online pharmacy no prescription 2013-04-07 02:14:00|
reliable online pharmacy no prescription - online pharmacy usa
online pharmacy 2013-04-06 09:13:00|
online pharmacy no prescription united states - online pharmacy overseas
vxzbbki 2013-02-11 11:33:00|
Bnjyjj ucldlhzvymxh, [url=http://lhnngcatsroa.com/]lhnngcatsroa[/url], [link=http://zzaktcmqqxuu.com/]zzaktcmqqxuu[/link], http://avmpkacnfjye.com/
slasha 2011-01-16 02:20:00|
In my day punks got out more.
Also didn't fucking bother with mass mediated content.
Diogenes 2011-01-13 12:59:00|
Oppps! Sorry. Yes, Hervey Cleckley. "The Mask of Sanity" "The Twelve Faces of Eve" [at least, if I remember right].
You can avoid psychopaths, or you can destroy psychopaths if you recognize them and have sufficient authority. They are not insane, though. They are -- to conventionally minded people [like me] -- evil. That's why I come here: serious and bright people trying to sort through what we're dealing with and how to deal with it; led by a very serious and very bright person whose insights are truly substantial.
There's hope here.
The notion of a whole generation taught "a devastatingly dangerous mental illness..." reminds me that among the sources of our political and financial trouble are the teachers' unions. IP's [or CP's] bit about the old days didn't metion it [I don't think] but before 1974, more or less, our schools were different places. The takeover of the unions by the hard left, and the takeover of the shcools by unions, has been horrifyingly destructive.
DJMoore 2011-01-13 11:25:00|
Even skimming the Wiki article on Mask makes it clear you've presented a true insight.
My whole generation, deliberately taught and trained to a devastatingly dangerous mental illness.
This means that except in a few cases of close friends and acquaintances, public debate is useless. You can't convince them; all you can hope to do is keep the infection from spreading.
They're socialist tarbabies.
Eduardo 2011-01-13 09:58:00|
What's become evident to me is, regardless of how many degrees they may have, liberals are pussies. It's why they can't stomach a fair fight or a fair debate. It's why they only appear bold when blogging from the internet or giving an Oscar acceptance speech or droning at MSNBC. It's why they set dumpsters on fire at WTO meetings instead of protesting female castrations in Saudi Arabia or Africa. It's why they prefer to change the country through the courts, as behind the scenes as possible, because once they can get something written into law they can get someone else to enforce their will, like the police or some faceless federal agency. It's also why they are up in arms about this shooting. They are scared shitless and don't want to be the next to take a bullet from one of their deranged base. Remember the Congresswoman who got shot voted against Obamacare. The MSM and Democrats are sending the message, loud and clear: "We understand! We will do what you want!"
The left has been short circuiting debate, democracy, freedom, the legislative process, etc all because of the degree of their pussitude. The more people are on to them and figure out what scheming, dishonest douche bags they are, the more desperate they get. It's nearing the point now where there really is no point in talking to them. Any of them. Not for lack of trying on our side, but because what happens when you try to engage them? "Hey, I don't want to be fined for not paying into some monstrous federal health care system." Reply: "Oh yeah? Well fuck you! I just made it a law, so pay up, dickhead. A judge said it's unconstitutional? Well fuck him, too! Fuck all y'alls! I'm going to play golf. Somebody go collect my money."
The left has gotten us to the point where force is applied when we don't swallow their bullshit. It's looking more and more like force will be the only way to push back and keep the train from coming off the rails, and that's why people like Allahpundit & Ace are all tied up in knots. They're pussies, too. Just saying.
And yeah, they are probably all psychos, too.
IP 2011-01-13 09:01:00|
Diogenes. Thank you for your lantern. What I've been trying to say, obviously less well than you've said it.
Diogenes 2011-01-13 08:32:00|
The behavior we witness from the left is classic [as in, "as defined by Kleckley"] psychopathic behavior. The difference is that it has been institutionalized into our "press" and the democratic party from its sources in the various radical lefts of the '60s and '70s. It is most easily represented by the Alinsky tactics that we've been hearing about and the Cloward-Piven strategy as well. If you compare the Alinsky/Cloward-Piven crap to the definitional behaviors of a psychopath, you'll find that they are strongly correlated. The left has analysed psychopathy, refined it, and made it into their operating system.
What the rigth has not yet learned is that you cannot fight a psychopath on his own terms and win; you will always lose. In almost every case, a psychopath will decieve a psychiatrist, let alone a "layman," into believing him; and then will wreak havoc on the "victim." They are, I assure you, almost magical.
