Re: Nuke em if ya got em "TCMay"

[tallpaul@pipeline.com (tallpaul)]

On Feb 05, 1996 06:49:57, 'attila <attila@primenet.com>' wrote: 
 
 
> 
>attila sez: 
> 
>	It is not whether paralax does not know shit from beans, but that 
>he proves to all that he would prefer to censor TCMay and James A. 
>Donald than listen to their opinions, despite the fact he posted his 
>own rather trivial and absurd point.  
> 
>political correctness and the liberal news intrepretations of "all 
>men are created equal" with reverse discrimination, destruction of 
>the work ethic for the dole, and the New World Order whose need is 
>more and more cheaper labor, even to the point of disenfranchising  
>whole element of America society to achieve a worker's underclass is  
>the shit part of beans and shit. 
> 
>	with this, I suppose I have been entered upon your "list" of  
>enemies of the 'statist' nation along with TCMay and James A. Donald, 
>and that my prejudged conviction and sentence requires me to write 
>30,000 lines of debugged C source code before the end of this year.  
> 
>	how about 30,000 lines of debugged Ada source for you?  --while 
>I add you to procmailrc: 
> 
>	    :0: 
>	    * ^[FRST].*paralax 
>	    assholes 
> 
 
It seems that the lib'ers on the list continue to behave in their
increasingly demagogic style. 
 
Instead of dealing with substantive criticism they charge those who
disagree with them are "censors". 
 
First Atilla charges one critic "paralax" with "not wanting to listen" when
it seems obvious that paralax is not only listening but responding. Then
Atilla concludes by giving us the code for his mail software whereby he
will not listen, thus doing the very thing he accuses others of. 
 
Second, instead of discussing the substantive issues he goes off to
denounce the various lib'ber horsemen of the "liberal media," "political
correctness," "reverse discrimination," "the dole," and "the New World
Order." 
 
I sense that both groups of lib'bers share the same methodology. 
 
The first group (Rush's "lib'bers") around people like Dworkin and other
professional "anti-rape feminists" have their Politically Correct Agenda
and Politically Correct terminology. If you disagree with it they proceed
with a stream of demagogic and vitupertive abuse, followed by another
stream of off-the-wall political attacks using words like "stalking,"
"sexual harassment," "rape," and "male patriarchal [whatever]" followed by
statements of their personal sense of "indignation" and "outrage." Then
they announce they are no longer going to listen to the very discussion
they started. 
 
Until they start another. 
 
The second group (the lib'bertarians) have their Politically Correct Agenda
and Politically Correct Language. If you disagree with them to also get a
stream of off-the-wall political attacks featuring terms like those Atilla
used. Then they, very much like the radical feminist lib'bers put their
electronic fingers in their electronic ears so they do not have to listen. 
 
These are the people who have the political agenda, the personal maturity,
and the political strategy to make the net and the world a better place? 
 
Not from what I've seen. 
 
--tallpaul