Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
quickstrategy
Published Letters: 397
Thanks for proving my point to Rowan about being thin-skinned. One request for substantiation, a gentle jab about having had one too many, and here you are right on cue squealing about slinging insults and some nonsense about s&m orgies. All I had to do was mention your name.
You find slinging insults fun and games until the other side returns fire
Yeah, because that's pretty much all I do in here, is sling insults day in and day out.
Don't you find it hard, typing with that mirror in front of your face?
You're right about one thing, though: telling Rowan or anyone that they sounds like you was a harsh insult, indeed. Rowan, I apologize.
Strauss was a bit of a phony, in the way he used pseudo-classicism throughout his career, and not much of a Jew (if I may be permitted to say this).
As to whether or not Strauss was a good enough Jew for your tastes, I have no provenance to speak one way or the other.
But you definitely lost me as to how Strauss was a 'phony' who 'used' 'pseudo-classicism' throughout his career.
1. What was it that made him a 'phony'? What alternate moves or circumstances would have made him a non-phony?
2. What do you mean by 'pseudo-classicism'?
3. How did he 'use' it?
Don't take this the wrong way, because I genuinely want to understand what you're saying, but I ask as someone who's read a good deal of political philosophy, including Strauss, so please don't give me the 'let me explain it to you slowly in small words' version.
You know, I had no idea there was 'another' Scott Horton. Bizarre. Or perhaps, Bizarro, as in the world from which the other Scott Horton comes from ...
You're the one talking about s&m orgies, not me.
As usual, your non-sequiturs reveal a lot more about your own private fantasies than they do about anything else.
On the other hand, since you've introduced this s&m business I'll grant you this: inflicting physical pain on you would certainly give me pleasure.
He never defends a position so much as dances around it.
Still trying to type with that mirror in front of your face, I see.
My, my. Another armed thug trained by the government shows his true colors.
Trust me, the sentiment is shared by many of my non-government trained colleagues.
You just know how to bring out the best in people.
How do you see anything with your head so far up your ass? Got a periscope?
Another brilliant rejoinder from bucky. My, the logic of your argument is simply unassailable.
Is that pearl of wisdom something you got from your indepth reading of 'the Sufis'? Or was that 'the Gnostics' in action?
So now we're back to 'coward', adding 'thug' and 'woman-beater'. Nice! Keeps you from having to make any actual points, doesn't it? Don't think we don't notice.
And I'm grateful, really. The entertainment value is extraordinary.
Even leaving aside your reliable slide into the most puerile insults, your s&m fantasies and your unhealthy obsession with fecal matter, there are the cries of victimhood, the constant squealing about how you're being smeared and attacked, your sycophancy when you get called on it, and your tireless self-fluffing that I've come to count on.
Keep up the good work!
So, you cuddle up with your LBJ dolls and dream of killing gooks --- you know the sub-humans you and LBJ slaughtered.
Another brainy riposte! Wow, you can feel the earth shaking from the sheer intellectual mass, like the foot steps of a giant!
You really told him!
You misunderstand. I don't hate you at all.
I *count* on your many facile replies for my amusement. There's nothing quite as funny as watching a self-important blowhard project his inaquecies onto people who disagree with him and then paint himself as a victim who's standing up for his non-existent honor.
(Okay, there are funnier things, and it does get tedious after a while, but I'm not doing anything else at the moment)
Please, don't stop now!
what i 'through' at you?
from 'wince' I crawled?
And they let you teach children?
Thanks for those links! I'd read Krugman (never miss him) and the Janczsen (sp!) bit in Harper's, but the rest was new. Thanks again.
Thank you for sharing your (alas, aborted) comments. I hope you'll pack those up in an email to WaPo, they need to hear it. The JWR article also had Parker's email at the bottom ... I suspect your email would fall on deaf ears, but she should see what you have to say, just the same, if you're so inclined.
Thanks again.
From the Army War College, a survey of the misuse of "appeasement" rhetoric to sell people on foreign policy boondoggles in the post-war era. h/t Matthew Yglesias (original post at sig)
http://tinyurl.com/3jf4p6
Baldie, thanks. This is serious.
It makes me look at India and Thailand in a new light, too.
Also, the San Diego Zoo.
Aside from having William Safire on its Op-ed mast for decades, as has been pointed out, the NYT has David Brooks, clearly a conservative writer, and until not too long ago had John Tierney, whom Kristol was allegedly hired to replace. So they obviously don't fear having conservatives in their ranks.
Those are just writers on 'staff' (though in the case of Kristol, 'staff' apparently means he also gets to keep his other job at National Review). Examine the Op-Ed contributor page and see the ongoing presence of countless other conservatives who have (ab)used those pages to cheerlead for war, argue conservative economic and social policies and lambaste 'liberals' (though rarely ever to publicly admit when they turn out to be disastrously wrong).
Maybe the NYT does, in fact, live in fear of conservatives ... which would explain why so many of us think they have capitulated to them.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
