if that's how you feel.
Back on topic--- This is exactly what is happening in the US today with Liberalism. If you don't agree, you're childish, mean, uncaring. If you criticize, you're attacking, bashing, and screwing everyone over. These tactics are what the far left employs to squash any voice of dissent. Perhaps Congress as it defines and protects left leaning groups with hate crime legislation, liberals will be next on the list. Does anyone notice how conservatives are gradually being excluded? IMO a grand and noble idea being abused for political gain. Shouldn't the law apply to everyone the same, not just special interests?
Back off topic--- AJ here's your quote the way it comes off to me (bold my addition for comparison). Hope it provides clarification.
What does a liberal need to get your service, since you ignore their typo's, or is your benevolence only for conservatives?
My thoughts exactly when I heard the same of the Liberal Avenger!
Nitro, like i said:
1. If I'm curious about something, then I'll be upfront and blunt about it. Don't take it personal, because you do, and that only serves to hasten problems. Yes, I know...this coming from me.
I'm just trying to say that when you come after me (when making a snide commet, whatever), it only serves to piss me off, and then...xyz happens. I'll continue working on reigning in my numerous faults, if you would - please - reign in the snide comments.
There is just, in my opinion, a difference between out and out insults/snide comments (i.e being rude/an ass/cruel), and giving people a bad time.
2. If you go after me, then I'll show my teeth. I have zero tolerance for shit like that; I respect myself and just won't deal with it. Been through it before (and no I don't mean LW), That being said, I will definitely try my best to hold my temper back, and not insult you back (etc), but...fyi...it's a work in progress. Pretty much, if you've got something to say to me, or disagree with me - do it civilly, and treat me with at least a small modicum of respect.
So again, if you would, take this as a mea culpa.
I would actually agree that modern liberalism has become a rather deformed version of what it was/could be. It could be a great thing, a thing to counter (primarily) reactionary/special interest driven conservatism.
Nitro, you just don't get it. I don't care if you disagree, but you know, the unspoken words of debate mean that you respect other person, whether theyve had time to earn any or not. You show them civility in the discourse of your disagreement. This has nothing to do with whether you agree with me or not. I don't care if you have your opinion; all I'll say about that is good for you. I may disagree, but good for you.
Bottom line, debating...isn't bout lowering yourself to the level of insulting those who are merely giving their opinion. What happened to fucking honor?
In fact, why waste my time trying to explain what I mean when I could just show you something that hits at what I mean. THIS, below, is what I'm talking about:
1) HAVE EMPATHY
By far, the majority of people, in general, mean well. If you really believe that they are intentionally being evil - don't waste time in debate with them. However, if you really think about it, most people, no matter how deranged their position or how harmful such a position may be to you, hold it because they actually believe it is the right position to take. It is easy to hate a stranger but try to imagine how you might respond if a loved one were to take the same position. Hate positions, beliefs, policies, and actions but love people.
2) BE CLEAR
It is possible to argue with someone for an hour before realizing that you actually agree but are using different semantics. Even if you don't agree, miscommunication about definitions can lead to huge blocks of unproductive time in argument. Be clear with your definitions and be sure you are clear of theirs. Think of your first few rounds of discussion as strictly information gathering - don't make judgments at the beginning and don't jump to conclusions. Ask questions - especially about words such as love, religion, government, spiritual, moral, better, believe, wrong, etc.
3) STAY FOCUSED
Often, as emotions rise, it is easy to turn debate into a vendetta. The purpose of debate, in the freethought spirit, is not to demoralize your opponent, to make yourself look or feel good, or to enact revenge for other statements. There is only one proper purpose for such discussion, and that is to find truth - no matter what the consequences or implications of such conclusions.
4) DON'T WASTE TIME IN COMBAT
Most people are not open-minded and merely want to win the argument. Identify victory-seekers early. If there's little chance of them listening to anything you have to say, or if they refuse to listen to obvious reason, then it is best not to waste your time. If you must converse on such topics, be passive - listen, ask questions, and let them reach conclusions on their own.
5) KEEP COOL
Often, because they are feeling insecure of their position, threatened by yours, or simply unaware, people will use wording which you may find insulting. If these are raw insults by themselves, then it is best to end the conversation. If the insults are part of the argument itself, there are a few things to keep in mind. For one, he or she may not realize how offensive the remarks are to you. Secondly, this may only be an exaggerated word used to over stress a concept. Most importantly, focus on their intentions - not how you perceive them. If the words are offensive to you but you have every reason to believe the person wasn't intending to offend, then don't worry about it. In the end, remember that words are just words - get tougher skin and move on.
