Why does the right insist

[Typo Fu Master]

I'm more in the "let's burn both down and we'll all be better off" camp.

Got any marshmallows?

 

[hashtag46]

The GB rubs on ya.

Before joining the forum I was prim and proper. Now I call people needledicks, libtards and all sorts of nice things on a regular basis.

 

[KingOrfeo]

I'm more in the "let's burn both down and we'll all be better off" camp.

Kill all the liberals, kill all the conservatives, and the moderates will die of boredom.

 

[Colonel Hogan]

Of course both sides call names here. The difference is a matter of style. I often call Liticons idiots, bigots, ignorant, narrow-minded -- disparaging words to be sure, but also words of definite semantic content, the kind of words mature adults use when they want to say something. OTOH, I almost never call anyone cunt, cuntface, dipshit, shitbag, queer, girlie-man -- the kind of words you use when you do not even know what you want to say, you only know you want to use what linguist S.I. Hayakawa called a "snarl word." The latter style, much employed by Liticons and little by Litilibs, is an obvious sign of mental and moral inferiority.

LOL!!

Well, there you go, ladies and gents! It's all about style points. If one invective is arguably more semantically focused than the other guy's then presumably his argument is better. And don't tell me that's NOT the implication of a person too stupid to be able to precisely use the language.

Nevermind that it takes a bigoted, ignorant, narrow-minded person to think that way. It also dismisses the possibility that bigotry, ignorance and narrow-mindedness was what your detractor was addressing when he or she called you a "dipshit."

Honestly, you can't make this shit up. Yeah, I know you just did, but still....

 

[Christobal]

Kill all the liberals, kill all the conservatives, and the moderates will die of boredom.

Well crap. The boredom is encouraging. Help me! Please piss me off in someway.

 

[Conager]

LOL!!

Well, there you go, ladies and gents! It's all about style points. If one invective is arguably more semantically focused than the other guy's then presumably his argument is better. And don't tell me that's NOT the implication of a person too stupid to be able to precisely use the language.

Nevermind that it takes a bigoted, ignorant, narrow-minded person to think that way. It also dismisses the possibility that bigotry, ignorance and narrow-mindedness was what your detractor was addressing when he or she called you a "dipshit."

Honestly, you can't make this shit up. Yeah, I know you just did, but still....

Projection is one of the most common defence mechanisms. I see it all the time in the accusations from the left. No doubt, from their prospective, it looks much the same.

 

[LincolnDuncan]

I think there are two kinds of Trump supporters:

Those who are the racist, homophobic, xenophobic or misogynistic haters

and

those who aren't but were okay with it.

I don't disagree and I don't believe that all Trump supporters are racist. I guess it all depends on the definition of racist. I try very hard not to generalize about any group but I think that the majority of Trump support is at least racially biased. Thy might not be misogynist but have an at least unconscious bias toward women. The word homophobic is unclear to me. A phobia, I think is an unrealistic fear.In this case of homosexuality or homosexuals or being thought of to be a homosexual.

 

[islandman]

Got any marshmallows?

Racist!

 

[KingOrfeo]

Nevermind that it takes a bigoted, ignorant, narrow-minded person to think that way.

No, it doesn't, and you know it.

It also dismisses the possibility that bigotry, ignorance and narrow-mindedness was what your detractor was addressing when he or she called you a "dipshit."

That is not dismissed, that is irrelevant. The choice of words remains a sign of mental inferiority, the motivation makes no difference.

 

[Christobal]

LOL!!

Well, there you go, ladies and gents! It's all about style points. If one invective is arguably more semantically focused than the other guy's then presumably his argument is better. And don't tell me that's NOT the implication of a person too stupid to be able to precisely use the language.

Nevermind that it takes a bigoted, ignorant, narrow-minded person to think that way. It also dismisses the possibility that bigotry, ignorance and narrow-mindedness was what your detractor was addressing when he or she called you a "dipshit."

Honestly, you can't make this shit up. Yeah, I know you just did, but still....

Stop making sense you magnificent bastard.

OK that will fly over the heads of most people. Yes Patton read Romells book.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Well crap. The boredom is encouraging. Help me! Please piss me off in someway.

Your psychedelic cat looks ugly and stupid.

 

[Christobal]

Your psychedelic cat looks ugly and stupid.

Now that just hurt my feeling and you should feel bad.

My cat can't help the way he looks,

 

[Colonel Hogan]

No, it doesn't, and you know it.



That is not dismissed, that is irrelevant. The choice of words remains a sign of mental inferiority, the motivation makes no difference.

I've often called people "dipshits" here, and USUALLY at the conclusion of a 10- or 20-paragraph dissertation using perfectly civil, articulate and precisely accurate words detailing factual research they should have done in the first place or correcting the blatant irrationality and false equivalencies of their arguments. I've observed many conservative posters here doing the same.

