Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > Pol Lounge General News Thread of "This doesn't deserve it's own thread"

Pol Lounge General News Thread of "This doesn't deserve it's own thread" (Page 11)
Thread Tools
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 5, 2017, 09:15 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Yes, and he would have gotten in ten times the trouble for it.

That would be, like, insanely degrading in the context of several thousand years of men using women's sexuality as a weapon against them.
Actually I think it would be a sexist slur as your explanation clearly implies. It isn't really critical of homosexuality, or at least no-one at all is going to interpret it that way. He probably would have gotten in more trouble for it though, you're right on that. I'm not sure there is a way you could imply a female politician was being subservient to a male politician without straying outside the bounds of political correctness though. Lapdog? Maybe. You could talk about ass kissing but in a literal sense that isn't any better than being the aforementioned holster.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 5, 2017, 09:31 AM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Nope, it's on Colbert for saying, "Trump's so terrible that he sucks another man's dick". If you can't see how that's offensive to gay men, well, that's on you.
But that isn't the implication. Thats how you read it, but you're wrong because Colbert isn't a homophobe and doesn't think anyone is terrible for sucking dick.

The insult is about power. Trump is subservient to Putin. He is Putin's bitch. He does anything Putin tells him to the point that he will suck Putin's dick any time Putin demands it. You could even add despite not being gay and it wouldn't diminish the real message/insult.

Colbert is not an idiot. He knows that Trump, like you will take the simple conservative interpretation that you did and take extra offence as a result. But that is definitely on Trump, not Colbert.


Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
As for "saying whatever he wants", while it's true the gov't can't come after him for it, his network can drop him like a bad habit for it. What's good for Milo, a private company de-platforming him for being an ass, is good for Colbert. Just because you love the guy, despite the homophobic slur, changes nothing (except perhaps proving that you're less of a person for it).
The network certainly could drop him but I can't imagine he didn't run it by them first and its been pointed out that if they didn't like it, they wouldn't have aired it. I didn't even see a "not representative of the views of this network" disclaimer flash up anywhere. The BBC have been known to do that on occasion, I don't know if it happens in the US.

Milo appeared to touch a much more sensitive nerve with his comments. I think everyone who didn't take the time to consider his words in depth took some offence. Colbert's remark is a much more partisan one and as I say, I still expect most gay men to take Colbert's side over Trump's (not Milo obviously) so there are far fewer directly affected parties to take offence.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 5, 2017, 10:11 AM
 
Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
Yes, because every time someone calls a gay person a faggot, it's on the gay person for how "we know they will likely take it".
This is much closer to the analogy someone made with the n-word. Faggot is a well established homophobic slur, there is no ambiguity in the intention whatsoever. The analogy fails when you use the term against someone who isn't gay. Calling a white person the n-word doesn't make a lot of sense as its usually obvious they are white. I would say its more likely that a black person would refer to a white person via the n-word with neutral or even friendly intent than it is that one white person would direct it at another with the intention of insulting them.

When a straight person calls another straight person gay, its no longer remarkable to hear "I'm not but so what if I was?" Its all about the users intent and the subject's attitude to homosexuality.

Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
You sound a lot like the type of people you're claiming to hate.
While I consider this to be frivolous nonsense, this thread is proving an interesting reversal of some of the usual back and forth.


Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
Seriously dude, are you advocating for hate speech here?
If Trump and Putin were just two random guys then maybe it would be hate speech.

Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
I thought we all decided that wasn't right?
Only without consent. Trump seems to love Putin so the implication is that consent is very much given.

Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
And there we go, your admission you are partisan beyond a fault.
I didn't like Trump when he was a Democrat/non-politician. If you want to call it partisan, thats ok but I just really don't like the guy.

Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
Fair enough, but remember that being an asshole, even to an asshole, still makes you an asshole.
I'm not sure thats always true.

Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
Yes, lets all be like Trump! That'll show him!
We aren't blessed with too many options as to what we can do about Trump if we don't like him. With the GOP in total control of both houses and his comfort with running straight to his XO book before asking Congress anyway, he can do as he likes and no-one else can do much about it other than complain or call him names. Trying to undermine him seems like a reasonable idea.

It does beg the question as to why people like you are more concerned with calling out Colbert for calling Trump a cockholster than calling out Trump for being one.

