Leonardo DiCaprio to, uh, save the world!

[alphamale]

Leonardo DiCaprio will make a documentary on global warming, undoubtedly with the usual left religious viewpoint. Helping him is the Tree Media Group (). DiCaprio has 5 degrees in Atmospheric Science.

http://www.eonline.com/News/Items/0,1,17912,00.html

Well I guess if many people get their politics and history from the movies, they might as well get their science there!

[viscousmemories]

Don't forget to cut-n-paste when Rush gives you your opinion on this.

[alphamale]

Originally Posted by viscousmemories

Don't forget to cut-n-paste when Rush gives you your opinion on this.

You aren't qualified to have an opinion, cut and paste or otherwise! But repeating your religious mantras is OK, and probably soothing for you!

[viscousmemories]

Right. As I said, don't forget to cut-n-paste when Rush gives you your opinion on this. I'm sure it'll be fascinating.

[alphamale]

Originally Posted by viscousmemories

Right. As I said, don't forget to cut-n-paste when Rush gives you your opinion on this. I'm sure it'll be fascinating.

Whoa! Post #4! Isn't it time for you to bring the big cocks into the thread?

[viscousmemories]

Originally Posted by alphamale

Whoa! Post #4! Isn't it time for you to bring the big cocks into the thread?

Bring them in? One started the thread.

[alphamale]

Originally Posted by viscousmemories

Bring them in? One started the thread.

Uh, yuk yuk hee heeee!

[viscousmemories]

Okay, I gotta give you props. I totally thought you were too stupid to get that joke.

[alphamale]

Originally Posted by viscousmemories

Okay, I gotta give you props. I totally thought you were too stupid to get that joke.

Uh, why do you totally speak like a 12 year old? Oh I get it ... never mind.

[Legs]

Originally Posted by alphamale

Uh, why do you totally speak like a 12 year old? Oh I get it ... never mind.

vm - he's using your observations now, I guess he can't come up with his own material.

[seebs]

Alpha, I'm curious.

Nearly every post I've ever seen by you has been derisive and hostile. I have never once seen you distinguish between disagreement with you and incompetence.

Are there any people you respect but do not agree with? Say, can you name any Democrats you believe to be honest and intelligent?

Because frankly, if you can't, it suggests that the problem is you, not them.

[alphamale]

[QUOTE]

Originally Posted by seebs

Alpha, I'm curious.

Nearly every post I've ever seen by you has been derisive and hostile. I have never once seen you distinguish between disagreement with you and incompetence.

Uh, look again. There are a number of stalkers here, a clown troupe actually, which follows me around, and when I open a new thread, immediately begins their clown act. They do that because this site is 99% liberals, it probably should be called "Liberal Thought Forum", and they know a priori they will lose in a real debate. There are a few exceptions - JC seems to have at least temporarily left the troupe.

Are there any people you respect but do not agree with? Say, can you name any Democrats you believe to be honest and intelligent?

Sure - Sen. Joe Liebermann comes to mind. Hillary is of course very intelligent, but very dishonest.

[viscousmemories]

Originally Posted by alphamale

Uh, look again. There are a number of stalkers here, a clown troupe actually, which follows me around, and when I open a new thread, immediately begins their clown act. They do that because this site is 99% liberals, it probably should be called "Liberal Thought Forum", and they know a priori they will lose in a real debate. There are a few exceptions - JC seems to have at least temporarily left the troupe.

No, some of us (like me) have resorted to ridiculing you because of your annoying and disingenuous tendency to create new threads to reassert the same crap after your ass has been handed to you the first time around. As you have said, you're just here to spread your ideas. I don't believe you're capable of or interested in any real discussion or debate on any of the issues you post about.

[alphamale]

Originally Posted by viscousmemories

No, some of us (like me) have resorted to ridiculing you because of your annoying and disingenuous tendency to create new threads to reassert the same crap after your ass has been handed to you the first time around. As you have said, you're just here to spread your ideas. I don't believe you're capable of or interested in any real discussion or debate on any of the issues you post about.

I give at LEAST as good as I get. Your real problem with me is I'm the only non-liberal here. If you don't think I can debate, why not keep out of my threads?

[livius drusus]

Do you actually want debate, alpha? Because you've repeatedly stated you're just here to propagandize to the lurkers. In fact, you once said we could go ahead and put you on global ignore, that whether members read or reply to your posts was insignificant to you.

I'd like a straight answer, please, without assumptions about my politics and motives if that's possible. Thank you.

[seebs]

Originally Posted by alphamale

Uh, look again. There are a number of stalkers here, a clown troupe actually, which follows me around, and when I open a new thread, immediately begins their clown act. They do that because this site is 99% liberals, it probably should be called "Liberal Thought Forum", and they know a priori they will lose in a real debate. There are a few exceptions - JC seems to have at least temporarily left the troupe.

I'm not talking about your interactions with the other people here.

Whenever you comment on politics, you always do so in a derisive and insulting manner. You swamp whatever points you could make in a sea of generalizations that call out for rebuttal. Why? Are you trying to get into the Coulter/Franken market and sell books that are mostly a success because people who disagree with you want to read them so they can be offended?

