with anyone else but Warren Bonesteel.
If you have a yen to read a very hard bitchslap administered by Jeff, here’s your chance.
Related: There’s still time to vote
Search
Archive Calendar
| M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | ||||
| 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
| 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 |
| 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 |
| 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | |
Archives
Categories
- A Government That Can Force You to Buy Health Insurance Can Make You Do Anything (3)
- a protein wisdom philosophy primer (3)
- academics (25)
- armadillo (8)
- Friday Fiction 100 Word Challenge (51)
- from the protein wisdom conceptual series (136)
- identity politics (33)
- If Republicans Win the Senate in 2014 (1)
- in which celebraties comment on current events (67)
- language / intentionalism (88)
- legal (6)
- My brief conversations with inanimate objects (130)
- NSA / FISA (46)
- One Term to Serve, the 2012 Revival (6)
- Overheard in a Fallujah bunker (27)
- Poems from 196x, Revised by the Ghost of Richard Brauti (27)
- protein wisdom's DNC coverage (30)
- protein wisdom's RNC coverage (29)
- protein wisdom: the movie Lists (20)
- Provocateurism (16)
- real-time empirical observations (51)
- red pills found behind the sofa cushions (42)
- Scenes from my driveway (61)
- Talking back to 80s music (41)
- The Martha Stewart Chronicles (58)
- The protein wisdom interviews (10)
- The protein wisdom original poems (142)
- Uncategorized (20,046)
- Zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance, abridged (34)
Recent Comments
- In The Mailbox: 02.28.23 (Afternoon Edition) : The Other McCain on Hey, longtime pw readers…
- In The Mailbox: 12.23.22 : The Other McCain on Patrick J. Carroll truly IS a sad, embittered psychopath
- Danger on Patrick J. Carroll might be a psychopath
- Danger on Patrick J. Carroll might be a psychopath
- In The Mailbox: 07.18.22 : The Other McCain on Patrick J. Carroll might be a psychopath
Dayum!
I know that Worn Bonestealer won’t appreciate the effort, but I sure do.
Worn Bootheel.
But if he suggested what he’d rather see us doing, he’d be stomping all over our sovereignty!
Or something.
Geesh.
Wait… maybe he’s one of those folks who considers any attempt to persuade to be inherently oppressive. Now, usually they restrict themselves to bitching about advertising, but maybe he’s taken it a step further and is objecting to the very idea of communicating ideas?
Wow. Nice job, Jeff. I had faith in Mr. Bonesteel. I still think he means well, but as Jeff said, the man just can’t communicate. And the god complex is a bit creepy.
but maybe he’s taken it a step further and is objecting to the very idea of communicating ideas?
That gave me a headache. If contemporary liberalism can justify all crappy ideas it produces with an implicit rejection to communication of all ideas as intellectual imperialism, is it any wonder that its products are so goofy?
And by the by, as one who is usually in over his head here, I must say, simply, that Jeff has always been patient and polite, even when you’ve slightly pissed him off.
Warren Bonesteel is the One True Conserv… er… Classical Liberal. All others are frauds and charlatans.
I just imagined that Andrew Sullivan chose that as a pseudonym, and now I can’t stop laughing.
I had missed that post. Thanks for linking it Dan. Excellent as usual Jeff G.
Don’t make fun of his name, blah. You’ll get a 20-screen dissertation on its origins in pre-Roman era Celtic or Nordic or whatever the fuck it is.
Well.
I’m glad you pointed that one out Dan.
That was special, just special.
BTW, I did like the one part where asking another what you should do is surrendering sovreignty.
Asking advice is surrendering sovreignty?
Even if I take the advice, I am still making sovereign decisions.
A very Whiskey Tango Foxtrot thing.
I was reminded of Klaus Kinski’s scene in Doctor Zhivago where he’s chained up on the train and saying he’s the only free man there. Ouchie
“BTW, I did like the one part where asking another what you should do is surrendering sovreignty.
Asking advice is surrendering sovreignty?”
Mikey, that was Warren’s long winded way of saying, “I got nothing”.
It’s worse than that, even. Taking the advice not to take advice or else you surrender your sovereignty is a surrender of sovereignty by virtue of your having taken the advice not to take advice.
Catch 22 squared.
QUESTION AUTHORITY!