I should add that its specifically being Putin's cockholster that is the issue. If he just generally enjoys being one then its fine with most other people, just not powerful foreign leaders.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 5, 2017, 12:50 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
Actually I think it would be a sexist slur as your explanation clearly implies. It isn't really critical of homosexuality, or at least no-one at all is going to interpret it that way. He probably would have gotten in more trouble for it though, you're right on that. I'm not sure there is a way you could imply a female politician was being subservient to a male politician without straying outside the bounds of political correctness though. Lapdog? Maybe. You could talk about ass kissing but in a literal sense that isn't any better than being the aforementioned holster.
I'm not sure I understand the desire to split this semantic hair.

The use of "cocksucking" as a slur has an equally long history. It isn't just about indicating subservience, it's indicating subservience at the expense of the status of homosexuals in society.
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 5, 2017, 01:37 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
But that isn't the implication. Thats how you read it, but you're wrong because Colbert isn't a homophobe and doesn't think anyone is terrible for sucking dick.
You don't know Colbert, you're only familiar with a couple characters he plays. How do you always **** up on all this Hollywood shit? Wow, you're wilfully obtuse. He clearly let his Tonight Show persona slip and unleashed a homophobic jab. Since you seem to worship the guy, you're willing to let it slide, even prop him up for it, but most people don't. And of course, we ALL know how homophobic Vox is, right?

https://www.vox.com/identities/2017/...obia-late-show

The insult is about power.
and while trying to stab Trump, over a perceived power dynamic between the two men (that's pure conjecture), Colbert bashed gay men. YOU don't care, because you hate Trump and feel it's justified, and continue to do mental gymnastics to try and bail him out. We know.

Trump is subservient to Putin. He is Putin's bitch.
Much like how the MSM, and the Left in general, has been Trump's?

He does anything Putin tells him to the point that he will suck Putin's dick any time Putin demands it. You could even add despite not being gay and it wouldn't diminish the real message/insult.
*insert comment about WAS's own sexual fantasies* Perhaps you need a date?

Colbert is not an idiot.
In that instance, he was.

The network certainly could drop him but I can't imagine he didn't run it by them first and its been pointed out that if they didn't like it, they wouldn't have aired it. I didn't even see a "not representative of the views of this network" disclaimer flash up anywhere. The BBC have been known to do that on occasion, I don't know if it happens in the US.
Citation for him running this by the network? I've not seen any evidence of this, it's just another assumption from you while you try to defend him.

Milo appeared to touch a much more sensitive nerve with his comments. I think everyone who didn't take the time to consider his words in depth took some offence. Colbert's remark is a much more partisan one and as I say, I still expect most gay men to take Colbert's side over Trump's (not Milo obviously) so there are far fewer directly affected parties to take offence.
Ironic then that it was gay men on the Left who spoke out and took umbrage with all this, not the Right. (See Vox story above.)
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 5, 2017, 04:35 PM
 
Poor Larry Fishburne, being cursed with such a wretched kid. First she hilariously blames Trump for her DUI (WTF?), and then drops trow by the side of the road and takes a piss in front of the cop, and anyone who happened to be driving by. The snowflakes have lost their minds.

Actor Laurence Fishburne’s daughter arrested for DUI in Florida | WJAX-TV
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 5, 2017, 07:16 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I'm not sure I understand the desire to split this semantic hair.

The use of "cocksucking" as a slur has an equally long history. It isn't just about indicating subservience, it's indicating subservience at the expense of the status of homosexuals in society.
I think thats true if you aren't being specific. I also think history is a relevant point. If you call a straight guy a ****sucker, then yes that has clear homophobic implications. If you accuse someone of sucking a specific cock however, perhaps their boss for example, the same could still be true but isn't necessarily. The implication is that you are trying to curry favour by doing something you wouldn't normally do. There is no explicit attachment of shame to the homosexual aspect of the act, only to the willingness to break your personal habits for personal gain. If you made the same accusation to a woman, it would still be considered self degradation for personal gain.

Back in the 70s or 80s it might have been perfectly fair to attribute homophobic intent to any and all slights and insults regardless of source but that was a long time ago. It says something to me that those arguing hardest are the more conservative voices here. They think they sound enlightened, catching out liberals being hypocrites for a change, but really they are just showing up how enlightened they still aren't because they can't conceive that in a comment with this level of specificity the homosexual aspect is neutral.