[alphamale]

Originally Posted by livius drusus

Do you actually want debate, alpha? Because you've repeatedly stated you're just here to propagandize to the lurkers. In fact, you once said we could go ahead and put you on global ignore, that whether members read or reply to your posts was insignificant to you.

I'd like a straight answer, please, without assumptions about my politics and motives if that's possible. Thank you.

I will engage in REAL debate, with someone who seems capable of it. The times I've been offered this here are extremely rare. Usually, I will mostly ignore posters who seem intellectually deficient, or irretrievably brainwashed - there's no point in talking to such persons. I didn't say I wanted to "propagandize" the lurkers. Being the only non-liberal here, I don't have time to fight every fight. I am more interested in presenting ideas to the lurkers that never see the light of day within the LME. You CAN put me on ignore, I don't care one way or the other.

[Crumb]

Originally Posted by alphamale

Usually, I will mostly ignore posters who seem intellectually deficient, or irretrievably brainwashed

How do you identify such people? Or is this anyone who disagrees with you?

[alphamale]

Originally Posted by Crumb

How do you identify such people? Or is this anyone who disagrees with you?

I figure they're intellectually deficient if they hold ideas I rejected at age 12, or if I could argue their side five times better than they can, or if they seem unaware of well-known facts on the given subject.

Irretrievably brainwashed people are those almost all of whose conceptions of a subject consist of regurgitation of ideological mantras or standard propaganda slogans.

[Crumb]

Originally Posted by alphamale

I figure they're intellectually deficient if they hold ideas I rejected at age 12

Don't you hold any ideas that you rejected at age twelve? Or do you still hold all the same beliefs you did then?

[viscousmemories]

Originally Posted by alphamale

Being the only non-liberal here, I don't have time to fight every fight.

Maybe the fact that you have started over 175 threads in 60 days has something to do with why you don't seem to "have time" to adequately defend your many wild claims.

[erimir]

Originally Posted by alphamale

if I could argue their side five times better than they can

Oooooh, I'd like to see that!

How about you do it for something like affirmative action, tort reform, or something like that?

This should be a laugh.

[livius drusus]

Originally Posted by alphamale

I will engage in REAL debate, with someone who seems capable of it. The times I've been offered this here are extremely rare.

I would disagree, naturally, given the number of times I've seen you ignore substantive posts in favor of flames or that derisive sneering seebs noted which has become a trademark of your political posts.

Still, it's true that you get more broadsides than engagement nowadays. I assumed that was your intent in posting the way you do. Is it not?

Usually, I will mostly ignore posters who seem intellectually deficient, or irretrievably brainwashed - there's no point in talking to such persons.

But not before calling them names. What's the point in that?

I didn't say I wanted to "propagandize" the lurkers. Being the only non-liberal here, I don't have time to fight every fight.

You're not the only non-liberal here. You're the only paleo-con, though. Were you serious when you labelled yourself as such, btw?

I am more interested in presenting ideas to the lurkers that never see the light of day within the LME.

Fox News has a large viewership/readership. I believe it's larger than CNN's, in fact. Same with so-called conservative radio. Since so many of your threads have been simple Fox News articles off their site, it doesn't seem to me that you're presenting novel ideas, but rather relatively mainstream ones.

You CAN put me on ignore, I don't care one way or the other.

I was referring to your comment that we could put you on global ignore and you wouldn't care, which is quite a different thing than any given individual putting you on their ignore list.

[alphamale]

[QUOTE]

Originally Posted by livius drusus

I would disagree, naturally, given the number of times I've seen you ignore substantive posts in favor of flames or that derisive sneering seebs noted which has become a trademark of your political posts.

Well, as Mark Twain said, its differences of opinion that make horse races.

Still, it's true that you get more broadsides than engagement nowadays. I assumed that was your intent in posting the way you do. Is it not?

Uh, no.

But not before calling them names. What's the point in that?

Recreation - it's fun to stomp liberal ducks just to hear them squack!

You're not the only non-liberal here. You're the only paleo-con, though. Were you serious when you labelled yourself as such, btw?

Let me give an expanded answer. When I was in high school, with as Rush likes to say a head full of mush, I was believe it or not a liberal. When I was an undergrad and started reading books like those by Adam Smith, Hayek, Rand, etc, I became a libertarian. Now, in an era when I see american society (the family, religion, the military, the academy, the language, the culture, the rule of law, free speech) ferociously attacked by the left, I've moved on to conservativism - the only group that will fight back.

Fox News has a large viewership/readership. I believe it's larger than CNN's, in fact. Same with so-called conservative radio. Since so many of your threads have been simple Fox News articles off their site, it doesn't seem to me that you're presenting novel ideas, but rather relatively mainstream ones.

I've quoted Fox for events, not ideas.

I was referring to your comment that we could put you on global ignore and you wouldn't care, which is quite a different thing than any given individual putting you on their ignore list.

You can put me on global ignore - perfectly OK by me!

[ChuckF]

Originally Posted by alphamale

as Rush likes to say a head full of mush

Slight misquote here. I think the proper Rush quotation is "a head full of Oxycontin (hillbilly heroin), and a variety of prescription painkillers to which I am severely addicted."