|
Post by aboutwell on Apr 26, 2018 21:40:26 GMT -5
You mean we are now forbidden to use slang language here?... I guess we'd better not... you guys have enough problems reading and understanding when we don't...
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Apr 26, 2018 21:43:56 GMT -5
You mean we are now forbidden to use slang language here?... I guess we'd better not... you guys have enough problems reading and understanding when we don't... Of course you're not forbidden to use slang. You and PAM can use whatever made-up nonsense terms you want. In fact, I highly encourage it.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Apr 27, 2018 9:08:15 GMT -5
For the terminally confused, who clearly don't understand why Godwin's Law is a real thing, and Hanson's Law isn't:
Nazi's haven't existed in any real numbers in decades, and they are nearly universally understood to espouse the most abhorrent ideology in the history of the human race. Calling random people Nazi's is a cop out, unless of course they've done something fascistic like tried to destroy basic human rights contained in the Bill of Rights. Or, turned over 20% of the economy to large corporations under tight government control. The former being an example of totalitarian power grabbing; the latter being an example of fascistic economic theory.
Liberals, on the other hand, are still clinging to some degree of political and societal power. Calling them out on their ignorance and failures is simply speaking truth to power.
Don't get me wrong, I understand the confusion. Nazism and fascism are subsets of liberalism, so on the surface, it isn't entirely unreasonable to assume that Godwin's Law and Hanson's Law are, at their core, basically the same thing. However it isn't really appropriate to tarnish the larger group (liberals) with the genocides committed by the smaller splinter groups (communists and fascists) for the same reason you can't lump all gun owners in with the Las Vegas sniper.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Apr 27, 2018 9:10:33 GMT -5
Since he has no idea what we are talking about, and wouldn't know judicial misconduct if it bit him, he has someone mention "Hanson's law", so he decides to try it out for himself. Can't ignore you this time, idiot. HANSON's law. With an O, not an E. Please learn to read, though I doubt you ever will. Judicial misconduct? I worked for a court system. I understand Judicial misconduct. Have you ever had a job? You've never mentioned any, so I'm guessing not. Another one of our "entitled" people continuing to live off welfare and SNAP? I guess you can't tell an "O" from an "E". I spelled it exactly the same way you did, so what's your beef? Sweeping the floors and dumping the trash in a "court system" is not exactly the way to become an expert on judicial misconduct. However, completely ignoring the law, as several judges have done in striking down Trump's "ban" on Muslim invasion is serious misconduct. So is claiming that one President has no authority to overturn the EO of another President. Neither is law, since it wasn't passed by Congress, and have no impact beyond government agencies required to operate under an EO. What we have been reduced to by the Party of the KKK is rule by ideology, since the "judges" imposed by The Puppet have no idea what any law actually says, they get their marching orders from the Party of the KKK and Russia.
|
|
|
Post by palealeman on Apr 27, 2018 12:07:58 GMT -5
Actually, RJ, I had a slightly different meaning in mind, one that describes you and the commie to a T:
"Reducing one's credibility in any argument by using words like "lib", "liberal" or "liberals". One a person uses the above words with derogatory intent, he demonstrates his political bias, polarizes his audience and loses any remaining credibility. Once Hanson's law is invoked, the offender's argument is considered useless banter or low level regurgitated propaganda from that point forward."