I have it on good authority that questioning authority is questionable.
“I have it on good authority that questioning authority is questionable.”
Ya see, Squid. I question that.
But isn’t that just another way to surrender my sovereignty?
Don’t take this the wrong way, Jeff, but I often scroll through your posts. Not because I’m not interested, but because I don’t have the liberty to make the time your posts deserve or require for my comprehension. I have to admit, the “signs”, “signifiers”, etc. stuff makes me scratch my head somewhat. Likely because of my lack of education in matters philosophic and linguistic. However, as I read through the comments and pick up through them your main points, I find myself wishing I had the necessary grounding to read what you’re saying in the clear. Because it’s good stuff.
To lengthen an already long point: when I scroll through you Jeff, I feel my own inadequacy. When I scroll through Boney, I don’t feel like I’m missing a thing.
Warren, SEK, Bennett, all monkyboy directors cut, extended version with behind the scene documentation, in a box set with rare interviews, deleted scenes, and a variety of alternate endings.
In other words(being apropos), drawn out, overwrought, verbose parsnip; babbling importantly, self righteousness presented like a shield intricately woven from a thousand assertions.
All hat and no cattle.
oops…
I especially like the Cheers and Seinfeld reference because Warren strikes me as a cross between Frazier Crane and George Costanza. And not in a good way.
Jeff, hows that work on getting trade coming? Pretty damn good by your response at #77. Now when will the Goldstein Hootchshine be ready, because Garçon Green is waiting to serve drinks to Simon.
And alppuccino, “Warren strikes me as a cross between Frazier Crane and George Costanza. And not in a good way.” Interesting observation, but what, no Lovey thrown in there too?
Lovey is dried out Joe.
#14 Jeff G.:
Yeah, that really runs hard into the old whiskey-tango-foxtrot loop right there.
I have a feeling Warren wouldn’t get along at all with Jon Donne; and I bet he thought Robinson Crusoe had a sad ending.
Warren, if you’re reading:
sophâ‹…istâ‹…ry
   /ˈsɒfəstri/ [sof-uh-stree] –noun, plural -ries.
1. a subtle, tricky, superficially plausible, but generally fallacious method of reasoning.
I get the feeling you don’t know what the word really means, because you use it awfully loosely. In other words, you use it poorly, to the point that it’s devoid of meaning in the context of your comments.
It’s like the way people use the term “rhetoric” to mean “empty rhetoric” and “begging the question” to mean that a statement leads to a question.
OTOH, Jeff uses it correctly here: “There’s nothing classically liberal about begging the question.”
Also, as Jeff pointed out, “deconstruction” doesn’t mean “tearing down an argument.” It refers to a particular theory of language that shows how a text can mean two opposite things at once, and this because language is a slippery way to create meaning.
For example (pay close attention, because you don’t seem to know what an example is): The bumpersticker that says “Question Authority” can easily be deconstructed thus–the plain meaning of the text is that the speaker is enjoining us to defy or at least be skeptical of those who claim to have authority over us. However, the verb is in the imperative voice, which is the voice one uses to issue commands, a clear hallmark of having authority.
Pointing out the flaws in Amanda’s arguments (a fairly simple task, granted, but Jeff does it with a certain élan) is not “deconstruction.” It is merely pointing out the flaws in an argument.
OK, I’ve shown you an example of “deconstruction.” Now you show me an example of “sophistry.” This will count on your final grade.
You are violating his sovereignty, Dicentra.
At least there is no math.
Don’t question Jeff’s authority.
So…Jeff’s supposed ‘bitch slap’ contained something that he really hated when Fr[*]sch did it to him, but it’s ok when Jeff uses veiled threats and personal attacks against others?
Interesting.
I didn’t catch the part where he threatened your kid, Warren.
Veiled threats and personal attacks Warren?
I really think you don’t quite understand the English language. I read the entire comment Dan linked to and I did not perceive one threat or personal attack – unless disagreeing with you and saying it plainly and in detail is both a veiled threat and an attack.
At some point it may occur to you, Bonesteel, that you’re an inadequate advocate for whatever it is you’re pitching. The sad part is that there’s probably something to whatever it is you’re pitching.
Rapid, but not fast city driving, say 55 or so along the Crestview, in order to get your Morning Coffee?
