• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Imus be an idiot . . .

I do believe this. Why would you take offense at something said to or about you (or your silly special-interest group) that has no truth in it?

Because it was hurtful;
Because other people heard it and may believe it;
Because it isn't true, but you have no defense against it;
Because it revealed the speaker's cruelty.

I have had plenty of life experience, thank you.

I don't know your age, so I won't argue.

Truth is not subjective, why would you think that it is?

That we are arguing here and now about our own notions of what is true should show you that, and easily.


True. Therefore, I take no offense. :p
 
Then this like slingblade's c-word are examples of the height of hypocrisy.

And this just demonstrates how little you actual understand about human communication.

Thank you, have a nice day.




(Oh, and something interesting: "Thank you, have a nice day." is supposed to be a good, nice, happy phrase. In this context, it is a dismissal, and is more prone to create frustration or anger in the listener, depending on who the listener is. Hypocrisy, right? If you think so... then you don't know anything about communication.)
 
Last edited:
Because it was hurtful;

How so if it is not true?

Because other people heard it and may believe it;

Why would this matter if it is not true?

Because it isn't true, but you have no defense against it;

How so? Someone calls you a "sh#t-eater", it should be obvious to your friends and co-workers that you are or are not.

To others why would you care?


Because it revealed the speaker's cruelty.

How does the measure of the speaker's cruelty measure against the truth of a statement?

You are or you are not a thing.

If I am called a "bad-father" I do not take offense, because I am not.

If I am called fat I do because I am (slightly).

I don't know your age, so I won't argue.

I am 40.

That we are arguing here and now about our own notions of what is true should show you that, and easily.

Arguements do not change truth.



True. Therefore, I take no offense.

Good, because I truly mean none.
 
No, it demonstates how hypocritical and petty people tend to be.

Error: You are wrong!



...



Didn't you state that you would provide evidence that someone (such as Al Sharpton) was proposing actual government action, or government legislation, or some form of government interference?
 
I'm not a teenager.


[Dustin proof mode]

yes you are. I've proved it. Here this post proves that you are a teenager. Only a young kid would use such a childish insult and would make such a transparent attempt to appear older than he actually is through using "sunny" [sic].

How have I not proved it? Go through all my posts and show me how i've not proved it.

[/Dustin proof mode]
 
Whatever.

Hm?

It's not that hard to understand. Let me use little words:

What's used in one way, one day, can be used another way, another day. A screwdriver can turn into a knife. A gun can turn into propellant in space.

In the same stroke, someone that calls someone else a "c***" with meaning to be insulting is using the word in an entirely different way than someone who uses it as humor with a friend.

And, quite frankly, my mother suffered under a tremendous amount of verbal abuse by my father. She was called a "c***" over and over again in public. This isn't even mentioning the physical and financial abuse, but I'm getting more than a little ticked at you suggesting that my mom could only be offended if she was a "c***". That is an extremely ignorant, arrogant, and moronic attitude, suitable only for children under the age of 10.

Yes, and didn't you state that you had a larger penis than Dustin?

That was done as satire. I'm sorry that you did not understand that communicative process, but as we've demonstrated, you already have problems with communication. But allow me to explain this in little words too, in the vain hope that you might actually be able to comprehend:

I was suggesting that Dustin came to these forums as part of a "my dick is bigger than yours" contest. That's all he's ever done on these forums, is get into pathetic debates and flaunt how great and amazing he is, even going so far as telling me that he "puts me in my place".

I also notice that you only remark on the immaturity of the person that happens to disagree with you... funnily enough, considering how you love to erroneously throw the word "hypocrisy" around. Though in this case, I do believe that the term that fits is "double standard".

Now...

That's a red herring. Do you have evidence or do you not?

It is becoming readily apparent that the latter seems the most likely to be true. If you do not wish to prove your point, then the fault does not lie with me. No one is advocating government action. Moving on.

Do not use alternate spelling or spacing to get around the auto-censor.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Lisa Simpson
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Only a young kid would use such a childish insult and would make such a transparent attempt to appear older than he actually is through using "sunny" [sic].
How have I not proved it? Go through all my posts and show me how i've not proved it.
[/Dustin proof mode]
Please, don't go all POCLA on us, OK? :cool:
I was refuting nonsensical arguments on this forum when you were sucking your still mommies tit, sunny.
Dustin was ranting against college, and the wasteful expense of it, about the time I got to this board: less than a year ago. How long were you breast fed?
So, he's a liar
Most likely.

DK demonstrates grammatical ineptitude. The prose from that post should have flowed as follows, in order to make proper sense:

I was refuting nonsensical arguments on this forum when you were still sucking your mommy's tit, sonny.

Not doing well.

DR
 
It's not that hard to understand. Let me use little words:

Okay, if it is easier for you.


What's used in one way, one day, can be used another way, another day. A screwdriver can turn into a knife. A gun can turn into propellant in space.