That's all we ever get from you -- debasing anything to the left of John Birch, and therefore a lot of useless banter and/or low-level regurgitated propaganda. But we're used to it from you and him.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Apr 27, 2018 12:14:05 GMT -5
Actually, RJ, I had a slightly different meaning in mind, one that describes you and the commie to a T: "Reducing one's credibility in any argument by using words like "lib", "liberal" or "liberals". One a person uses the above words with derogatory intent, he demonstrates his political bias, polarizes his audience and loses any remaining credibility. Once Hanson's law is invoked, the offender's argument is considered useless banter or low level regurgitated propaganda from that point forward." That's all we ever get from you -- debasing anything to the left of John Birch, and therefore a lot of useless banter and/or low-level regurgitated propaganda. But we're used to it from you and him. Again, this isn't a thing. Opposing liberalism doesn't discredit anyone. However, creating a phony corrolary to Godwin's Law and then hiding behind it when someone challenges your world-view... now THAT is not just discrediting. Its embarrassing.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Apr 27, 2018 12:27:30 GMT -5
Actually, RJ, I had a slightly different meaning in mind, one that describes you and the commie to a T: "Reducing one's credibility in any argument by using words like "lib", "liberal" or "liberals". One a person uses the above words with derogatory intent, he demonstrates his political bias, polarizes his audience and loses any remaining credibility. Once Hanson's law is invoked, the offender's argument is considered useless banter or low level regurgitated propaganda from that point forward." That's all we ever get from you -- debasing anything to the left of John Birch, and therefore a lot of useless banter and/or low-level regurgitated propaganda. But we're used to it from you and him. The Left, and the alleged "liberals"(Communists), have debased themselves so thoroughly that no further debasement is needed. Just the screeching of imbeciles like Waters, Pelosi, and the rest of the "resistance" to impeach Trump, doesn't matter if there is anything to do it on, is enough. Then the hysteria over the NRA, because some Party of the KKK groomed animal shot up a school, the use of the Planned Parenthood butcher shop to "teach sex education" and the concomitant refusal by the school districts to let parents pull their kids from it, the suppression of any speech that the Left doesn't agree with, all debase the ideology far more than anything the Right does. Or could do. You are Communists, and, like Stalin, willing to kill or imprison anyone that disagrees with you, because none of your "arguments" can withstand any scrutiny. They are insanity writ as policy. The FL shooter is emblematic of your agenda.
|
|
|
Post by palealeman on Apr 27, 2018 17:06:39 GMT -5
Well, RJ, you almost had me. I did some research -- you remember that term, don't you? -- and started by doing a for "Godwin's Law." However, none of the sources call it a Law -- they call it law. There's a difference. It's also defined as an Internet adage.
So what's an adage you call a law. And you keep saying that I make a fool of myself. Do you know the difference between a law and an adage? Apparently not.
But keep going. You continue to prove Hanson's Law (with a capital L).
Thanks for playing. As Aboutwell said, this board is dying, and you and your commie friend are the main reasons why. I'll check back in a few days and see if you've posted anything of interest . . . but I doubt that will ever happen. In the meantime, you may want to study up on the difference between an adage and a law. But somehow I doubt you'll do that either.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Apr 27, 2018 17:15:42 GMT -5
Well, RJ, you almost had me. I did some research -- you remember that term, don't you? -- and started by doing a for "Godwin's Law." However, none of the sources call it a Law -- they call it law. There's a difference. It's also defined as an Internet adage. So what's an adage you call a law. And you keep saying that I make a fool of myself. Do you know the difference between a law and an adage? Apparently not. But keep going. You continue to prove Hanson's Law (with a capital L). Thanks for playing. As Aboutwell said, this board is dying, and you and your commie friend are the main reasons why. I'll check back in a few days and see if you've posted anything of interest . . . but I doubt that will ever happen. In the meantime, you may want to study up on the difference between an adage and a law. But somehow I doubt you'll do that either. No seriously, we all know liberals are mentally weak, but I didn’t realize they were so pathetically weak they had to invent something called “Hanson’s Law” so lefties can pretend they don’t need to answer for their failures. It’s not a real thing. It’s a contrived, phony term weakings hide behind.
|
|
|
Post by palealeman on Apr 27, 2018 17:28:47 GMT -5
And again you prove just how accurate it is.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Apr 28, 2018 8:39:21 GMT -5
And again you prove just how accurate it is. Let me distill this down for you: having a “viewpoint bias” in a discussion is called “taking a position.” Taking a position is a fundamental necessity in any discussion. “Hanson’s Law” says having a viewpoint bias contrary to liberal orthodoxy is illegitimate and doesn’t merit a response. In short, it is a phony excuse only weak people would use to avoid a discussion. It isn’t a legitimate thing. But go ahead and wallow in it if you’d like. It’s both a pity, and not surprising someone would come up with “Hanson’s Law” to defend a point of view that has no ideas to defend because they’ve all been tried and failed.
|
|
|
Post by palealeman on Apr 28, 2018 14:13:01 GMT -5
And you discuss? You take positions that are like your last post: no ideas to defend. You continue to hold that you are the source of truth, and that anyone who doesn't agree with you is wrong. There's no discussion on your part, only preaching and trying to convert people to your brand of un-orthodoxy.