Happy President’s Day, Warren! I know it’s early but by the time Monday rolls around I probably won’t feel near as festive about it. I’m thinking about celebrating with baba ghanoush and kvass this year. Mix it up a little.
Was that actually Bonesteel commenting there Dan, or someone posing as Bonesteel? Cause really, that makes no sense to me at all.
I don’t know if this is sophistry exactly but I don’t get it. The title is We Are All Fascists Now but pajamas gives it this path: http://pajamasmedia.com/michaelledeen/2009/02/12/we-are-all-illiterates-now/ … but nowhere in Michael Ledeen’s piece does he talk about illiteracy. Someone explain?
You can choose a pompous drone,
In some bombastic voice.
By a petard of his own,
His ass is always hoist.
You can choose to hear his sneers
And logic that’s concealed.
I will choose a path that’s clear.
I will lose Bonesteel.
Comment by Warren Bonesteel on 2/13 @ 3:31 pm #
Do you speak English?
Again, no examples proffered.
What did I do to you that Fr*sch did to me? Where is the veiled threat? Where is the personal attack? I answered your points, painstakingly. You have yet to address any of mine.
In fact, every comment you leave cements my argument even further.
Irony, that is.
I second the question as to whether the comment in this thread is really Bonesteel. His previous comments have been arrogant, nonsensical, and childish, but reading threats into anything that was said charges into the realm of delusional.
Rob – a takedown of an argument point-by-point can be considered a threat to some people – especially if they cherish that argument.
but it’s ok when Jeff uses veiled threats and personal attacks against others?
Sure.
in Chicago.
People pay good money for that sort of thing. Go give him a visit.
Really, people. Help me out. If I’m making veiled threats, point them out. Because that’s not my style. If I want to throw down, I say so.
I thought I was very rigorous in my response.
Oh. And the IP matches the other Warren comments, so yeah, that’s him.
this would make me feel threatened…
Respect Andrew Sullivan’s Authority!
That Andrew Sullivan clip would be perfect when he guests on Bill Maher’s Real Time. But he has obviously been hitting the bong and the brownies a bit hard.
Perhaps they were so veiled, they were invisible. Remember when you used to put the answers to those music things in white, and you had to highlight to read the answer?
I’m thinking you threatened to cockslap him, but used that old trick so only he saw it.
Maggie’s so pithy at times. Forgive me if I’m a tad envious. It’s something to aspire to.
Rob’s suggestion of a charge into the delusional looks apt to me then. I re-read your linked #77 in Real Am. Heroes and find no such threats, veiled or otherwise. Nor any in 67. Nor 56. Nor 31. So what the heck he’s referring to with “…but it’s ok when Jeff uses veiled threats and personal attacks against others?…” I haven’t a clue.
I guess we’ll just wait for Warren to fill us in on his intent (or not), for now (what the heck, that’s getting to be habitual at this point).
see, now, this made me chuckle.
you’re much too kind, Carin.
I saw no threats, Jeff, veiled or otherwise. I can only conclude that he feels threatened when someone attacks his arguments.
Pithyness (not a word I guess) is a nice quality to be able to express. I wish I had the ability.
For instance, Tom Petty can write pithy lyrics that nevertheless encapsulate a world of meaning. Any song I write has words spilling out all over the place.
Bringing up the crazy person’s name is more along the lines of a veiled threat I think really. Most people what are socialized know to leave that alone. I say that because most people what are socialized leave that alone.
Steal my lyrics, cranky. They’re romantic.
Are we certain Warren doesn’t write the script for Obama’s speeches? Warren’s probably a professor of obfuscation theory at a prestigious university. The signal to noise ratio is similar, remarkably low.
I saw no threats, veiled or otherwise, to anything other than Warren’s ego.
Bonesteeliana, wherein he expounds forthrightly his vision in Oct. 2007. It’s a big synthesis thing. Or as he puts it, “a true mega-trend”.
I’m inclined to view it as a bit of over-reach, but then, that’s just me.
are veiled threats shariah compliant?
Sdferr’s link tells us all we need to know. Warren is used to having his verbiage accepted as fact; inspired, even, in its eloquence. The fact that it is not happening here is the source of the imagined antagonism, as was already suggested above by others.
Consider that Bonesteel’s perception may just be so keenly honed that he can see things that none of us could even begin to imagine.
