maximus Loc: Chattanooga, Tennessee

debeda

Well deserved, that was a super post

straightUp Loc: California

So... This afternoon I took the time to investigate the history of the term politically correct and I'm going to admit that I underestimated the significance of the term when I said it was the same thing as being polite.

It's not a term I've ever paid much attention to and as you can see by the definition I took from Britannica it basically calls it a way to avoid offending people, which is basically polite behavior. I didn't realize the term was used as far back as the 1930's to describe a strict adherence to a range of ideological orthodoxies within politics until this afternoon. So, it appears you are correct.

Now here's the interesting thing about what I learned today... The term as it is used today is apparently far more pervasive in right-wing circles than it is in liberal circles where it is hardly mentioned, except in jest. So, I bet there are a LOT of liberals out there that are clueless as to what you are accusing them of when you pull the PC lever. Just so you know.

Also, when I say "right-wing" circles I am not referring to classic Reagan-style conservatism that I was once a part of. I am referring to what you find to the right of the WSJ, to the right of the National Review even. I'm talking about the land of Breitbart and InfoWars which is an area I find plagued with waste-of-time conspiracy theories so I don't spend much time there... and it's apparently where the term PC is in constant use.


I disagree. Civility does change. I've had conversations with each of the individuals you've mentioned. All of them maintained civility in some of the conversations while some of them lost their civility in other conversations. Keep in mind that if your viewpoints don't bother them as much as mine do, they won't be pushing the limits of their civility as much either. (Slatten and Permafrost, who I rarely disagree with, are not among those who ever lost their civility with me).

I also disagree, based on YOUR definition of PC, with the assertion that none of these posters you mention are PC. In fact some of them are VERY PC - I know... because I spend most of my efforts on this forum challenging what others are saying and on numerous occasions (with several of the individuals you mentioned) I have presented data or logic that they saw as a threat to their ideology and they dismissed my argument sometimes, with less than a civil tone and yes, these were conservative posters.

Which brings me to this... What exactly makes you think a theologian's unwillingness to accept anything that threatens his Biblical narrative is functionally any different than political correctness?


I don't dismiss anyone's viewpoint Kyle. In fact I'm one of those "wackos" that think reality is relative. What I do is I challenge them. I point out what I see as flaws, I introduce conflicting data, I learn lessons if I am wrong and if they simply refuse to consider my counter argument, I just disagree with them.


Now your just taking one of my recent responses on this thread out of context. Kyle, I thought you were better than this.


Oh, c'mon!


depending on the context, the situation and the mode of conversation.


Kyle, that was me drawing a parallel between the offenses taken by the use of dirty words and the offenses taken by what I thought were politically incorrect expressions. I am fully aware of the forum rules and it has no bearing on my argument.


I dare you to find any poster that asks more questions than I do in order to learn where someone is coming from.


Here's where I DEMAND you provide some proof.


No offense was intended. I didn't know you were that easily offended. From now on I will refer to you as Canuckus Deploracus.


Yeah professor, I see, but I'm getting tired of your arrogance, your shallow assumptions and your passive aggression.


Yeah, you're wrong about a lot my friend. I'm 58 - not exactly young.


Canuckus Deploracus, I have been on this site 5 years longer than you have. I'm not always here because of the nature of my work so, I am off and on. When I returned a month ago from a long absence I got private messages from a fair number of other posters welcoming me back. This is because they see me as a positive contributor who puts a lot of thought into what I say and because I've been known to work past indifferences and even joke around.

Look, I can play rough too and not everyone can do that without getting offended. So I adjust my style to the mode of conversation. I remain civil when I'm conversing with a civil participant and if it seems I am conversing with someone who is playing rough I reciprocate.

Why do I think it's okay to play rough? Because A) I'm not easily offended and B) my personal rule of conduct is that I do not insult people directly, even when I am playing rough. I might have things to say about specific stereotypes that some people take offense too, but generally don't insult people directly.

This is why I "demanded" that debeda link to where she said I directly called her stupid (which notice she hasn't done, probably because her accusation is false). I have found that a good number of posters here are very easily offended. They need to understand that if your going to express your opinions on a political web site like OPP, they are going to face opposition.


Times have changed Canuckus Deploracus. It's possible you are getting it wrong. There are a lot of reasons why America is so divided now compared to a generation ago. It's possible the behavior of those millennials is a reflection of the current climate and not the other way around as you seem to be suggesting. My kids are both in their early 30's and I worry too.


What exactly did I say to warrant the absurd accusation that I am in a PC hole? Man, you really, really don't know me.