We are not talking about use, we are talking about perception.


In the same stroke, someone that calls someone else a "c unt" with meaning to be insulting is using the word in an entirely different way than someone who uses it as humor with a friend.


This is hypocritcal.


And, quite frankly, my mother suffered under a tremendous amount of verbal abuse by my father. She was called a "c unt" over and over again in public. This isn't even mentioning the physical and financial abuse, but I'm getting more than a little ticked at you suggesting that my mom could only be offended if she was a "c unt".

You brought your mother into this, not me (Do not project your anger at your father onto me please).



You seem to get offended very easily, pity for you.




That was done in parody. I'm sorry that you did not understand that communicative process, but as we've demonstrated, you already have problems with communication.

Oh, I thought you were bragging or something and it was something that you felt we all should know.
 
Proof a "ho" is usually considered a woman and "nappy" hair is considered black and unclean by most people:

Originally Posted by Tailgater

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=ho

Find a reference that is not a woman.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=nappy

Nappy-Number 1 answer:

one of African desent who has tightly coiled unkept hair; one with locks of hair that is tightly curled that is unwashed and uncombed

"Sholanda has such nappy hair you can see her buckshots even after she gets a perm."

You disappeared pretty quick after I posted this Dustin. No comment?
 
We are not talking about use, we are talking about perception.

Yes, we are talking about use.

Don Imus said, "Nappy-headed hos" as a specific insult towards a group of women that didn't have it coming. It was meant to be offensive.

It doesn't matter if that was his shtick, was to be offensive to random people; he still was offensive to a basketball team, and that was his intent, just as it is his intent to be offensive to everyone when he goes onto the radio show.

This is hypocritcal.

No, it is not.

Dictionary.com said:
1. a pretense of having a virtuous character, moral or religious beliefs or principles, etc., that one does not really possess.
2. a pretense of having some desirable or publicly approved attitude.
3. an act or instance of hypocrisy.

Nowhere in there does it state, "Someone that takes offense at a word meant in one context, but not in a completely different context".

You brought your mother into this, not me (Do not project your anger at your father onto me please).

I am not projecting. But you are specifically saying that those that take offense at a word are those that the word applies to, period. That's moronic.

Let me make this more clear:

You are claiming that if someone that takes offense at being insulted, then that insult must be true.

So if I call you a retard, you'll only take offense if you're retarded. If I call you a goddamn faggot, you'll only take offense if you're gay. If I say you suck cocks on a regular basis to millions of people on public radio, and you take offense, then you obviously must suck cock.

This is bullspit, easily verified as untrue, and is a completely ignorant and insulting statement. Quid pro quo.

And yes, this does mean that you have indirectly insulted many people that have taken offense at statements across the world. This also applies to my mother. So I ask you to retract it.

You seem to get offended very easily, pity for you.

Moronic, arrogant, ignorant statements do offend me, yes. Especially when you are suggesting that the basketball team are "hos", because they got offended at being called hos.

I think that this makes you far more insulting than Don Imus ever was. At least I have reason to assume he wasn't completely serious with his statement.

Oh, I thought you were bragging or something and it was something that you felt we all should know.

Everyone makes mistakes.

But I would add that this demonstrates that perhaps your grasp of communication skills is not quite as strong as you may have thought.
 
Last edited:
I still proclaim this as a red herring.

GroundStrength:

Kindly provide evidence that anyone, Al Sharpton or anyone else, is proclaiming that the government should be directly involved in this case.

If not, then please retract your statement.

It does not matter if I mentioned a specific appendage on my body, that has nothing at all to do with whether or not you have evidence or not. To proclaim such is to initiate a fallacy.
 
Don Imus said, "Nappy-headed hos" as a specific insult towards a group of women that didn't have it coming. It was meant to be offensive.

I think he meant to be funny.



Nowhere in there does it state, "Someone that takes offense at a word meant in one context, but not in a completely different context".

Yes, it does.

3. an act or instance of hypocrisy.

I am not projecting.

Thank you.

But you are specifically saying that those that take offense at a word are those that the word applies to, period.

Yes, I am.

That's moronic.

What ever.


You are claiming that someone that takes offense at being called something, fits within that something.

Yes. Now you get it.

So if I call you a retard, you'll only take offense if you're retarded. If I call you a goddamn...


You may call me what you want. I will only be offended by the things that are true that I don't like about myself.

None of these things offend me.

Moronic, arrogant, ignorant statements do offend me, yes. Especially when you are suggesting that the basketball team are "hos", because they got offended at being called hos.

There you go getting offended in someone else's stead again. You really are too wound up.

Everyone makes mistakes.

Noted. Your penis is not bigger than Dustin's.
 
It does not matter if I mentioned a specific appendage on my body, that has nothing at all to do with whether or not you have evidence or not. To proclaim such is to initiate a fallacy.


Oh, but it made the thread interesting again.

;)
 

Back
Top Bottom