We could get Keanu Reeves to play him in a movie, maybe, with Hugo Weaving as Jeff. But only if Hugo did a tonne more weights and some rigorous gripper workouts.
are veiled threats shariah compliant?
Yes, veiled threats are halal. Naked threats are haraam.
Make a note of it.
Andy Sullivan apparently voiced contempt at Congress today – not at the Democrats for passing the GREATEST generational THEFT in American history (future generations will be paying for this boondagle for decades) but at the Republicans because one of them held up a toy rat during his floor speech (yes, really…and no, I’m not linking because I don’t want that POS getting any traffic).
You know when liberals get all projection-y and accuse conservatives of hate? Well, it’s not true of course. At least, not usually. But I just unleashed a torrent of hate at Sullivan via email. I hope that little fucker reads the whole thing. Anyway, he’s dead to me so let’s move on.
Anyways, I’m sure parsnip, thor and other associated lib-fucks here are thrilled by this “victory” for their party. Of course, now that you’re in charge, you WILL be held accountable for all of its glorious failures. This is not a football game. Your party may have won, but America has lost today.
There is no entitlement to a certain standard of living for a nation, and this bill will reduce the standard of living for ALL future generations of Americans. Our deficits are going to climb to absurd levels, interest rates will rise to levels we never thought we’d see again. Inflation may come back in a very painful way as we’ll have to print money just to pay for the debt we accrue the next couple of years.
And for the record lib-fucks, I am currently finishing up my PhD in Economics and NOT A SINGLE member of the Econ faculty at my school thinks this bill is a good idea. Not-a-fucking-one. Congrats on your pyrrhic victory, blowback is going to be a bitch in 2010.
God bless America, we could use the blessings now.
PS I add my credentials because Baracky recently said everyone thinks they’re an economist these days.
Well, I am an actual economist by training. Baracky is a “community organizing”, party hack, socialist thug who knows something between jack and shit about economics and he’s a liar to boot. So he’s right – not everyone is an economist.
So when is the public getting the 48 hours Baracky promised before signing any bill? (it’s still on his website even now, go look it up) That’s right, the public isn’t getting it. Now take your medicine America, you voted for this guy and now you have him. Don’t bother with the apologies, just vote these clowns out next time.
I would like to offer you positive reinforcement with respect to your torrent of hate. Just cause you’re right about how devastatingly awful and malignant the stuff what Baracky and his socialist friends are doing is going to be.
that poor woman in buffalo was an unveiled threat to some moderate
I think you’re being a little hard on America, Phil.
Charlton BG. Psychological neoteny and higher education: Associations with
delayed parenthood. Medical Hypotheses. 2007; 69: 237-40.
Charlton BG. The rise of the boy-genius: psychological neoteny, science and
modern life. Medical Hypotheses. 2006; 67: 679-81
On Bullshit and Sophistry:
by Bruce Deitrick Price
Serious Study: Immaturity Levels Rising
Jennifer Viegas, Discovery News
June 23, 2006
Psychological Neoteny and NPD
by Kathy Krajco
Video: Perceptual Experiment.
Daniel Simons.
Cognition Lab, University of Illinois.
“The Evolving Self:”
“In Over our Heads”
Robert Kegan
Psychology department. Harvard.
Social-Psychological Influences on Opinion Expression in Face-to-Face and Computer-Mediated Communication
Shirley S. Ho and Douglas M. McLeod.
Replace the Symbol with the Substance
Eliezer Yudkowsky
Overcoming Bias
February 16, 2008
‘Careful, folks. You’ve become that which you claim to hate in others.
As a Catholic, I can’t understand why people think the hair shirts and self-flagellation are so primitive. I mean, compared to weepingly confessing your sins to your constituents on television.
“Now take your medicine America”
oh geez i hope baracky ain’t doing this big time
Geez, can you work that all into a concise lecture, Mr. Primate?
I don’t follow. For sure I don’t hate roguishly good looking people with good congenial temperament what are somewhat possessed of a thinly disguised air of ennui.
Hate Warren? I hardly think I’ve ever written the word here, save perhaps in quoting someone else’s use of it. I would confess to the emotion in myself on occasion, though I believe it’s directed for the most part at jihadist types who behead defenseless captives or other jihadist types who walk into crowds and explode bombs.
