When Reason is Unreasonable

So I like to blog on conservative sites. Yeah, I’m a conservative. Actually, because I voted for Ron Paul, I’m a 7%er. Hey, can’t be too bad. It sounds kinda lucky to me….

Believe it or not, I have a lot of progressive friends. I typically try to drive them crazy by singing show tunes full voice in closed quarters. (I figure it’s just payback for makin me watch those Michael Moore shows). It’s really a shame that our FLOTUS wasn’t around when he was a boy…she would’ve made damn sure schools weren’t servin those cream-filled-delights, aka, Twinkies at lunch. Then again, a skinny Michael Moore would be weird. Dang! What was I talkin about?

Oh, yeah. When Reason is Unreasonable. So I was taking up for a Progressive friend of mine on this site, because if an argument is legitimate, I’ll back you. Unless you’re Muslim. Cause Glen Beck says you’ll lie to me for 7 years, or somethin like that. I suppose that’s not as bad as my sisters….they’ve been lyin to me goin on, oh, 21 years now? Yes, that’s it. 21.

So when I posted the other side of the argument for FL, since at least FL was curious enough to want to see the other side, I was amazed and disappointed by the lack of logic employed by the others. I felt as if I were in the Seinfeld Bizzarro episode. Suddenly, my Conservative friends transformed into Bill Mahers. They pulled the classic Progressive move of attacking, while not bothering to argue the issue I was presenting. Evade and attack. In other words, there was no rhyme to their reason…..or is it reason to their rhyme? Whatever it was, it was heated and disturbing; so much so, that I pulled the post to keep the peace.

I believe if you think with Reason, you think objectively. I know I’m oftentimes the Fool. But how is one to learn if they are not? I just hope I will realise when I have become Unreasonable.

The important question is: What the hello happened to my Twinkies?

24 thoughts on “When Reason is Unreasonable

  1. Just one criticism. Ad hominem attacks are not a classic “progressive” move any more than it is or not a classical conservative move. They are just a common classical move. All types use them.

    • But Progressives and the medis do use diversion tactics.

      Now, you aught to be the noble man and throw an apology to a certain someone, P. If I can break down and apologise for spewing the f word on this site, I know damn well you can.

      • If you read my comment again, you will see that I do not deny that “progressives” use the tactic. I was merely pointing out that “conservatives” do too. Surely you agree with that?

        I was the aggrieved party and so it is I who should get an apology.

      • What other site? I’m tired of explaining things; I responded to an uncalled for attack. I don’t apologise for that to someone who has not acknowledged they were wrong to do so.

        The language was not the issue with me, and you would know that if you read my explanation thoroughly.

        And whoever M is, he is either American12345 or Utah.. The former attacked me for no reason and the second treated my symptom and ignored the cause. Whether “M” is being a “noble gentleman” or not is by-the-by from my angle because I have not been approached by him or anyone else. Unless he has you doing his talking for him.

        I would prefer you either acknowledge my right in this scenario or leave it alone. I get the increasing impression that you are fully on the opposing side in this. Did you delete the copy paste you did here of my post? If so, why was that?

        • I am for both of you. I deleted my argument for you because everyone got too upset by the post.
          I am for M. (Utah) in that this is his site and it does have rules. Augger explains it beautifully, below.

          • “I am for both of you. I deleted my argument for you because everyone got too upset by the post.
            I am for M. (Utah) in that this is his site and it does have rules. Augger explains it beautifully, below.”

            Words are cheap. You put up my explanation, because Utah deleted my words and stopped me from further contribution. However, you deleted my explanation. If you were for me as well, you would have insisted Utah stopped trying to explain himself whilst blocking me.

            To me privately, you were supportive but now you have responded to peer pressure and try to justify it. I don’t blame you for that. Peer pressure can be hard to resist.

            Does one of Utah’s rules address being rude to innocent questioners? If so, why did he not address that? If not, then his rules are not worth considering.

            Augger in essence merely reflected Utah and showed his bias by his choice of expression.

  2. I’ll agree with your first point, but I will disagree with your second. You were maligned at another site, but you know and I know that the language was the issue. M. is being a noble gentleman. Surely you can step up to the plate and do the same, pal Joey.