People here often like to take my casual assertions apart with legal level scrutiny and I'm afraid that the shoe is very much on the other foot here. Any sane court of law, would rule that there is no proof (certainly beyond very reasonable doubt) that there was any deliberate homophobic intent behind this remark because the specific wording and scenario involved do not require it for the jibe to work as a jibe. You then have to examine the source and there is no history I'm aware of to incriminate Colbert for homophobia.
Of course it won't stop the FCC from fining him as heavily as they can, but thats just a reflection that conservative America is still closed-minded, backwards and ultimately infantile when it comes to nudity, sex and bad words.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 5, 2017, 07:37 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
You don't know Colbert, you're only familiar with a couple characters he plays. How do you always **** up on all this Hollywood shit? Wow, you're wilfully obtuse. He clearly let his Tonight Show persona slip and unleashed a homophobic jab. Since you seem to worship the guy, you're willing to let it slide, even prop him up for it, but most people don't. And of course, we ALL know how homophobic Vox is, right?

https://www.vox.com/identities/2017/...obia-late-show
I don't really see how a talk show host's political monologue can be thrown in alongside your allegations that I can't tell TV and movie fiction from reality other than "famous people". Perhaps you have some problems separating unrelated things yourself.

Reading the article its clear Vox haven't really thought things through any more than you have. I'm surprised you aren't calling them snowflakes for being oversensitive and jumping on a bandwagon of taking unnecessary offence. Looks to me like a clear case of a knee-jerk reaction.


Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
and while trying to stab Trump, over a perceived power dynamic between the two men (that's pure conjecture), Colbert bashed gay men. YOU don't care, because you hate Trump and feel it's justified, and continue to do mental gymnastics to try and bail him out. We know.
Except I've explained how he didn't bash gay men. I've just added in my last response to Subego how any sex act can imply subservience when there is an external power dynamic at play (be it implied or real) and one party is acting atypically (by their personal standards) potentially as a direct result of this.

Its all starting to sound like one of those complicated issues around consent that I know you struggle with. I'm sorry if you can't grasp my explanations but they stand up pretty well as I re-examine every time I re-iterate them in this thread.

Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Much like how the MSM, and the Left in general, has been Trump's?
This is as much pure conjecture as Putin's influence over comrade Trump. I know you love your double standards though.


Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
*insert comment about WAS's own sexual fantasies* Perhaps you need a date?
Is that an offer, princess?

Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
In that instance, he was.
If I can't say he's not a homophobe, you can't say he's an idiot. Yet another double standard.


Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Citation for him running this by the network? I've not seen any evidence of this, it's just another assumption from you while you try to defend him.
Just a guess, but as well all know they had plenty of time to veto it which amounts to the same thing.


Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Ironic then that it was gay men on the Left who spoke out and took umbrage with all this, not the Right. (See Vox story above.)
The only gay man quoted in that story, who is indeed on the left as far as I know is Anderson Cooper. Unfortunately for you he was quoted on the subject of a 2013 outburst by Alec Baldwin against a photographer and not on Colbert's comment. I can explain why that outburst was different if I really have to, just ask.

Did you not read the article you cited as usual or was it just your even more common inability to follow plain English very well?
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Snow-i
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Maryland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 5, 2017, 10:30 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
This is much closer to the analogy someone made with the n-word. Faggot is a well established homophobic slur, there is no ambiguity in the intention whatsoever. The analogy fails when you use the term against someone who isn't gay. Calling a white person the n-word doesn't make a lot of sense as its usually obvious they are white. I would say its more likely that a black person would refer to a white person via the n-word with neutral or even friendly intent than it is that one white person would direct it at another with the intention of insulting them.

When a straight person calls another straight person gay, its no longer remarkable to hear "I'm not but so what if I was?" Its all about the users intent and the subject's attitude to homosexuality.
I don't think the intended audience defines the offensiveness of the speech. The speaker? Maybe. The audience? No.


While I consider this to be frivolous nonsense, this thread is proving an interesting reversal of some of the usual back and forth.
We all play our parts in the machine that is politics, love, and war.



If Trump and Putin were just two random guys then maybe it would be hate speech.
Again I'll quote:
Being an asshole, even to an asshole, still makes you an asshole.


Only without consent. Trump seems to love Putin so the implication is that consent is very much given.
I think that's a stretch.

I didn't like Trump when he was a Democrat/non-politician. If you want to call it partisan, thats ok but I just really don't like the guy.
I get that part, I just don't think it gives you license to say really offensive shit that would otherwise be intolerable.