Warren, please go do something. Something that doesn’t involve hurting people. Something filled with praxis. Then come here and tell us about it.
Maybe we’ll get it, then.
baracky might know him
Here’s one for you Warren:
Plato’s Sophist: Part II of The Being of the Beautiful, Seth Benardete (Translator)
Good grief.
Warren found another one of those sites that lists stuff. And Warren, our intellectual better, has read all of them.
Three times.
No quotes from these “earth shattering” works mind you, but us retards should read and contemplate them all the same.
Just so’s us mouth breathers can catch up with Warren’s vastly superior Vulcan education.
Where are my fake pointy ears, Tricorder and Sharpie eyebrows?
I’ll tackle Warren’s Googled stack of “logical” yet.
I will attempt to synthesize a thesis from Warren’s unessayed lump of references:
He perceives himself as Mozart to Jeff’s Salieri.
Or maybe vice-versa, because, you know, immaturity is bad, even if you are a child genius.
Mission Critical:
on-line tutorial in critical thinking and reasoning
Professor David Mesher,
SAIL Coordinator
San José State University
Bonesteel is like thor only without the grace and charm.
Warren obviously doesn’t understand how a comment board works. Add that to what I am betting is a really long list.
I’ve been gone the last few weeks so I am just getting caught up on WB’s comments. Amusing to say the least. This guy reminds me of Reg in “Life of Brian.”
I can see one of his meetings now:
WB: This is the Liberated Peoples Front!
Acolyte: Can I join your group?
WB Fuck Off!
Acolyte: No, really. Can I join your group?
WB: This is the LPF. To join us you have to really hate the government.
Acolyte: Oh, I do! I hate the government already!
WB: Oh yeah? How much?
Acolyte: Alot
WB: Right, your in.
i like appeals to authority but then i got a sticker saying QUESTION AUTHORITY
Sorry, That should be “Last few Days” not weeks. Haven’t been gone that long.
Now you’re just making me embarrassed of my minor in philosophy, Warren. :c
Get Ready For Pre-K: 270 Interactive Activities and 2.270 Illustrations That Make Learning Fun!
by Jane Carole
Assessing and Teaching Reading Comprehension and Pre-Writing, K-3 (Assessing & Teaching: Reading Comprehension & Pre-Writing)
by K. Michael Hibbard and Elizabeth A. Wagner
Writing to Standards: Teacher’s Resource of Writing Activities for Pre K-6
by Kathy Kirk
Easy Activities for Building Social Skills: Dozens of Effective Classroom Strategies & Activities to Teach Cooperation and Communication, Manners and Respect, Positive Behavior & More!
by Nancy Jolson Leber
Holy crap, BMoe. My sides hurt! Well done!
I think the exclamation points really sell them, B Moe.
omg i pay property taxes for this
Pre-Writing?
#69 Dan:
He can’t put it into a concise lecture because he can’t reconcile individual sovreignty with living in a society numbering more than ‘one’ person. Every human that has been born to date has had, at some time, to live with other humans. And that ends personal ‘sovreignty’ (whatever the devil that actually means – I am using it as ‘autonomy’ or ‘complete freedom of individual action’) because two humans cannot occupy the same physical space at the same time no matter their personal desires or will. In other words – someone will get into the john ahead of you and you will have to hold it and wait.
Humans live in groups – that’s a fact, deal with it. How we live in groups? That ‘how’ is open to debate, but the debate has to start at recognizing that we will live in groups and accepting that human freedom, or autonomy, or ‘sovreignty’ will always be limited by the group. Theory is fine for a bull-session, but reality is a hard wall to fly into, and no, your theory won’t work as a crash-helmet.
Of course, there is the problem of advocating personal sovreignty while also listing supporting authority. Does taking the advice proffered impede my personal sovreignty?
This is a quandry.
Mikey, that’s probably why he spends his life on the intarwebs.
#85 B Moe:
I can imagine the conversations:
“I’ll civilize you if it kills you.”
“Don’t you mean ‘if it kills me’?”
“No. I said you and I meant that.”
Oooohhh ratsity rats. It’s becoming clearer and clearer:
Stubborn misinterpretation of others’ words and/or past events  check
Grandiosity of manner or speech  check
Expectation of respect or adulation without concomitant accomplishments  check
Insistent appeals to authority  check
Lack of insight into one’s own actions/words  check
DON’T QUESTION ME! I’VE GOT A DEGREE  check
All definitive “tells” when you’re dealing with a cerebral narcissist.