Perhaps if you focused more on the substance of their arguments and less on their style you'd be less of a narrow-minded idiot posing as a broad-minded sage.

 

[hashtag46]

As far as the GB is concerned, both sides call each other names.
Sometimes it's a chicken and egg thing, and it's hard to suss out who started first.

In my defense, I only say stupid and malicious things to those who trolled me or called me names ++. It just happens that all of those called themselves "liberals."

I tend to be respectful towards the liberals and conservatives who treated me in a considerate manner.

 

[EternalFantasy]

Projection is one of the most common defence mechanisms. I see it all the time in the accusations from the left. No doubt, from their prospective, it looks much the same.

Sooo bingo here.

i almost wrote this to someone today. The most common indeed.

Spot on!

 

[EternalFantasy]

I've often called people "dipshits" here, and USUALLY at the conclusion of a 10- or 20-paragraph dissertation using perfectly civil, articulate and precisely accurate words detailing factual research they should have done in the first place or correcting the blatant irrationality and false equivalencies of their arguments. I've observed many conservative posters here doing the same.

Perhaps if you focused more on the substance of their arguments and less on their style you'd be less of a narrow-minded idiot posing as a broad-minded sage.

You guys are on a roll!

This is another Bingo here! A well targeted one too.

 

[silver gurl]

I think both sides have done name calling. I have seen and heard extremes from both sides. Hatred is all around.

 

[BabblingBrooke]

On all of the name calling? I don't understand.

I think both sides are guilty, but I agree with you that many on the right seem to be all about name calling lately. I'm seeing some of the same comment convos as you (on the book of faces) and I have to believe that these are people who've just given up on reasonable conversations and lack the ability to disagree without being disagreeable.

There's just a lot of anger surrounding current events. People feel justified in their outbursts. Both sides do it, but we probably always feel bias towards our side, finding more validity in the argument we find accurate.

 

[KingOrfeo]

I've often called people "dipshits" here, and USUALLY at the conclusion of a 10- or 20-paragraph dissertation using perfectly civil, articulate and precisely accurate words detailing factual research they should have done in the first place or correcting the blatant irrationality and false equivalencies of their arguments.

Then, having made your point in an intellectually defensible manner, you didn't need to call them dipshits, did you? That only undermines your argument, and certainly adds nothing of value to it, all it does is make you feel better and look worse. It is beneath the dignity of an adult of your intelligence.

 

[Colonel Hogan]

Then, having made your point in an intellectually defensible manner, you didn't need to call them dipshits, did you? That only undermines your argument, and certainly adds nothing of value to it, all it does is make you feel better and look worse. It is beneath the dignity of an adult of your intelligence.

And you and your friends on the other side of the aisle have exactly the same capability. And arguably more of a responsibility to take the high road if you possess the superior intelligence that you've implied liberals have over conservatives. In any event, your argument applies equally to your own name-calling regardless of your self-justifying style.

So I guess your excuse for departing from civility is no better than mine, huh?

Now what?

 

[KingOrfeo]

And you and your friends on the other side of the aisle have exactly the same capability. And arguably more of a responsibility to take the high road if you possess the superior intelligence that you've implied liberals have over conservatives.

And we do take that high road. We display superior intelligence, which is not the same thing as superior civility, which we also display. What is your point?

 

[Conager]

I think both sides are guilty, but I agree with you that many on the right seem to be all about name calling lately. I'm seeing some of the same comment convos as you (on the book of faces) and I have to believe that these are people who've just given up on reasonable conversations and lack the ability to disagree without being disagreeable.

There's just a lot of anger surrounding current events. People feel justified in their outbursts. Both sides do it, but we probably always feel bias towards our side, finding more validity in the argument we find accurate.

That is exactly it. When I called KingOrfeo a disingenuous fuck it isn't simple name-calling- it's accurate. He is actually being a disingenuous fuck. Tonight he had me waste pretty much an entire hour carefully documenting how his little narrative about past deportations was exagerated. He then simply slunk away like the cowardly puke that he is.

So you can see how the words that I employed were perfectly reasonable under the circumstances.

To me.

And so it goes for everyone. Those on the left think that those on the right are actually intellectually inferior and likely racist. So then calling us dumb racists, to them, is not name-calling it's just accuracy in reporting.

 

[Conager]

.....

 

[magicalmoments]

OMFG, what a hypocrite.

Hahaha funniest post on the thread thus far. Again.

 

[magicalmoments]

There isn't a leftist who hasn't called a Republican a racist, homophobe, Islamaphobe, or a misogynist.

I haven't. But thanks for the tips.