Take this statement for example made by Pandora, one of Delaware Liberal's esteemed contributors.
"One of mike w’s problems is that he demands we all trust every gun owner, and that’s just not realistic. I have no idea who these people are – they are strangers – and, yes, I would be intimidated if I attended a meeting and there were people openly carrying guns – because I DON’T KNOW THEM!"
Let's ignore the fact that Pandora's claim made in the 1st sentence has never been espoused by myself nor any 2nd Amendment supporter.
Now let's change her words a bit. I will not change anything but the target of her ire. I could just as easily say "woman voter" or use gays kissing in public as an example.
"One of Mike W.'s problems is that he demands we all trust every black voter, and that’s just not realistic. I have no idea who these black voters are – they are strangers – and, yes, I would be intimidated if I went to the polls and there were large black men voting – because I DON’T KNOW THEM!"
Should those large black men stay home from the polls because some people are distrusting of them and are intimidated by their mere presence? Should they stay home from protests lest they unintentionally intimidate another protestor? The bigotry of such a statement doesn't change based on the group targeted. The fact that anti-gunners are so often deeply offended by such comparisions only further illustrates this point.
It would appear Joe Huffman and I are on the same page. We said almost the exact same thing one day apart. As usual Joe said it better than I did. Yes, bigotry is an ugly thing. These bigots should be exposed and ridiculed whenever possible until their views are seen as so socially repugnant that they're ashamed and afraid to express them in public.
Want to really see how ridiculous it is: change it to car/driver
"One of mike w’s problems is that he demands we all trust every car owner, and that’s just not realistic. I have no idea who these people are – they are strangers – and, yes, I would be intimidated if I drove on a street and there were people openly driving – because I DON’T KNOW THEM
Yes, that is exactly what we do every day with people. We let them near us with 3,000 pound lethal weapons.
You called it -Bigotry, pure and simple.
Coincidental timing - I just finished up a post from yesterday with this line:
I guess I should not be surprised - discriminating against one civil right is no different than discriminating against another.
And that applies whether people are discriminating against equal standing under the law, self-defense, freedom of expression, or any other intrinsic, natural right. People who stand up against rights are discriminatory bigots, no matter how often or vehemently they may claim otherwise.
I don't find that convincing at all. You guys have been doing this to me for some time now. When we're talking about gun owners, that's what we're talking about. It makes no sense to replace the words with something else.
And besides, if the supposed bigotry is so obvious, why would you have to substitute the words with something else? You wouldn't have to because there's no bigotry there and the substitution game doesn't work.
A civil right is a civil right is a civil right is a civil right, MikeB. It does not matter whether you are discriminating against someone because they dare to want equal treatment in society, or whether you are discriminating against them because they dare to want to defed themselves, or whether you are discriminating against someone because they are freely expressing themselves - it is still bigoted discrimination.
Furthermore, racism and "gun control" go hand-in-hand, or have you not heard how gun control is "bad news" for blacks, and how gun control has its roots very deep in racism?
Somehow, it really should not surprise me that you do not understand us rephrasing the situation to better explain it, given your continued and incessant reliance on the logical fallacy of "proof by vigorous assertion". We are trying to make our points, MikeB, that is why we present the argument using different methods. No, we are not trying to make our points to you - you are already a lost cause, given how your mind is already occluded by hatred, fear, and bigotry - but we are trying to illustrate, to the world, just how pervasive, consistent, and despicable your bigotry really is.
Which, in a nutshell, adequately describes why you so very hate us using that tactic. I know you do not understand it, but that should surprise no one.
If you stand against one civil right, you might as well stand against them all, especially when that civil right is one which allows us to keep ourselves alive.
And right on cue MikeB proves this isn't about safety
"When we're talking about gun owners, "
YOU are talking about gun owners. We are talking about rights and criminals.
IF I'm not a criminal, why should I have to give up my right.
We haven't PROVEN you are a person who produces child pron....yet you COULD BE right? So, march your happy self down and register your computer and camera, submit to a background check, submit fingerprints, limit yourself to one blog post a month, and on and on. By the way, you can not carry a laptop, cell phone (with assault characteristics like a camera), a camera of any sort without a carry permit. It will only cost you $250 dollars.
YOUR rights are subject "reasonable" restrictions, isn't that correct?
Isn't that what you are telling us? Our right to keep and bear arms is subject to those same reasonable restrictions?
Word substitution is always fun, and illuminating too!
I don't find that convincing at all. You guys have been doing this to me for some time now.
Oh, pooooor, persecuted Mikey, just look at the mean ole gun owners picking on him! Dude, you want some cheese with that whine?
if the supposed bigotry is so obvious, why would you have to substitute the words with something else? You wouldn't have to because there's no bigotry there and the substitution game doesn't work.
Because, as you so aptly show with your last sentence, some people refuse to see the bigotry unless you make the comparison/substitution and put it right there for them.
Some, like you, will steadfastly deny it even when it's staring you right in the face.
Linoge, You are a hoot. Keep singin' it, brother.
"you are already a lost cause, given how your mind is already occluded by hatred, fear, and bigotry - but we are trying to illustrate, to the world, just how pervasive, consistent, and despicable your bigotry really is."
Pistolero, nice pic.