And that's fine... I'm sure she's a wonderful person, but that doesn't change the fact that she has tried to insult me directly and then had the audacity to falsely accuse me of the insulting her directly.

Feel free to browse the conversation for yourself, it's all there, you will find the first thing she said to me here https://www.onepoliticalplaza.com/tpr?p=3060432&t=170144... (see how that works?)

Fortunately, like I said, I do not get offended easily. Apparently, the same can't be said for her, maybe she shouldn't engage with me because when she tosses out insults like that, I think she's just playing rough, so I play rough back (only without the direct insults). Next thing I know Canuckus Deploracus is playing hero and running to her defense.


I'm sure Maximus is a great guy, but does that mean I can't poke fun at his tirade of unfounded accusations and insults about the witnesses in the impeachment process? Does your little cliche have a PC problem with that?


Not all differences of opinion are the same Canuckus Deploracus. You are obviously more ideologically aligned with the two you mentioned than I am. So it's possible they are more tolerant of your differences. When you climb off your white stallion maybe consider that.


I'm sure there are, but that's less likely to happen if you're compelled to respond to my views with ad hominem attacks, right?


No, you don't know me Canuckus Deploracus. But you can learn more about a person by paying attention to what he writes before turning the conversation into a condescending counsel on his character. Also, I've been around the block a few times, I know passive aggressiveness when I see it. You've made some unfair assumptions about me that I don't appreciate but don't worry, it's not a big deal. My world view is uncommon so I'm quite used to being misunderstood.


I appreciate your olive branch and perhaps on another day we can have a little fun but what I would like you to understand in the meantime is that this is ultimately an open forum for political discussions and that is primarily what I come here for. I am among other things an activist and a writer, so participating in these discussions, even if confrontational, is a form of constructive exercise for me. Also, my political position all but guarantees that I am going to piss some folks off, especially among the less tolerant people on the right. So I'm not arguing just for sake of argument I'm just being honest about my views but I can bridge that and otherwise get along fine with those same people. Heck I play banjo in an Irish band with a bunch of Trump supporters... The question is can you folks do that?

straightUp Loc: California

But in reality, it's more like this...

1. The Dems win by a field goal in the final 2 seconds of the game but the referees call a foul and the game goes to the Reps instead.

2. Dems are shocked but they deal with it.

3. days later reviews show that it was actually a bad call, possibly influenced by a bribe.

4. Dems try to address the corruption issue so it doesn't happen next season.

5. Reps try to interfere because they know they NEED to bribe the the refs to to win so they start acting like the Dems are attacking the referees AND the crowd AND ripping up the field AND raping all the children AND killing all the puppies.

6. Dems are like... say whaaat?

;)

straightUp Loc: California

screeetch... Ugh, their homes? Really? First of all I never heard her say that and secondly that would be illegal so if Waters actually encouraged such actions she would have made headline news and she would be in some trouble. Also in the video I saw, Waters was referring to Republican lawmakers not private citizens. So are you sure you're not exaggerating a little bit? That tends to happen with partisan politics.


*sigh* OK, look even if that did happen (which I kinda doubt) I'm pretty darned sure it's NOT what Waters encouraged. People have been known to take encouragement way past it's intentions.


Well, that may be the case if what you say is actually true. But I don't see any evidence that it is.


No, you just need to get your facts straight (or not, I really don't care) but Pelosi never said that. She DID once say this... "We have to pass the bill, so that you can find out what is in it — away from the fog of the controversy.”

She was referencing Obamacare and more specifically, all the lies that Republicans were saying about it. Her point was that the Republicans will obscure the truth about the bill for as long as the debate continues, which suggests that the people won't really know unless it gets passed.

Of course the Republicans took the quote out of context and tried to turn it against her. Now it appears someone is trying to recycle the lies by replacing Obamacare with Impeachment.

It's amazing how utterly ridiculous the GOP has become.

Canuckus Deploracus Loc: North of the wall

Straightup... I'm at work... But will reply in full when I finish... Cheers..