And, while you continue to claim that Hanson's law is not real or a phony excuse for weak people, you continue to prove the validity of that law. I guess that's part of being an unthinking partisan, as you continue to show you are.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Apr 28, 2018 18:59:22 GMT -5
And you discuss? You take positions that are like your last post: no ideas to defend. You continue to hold that you are the source of truth, and that anyone who doesn't agree with you is wrong. There's no discussion on your part, only preaching and trying to convert people to your brand of un-orthodoxy. And, while you continue to claim that Hanson's law is not real or a phony excuse for weak people, you continue to prove the validity of that law. I guess that's part of being an unthinking partisan, as you continue to show you are. Please at least try to be serious. For 2 decades now, liberals have been calling everyone who looked at them funny Nazis, fascists, bigots, racists, homophobes, islamophobes, mysoginists, and most recently deplorables. While everyone to the right of Bill Clinton rightly called these ad hominem attacks, no one tried to come up with a special name for it. Except, of course, for Godwin’s Law, which was specific to the especially absurd Nazi slur. The reasons Hanson’s Law is a joke are pretty extensive. First, Hanson’s Law is obviously Godwin’s Law only for liberals instead of Nazis. No sensible person would invite that comparison. And second, use of the term “liberal” isn’t an ad hominem… or at least it wasn’t until Hanson’s Law came along and made it one. No rational liberal would assert Hanson’s Law. A conservative on the other hand might. After all, liberal snowflakes are prone to grabbing their emotional support peacocks and running to their safe spaces when someone has the temerity to question them. And at the end of the day, that’s what Hanson’s Law really is.
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Apr 29, 2018 10:46:57 GMT -5
Give it up, Palealeman... he isn't worth it... after 21 years here, I find it better to go elsewhere rather than have to deal with people like RJ... much more reasonable and rational people in other places...
|
|
|
Post by palealeman on Apr 29, 2018 20:56:23 GMT -5
I agree, About well. I just find it ironic that he spends so much time and effort bashing Hanson's Law and, in doing so, shows just how accurate it is. And the sad part is that he doesn't see what he's doing. And, to top things off, tried to use an Internet adage as a law. You'd think that someone who claims to have at least a couple of college credits would know the difference.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Apr 29, 2018 21:08:06 GMT -5
I agree, About well. I just find it ironic that he spends so much time and effort bashing Hanson's Law and, in doing so, shows just how accurate it is. And the sad part is that he doesn't see what he's doing. And, to top things off, tried to use an Internet adage as a law. You'd think that someone who claims to have at least a couple of college credits would know the difference. Wow... you really believe Hanson’s Law is a thing, and Godwin’s Law is just an Internet adage? And that believing such silliness is evidence of an education? Dude... you paid for an indoctrination, not an education, if you even got that. You really should try googling Hanson’s Law at some point. Surely, if it were a thing serious academics accepted, it would show up somewhere other than Urban Dictionary.
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Apr 29, 2018 23:15:38 GMT -5
Did you get your "Hanson's Law" mug, Ranger John?... you deserve it...
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Apr 30, 2018 7:29:54 GMT -5
Did you get your "Hanson's Law" mug, Ranger John?... you deserve it... This is where you or PAM could post a link to a credible site explaining what Hanson’s Law is. When you run it through Yahoo! the results first ask “did you mean Hanlon’s Razor” and the first actual reference to it is the Urban Dictionary entry I linked to, on the 4th page of links. The next reference is Hansen’s Law. That shows up on page 7. It literally does not exist anywhere on the internet except at Urban Dictionary. Every other link is to a law firm. Google asks “did you mean Hansen’s Law?” and serves up the UD link first. Then nothing. By contrast, googling Godwin’s Law gives us a Wikipedia page at the top of the first page. Apparently the rest of the world is smart enough not to invoke Hanson’s Law because they’re rightfully embarrassed by it. You guys really ought to grow up and stop using an UD meme. Especially given the primary definition there mocks it.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Apr 30, 2018 10:31:23 GMT -5
Give it up, Palealeman... he isn't worth it... after 21 years here, I find it better to go elsewhere rather than have to deal with people like RJ... much more reasonable and rational people in other places... It's actually sad that you have decided to leave rather than defend your positions. As absurd as most of them are, if you believe in them, you should be able to defend them. Provide some sort of actual evidence. I will miss you if you decide to actually leave, and I'm usually a better shot than that.
|
|
|
Post by palealeman on Apr 30, 2018 13:06:54 GMT -5
Maybe, RJ, just maybe the problem isn't that Hanson's Law doesn't exist. Maybe it's just too new to be included in Wikipedia, an encyclopedia that grows as people contribute to it.--
You complain that the only link to Hanson's Law is in the Urban Dictionary. Guess what else is found there? Godwin's law. So for your "law" it doesn't matter if it's there, but for another law -- which you continue to prove daily -- it's not acceptable to be found there? I think I'd be rather embarrassed too if I continued to prove the existence of a Law that I claimed wasn't a Law. But that's unthinking conservative partisanship for you!
