Trump & Hillary

[gunslingerdick]

Yeah, I can tell, that's why you keep bring it up! LOL

If you recall, when I ignored that particular poaster, I said "I will continue to make fun of you and you'll still be annoying, so little will change." He and I both are holding up our ends of the bargain.

I don't recall you being a part of any of that. Yet, here you are, jumping in the Kool-Aid without knowing the flavor.

 

[strummingram]

I would say he probably meant harmful in the sense of harming your way of thinking, or your ability to understand not necessarily physically harmful to you or anyone. It harms your ability to have productive relationships and conversations, I imagine.

I would quote you, but 71-00 has already made a generalization about women earlier.

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

I think we should have GSD play "Survivor Ignore" where each day he snuffs out another poaster's torch by adding them to his ignore list. Presumably it'd go in order of most stupid/asinine poast of the day would get the ax. I wonder who the last poaster standing would be? Any wagers?

 

[chick_bleeds_carolina_blue]

I would quote you, but 71-00 has already made a generalization about women earlier.

Ehhhh, he just doesn't like one that is not afraid to speak her mind. It probably annoys the pee out of him! hahahaha

 

[chick_bleeds_carolina_blue]

If you recall, when I ignored that particular poaster, I said "I will continue to make fun of you and you'll still be annoying, so little will change." He and I both are holding up our ends of the bargain.

I don't recall you being a part of any of that. Yet, here you are, jumping in the Kool-Aid without knowing the flavor.

oh please, Dick, I figured you out the first day I got on here! LOL I don't have to be part of it... just put me on ignore too.

 

[strummingram]

Yeah, I can tell, that's why you keep bring it up! LOL

He loves beating his head against a wall. And, the only reason I have "kept up my part of the bargain" is because he put me on ignore.

If you're going to do that you 1) don't need to announce it and then remind people over and over and over and 2) when you do announce it, and continue to remind people over and over, you're not really ignoring the person at all.

I'm saving all my hugs and kisses for our reunion.

 

[gunslingerdick]

I think we should have GSD play "Survivor Ignore" where each day he snuffs out another poaster's torch by adding them to his ignore list. Presumably it'd go in order of most stupid/asinine poast of the day would get the ax. I wonder who the last poaster standing would be? Any wagers?

 

[gunslingerdick]

oh please, Dick, I figured you out the first day I got on here! LOL I don't have to be part of it... just put me on ignore too.

Then who's gonna make my sammiches?

 

[chick_bleeds_carolina_blue]

He loves beating his head against a wall. And, the only reason I have "kept up my part of the bargain" is because he put me on ignore.

If you're going to do that you 1) don't need to announce it and then remind people over and over and over and 2) when you do announce it, and continue to remind people over and over, you're not really ignoring the person at all.

I'm saving all my hugs and kisses for our reunion.

there ya go, Strum! LOL love it! He misses you, I can tell, he brings you up every other day!

 

[chick_bleeds_carolina_blue]

Then who's gonna make my sammiches?

Hey now! Julez or someone started a weird food thread and apparently we have dogshit burgers... want one of those??? LOL

 

[strummingram]

there ya go, Strum! LOL love it! He misses you, I can tell, he brings you up every other day!

Or every day.

His ego won't even allow him to honor his decision to put me on ignore. Classic dick!

 

[UNC '92]

I think we should have GSD play "Survivor Ignore" where each day he snuffs out another poaster's torch by adding them to his ignore list. Presumably it'd go in order of most stupid/asinine poast of the day would get the ax. I wonder who the last poaster standing would be? Any wagers?

I don't know about last, but @coolwaterunc would have been snuffed out first yesterday with his bullshit grits comment.

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

I don't know about last, but @coolwaterunc would have been snuffed out first yesterday with his bullshit grits comment.

Ya, I know I wouldn't make it to last - I'd be surprised if I made the final tribal council.

I'm liable to make some rather dumb analogy like the DogShit burger - or say something that outs me as a Yankee. I might have a few tricks up my sleeve, like a hidden immunity idol (a can of dip to give him) to save me - but that would only carry me so far.

 

[tarheel0910]

If you recall, when I ignored that particular poaster, I said "I will continue to make fun of you and you'll still be annoying, so little will change." He and I both are holding up our ends of the bargain.

I don't recall you being a part of any of that. Yet, here you are, jumping in the Kool-Aid without knowing the flavor.

 

[UNC71-00]

No, you're right. Make more generalizations. Make sweeping generalizations. That will help create new and improved stereotypes. Those are always beneficial.
.

Don't be a whiny little bitch.