    • Looking at the count-down here, I seem to have replied to your last comment in the wrong place. Maybe I did that with all. I trust you can work it out.

    • Yes, I was maligned on IS’ site. She deleted my words and disdainfully dismissed any further contribution from me. AmNumb gave no further display of his acumen. Then while we were talking about it here on your site Utah revealed his august presence unto us, doing his “I’m Caesar and so render unto me” spiel and so it was on again. So, I didn’t bring it anywhere. Us talking about it on your site and someone else joining in is not down to me.
      If you are for both sides of it, then stop giving the impression that you’re not.
      That said, I found my water birds are laying at dawn, so I’m off for a fry-up.

  3. “The language was not the issue with me” – maybe that is your problem with not achieving the moral high-ground in this ongoing, long winded, and frankly exhausting rehash of a topic. But for the sake of clarity, I will try to explain. But first of all, you have read the terms of use of this site, correct?

    Now I will not insult your intelligence by quoting the terms of use here, but I would like to remind you that this forum is a privately owned forum. It’s not funded by outside monies, and is ran solely at the discretion of the person who created it. (take note of that).

    What ever your beef was, whatever your issue was, however you felt slighted the bottom line is this … in the mind of the person who runs this blog site, you broke the terms of use as he sees them.

    On someone else’s turf, it cannot always be about you.

    Now I ask, what makes you think you can come to someone’s else’s property, and willfully break their rules there by disrespecting them, and expect a different outcome? Do you think you are entitled to do as you please with other people’s belongings?

    Just food for thought …

      • He’s the same as I, another (regular) blogger on this site, but what difference does it make who is who? Nobody questioned who you were when you first posted here.

        • * I don’t have a problem because I do have the moral high ground.
          * It is not a rehash for me because it never came to a conclusion.
          * If you find it an “ongoing, long winded, and frankly exhausting rehash” is that possibly because you were not the one insulted and then treated unjustly; and you don’t care how rude people are on RNL? I suggest you ignore what Kellsbells and I are discussing. As far as I’m concerned, I’m on her post responding to what she says and asks. It just so happens to be about this saga.
          * When I am insulted for no reason of my own, it is always about me.
          * If Kellsbells was not “persuaded” by peer pressure to remove my explanation of events from her post which she kindly put up, you would have read my side and had the due response to what you are asking. I originally wrote it for her and one other privately, then made it public on my own blog site and allowed her to show it to interested parties on RNL. If you want to read it, ask her to put it up again.
          * You loaded question, asking about my “wilfully” breaking the rules and suggesting I did “as I pleased” and the previous “it cannot always be about you” shows where you stand on the justice of said events.

          • I swear, you make me wanna write a post on gratuituos cursing. It upsets you, (enough to write a post) and yet you won’t apologise for doing it on this site. Granted, I know you were rehashing events, but, you know, you still cursed… Dang! Now, I feel like I’m talkin to one of these boys because in reality, you’re all the same! You’re all so damned thick!

            I have a little dedication for all you boys (because you drive me crazy) :

  4. Pretty simple.

    Make your point, stay within the rules and we are cool. My goal is not to stop dialog – so after reflection, you are back in. The rules still apply, and I won’t hesitate to pull the plug permanently the next time.

  5. Lovegrove, my friend, you were aggrieved on another site. and you brought the fight over here. Then you used language that might be okay amongst friends; believe me, you are not drowning in a sea of camaraderie here.
    While I too believe that the reaction to your question was childish, your reaction was no better, maybe worse, because it gave them the cover they needed, so as not to acknowledge either the fallacious reasoning or the ad hominem attack.

    • Bonjour Mefamy,
      Actually, I haven’t taken it anywhere as such. I’ve just been responding as the topic arose. It was soon apparent that my side held no interest for such people. You’re right about cover. I’ve always known the negative result of emotive response but that’s just the trouble with emotion responses, they’re emotive. I very soon if not immediately realized that no acknowledgement was forthcoming and so just settled down to a routine of responses.

      Now Kells has returned unto the fold and so there is no need to be concerned there.

      So how was your day?

Talk Amongst Yourselves:

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s