ok ustwo..
trivial aside: on the fraternity statement: it was in the subjunctive.
"were i to start...." is the subjunctive.
it doesnt mean i am actually considering it. it doesnt mean i would do it. it means that, sitting in this chair thinking vaguely about organizations that i see as serving a retrograde function...WERE I to on that basis imagine banning them, i'd start there.
you can figure it out.
jesus christ on a stick indeed.
your "argument" is basically a series of sophistries that demonstrate what i said before. you rely on a series of empty terms that you do not and presumably cannot explain.
Quote:
|
Academics don't tend to take conservatives seriously because such academics have no clue what they are talking about. They live in sheltered isolated environments, often sucking off the government tit, and have no idea how the real world works day to day.
|
this means nothing.
for example, you seem to be under the illusion that a university is not a space within which people have regular jobs and are just as much involved with "real life" as you are.
when you write that, you say to me that you havent the first idea what you are talking about. that because, frankly, you dont.
so what i learned from it is that you operate through stereotypes.
but i knew this already.
everyone knows this.
Quote:
|
Universities are perfect for people like you
|
ad hominem.
you dont know me.
but hey, dont let that stop you from making stuff up.
this:
Quote:
|
Liberals base their believes on what they think SHOULD work in theory, conservatives base it on what does based on human nature.
|
is limbaugh level nonsense, the waving about of an ill-considered straw men...another stereotype...well, two of them, actually: the first of those who oppose you politically, whom you do not understand but whom you feel justified--for reasons that baffle me--in feeling yourself superior to--and of conservatives, who you caricature as being conservative for the same reasons you are.
and you have a category in there---"human nature"---which is to my mind meaningless. but you presume to know what it is.
and i am the arrogant one.
you make me laugh.
you cannot possibly be serious in imagining that this is an argument that does not do exactly what i criticized conservatives here for doing--relying on a private language that has some currency in a very limited world that you do not and cannot either explain or defend.
you only repeat it.
its like that's all you can do, ustwo--and i say that because its all you ever do.