bleeding heart

I have seen you act in a dipolomatic manner. Towards myself, in fact. This is not a criticism. Yes, this is AW's new tactic. But why would anyone wish to do so?

It was today, post #134. I get it; apology not accepted. - After I apologized, you castigated me for what I had already apologized for. After I apologized, you castigated me for what I had already apologized for. So you were the one "bringing it up." I don't know why an apology should send you into another paroxysm of mockery.

True, we've all heard more than our fair share of wannabe prison-rape junkies extolling the virtues of predatory behaviour. Just looking for an excuse to vent their genuine dankness, I guess.

OK.

It's odd to me that Conservatives, of all people, would mock some sort of ill-defined Elitism.....oh well.

Exactly. It's not that they're not often bad...they're just not as bad.

So am I, and so is she.

No, that's very true. When I hear people accuse this entity called "the Left" of all manner of iniquities, I have to wonder why they should think lefties are immune to bad human behaviour...and why those who dislike the Left should hold them to a higher standard. It's frankly bizarre.

You've got to be kidding me.

Sure, of course you're right. Many of the more demanding and difficult jobs are derided and mocked. I think I speak for a lot of posters when I suggest that he's extremely aggressive, which is off-putting.

There are differences, certainly, but within a very narrow, proscribed spectrum. Tthe essentially centrist position--which, yes, has served Western states quite well in many ways--nonetheless demands a continuity of policies, and of ideology in a broad sense. Centre-right and centre-left both agree on militarization, bombing the crap out of foreign people under flimsy and contradictory pretexts, and favouring the wealthy over everybody else. That's a simplification, I freely admit, but not much of one (and less of one than what you're proposing, which is a partisan preference for one of the two major Business Parties, essentially two wings of the same creature, with some minor quibbles). The US is perfectly normal in this regard; the same thing is true for Canada, for the UK, for France, and so on. In fact, Western Europe has been the teacher in this style of rule, later adopted by its offshoots in North America and elsewhere, with minor variations.

I'm not sure people are denigrating the work; I think they have some issues with socialist's...style, shall we say.

You should relax, and lay off other posters just a little bit. Not that they care, I don't think; but this is feeling pointless.

Jesus, Melanie, you're on a roll!

Good question. Let's assume that "identical" is a word with a real meaning, and wait for the specifics.......

Zing!

Too good for this fallen world, truly.

So...you hate the Muslim self-hating gays?

Statists will also deride the sort of statism they don't like, while embracing that that they do. The entire point of this thread, and of Cybercoma's "false choices" whose intent you seem to have misinterpreted.

Yes, I do have that impression, expressly because you continue to discuss it. My only problem with it, as is plain from what I've said, is that you are rather sanctimonious about the awful way that others, myself included, debate with you. I'm merely pointing out that you have no high moral ground to stand on, and so I can't take your wounded victim status seriously. - This sounds a little coy; but I've never made any secret about the fact that I used to post under another name, and in I have brought the matter up to several posters, unbidden. There's nothing secret or untoward about it; it's happening only because of some minor glitch when I began posting here again, after several months hiatus...and I decided to keep it as it is. Did you miss my open and explicit apology on exactly this matter?: Even if the apology is not accepted, which of course is your prerogative....it's in bad taste to harp on the subject after the apology has been freely and genuinely offered.

Well, you do like to carry on about how others practice bad debating tacts...no doubt you are often correct. Breaking forum rules, losing all sense of civility, and calling someone with whom you're having a dispute an "asshole" is similarly a bad debating tactic. Yeah, I completely agree that this was unneccessary. Obviously you have no more in common with that little degenerate than I do. My bad, and my apologies. We all restrain ourselves on these forums...and don't indulge as you did. So it would appear that you are weak when it comes to restraining yourself. I feel confident that this is your own fault, not mine.

I'll give you that, sure; it's an unfortunate aspect of political discussions, no doubt exacerbated by the anonymity of forums like this. And I'm sure you'll agree that at least half of the remarks about the NDP on this board have little relation to reality...or, at least, very little seriousness or weight. Now the Liberals, on the other hand, deserve every insult they get.....

I think he does see it. That's the point.

Since you're addressing this directly to me, guyser, I would suggest to you that you haven't read her lovely exchanges with me. She candidly informs me that I'm an "asshole," and I have been too civil to return the favour. Or perhaps this was her being "misinterpreted"? At any rate, your helpful little lecture is best directed at the poor, misunderstood little victim herself, it would seem.

Now you're just being arrogant to provoke people. Why bother?