6) REVENGE IS POINTLESS
If offended in any case, simply tell them their words are offensive and why but do not answer with equal offense - there's no point to it. When you engage in revenge talk, you ensure that you will not be listened to, your position will not be spread, and you will likely hurt the cause for which you fight. What is worse is that you are hurting a good cause for your own emotional gratification. What is sometimes confused with enthusiastic support for a cause is actually selfish betrayal of it.
7) CRITICIZE POSITIONS & ACTIONS - NOT PEOPLE
Sometimes you may feel lulled into ad homonym yourself. Don't do it - even a little. That includes using sarcasm, humor at the other's expense, or even wording that merely suggests something insulting without stating it overtly. Insulting people is a completely separate task from debating. Insults never make your point better than plain facts. It is best to stick to the issues at hand.
8) DON'T MARRY YOUR POSITION
To be fair, you yourself must be open-minded enough to listen and really consider what the other person is saying. Put yourself in their shoes and imagine yourself believing what they believe - much like an actor. Not only does this help you to listen, it helps you to understand why they believe what they do. This will mean that you can both spend your time focusing on the key points of difference, rather than squabbling over fringe elements of the issue. Don't feel threatened or hurt if you are "loosing" the argument. You know you are not perfect. This means that you absolutely must be wrong about some things - you just don't know which. This might be one of them. You don't have to concede in one sitting but you can at least say, "That's a good point. I'm not sure about that but give me some time to look into it and think about it and I'll get back to you." If you look into it and, after careful consideration, find that you are wrong, then change. Your position is not you. It is a good idea to admit this openly to the other person to affirm them in their correct stance as well. This can also be an opportunity to show them that you yourself are not merely a victory seeker in debate. Letting others know when they are right is a way to "cash in" on your open mindedness and not only improve relations but set a good example, which will encourage open mindedness in others too.
9) DON'T USE DECEPTION
It is better to lose the debate than to win it with deception. If you had to distract your opponent with logical fallacy, ad homonym attacks, or irrelevant data, then you have intentionally spread what might be falsehood for your own personal gain. If you need shifty tactics, then you are probably wrong and should concede defeat. If you "know" you're right, then you should be able to back it up with facts and logic. If you can't, then you're either wrong or you need to learn more. Put the argument on hold to study the other's points further if you must but do not attempt to win by illegitimate means.
10) FORGET ABOUT WINNING
Regardless of what much of the world, including debate clubs, encourage and promote - for the ethical and thinking person, the point of a debate is not to win. When two people disagree, either one of them is wrong, or both of them are. This presents a good opportunity for learning and improvement - maybe for him or her but also maybe for you. If you win the argument you have helped to enlighten someone else, but if you lose then you are the most fortunate of the two, for you have learned something new today. Pride is irrelevant, and a vice when it leads one to be unethical or to care more for one's image or position than for truth. Finding or spreading the truth is more important than you.
( Source: http://dtstrainphilosophy.blogspot.com/2005/07/ten-ethics-of-debate.html )
You know, I won't hide it...I'm at heart and idealist and would love, LOVE to see everyone get along. No, not get along the liberal or conservative way, but just get along period. That, however, won't happen - just is the reality of life. But, a guy can hope for something a little bit better than this hell of a world, right?
These laws/rules (etc) should apply to everyone - republican, democratic, liberal, conservative, anyone and everyone. But the problem is....they don't. When Republicans get into power, they use and abuse; when Democrats get into power, they also use and abuse. Meanwhile, when the other party is in power, the other one will put the other in the spotlight. They'll demonize them and claim that they're not representing the people, that they're abusing trust, and so on so forth. Then the same shit happens. Neither party is best, neither party works. It's why I strongly believe in pushing to get a grassroots movement for third parties. The age of the (fallacious) choice between a Republican or Democrat is fading. We need fresh insight, fresh ideas.
So yes, I agree, but then again...I try not automatically jump to a conclusion or opinion on some of the issues that fall under what you said. (I try not to) Instead I try to look at it from multiple angles.
To each their own Nitro, remember what you said:
Have a good evening/night., ~AJ
Frankly, what is immoral is engaging in partisan or ideological politics instead of simply doing what is obviously right, practical, and necessary. Politics is what is evil.