I'm not sure thats always true.
It's right there in the first part. Logically speaking, there's no way around it. No matter what, you're still being an asshole even if you believe the person deserves it.


We aren't blessed with too many options as to what we can do about Trump if we don't like him. With the GOP in total control of both houses and his comfort with running straight to his XO book before asking Congress anyway, he can do as he likes and no-one else can do much about it other than complain or call him names. Trying to undermine him seems like a reasonable idea.
I think you're more undermining your opposition/credibility than you are undermining him.

It does beg the question as to why people like you are more concerned with calling out Colbert for calling Trump a cockholster than calling out Trump for being one.
One claims to be the moral superior (assumedly holding himself to a higher standard), then acts in a manner consistent with that which he claims to be superior to, is even worse than just being flawed in the first place.

For instance, If I keep telling you how much cooler I am than you, then go and do some really uncool things, I'm much worse than you for just being uncool in the first place. Nerd.

I should add that its specifically being Putin's cockholster that is the issue. If he just generally enjoys being one then its fine with most other people, just not powerful foreign leaders.
*shrug*
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 6, 2017, 03:02 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
I think thats true if you aren't being specific. I also think history is a relevant point. If you call a straight guy a ****sucker, then yes that has clear homophobic implications. If you accuse someone of sucking a specific cock however, perhaps their boss for example, the same could still be true but isn't necessarily.
To reiterate, I like Colbert, and I don't think he's homophobic.

Likewise, I don't think he intended to rattle anyone's cage other than Trump and Putin's.

What I'm arguing is his intent doesn't erase the historical context of the phrase and how it's been used since time immemorial.

Use of the phrase digs all that up whether it was meant to or not.
     
Paco500
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 7, 2017, 02:55 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Personally, I think Le Pen will take it
Good call.
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 7, 2017, 03:11 PM
 
Came here to post about that. Macron appears to win by 30+ points, 65-35. It is not far off from Macron getting two votes for every vote Le Pen gets. Since turnout is down from the first round and the number of invalid and "none of the above" votes is the highest ever, it seems Le Pen gained exactly zero votes between the first and second round.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 7, 2017, 07:10 PM
 
Perhaps the whole world isn't going to shit after all.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2017, 06:38 AM
 
Originally Posted by Paco500 View Post
Good call.
Oh well, this isn't the first time Germany has controlled France.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2017, 07:15 AM
 
You're going to have to explain that one. Are you accusing Macron of being a puppet?

Also: If he is a puppet, isn't better to be a puppet of Germany than of Russia?
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2017, 01:36 PM
 
The goal of the EU is to fully integrate the member states into one "superstate", with the head in Brussels. The next step is to create an EU army and dissolve the militaries of the member states. In essence, what Germany couldn't perform via force in the first half of the 20th century, they're achieving via diplomacy and capital almost a century later, with the ultimate goal being a one world gov't. That's far too much influence for any entity to wield. Power corrupts, and the tools for peace in one generation become the weapons of tyranny the next.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
andi*pandi
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2017, 01:48 PM
 
If we can't unite under common principles of decency, we'll never be accepted into the Federation of Planets.
     
Paco500
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2017, 04:14 PM
 
Don't forget the chemicals the EU is putting in the water that is making the frogs gay.

Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
The goal of the EU is to fully integrate the member states into one "superstate", with the head in Brussels. The next step is to create an EU army and dissolve the militaries of the member states. In essence, what Germany couldn't perform via force in the first half of the 20th century, they're achieving via diplomacy and capital almost a century later, with the ultimate goal being a one world gov't. That's far too much influence for any entity to wield. Power corrupts, and the tools for peace in one generation become the weapons of tyranny the next.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2017, 04:30 PM
 
Originally Posted by andi*pandi View Post
If we can't unite under common principles of decency, we'll never be accepted into the Federation of Planets.
The UFP is Galactist government with far too much influence in the galaxy.
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2017, 04:56 PM
 
Originally Posted by Paco500 View Post
Don't forget the chemicals the EU is putting in the water that is making the frogs gay.
Actually I was paraphrasing Nietzsche, but far be it from me to interfere with your Alex Jones fantasies.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2017, 04:58 PM
 
Originally Posted by andi*pandi View Post
If we can't unite under common principles of decency, we'll never be accepted into the Federation of Planets.
I do sometimes wonder how much that silly show influences what some people believe real progress is like. Unfortunately, Islam alone would keep us out of membership, if such a thing exists in the galaxy.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2017, 06:07 PM
 