As long as righties think lefties are coming from actual legitimate [or possibly legitimately arguable] postitions, they will be tricked and will lose. It requires a tremendous amount of skill, inisght, and energy to react to reality rather than the thing thrown at you by a psychopath. The only person who I think has an inkling of this is [I shock myself with this, frankly] Glenn Beck; and he's not entirely clear much of the time. Krauthammer has a clue on occasion. Conrad Black's pretty good, well, really good; but he can't lead the right here. Mark Steyn, ditto. Limbaugh doesn't need to understand this; he simply handles it better than anybody [my wife has the same gift]. But he's not going to run for office. Maybe Chris Christy...
Anotehr way to think of this is older: diabolical [literally, in greek] -- teh evil thing thrown across the path of good. One must assume that everything "they" say is a lie.
DJMoore 2011-01-12 10:42:00|
I'm afraid I don't even have the excuse of muscle relaxants. (Interestingly, one of...THEM...assumed I was drunk. No, just my natural lack of writing talent, I guess.)
The thing is, though, that arguing with these people on the Internet accomplished nothing that I can see. They're not listening any more.
It's still worth trying to make points in a forum where undecided others might be reading, but arguing with the committed left is useless.
They're just not listening. It's hard for me to accept, because I used to be one of them, and I listened. I changed my mind. I want to believe they can, too.
Here's my strategy from here on out, in any given forum: Somebody calls out "Sarah Palin!" I make two or three points.
If somebody answers back, brings evidence, addresses my points, fine, game on.
But any group that can only explain, "Shut up, hater!" isn't worth the wear and tear on wrist and keyboard.
apotheosis 2011-01-12 09:11:00|
I understand that if you wrestle with a pig, you both get dirty and the pig enjoys it.
But if the pig has your house keys, you're pretty limited in your options.
You can certainly kill the pig, which is obviously how pigs everywhere assume we will react.
You can try to wait out the pig, hoping it'll lose interest in the keys. This is unlikely in the extreme. Even if you eventually get the keys back, they'll be filthy, hog-chewed pieces of shit that aren't likely to work anymore.
Or, you can just wrestle the damn pig.
The moral of this story: don't compose tortured metaphors while zonked on muscle relaxants.
DJMoore 2011-01-12 08:45:00|
The excuse I give myself is that stating my case in front of a hostile audience helps me understand my case. They attack the weak spots, I do some research, shore up the walls.
But this time, this issue in particular — I think you're right.
"They're smarter, better educated, and more rhetorically adept than you."
But also wrong.
They've got not a damn thing. Nobody's even trying to engage me. I throw arguments out, find counter examples, check their statements and show them wrong, and I get exactly three responses:
1. Sarah Palin.
2. Right wing hater.
3. The Klavan Explanation: "Shut Up".
No subtlety. No sharpshooting. I grind them to hamburger, eat them for lunch, shit them out, and they reconstitute themselves right out of the sewer and explain "Sarah Palin. Right wing hater. Shut up!"
Christine Green's father says the death of his beloved daughter is a necessary price of liberty?
"Sarah Palin." (Although I have seen one youtube loon claim he was a, swear to God, right wing media shill. )
Barbara Walters on the View says, Not Palin's fault, not the Republicans' fault?
"Right wing hater." Not Walters, mind. Me. No recognition of Walters at all.
Several catalogs of socialist-Democrat hate speech?
"Shut up!" In any of the many ways Klavan described, although "Right wing hater Sarah Palin put rifle crosshairs on a map! So shut up! And they're not surveyor's marks, they're cross hairs, so shut up, you Sarah Palin loving right wing hater!" is by far the most common this time around.
You cannot argue with a pack of rabid skunks.
I tried, and I don't think there's enough rhetorical tomato sauce in the world to wash the stink off.
I have evidence that the group I have in mind is actually fairly smart, fairly well educated. They have caught me out more than once in the past, which I consider useful.
But on this?
"Sarah Palin. Right wing hater. Shut up!"
It's all they've got, all they need, all they can hear or say.
Thanks for the slap. I'm awake now.
apotheosis 2011-01-12 08:00:00|
I guess I don't understand. I think the argument is healthy. I think ignoring the accusations could be at least as detrimental as responding to them, and maybe more.
I'm not as smart as you. I concede.
IP 2011-01-12 06:34:00|
And sometimes I think nobody understands. Monsieur M, you have hit the mark once again. Dr. Pangloss would be proud.
M. 2011-01-12 06:14:00|
This is about the Paper People again, isn't it. Reductionists, they reduce. Ain't it all they do. Reduction to psychology. Reduction to biology. Reduction to sociology. Reduce yourself to their pharmacology---it'll all get better. But to argue them--prosaically, for example, on the internets--opponents can't muster more than their own bland reductions. You can't beat them, but you can join them. In the land of Paper People, where you will never beat them.
Reduce and be reduced. Or, somehow, defy reduction. Which is pretty much what you manage to do here. And have done elsewhere.
Cela est bien dit, mais il faut cultiver notre jardin.