Everyone generalizes, it's almost instinctive. The problem (and harm) arises when it affects your attitude toward people who DO NOT FIT your generalization. Or, when you make a generalization and the exception catches up with you.

I agree that generalizations are instinctive. And I agree that problems can arise when the exceptions occur. I'm just not sure that the problems are significant.

However, given that the exceptions are, well, the exceptions, why should we devote much time to concerning ourselves with them? Are there instances which come to mind which have shaped your view here?

 

[UNC71-00]

I would quote you, but 71-00 has already made a generalization about women earlier.

If you quoted her, you would be redundant because I already did.

And in that particular generalization, the moral of the story is don't argue with women. How does avoiding an argument with a woman cause any problems or harm? In fact, I would say that generalizing here makes everyone safer.

Maybe your generalization about generalizations is actually the only dangerous generalization.

 

[UNC71-00]

Ehhhh, he just doesn't like one that is not afraid to speak her mind. It probably annoys the pee out of him! hahahaha

The women in my life all speak their minds just fine and are generally smarter than me.

The difference is I don't surround myself with women who are like you, all praise be to Jesus.

 

[tarheel0910]

all praise be to Jesus.

 

[Raising Heel]

This thread right now:

 

[chick_bleeds_carolina_blue]

The difference is I don't surround myself with women who are like you, all praise be to Jesus.

And for that I am VERY thankful! Praise the Lort!!!!

 

[strummingram]

I agree that generalizations are instinctive. And I agree that problems can arise when the exceptions occur. I'm just not sure that the problems are significant.

However, given that the exceptions are, well, the exceptions, why should we devote much time to concerning ourselves with them? Are there instances which come to mind which have shaped your view here?

Have I ever experienced a situation where making a generalization proved detrimental? yes. If you haven't, then great. You're making sweeping generalizations about political philosophies, social policies, governmental processes, and even racial attitudes. If you think those are not potentially hazardous when it comes to making generalizations, then go right ahead. I do not believe you're being remotely sincere about this discussion, so I'm done here.

But, before I go; Here's an example for you. There was a generalization that began in the 1930's that all Jews were parasites and were a threat to Germany, not only to their society, but even to the human species. You remember that, right? So, sometimes generalizations can go way off-the-rails. Now, I realize that is a rather isolated, extreme, situation, but it does illustrate how generalizations can and do create significant damage to us. But, as you said, exceptions are rare, so maybe only one Holocaust per century shows that it's not really worth devoting much time concerning ourselves with them.

I'm going to try to reduce my generalizations. You can go right ahead with your frequency of making them.

 

[coolwaterunc]

What is this thread?

 

[JuleZ '02 HEEL]

And for that I am VERY thankful! Praise the Lort!!!!

 

[UNC71-00]

Have I ever experienced a situation where making a generalization proved detrimental? yes. If you haven't, then great. You're making sweeping generalizations about political philosophies, social policies, governmental processes, and even racial attitudes. If you think those are not potentially hazardous when it comes to making generalizations, then go right ahead. I do not believe you're being remotely sincere about this discussion, so I'm done here.

The generalizations aren't the issue, the danger lies in the conclusions drawn from the generalization. Generally speaking of course.

But, before I go; Here's an example for you. There was a generalization that began in the 1930's that all Jews were parasites and were a threat to Germany, not only to their society, but even to the human species. You remember that, right? So, sometimes generalizations can go way off-the-rails. Now, I realize that is a rather isolated, extreme, situation, but it does illustrate how generalizations can and do create significant damage to us. But, as you said, exceptions are rare, so maybe only one Holocaust per century shows that it's not really worth devoting much time concerning ourselves with them.

I was hoping against hope that you would try to correlate the Nazis with generalizing conservatives and liberals. And low and behold, my prayers have been answered. It must have been that praise I gave to Jesus for not surrounding me with women like Chick.

Nazis didn't generalize Jews, they viewed Jews as sub-human. So that analogy is just worthless and lacking merit in every way. Specifically speaking.

Is racism a form of generalization? Sure. So since you oppose generalizing, you oppose calling the Nazis evil. Because that's not fair and potentially harmful to the good things that Nazis may otherwise be doing if people weren't holding them back, right?

With regards to potential hazards, you have to figure out which train of thought will lead to a greater likelihood of actual hazards. I would think that one would lead a less hazardous life by tending to generalize more than one who needs to stick his finger in every outlet to check for current.

And then there is the issue of time. I'm not writing a research paper and taking bong hits all day, I got shit to do, man. Generalizing allows me more time to accomplish more things.

So in conclusion, generalization is the key to happiness and life, generally speaking. Whereas your method makes everyone want to place you on ignore.