You can’t fool me, Warren, I was raised by one, so I know how to spot ’em, once I see enough.
And the only way to deal with narcissists is not to. They won’t change and there’s nothing you can do about it.
So you are saying that this is his intellectual john, Dan?
That explains the smell!
I dunno, I think maybe Warren’s schtick would make more sense if he was posting as, say, ‘Sarah Connor.’
Bibliography and complaints of nonexistent attacks seem to be his normal mode of discourse on the internet.
Could Warren be a college freshman?
Google
ispretends to be your friend, N.O’Brain.I like what Mikey NTH said in #90.
Forget Warren. I wanna read Mikey’s books.
I may not be smart enough to understand them, but I agree with the premise as stated.
Plus Mikey’s books seem a lot less assholish.
Oh, Emo Boy gets teh irony. It burns.
I enjoyed playing “Buzzword Bingo” in earlier threads. I would have won too, but Warren never used “Paradigm Shift.” Fucker
I’d be glad to give your opinions a once-over, if you’d only share then with us.
I’m more interested in what you think, if there’s anything rattling around in there that’s not self-important, condescending I’m-right-and-y’all-are-fucked horseshit. It all pretty much seems to consist of how some or all of us have, supposedly, lost the ability to think independently, magicly asserted without the least bit of substantiation. Tedious, really. You seem to want to have us make your arguments for you, which is…well, lazy, and shoddy.
Don’t run. We are your friends.
I’m gonna go do important changey stuff and make a difference not that anyone told me to it’s just how I roll. Hah just kidding I’m gonna go get some tasty baba ghanoush and go home.
Thanks, Lamont.
That’s the nicest way that anyone has told me that I ‘have a masterful grasp of the obvious’. At least since my dad last said it.
And no, I am not being sarcastic in the least.
No, your friends reside in the troll bin. Bye.
Don’t run. We are your friends.
In the movies I’ve seen that had that line the scene never ends well.
where’s the swiss rolls
Dammit router I wish you hadn’t mentioned those things. Now I’m wanting a box full of ’em and gots no way to get any. Curses, man.
I should definitely pick up the swiss cake rolls too. I think I saw where they had strawberry ones. Honestly though router what’s put me off the swiss cake rolls lately is that you walk up to that endcap where they live at Ralph’s and you’re assaulted by these “100-calorie packs” that basically scream at you that you’re not supposed to be eating these things anyway so I’ve been walking away chastened a lot. I know I talk big but I hate it when tasty goodness gets all passive aggressive like that.
Wow. Warren’s been back several times and still hasn’t substantiated a single fucking accusation.
Color me bonesteeled!
I don’t want to do that, Jeff. Do I have to?
i’m wondering if baracky gets swiss rolled
if you machine swiss rolls do they get “bonesteeled”
Bonesteel Bibliography would be a good name for a band.
Three paragraphs in, and I couldn’t identify a thesis. Lots of crap about how special he is, but no clear statement of his point.
I suspect he was grasping for what has been called “An Army of Davids” (maybe somebody should write a book!), but his assertion that no one else has ever noticed what he has eliminates that possibility.
Yeah, a pseudo-intellectual with delusions of brilliance, who has never foundered on the rocks of skepticism.
Except for the Jean-Jacques Rousseau part.
What now, another one?
Virulent Ethnocentrism: A Major Challenge for Transformational Conflict
Resolution and Peacebuilding in the Post-Cold War Era
Dennis J.D. Sandole, George Mason University
(1)
Cognitive blindness: the condition of not being able to perceive something in,
for instance, either World 1 (nature) or World 3 (human-made) because of the
absence of a corresponding concept, model, theory and/or paradigm in the
perceiving actor’s World 2 (mental) (e.g., the initial nonperception of reversed colors and shapes in the Bruner-Postman playing-card experiment).
(2)
Cognitive resistance: the condition of not being able to perceive the
anomalous thing over time, presumably because the existing concepts,
models, theories, and/or paradigms in the perceiving actor’s World 2 (mental)
fail to shift in order to accommodate it (e.g., the successive nonperception of anomalous cards in the playing-card experiment).