maximus Loc: Chattanooga, Tennessee

straightUp...Lets just stop bantering. You've been on OPP a long time, longer than me, but I am here almost every day and am just as qualified as anybody on this forum.
In a short couple of days that I even knew you existed, this IS your MO;
1. You argue and deny knowledge of a topic.
2. You say if that's true, then prove it.
3. If anyone such as myself posts proof you make fun of the proof.
4. You say something really crass like,"Are you stupid enough to believe that."
5. If a rebuttal is too short, you make fun of the poster.
6. If proof is proof, then you say something like," I haven't seen that and doubt if it is true."
7. If anyone such as Kyle calls you out on you behavior, you deny doing all these things and further insult the poster.
I said all that to say this. You come off as one big jerk. Your answers are smart a$$. Your demeanor is that you feel superior to everyone else, i.e. an egocentric. You make fun of people ONLY because they disagree with you.
You told me to get a spine because I cited Maxine Waters telling followers to identify Trump cabinet members and make a crowd, or more correctly a mob, to harass and scare them. You act as though this couldn't lead to someone taking it to the next step.
Here's how I am about being attacked because I'm a Trump supporter. I'm too old and fat to fight anymore but I'm armed everywhere I go. NO ONE will rob me of my dignity and/or be allowed to hurt me. I also make my living with a 40 Cal. semi auto on my side with 45 rounds (who wants to run out of ammo in a gun fight).
I have no fear.
I don't wear a MAGA hat because I don't want to go to prison for shooting some idiot that attacks me for my wardrobe.
All that aside, you really seem like one big jerk. If that's the persona that you want to project on OPP, so be it. I'll deal with it. I won't back down from you and I'll ask YOU to provide proof of what you say ( of which I haven't seen any, just mouthing).
You insulted Kyle and he is one of the nicest people you could ever meet on OPP or anywhere else. You say we don't know you but I think we know you much better than you think.
Sorry if it seems like I'm attacking you because I'm not. I'm just stating what I've seen from you in...what...two days?
Like I said, if that's the way you want to come across, that's all up to you. I will say I wish it were different.

straightUp Loc: California

Canuckus Deploracus Loc: North of the wall

It's good to learn..
Yes...You hear the term far more among the right...As we are in opposition to it and the ideology that it represents...
When an individual attempts to silence another because they believe that their words might cause a microaggression, then that person is being PC...



The fact that they failed to maintain civility at all times does not equate with civility changing... I have no doubt some of them were uncivil with you at times... If you're actions on this thread are any indication then I don't blame them..
It's not your viewpoints that bothered them so much as your attitude...



Apparently you still don't understand the term... And none of those individuals is PC..

The fact that they disagree with you doesn't make them PC...

And the unwillingness to consider other opinions is closeminded... Not PC... If they were to start applying arbitrary rules of speech to you based on your beliefs that would be PC...



Calling a person's opinion stupid is not introducing a flaw..
Mocking their beliefs is not introducing a flaw..
Devaluing their replies is not introducing a flaw...
All three are examples of dismissiveness..



As I have explained, I believe this is the first time we have interacted... I am judging you solely by this thread...



Why? There are polite ways to request a source... I do it all the time....



Which is what we are discussing here...




If you don't like the language don't use it... We've discussed PC... Your dislike of a term has no bearing on the other individual...
Cursing on the other hand is banned by the forum... That's not PC...



Done... Myself... I routinely query individuals over their assertions... And respect their answers... Or ask follow up questions..



The statement you made just before this one...



Not offended... Pointing out a fact... I have been called much worse than Canadian...
Casual familiarity is usually deemed derisive...



I often come across as arrogant.. And I apologize... It is not my intent... I tend to be straight forward...
At this stage (a single thread) shallow assumptions are all I have to go on...
My aggression is rarely passive... You'll know it when you see it...



Well... There it is... Although 58 shall not be deemed old on the OPP...



Didn't check how long you've been a member... As I said before, I'm judging just this thread...

Hope you are a part of the community... And can tell a joke or two...

Welcome back...



Play rough? Hardly...

You alleged that Debeda was stupid, then mocked her as a crybaby... So she called you a twit... I'll second that, twit...

Debeda probably decided not to bother with you anymore... That's not being easily offended...

Why go out of your way to offend others?



Absolutely possible... I hope your kids are healthy and well... And awake to the world around them...



I don't...You're correct...
And perhaps I'm mis-characterizing you...
Just seems like you go out of your way to isolate yourself, rather than build



Yep... I agree... You deserved to be called a twit... Did you not read your own words to her?



Twit is your idea of rough?
California snowflakes melt real easy...

As for running to the rescue...For Deb? Sure...Always...
Not that she needs it...



Poke fun?
In a political debate?
Why?
If you disagree then disagree... Throw a joke in if you want... But don't be derisive... That's the difference... And believe me..Maximus would be the first to apologize if he did that to you...



No doubt... But I maintain that about most members of this forum.. I don't need to be ideologically aligned to appreciate them and get along with them...
I fight with more eighties than lefties... Usually because I'm defending or agreeing with a lefty...



Exactly.....