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Apr 30, 2018 13:37:28 GMT -5
Maybe, RJ, just maybe the problem isn't that Hanson's Law doesn't exist. Maybe it's just too new to be included in Wikipedia, an encyclopedia that grows as people contribute to it.-- You complain that the only link to Hanson's Law is in the Urban Dictionary. Guess what else is found there? Godwin's law. So for your "law" it doesn't matter if it's there, but for another law -- which you continue to prove daily -- it's not acceptable to be found there? I think I'd be rather embarrassed too if I continued to prove the existence of a Law that I claimed wasn't a Law. But that's unthinking conservative partisanship for you! So you're arguing Hanson's Law is too new for the internet? ROTFLAMO I'm well aware Godwin's Law has an UD page. It is here: www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Godwin%27s%20LawThe differences are 1) Godwin's Law appears in many other locations, including Wikipedia, 2) the primary definition at UD doesn't mock Godwin's Law, where as the primary definition of Hanson's Law does, and 3) Godwin's Law is in essence a form of ad hominem which is a well established logical fallacy. It isn't really a form of name calling to note that someone is a liberal. You know... unless you're a self-hating sort of liberal.
|
|
|
Post by palealeman on Apr 30, 2018 14:50:59 GMT -5
But it usually a form of name calling the way you use the word liberal, usually (almost always) in a pejorative, demeaning way. Again, thank you for continuing to show us that Hanson's Law is real and accurate.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Apr 30, 2018 16:25:37 GMT -5
But it usually a form of name calling the way you use the word liberal, usually (almost always) in a pejorative, demeaning way. Again, thank you for continuing to show us that Hanson's Law is real and accurate. Oh I'm not saying it's not a marginally accurate description of what's happening. I'm saying that it's not a valid concern. Look, I oppose most liberal positions. And I happily call them out for being anywhere from simply flawed, to being outright deranged. Hanson's Law being a prime example of said derangement. The entire point of forums like this is to take a position and defend it. Having a conservative viewpoint, and taking on what I see as wrong liberal viewpoints isn't a bug called Hanson's Law. It's a feature. Indeed it is the entire point. "Liberal" is not a pejorative. Now, I can understand why you're ashamed of being one. I know I would be. But I'm not denigrating you by labeling you with a label you eagerly embrace. There is no better way to shame yourself in a place like this than to declare the other side's position invalid just because you don't share it. All that is, is intellectual laziness, and that is the beating heart of Hanson's Law.
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Apr 30, 2018 17:34:58 GMT -5
Did you get your "Hanson's Law" mug, Ranger John?... you deserve it... This is where you or PAM could post a link to a credible site explaining what Hanson’s Law is. When you run it through Yahoo! the results first ask “did you mean Hanlon’s Razor” and the first actual reference to it is the Urban Dictionary entry I linked to, on the 4th page of links. The next reference is Hansen’s Law. That shows up on page 7. It literally does not exist anywhere on the internet except at Urban Dictionary. Every other link is to a law firm. Google asks “did you mean Hansen’s Law?” and serves up the UD link first. Then nothing. By contrast, googling Godwin’s Law gives us a Wikipedia page at the top of the first page. Apparently the rest of the world is smart enough not to invoke Hanson’s Law because they’re rightfully embarrassed by it. You guys really ought to grow up and stop using an UD meme. Especially given the primary definition there mocks it. We/I know what it means... you don't... you don't want to know because it fits you too well... I could post the definition... but I am not going to deprive you the opportunity to find it for yourself... (intrinsic value, you know)... or better yet, read your own posts, take a quick look in the mirror... and you won't have to look up a damn thing...
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Apr 30, 2018 17:40:32 GMT -5
Give it up, Palealeman... he isn't worth it... after 21 years here, I find it better to go elsewhere rather than have to deal with people like RJ... much more reasonable and rational people in other places... It's actually sad that you have decided to leave rather than defend your positions. As absurd as most of them are, if you believe in them, you should be able to defend them. Provide some sort of actual evidence. I will miss you if you decide to actually leave, and I'm usually a better shot than that. I'm not going anywhere... RJ simply takes over every conversation and nobody else can have a decent conversation or discussion with regarding a difference of opinion... much better discussion and respect on the old board and in other places... I'm still gonna come see you one of these days... that time is getting closer and closer...
|
|