(3)
Evaluative-affective resistance (EAR) 1: the perceiving actor’s experience of
cognitive dissonance the longer the anomalous thing remains in his/her
perceptual field, suggesting to the actor that something is not quite right with ‘what is going on’ around her or him but which, like in ‘bare sensation’, he or she cannot quite grasp the nature of. What seems to be going on here is that the actor experiences dissonance affectively as anxiety but then, defence mechanisms are activated, protecting the actor from recognizing the nature of the anomalous thing and, in the process, protecting the status quo concepts, models, theories, and/or paradigms in his/her World 2 (mental) (e.g., when some participants in the playing-card experiment indicated their confusion over what they were ‘seeing’: red [black] hearts or black [red] spades
see also:
On the Perception of Incongruity: A Paradigm
Jerome S. Bruner and Leo Postman (1949)
Harvard University
First published in Journal of Personality, 18, 206-223.
I started ignoring most of the comments around here when the first loaded question was asked several days ago.
That’s pretty mutual. My rejoinder:
Blobbity blobbity blob, blob blob blobbity.
Oh, I forgot!
Sovereignty-blob.
Don’t tell me: a “loaded question” is one you can’t answer?
Bibliography does not persuade, Bonesteel.
is baracky 1,2, or 3 then again 4 On the Perception of Incongruity: A Paradigm
what happens to parsnips that are bonesteeled
I think they have to see a proctologist for reconstructive surgery.
Plus, there was that whole bit about complaining about Roger’s lack of professionalism…when the highly unethical and very unprofessional action of publishing of a private business communication …was shared with the world…by someone who was complaining about Roger’s unprofessional, perhaps even unethical, and *privately* communicated, words.
Which raises further questions about some folks’ understanding of the Classical Liberalism they publicly claim to believe and follow.
That is, perhaps they haven’t really performed an indepth study of what privacy actually means under the tenets and principles of Classical Liberalism.
After that performance, many businesses will refuse to have anything to do with you, for you’ve proven yourself to be untrustworthy.
It was, admittedly, a more difficult ethical choice than it may appear to be on the surface. It may have been the ‘right’ thing to do, if only to prevent others from becoming ‘victims,’ but don’t be real surprised if it further impacts your value in the marketplace. Personally, I think the primary motivation of the publication of a private business letter may have been something resembling a unrestrained fit of pique. i.e. Jeff gets a little payback for his wounded pride by trying to publically embarrass Roger…when he reallyneeds no help or assistance in doing so. The later reactions of Jeff and others here seem to fit those assumptions.
Notice that they have attempted the same thing wrt myself and the last two posts that have been made with direct reference to me.
…there are a lot of words in the dictionary that don’t seem to mean what they think they mean…words like honor and ethics and maturity…
A PARADIGM! A PARADIGM, PEOPLE!!!
God damn you, Warren. What the fuck is it you want us to goddamn do, you fucker?
Still no answer to what veiled threats Jeff was supposedly making. You’re avoiding that one so studiously, it’s clear you realize you laid a turd with that one.
Acknowledge the depth of his bibliography.
Duh.
I don’t get it. Is Warren asserting cognitive blindness on someone’s part? If he is, I think an example or two would be more persuasive than a definition of a fairly pedestrian concept.
Again, asserting something is not the same as proving something. Warren can’t seem to grasp the difference.
Too, he can’t seem to get past the rhetorical maneuver of argument by intimation — the reason why we’re constantly deluged with mini bibliographies.
Thing is, I dealt with people in grad school who were name droppers (and this is what Warren is, pretending to argue by listing the arguments of others that, frankly, don’t obtain here), and I’m not impressed. When and if they finally got around to trying actually to argue their position, they had nothing concrete to offer.
It’s sad, but I think dicentra nailed it in the other thread when she called him a cerebral narcissist.
Which should never be confused with being cerebral.
I see small print tightly packed manifestos written on cardboard in Warren’s future. Also, self made recordings on tape which will later be played over and over and used as evidence of the truth of his theories.
So be kind, put a dollar in his cup and let him find the release that only MD 20/20 can bring.
Really, people. Help me out. If I’m making veiled threats, point them out.
Maybe it was your capitalizations.
WTF are you talking about?
it’s so gay ain’t it
I’m sure Jeff wishes he could, in honesty, be less concrete. Yes, Chingese fucker.