How is Germany alone controlling what the EU does?
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2017, 07:30 PM
 
Who is the greatest economic power in the EU?
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2017, 10:41 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
The goal of the EU is to fully integrate the member states into one "superstate", with the head in Brussels. The next step is to create an EU army and dissolve the militaries of the member states. In essence, what Germany couldn't perform via force in the first half of the 20th century, they're achieving via diplomacy and capital almost a century later, with the ultimate goal being a one world gov't. That's far too much influence for any entity to wield. Power corrupts, and the tools for peace in one generation become the weapons of tyranny the next.

Last I checked, you don't get to decide what the EU's goals are.

As for becoming the tools of tyranny, the mechanism for this is for people like you to exploit the paranoid and the foolish by painting the tools of peace as an oppressive insurrection so they vote for divisive ideas, parties and individuals and risk generations of progress.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2017, 02:11 AM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
Last I checked, you don't get to decide what the EU's goals are.
That depends on whether we have to check Germany's ambitions, yet again.

As for becoming the tools of tyranny, the mechanism for this is for people like you to exploit the paranoid and the foolish by painting the tools of peace as an oppressive insurrection so they vote for divisive ideas, parties and individuals and risk generations of progress.
A Regressive, who sees value in limited speech, trying to accuse a Libertarian of exploitation. That's funny.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2017, 03:30 AM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Who is the greatest economic power in the EU?
Sure, but they would be the greatest power in Europe without the EU.

Also, by the same argument California and NY should rule the US. The results of the last election hint that they don't.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
Paco500
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2017, 11:21 AM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
A Regressive, who sees value in limited speech, trying to accuse a Libertarian of exploitation. That's funny.
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2017, 12:11 PM
 
^^ When you can come up with a rebuttal, let us know.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Paco500
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2017, 12:21 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
^^ When you can come up with a rebuttal, let us know.
A rebuttal to what? Me implying that you are clueless? I'm afraid I have no rebuttal to my assertion- I'll have to concede the point.
     
Snow-i
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Maryland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2017, 12:58 PM
 
Originally Posted by Paco500 View Post
A rebuttal to what? Me implying that you are clueless?
Stay classy Paco, it's easy to see you're winning hearts and minds around here

I'm afraid I have no rebuttal to my assertion- I'll have to concede the point.
There are plenty of intellectual discussions going on in these forums today, are you ever planning to join them or has the idea of contributing to our community completely lost out to the shill in you?

I know there's some intellect rolling around somewhere in there - believe it or not I am actually rooting for it to come out. On the other hand, ignorance is bliss so I guess you just keep doing you.

Here's some reading for you:
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem
     
Paco500
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2017, 01:49 PM
 
Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
Here's some reading for you:
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem
Right back at you.
https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/...6/Non-Sequitur
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2017, 02:26 PM
 
Originally Posted by andi*pandi View Post
If we can't unite under common principles of decency, we'll never be accepted into the Federation of Planets.
We'll end up as TNG style galactic supervillains.

Traveling from star system to star system and, you know... selling our goods and services.

For shame.
     
Snow-i
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Maryland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2017, 02:38 PM
 
Originally Posted by Paco500 View Post
Look, you can keep enjoying your snooty one liners, and childish attempts at discrediting your opposition through them.

Or you could try putting together an intellectual argument that stands up to scrutiny from your opposition. You might actually have like-minded individuals chime in to add to your arguments (there's a reason that hasn't happened).

The former will lead to the community continuing to skip right over your posts. The latter - hey you might actually learn something from perspectives outside your own and/or help someone understand where you're coming from. I've said this over and over to you - you'll get what you give. If all you want to give is the smell of your farts, which you seem to enjoy, be prepared to continue receiving as much in kind.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2017, 02:52 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
We'll end up as TNG style galactic supervillains.

Traveling from star system to star system and, you know... selling our goods and services.

For shame.
Yeah, I imagine a good lot of our politicians admire the Ferengi
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2017, 03:17 PM
 
     
andi*pandi
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2017, 03:37 PM
 
the klingons are unavailable! 404'd!
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2017, 03:42 PM
 
     
andi*pandi
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2017, 04:25 PM
 
the link itself works, but the video is "unavailable."
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2017, 04:31 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
A holster seems non sexual to me. But I'll certainly listen to how the gay community perceives it.
I haven't heard that particular word combo, so I second your suggestion: is it used as a homophobic slur?
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
Snow-i
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Maryland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2017, 04:42 PM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
I haven't heard that particular word combo, so I second your suggestion: is it used as a homophobic slur?
C*ck Holster?