My views of you have been formed by this thread... Unfair or not, those assumptions are all I have...
Promise I will modify them in the future as needed...



Yep... It's a political forum... Doesn't mean we have to behave like piticians...
Everyone's political position guarantees that they are going to piss some folk off...

I like Irish Rock..

And I look forward to future correspondence..

It might take a while, but I usually find myself liking those I engage with...

debeda

Now that you're done with your diatribe.....You asked me to link to where you specifically called me stupid. Posting on a phone is different than posting on a computer, so unfortunately I cannot cut and paste small sections, it's all or nothing. It was a fairly short post, surely you can see it.....You seem to see yourself as the arbiter of all truth. PC was pushed hard in universities from the mid to late 80s on. If you don't know that, maybe you havent been to college recently enough to know? Or at all, dont know your circumstances - tho I would guess you have some exposure to higher education, because pontification appears to be a strong suit for you. Good day, good life, get over yourself and learn to play nice.

eagleye13 Loc: Fl

StraightUp needs to straighten up, Debeda!

Dems attempt impeachment on presumptions!
Public impeachment hearings blow up in the Democrats' faces

https://youtu.be/Yl38mXnCwRY

debeda

That was EXCELLENT Made my day Thanks for sharing, Eagle

straightUp Loc: California

Look, Max... I've already responded to Canuckus Deploracus in depth... I'm here to discuss political issues not defend myself from ad hominem attacks from people who are offended by my views. Besides, I don't think any of your seven accusations against me have any basis anyway; they are in my opinion, knee-jerk reactions to arguments that happen to piss you off.

As for Canuckus Deploracus, I'm sure he's a nice guy but he was insulted when I referred him as "the Canadian". Just so you know, you can call me "the American" anytime you like or if you want to use my ethnic background go ahead and call me "the Englishman"... I don't take offense when people refer to me by my nationality or ethnic background.

I'm not saying people should stand for direct personal attacks, nor do I intentionally insult people directly. Yes, I challenge what people say and sometimes I ridicule what people say because sometimes people DO say stupid things and ridicule can be an effective way of exposing it. But that doesn't mean I think it's coming from a stupid person.

debeda presents a perfect example of what I am talking about. She said that I "sound like a twit". Now I don't know if that was intended to be a personal attack on me (nor do I really care) but if I read her statement in the literal sense, she is referring to the way I come off (at least in her eyes) not my person. She didn't say "you are a twit". See the difference? Now, she didn't challenge or counter what I said or explain why she saw it that way, so I know it was essentially the equivalent of flipping me the bird and driving away but I CHOSE not to be offended and I moved on.

I think you, debeda and Canuckus Deploracus just got too personal and you chose to be offended so instead of squaring off with my arguments you decided to attack my character, which is the very definition of an ad hominem fallacy and saying that your not really attacking me doesn't really change that. I could have just as easily posted my own negative assessments of your character as well. But I didn't, did I?

I do appreciate your emphasis on "how I come off" as opposed to what kind of person you think I actually am. So thank you for that. I just hope you folks can keep that in mind going forward and that our future interactions are focused on what we post not on assumptions about the kind of people we are.

I would like to apologize if I offended you but I am also true to my political stance which is very much opposed to YOUR political stance, so let's be honest here, the disagreements will continue, they may get heated and you may chose to get offended again (which is really up to you) but I promise it won't be from any lack of respect for you as a person, because despite my rough play and sarcastic suggestions, I NEVER make assumptions about the people behind the avatars.

eagleye13 Loc: Fl

"I NEVER make assumptions about the people behind the avatars" - straightUp
I wonder if you know how to swim, straightUp.
What would you do without a float? LOL

straightUp Loc: California

LOL - you KNOW I'm never going to conform to your PC sheep-pen, bro.


Ah, thank you for bringing this back to the discussion and it's called deduction eagle, the same legal process of putting two and two together that have led to criminal convictions for centuries. There is more than enough evidence to make the case but the Republicans who for some reason are scared shitless that Trump will be impeached are waaay out on a limb with the absurd assertion that no one is guilty unless they are caught red-handed... (unless of course it's a Democrat, in which case any half-baked conspiracy theory will do).


Ha! You WISH!

None of the hilarious distractions tossed out by busy bees like Hannity makes any difference to the impeachment case. The Dems are focused, smoke-screens aren't going to work.

As far as I am concerned, if there IS evidence of Democratic interference in the 2016 elections, they should pursue it. If they find proof they should prosecute. It still has no bearing on what Trump did in 2019 and it stumps me how any grown person can actually assume it will.

Hannity is in an idiot.

This however, *is* hillarious...