bleeding heart

But as Michael just said--perhaps you missed it--there are plenty of conservatives here who don't seem to have the same problem that you do, being persecuted by the leftist conspiracy that is the internet.

No, West...from where I'm standing.

An excellent citation. We couldn't ask for a more eminent and thoughtful personage than Breivik.

Have some appreciation for faith-based magic, wyly.....

Again...."mental disorder" is a term of mental health professionals. Oversimplistic. It is not a mental illness. You think it's some perverse sexual desire? You know nothing, nothing at all, about the subject. However, don't let that little triviality stop you: It's not a "cultural" matter...it's one of personal identity, at a core level. That is, these men genuinely feel like women; and these women genuinely feel every bit like a man as every other man does. I don't know why you can't get this. No; you wish to artificially keep people from being who they really are; they wish to behave organically; naturally. You are opposed to this. You are exactly what you think you are criticising. It'd be jaw-dropping, except that I'm already used to your foolishness. You do realize that you end virtually every post the same way, to almost every poster you "debate" with? Try some originality of thought, rather than regurgitating whatever reactionary mouthbreathers you're channeling. On the contrary, I have explicitly and purposefully only deemed you a hater on matters where you insist it is the case. And this is the only one, at least so far. Now, I know, you enjoy inventing things out of thin air: Nazis are leftists, you have intelligent things to say, and other farcical assertions. But some people might deem this dishonest. And by the way, Thinker: when you defend the Holy name of the sainted President Reagan...did he "ask[...] for your defense"? Curious, isn't it? the way you hold others to a higher standard than you hold yourself? You forgot to "thank" me for "exposing" them, kraychik.

Lots 'o "name-dropping" here, as elsewhere, kraychik. I'm assuming this is your method of conceding that you misspoke on the subject earlier.

But...but..kraychik....that's...name-dropping! Remember?

I agree. Argus undermined his "arguments" nicely. Seriously. Obama makes the same point kraychik made...and so Obama is a "Marxist."

Dear kraychik, Thanks for your letter of support. As I'm sure you understand, bleeding heart is too busy to answer all his fan mail, but I assure you that he reads each and every letter that is sent. His fans are important to him! Be sure to check out his revamped website, and visit the online store for t-shirts, signed photos, ringtones, and lots more. Members get a discount, so be sure to sign up now! Thanks again for writing, and we hope to see you on the Eastern leg of the new tour.

It's not about "opinion," it's about a core sense of identity. One that I (and presumably yourself) take for granted, so that we don't have to think about it. People aren't going to consider, much less undergo reassignment surgery based on a whim! I realize you hate them, kraychik...I'm just not completely sure why. They're no more nor less "obssessed with their genitalia" than anyone else. And it's not a mental disorder. Since you are using the language of the mental health profession, you might have looked into it to see their opinions on the matter. Or--crazy!--talk to an actual individual undergoing or planning to undergo the procedures, and realize that they aren't scary lunatics trying to destroy the social fabric of Canada, or whatever fears are driving your bigoted little opinions.

Very nice!

No....your view on this matter is "political correctness," and is a conventional and short-sighted view that is finally beginning to change. Just because you have a puritanical view of rigidly-defined gender and sex roles doesn't mean you're right. Fortunately.

You keep saying this; it's one of your chief topics, in fact. But if your really believed it, you would feel no such overriding need to keep repeating it. Truly, you think you are one of your own hated "intelligentsia" who must forever berate and educate the ignorant masses.

It has been argued that this is a very profound mental health issue, cutting to the bone, as it were, of a person's actual identity.

Yes, I understand the trajectory of your argument perfectly well. All that is bad is leftist, and all that is good is rightist. A rather beautiful little tautology, and one that informs all your stated opinions. You haven't heard of Saint Reagan?

Oh, kraychik...seriously, you need to grow some awareness. We've all had this discussion before, more or less word-for-word, with other extremists. No one is distressed; it's just that everyone (with the possible exception of Shady) seems to disagree with you.

No. You're a fringe fanatic shouting discredited nonsense.

You didn't even read my post...much less the Times article. I know this because you're insisting that you've missed the point. (No need to insist; I believe you, sincerely I do.) Pravda was an organ of state propaganda, so I am opposed to the idea automatically, on principle. You, however, are not; you take no issue with propaganda and deception....whatsoever...so long as sinister lefties aren't behind it. At least you concede that much. Again...if you had read the link that dicusses the propaganda model in brief, in the OP, you would be forced to take a different route here; this point is discussed. If you don't believe me, go back to the OP and actually read it before responding. A tall order, I suppose? Asking too much? This is discussed and dissected in the model...linked from the OP. That's not the argument. At all. There's certainly no conspiracy. That's silly. The very fact that the press is mostly free is one of the reasons that propaganda is so effective. Aside from a few commissars, no one much believed the Soviet State Press. They knew it was mostly nonsense. In relatively free societies, there actually is criticism, there are different viewpoints allowed. But there are pretty strict parameters drawn around it...self-censorship, not state-censorship. But then, I'm arguing with someone who has no clue--none at all--about the subject which we'e discussing...but for some baffling reason (unstated) believes that he a clue about it. See, you keep getting it factually wrong--not a difference in analysis, mind you, but actually misrepresenting the argument itself. So you have no frame of reference. The NYTimes was one of the chief supporters of Bush's Iraq War. Did you not know this, too? How often do we need to keep correcting you?

Citing wiki doesn't even begin to explain your comment. If you've got nothing, august, why not simply say, "I've got nothing"? No one will hold that against you.

Good advice, and I know you're right. But while some posters are so inclined, others make it a bit difficult.

Oh, please. Would you wish to be part of a country that materially supports overthrowing democracies in favour of dictatorships....or countries that collaborate with state terrorism at a genocidal level, and which makes Hamas look like the amateurs at terror which they are? Because that rules out both your country, and my own. But no.. a payout for Khadr, that's finally going too far.....

Just so. And hell, it's no insult to conservatives; conservatives hate the Nazis, so there's no shame, no guilt by association. Similarly, Ol' lefty bleeding heart isn't taking the rap for Lenin; I have always said that Lenin was a terrible man. A tyrant, and a killer. But it doesn't follow that he must, then, have been a right-winger! Such arguments are silly, an attempt to "purify" the very history of one's political leanings. A fool's game, as they all have plenty of skeletons and boogeymen.

Good man, and good point. I have my doubts as well. But when things do work...well, there it is, right?

It's not plainly an either/or. Absolutely, thank you. The number of leftists who are actually "communists" is trivial, irrelevant. We might as well be blaming "conservatives" for the ridiculous neo-nazis...whom most conservatives rightly despise. (Oh, wait...these arch-conservatives are leftists, according to our esteemed poster...I forgot!) The comparison is obvious, isn't it? I made the same connection myself. But I don't at all believe they're the same poster; few people would undertake the discipline to write in such distinctively different styles. We had some nameless right-winger here once, pretending to be a radical Islamist: he'd write things like, "I have three strong sons, and am teaching them jihad against you infidels!", and so on. But he didn't last, as such arttifice takes actual effort.

I'm not arguing this, and in fact never suggested it. So it's interesting that you'd lie about what I'm saying...and in the same sentence, call me a liar for what I never said! And what you're "exposing" is that you have missed the entire point of my post--for which you have no intelligent reply, none whatsoever...and so you deflect. When you make a serious attempt to discuss the very point of the entire thread...we can then go on to discuss your relatively trivial points, if you wish.