Yes. It's been around for quite some time.

It's usually an insult to women, i.e. slut shaming.
If directed to a man, it's a more derogatory way of calling someone gay.

UrbanDictionary
Originally Posted by Urban Dictionary
3
cockholster
1) The mouth of any member of the female persuasion (women, homosexual males, etc.). (usually derrogatory)
2) any member of the female persuasion (women, homosexual males, etc.).
1) Hey, shut yer cockholster.
2) Hey, cockholster! Shut yer cockholster.
by Lothos Seven Seven Three Four March 19, 2003
^ That entry was made in 2003
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2017, 05:02 PM
 
How this discussion reads...

"Long dong? The word 'long' isn't sexual."
     
Snow-i
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Maryland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2017, 05:12 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
How this discussion reads...

"Long dong? The word 'long' isn't sexual."
Colbert is a popular champion of the left. I used to enjoy the Colbert Report, but considering Colbert and his writers cannot come up with any entertainment beyond thinly veiling propoganda and political opinion as "comedy", I've completely lost the stomach for it especially considering how much more extreme the rhetoric as become.

I'm not surprised there were many that abandoned the PC push to come to his defense. My biggest problem in general with the left is that the "ends always justify the means" and this is yet another case of it, IMO. "Homosexual slurs and offensive speech are okay as long as we don't like the person it's directed at."

John Oliver FTW. He provides comic relief while calling out particular issues with logical, well-reasoned and well-supported arguments. I don't always agree with what he's saying, but I always respect what he's saying and leave understanding his message.
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2017, 06:58 PM
 
Originally Posted by Paco500 View Post
A rebuttal to what?
To anything? If all you're good for is the occasional, piss-poor, insult, why shouldn't everyone have you on ignore?

Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
Colbert is a popular champion of the left. I used to enjoy the Colbert Report, but considering Colbert and his writers cannot come up with any entertainment beyond thinly veiling propoganda and political opinion as "comedy", I've completely lost the stomach for it especially considering how much more extreme the rhetoric as become.

I'm not surprised there were many that abandoned the PC push to come to his defense. My biggest problem in general with the left is that the "ends always justify the means" and this is yet another case of it, IMO. "Homosexual slurs and offensive speech are okay as long as we don't like the person it's directed at."

John Oliver FTW. He provides comic relief while calling out particular issues with logical, well-reasoned and well-supported arguments. I don't always agree with what he's saying, but I always respect what he's saying and leave understanding his message.
Agreed. In real life Colbert has become nothing more than the left-wing version of the character he played on the Colbert Report. It's kinda sad, actually.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2017, 06:59 PM
 
Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
C*ck Holster?

Yes. It's been around for quite some time.

It's usually an insult to women, i.e. slut shaming.
If directed to a man, it's a more derogatory way of calling someone gay.

UrbanDictionary


^ That entry was made in 2003
That pretty much settles it then.

Still curious if any LGBT groups criticized Colbert.



Originally Posted by subego View Post
How this discussion reads...

"Long dong? The word 'long' isn't sexual."
It begets the question, is it possible to use the male organ in an insult in a non-sexual way?
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2017, 07:24 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
It begets the question, is it possible to use the male organ in an insult in a non-sexual way?
There are degrees.

Male organ in the mouth is on the more sexual end of the spectrum.


And thank you for not saying "begs".
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2017, 08:23 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
Still curious if any LGBT groups criticized Colbert.
Since there was (IMO) no ill intent towards homosexuals, there's only so much to criticize him about.

Sure. I'll pull out my Language Cop badge, but I'm not going to write a citation.

I have noted these newbie right-wingers on the force went straight to unloading a full clip of verbs.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2017, 08:24 PM
 
[Takes out ticket book]

It's "magazine". $25.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2017, 09:47 AM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
Just realized Kellyann Conway fell off the face of the earth
Well,well, look who they pulled out of mothballs
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2017, 11:24 AM
 
     
andi*pandi
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2017, 12:50 PM
 
I can no longer tell when you're pulling our legs. :eep:
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:34 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,