Just the same as Reverend Wright's anti-white and anti-Jew racism is really no different than the Aryan Nation's anti-black and anti-Jew (Gee, they have something in common!) racism. Anti-Rights bigots are anti-rights bigots.
BTW why do we need to substitute words? Technically we don't. That's the reason why gun rights are being restored and gun control movements are in a dead stall across the nation.
Mike W. was putting this post up for bigots like you and Pandora.
note how defensive and offended you got too!
It appears to work! You don't like being called a bigot, STOP BEING A BIGOT!
Either that or put on a hood!
You are right Weer'd they get offended when you expose their bigotry.
Pandora's response was as follows in the linked thread.
Mike, you’re a lying sack of sh*t. I never wrote any such thing. How dare you post such a vile lie and attribute it to me.
Of course I never said she wrote it. I made it clear that I was posting an *edited* version of her original comment.
Nemski apparently couldn't be bothered to read either, saying
Mike W, the problem I have is that your comment attributed the racist and bigoted words to Pandora without really explaining yourself. Next time when quoting someone do it accurately.
The truly scary thing is that people this dumb actually live and vote in the same district as me......A prime example of exactly how & why we get the government we deserve.
I will say this for MikeB - he stays on message.
Rarely deviates from the standards - guns are bad, guns are unique, we aren't talking about things that can kill people we are talking about guns, guns, guns, guns.
Somewhere I saw a definition that fit
Bigot -: a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or
treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance
Tell me exactly how you don't fit that definition MIKEB?
Jesus, I just read the thread (or most of it) Wow, they keep the classiness high 'round there!
When did they lift the ban on you, Mike W? And did they give a reason?
So after reading that thread, I have a question for MikeB. If Delaware liberal isn't a bigot discussion group, how does he explain the crude methods of handling Mike W over there?
I would expect a Black or a Jew openly posting on a White Supremacist site to get similar treatment.
That is the best response you can formulate, MikeB? No refutation, no defense, no challenge, just grade-school caliber name-calling?
Ok, here is your last chance to prove to me that you are something other than a useless troll: explain, to the group, how discriminating against one natural right is logically, rationally, and/or intrinsically different from discriminating against another natural right. For instance, self-defense is an inherent natural right of all human beings. Furthermore, equal treatment under any laws, society, or culture is another natural right of all human beings.
So what is the difference? Where does your line reside, and why? Take all of the time and space you need for an explanation, but bear in mind that citations, supporting documentation, and references are required. Furthermore, logical fallacies will immediately invalidate any argument they are being used to support. Present your case, using facts, precedents, and reality, or stop wasting our time.
In other news, you did not seriously think that the folks at DL had a firm grasp of reading comprehension, did you, MikeW? They can hardly reason their way out of a paper bag, much less understand what someone is trying to say when a few words are changed around in a quote...
Linoge - Well I tried to be clear by specifically stating that I'd changed the words of her quote in order to highlight her bigotry.
Still at least 3 commenters immediately afterwards failed to grasp what I'd done. I'm continually amazed that some people are capable of even functioning in society with such poor comprehension & reasoning skills.
Linoge, You should know by now that I would never ever allow you to dictate terms to me like that, like you're the teacher and I'm the student.
Weer'd, I don't know about Deleware Liberal. I know about me. I welcome Mike W. on my site and have respect for him. That means I try not to stoop to the level f name-calling, and believe it or not, I try not to be too offended when he does it to me, or you or Bob for that matter.
When it goes too far I use my comment moderation, but even that I do sparingly.
And MikeB continues to militantly not get it, though this comes as no surprise to anyone. This is not about a supposed teacher-student relationship, and this is not about me dictating terms... this is about you being expected to do what all people do - when you have an opinion, present your arguments, your rationales, your positions, and your stances using proven facts, sound logic, and the citations/sources/supporting evidence to support all of it.
This is not something new or unusual, MikeB, and this is not something I just pulled out of my head - if you have ever done a research paper for school, this is nothing more than the same exact thing, on a larger scale. However, just because you are out of school (one presumes), that does no tmean you can get away with saying, "this is true because I say it is true," and not having people call you on it.
However, the fact that you are unwilling or unable to defend your position clearly indicates that you truly are nothing more than a common troll, not worthy of anyone's time or attention, apart from ridicule, disdain, and disproving your baseless, fallacious, and specious nonsense whenever you dare to post it (which rarely takes any effort at all). I suppose I should thank you for making that clear, but I just cannot get past how much of a halfwitted, lazy jackass you must be for being unwilling to support your own gorramed position. Hell, your tactics are so half-assed, your reasoning so inherently nonsensical, and your overall arguments so completely dimwitted, you do not even make a good troll...
Linoge, What's gorramed mean? I saw you used it on Breda's site the other day.
And MikeB employs standard tactic #7 - change of subject.
Stay on subject Sparky.
Is it bigotry to continue your actions...if not explain why using more then the rationale of "Because I said so".
Can you and will you accept Linoge's challenge?
Stay on subject Sparky.
It seems that you want me and other gun owners to trust hoplophobes like yourself. That is just not going to happen. I have no clue who you are – you are a stranger to me. Yes, I would be intimidated if I walked down the street and people were denying me my 2nd amendment rights because I DON’T KNOW THEM. Therefore, I will continue to show you as a bigot.
And MikeB employs standard tactic #3....ignore the questions.
Post a Comment