 

[prlyles]

[QUOTE="strummingram, post: 635944, member: 3314" There was a generalization that began in the 1930's that all Jews were parasites and were a threat to Germany, not only to their society, but even to the human species. You remember that, right? So, sometimes generalizations can go way off-the-rails. Now, I realize that is a rather isolated, extreme, situation, but it does illustrate how generalizations can and do create significant damage to us. But, as you said, exceptions are rare, so maybe only one Holocaust per century shows that it's not really worth devoting much time concerning ourselves with them.

I'm going to try to reduce my generalizations. You can go right ahead with your frequency of making them.[/QUOTE]"Excuse me for butting in but anti-Semitism did not start in the 1930's. It goes back hundreds and hundreds of years. OK carry on...

 

[Archer2]

Then I must have misunderstood your participation in the entire thread about who CAN be trusted and who is better-suited for these offices? If you don't trust any of them, then why would you ever call-out some as better than others? Why in the world would you vote for them??? You don't trust them, but you will let them hold the office? Conservatives are good, Liberals are bad- is the more simplistic idea that is being conveyed.

There are varying degrees of trust. Some people I trust implicitly, some I trust for the most part, and some I don't trust at all. Hillary is one who wouldn't know the truth if it bit her on the arse and I don't trust her as far as I can throw her. I have grave reservations about Donald but not to the extent I have about Hillary. So if it's a case of voting for the lesser of two evils, I'll opt for that every time.

 

[strummingram]

[QUOTE="strummingram, post: 635944, member: 3314" There was a generalization that began in the 1930's that all Jews were parasites and were a threat to Germany, not only to their society, but even to the human species. You remember that, right? So, sometimes generalizations can go way off-the-rails. Now, I realize that is a rather isolated, extreme, situation, but it does illustrate how generalizations can and do create significant damage to us. But, as you said, exceptions are rare, so maybe only one Holocaust per century shows that it's not really worth devoting much time concerning ourselves with them.

I'm going to try to reduce my generalizations. You can go right ahead with your frequency of making them.

"Excuse me for butting in but anti-Semitism did not start in the 1930's. It goes back hundreds and hundreds of years. OK carry on...[/QUOTE]

Well, thank God it's not generalization.

 

[strummingram]

Nazis didn't generalize Jews, they viewed Jews as sub-human. So that analogy is just worthless and lacking merit in every way.

Is racism a form of generalization? Sure.

Which is it? You think "viewing them as sub-human" wasn't a generalization? you're NOT that stupid!


Comparing racial generalizations to sticking your finger in all electrical outlets isn't just worthless and lacking merit in every way. It's showing just how willfully ignorant you're willing to go in order to pretend you're "right."

If you enjoy making generalizations... DO IT!

And, if you put me on ignore, please make sure and announce it officially, and remind us every day that you've done it, so we'll know how well you're ignoring me.

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

I'm going to try to reduce my generalizations. You can go right ahead with your frequency of making them.

I would think that one would lead a less hazardous life by tending to generalize more than one who needs to stick his finger in every outlet to check for current.

Exactly. Making generalizations isn't inherently bad. In fact, it's an intelligent way to make "more probable than not" guesses on things that you're not 100% sure on - using information that coincides with things you are familiar with. Your example of the outlet is a great. I don't stick my finger in outlets because most of the time I shock myself if I do that. The probability is that I will shock myself. Will I be wrong a couple times and not shock myself because there was no current? Sure - but I'll be right more often than I'm wrong.

If we needed to be 100% clear on every aspect of everything before we made an assumption - nothing would ever get done!

 

[strummingram]

Exactly. Making generalizations isn't inherently bad. In fact, it's an intelligent way to make "more probable than not" guesses on things that you're not 100% sure on - using information that coincides with things you are familiar with. Your example of the outlet is a great. I don't stick my finger in outlets because most of the time I shock myself if I do that. The probability is that I will shock myself. Will I be wrong a couple times and not shock myself because there was no current? Sure - but I'll be right more often than I'm wrong.

If we needed to be 100% clear on every aspect of everything before we made an assumption - nothing would ever get done!

I think I said, succinctly, that making generalizations is natural... we all do it. And, I'm not talking about the more obvious generalizations drawn from experiences with electrical outlets. Gimme a fvcking break, man! Electrical outlets don't have heartbeats and mothers and fathers. I'm talking about PEOPLE! I'm talking about making assumptions and generalizations about groups of people in contexts that can have significant impacts on their lives.