Thank you, brilliantly said Mason! 
~AJ
The problem is in deciding on what is right, practical and necessary. Good ole Kim Yong Il has probably a different idea about that then any american administration during the last 60 years.
You just can't grasp it... I don't take anything (exception below) said here personally. Perhaps that's your perception. You'd probably be surprised at the amount of amusement things like this give me, even when it's at my expense.
As for me going after you, it's all in your mind. Do you think I stalk your posts just to pounce at the first opportunity? I've seen plenty of your posts that I thought silly and could have said something, yet just let it go. Just look who sought who out here. Paranoia doesn't look good on you.
Idealism is not suited to this environment. On the team I work with, I am the only conservative with one liberal and one moderate. We get along like brothers. Much different form of interaction.
If you believe this world is hell you have bigger problems than JU.
I remember what I said, and stand by it. I never said I know anyone here on a personal level here and I'm not angry at anyone. Nobody's bashing me, or screwing me over. Trust me I don't take this that seriously, why don't you try that?
Yeah these are lofty goals. One problem, I wasn't debating anyone here. Most posts are opinion (especially mine), plain and simple. You take it or leave it. AJ if you look back, most of the differences you perceive we have, arise from a comment you made concerning my post. I don't believe in debating on this site, I could careless if anyone agrees or not. I'm not here to change minds either. The only thing that will get a sharp response from me is when someone espouses the virtues of communism. Too many of my colleagues died in the cold war for me to stand by quietly. And few supporters/sympathizers/admirers lived through it as my wife has. One can be a communist if they like, just don't sell crazy around me.
Okay, here you go:
"Personally"
No apostrophe in "typos." It's plural, not possessive.
Irrelevant. Ever read "civil disobedience" or other texts of the like? they say slavery is EVIL with a capital E and that revolution is a required must against such evil. I didn't say slavery was ENDED because suddenly people figured out it was evil. It was ended because of a civil war which was NOT about slavery in the first place. But that doesn't change the FACT that slavery IS evil and that anyone with an ounce of morality referred to it as such.
I would expect a liberal to say that.
It is immoral to engage in partisan politics rather then doing what is right. Although sometimes partisan politics is about right vs wrong.
Ideological politics? well that depends, is your ideology "lets have communism"? that is evil. is your ideology "slavery is bad" that is moral and just and should be followed.
Politics is evil? politics is power, many evil people pretend to be good to get power from politics, but many good people also go into politics to do what is right. I wouldn't just lump all politicians all as "evil". (notice that I am lumping the ideology of liberalism as evil. Someone could follow an evil ideology because they are ignorant or stupid and fail to comprehend it and its consequences without actually being evil themselves)
You forgot the rest of what I said regarding Hitler not being "evil" if you fulfilled certain requirements that fit into his ideology of pure blood and the arian race and a world where Germany goverend the rest of the world - that is why it was called the third Reich after all. Reich means empire or kingdom and that is exactly what he wanted to do, conquer the rest of the world and create the successor of the holy roman empire of the german nation (962-1806). That empire was the 2nd, the first being the roman empire of antiquity. The somewhat preposterous goal to create an empire that would rule for the next 1000 years stemmed from here. Anyway..
Interesting distinction you made regarding slavery because I had gotten the impression that you argued slavery is evil and that's why it was fought.
Thanks, but as a conservative, you haven't answered my question. I guess it's only grammar and not comprehension.
Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
Stardock Forums
Liberalism at its core is coercion and force. For all the moral preening the Left does about how much they care and how heartless we conservatives are the truth is quite the opposite. There is nothing kind about using the force of government to compel ostensibly free citizens to surrender significant portions of their labor and property (income) to the state to serve the purposes not of the nation but of the State, i.e. the government.
Liberalism makes half the population servants to the other half of the population through various social programs that cannot be opted out of even though our lives are diminished by the confiscation of our earnings.
Liberalism root and branch is anathema to the American tradition of individualism as well as poisonous to liberty for how can liberty exist when the state seeks to control the lives of individuals rather than the individual himself?
Liberals are always trying to claim the moral high ground but how can this be a valid claim when their entire agenda can only be enacted by force?
Conservatism is the truly compassionate ideology because it seeks to free, and keep free, the individual from the state.
I do not now and will never work for the state and will die fighting against it if I must.
DerKrieger on October 19, 2009
Talk about cutting to the chase. I don't know who DerKrieger is, but I'd vote for him.