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

@strummingram sometimes I wonder if you really believe some of the crap you say. I feel like one day you'll say you've stopped breathing air because everyone else breathes air - and you're just not sure how vital it is, and that it may actually be causing everything that's wrong with the world.

If you really believe some of this crap, then I don't know if there's really any help for you. If you just enjoy seeing how irritated you can get a bunch of people by spewing the most insane garbage you can until someone calls you out for it then kudos to you - you're like next-level troll status.

 

[strummingram]

There are varying degrees of trust. Some people I trust implicitly, some I trust for the most part, and some I don't trust at all. Hillary is one who wouldn't know the truth if it bit her on the arse and I don't trust her as far as I can throw her. I have grave reservations about Donald but not to the extent I have about Hillary. So if it's a case of voting for the lesser of two evils, I'll opt for that every time.

If you trust evil, or "lesser evil" as you put it, go for it. You said you didn't trust politicians. I took you to mean that exactly as you said it. You trust the ones who claim to be conservative and Christian. So, you do trust some of them more than others. I don't trust anyone to be Christian because they say they're Christian. My definition of Christian is probably not your definition. Same with conservative and liberal. That's why the labels are not reliable to me.

 

[strummingram]

@strummingram sometimes I wonder if you really believe some of the crap you say. I feel like one day you'll say you've stopped breathing air because everyone else breathes air - and you're just not sure how vital it is, and that it may actually be causing everything that's wrong with the world.

If you really believe some of this crap, then I don't know if there's really any help for you. If you just enjoy seeing how irritated you can get a bunch of people by spewing the most insane garbage you can until someone calls you out for it then kudos to you - you're like next-level troll status.

Well, follow dick and 71-00 to the ignore room.

You can cease to wonder. I believe what I say here.

I'm not asking you for any help. I'm not trying to irritate anyone. I'm speaking my mind. And, I'm fully aware how my thought process is unorthodox. If you're irritated, then I'm sorry.

 

[prlyles]

If you trust evil, or "lesser evil" as you put it, go for it. You said you didn't trust politicians. I took you to mean that exactly as you said it. You trust the ones who claim to be conservative and Christian. So, you do trust some of them more than others. I don't trust anyone to be Christian because they say they're Christian. My definition of Christian is probably not your definition. Same with conservative and liberal. That's why the labels are not reliable to me.

Just wondering, what do you call a Christian?

 

[tarheel0910]

Just wondering, what do you call a Christian?

Can't speak for strum, but this is what I call a Christian.

 

[JuleZ '02 HEEL]

Can't speak for strum, but this is what I call a Christian.

 

[chick_bleeds_carolina_blue]

@strummingram you are wasting time with some of these nut jobs (generalization there). Everything they say about us can be said about them. I'm so done arguing with them and since a couple of them want me to leave, I think I will. I'm sure other boards aren't quite as nutty as this one when it comes to politics and social issues. You cannot have civilized discussions with people who have that perpetual stick up their anus!

 

[tarheel0910]

@strummingram you are wasting time with some of these nut jobs (generalization there). Everything they say about us can be said about them. I'm so done arguing with them and since a couple of them want me to leave, I think I will. I'm sure other boards aren't quite as nutty as this one when it comes to politics and social issues. You cannot have civilized discussions with people who have that perpetual stick up their anus!

Jesus... get back on topic.

 

[UNC71-00]

Which is it? You think "viewing them as sub-human" wasn't a generalization? you're NOT that stupid!


Comparing racial generalizations to sticking your finger in all electrical outlets isn't just worthless and lacking merit in every way. It's showing just how willfully ignorant you're willing to go in order to pretend you're "right."

If you enjoy making generalizations... DO IT!

And, if you put me on ignore, please make sure and announce it officially, and remind us every day that you've done it, so we'll know how well you're ignoring me.

No, it wasn't a generalization, it was a re-categorization. If they had generally thought Jews were sub-human, or thought that Jews were generally sub-human, they wouldn't have gone to lengths they did to exterminate.

I don't enjoy generalizations, but I view them as generally necessary to living a productive life as I define it, which is of course all relative.

I was just kiddin' about the ignore- I could generally never turn my back on you.

 

[strummingram]

Just wondering, what do you call a Christian?

Can't speak for strum, but this is what I call a Christian.

That bastard beat me to it! I was literally going to post a picture of Batman... but, oh well.

I don't have a definitive example of a Christian. Maybe Jesus??? Christian is indistinct. I mean, technically all Catholics and Protestants are "Christian." But, saying you're a Christian means very little. Are you BEING a Christian? I've seen self-proclaimed atheists BEING a Christian more often than the ones that call themselves Christians.