WRT ME, ME, ME!!!
Let me underline this point: ME, ME, ME!!!
That was my choice.
SOVEREIGNTY!
And of course, I don’t regard form letters sent me as “private correspondences” — nor do I need a lecture about my relationship with PJM from someone not privy to the nature and history of such a relationship.
Ironically, Warren of the Streets! is all about the “rules” when it suits his purposes. Otherwise he’s all about smashing the system!
Typically, the attacks are beginning to get more personal. I’m used to that. I seem to have the ability to draw that out of people.
And of course, as I publicly stated in my interview on the B-Cast, I’m allowed to be a jerk. I don’t have CEO after my name. Roger knew what he was getting when he took me on. And he certainly wasn’t complaining at the launch of PJM when I was out there defending them.
If I can’t make it in the increasingly clique-driven world of the conservative blogosphere, so be it. I don’t much care. With me you know what you’re getting, at least; I don’t pretend to be everybody’s buddy until it’s time to twist the knife in them.
Oh, and while we’re on the subject, have you come up with a justification for comparing my response to your arguments with threats against my son, Warren? Or should I just add that to the list of things that you’ll only respond to by posting a title to an unrelated article?
Argument by bibliography. Interesting.
George K. Simon Jr, In Sheep’s Clothing: Understanding and Dealing with Manipulative People (A. J. Christopher & Company, 1996).
Robert D. Hare, Without Conscience: The Disturbing World of the Psychopaths Among Us, 1st ed. (The Guilford Press, 1999).
Paul Babiak and Robert D. Hare, Snakes in Suits: When Psychopaths Go to Work (Collins Business, 2007)
Jacques Ellul, Propaganda: The Formation of Men’s Attitudes (Vintage, 1973).
Henry T. Conserva, Propaganda Techniques (1st Books Library, 2003).
Ron Paul, The Revolution: A Manifesto (Grand Central Publishing, 2008).
Un-fucking-trustworthy? That’s the way you took all the PMJ missives beginning, “I wasn’t going to say anything about this, but now that Jeff Goldstein . . .”? Un-fucking-trustworthy to whom? Was this somehow like leaking that we were launching Predator Drones from Pawkifuckingstan?
I thought Roger embarrassed himself with the clever quip about wingnut welfare. If only cause he’s a “ceo” what has been entrusted with “venture capital” and he precipitated a “pr disaster” I think. The letter was just the letter. If it had ended there Roger would have still had his dignity intact I think and not had to get all apologizey. I think Warren is framing that whole thing in retrospect in a contrived way just to make Jeff look bad and to make Warren look like he needs must reluctantly adjudge Jeff to be hypocritically nonadherent to classically liberal principles. What this means is no baba ghanoush for Warren.
Because a number of trolls were sharing the same IP address, some names could disappear from here for a while.
Try not to mourn them too long. They would have wanted you to get on with your lives.
…”there are a lot of words in the dictionary…words like honor and ethics and maturity”..
And you have those?
Because what? You read them in that dictionary?
And then, what?
Googled them?
Man, we are the worst generation ever.
The men and women who fought and continue to fight in Iraq and Afghanistan (and all over the goddamn place) shouldn’t be saddled with us.
Yeah, fuck you, Warren. No baba ghanoush for you.
Actually, Lamont, I’m surprised he hasn’t cited the dictionary.
True happyfeet. My first post about the end of the PJM network, wherein Roger’s letter appeared, was, in point of fact, newsworthy. I broke the story — good little citizen journalist that I am.
But if you recall, there wasn’t much in the way of editorializing until Darleen tipped me off that Roger had responded with his quip about welfare, at which point I took him to task over that.
I did a number of interviews — LAT, TNR, Breitbart — and in each one I said I don’t have a problem with PJM’s business decision as a business decision. It’s their company, and if their money guy wants to put all his cabbage on Glenn and a few others, that’s his prerogative.
But Roger’s response to those who spoke about the dissolution — and let’s face it, he was aiming some of that my way — showed poorly on him.
He has no one to blame for that but himself.
Everyone who has contacted me since about working for them has been told that they need to be familiar with me, what I write, how I write it, and my site’s culture. They need to know what they are getting.
Most people here don’t know this, but I turned down double the money I was making at PJM because it would have meant that I would be posting on a site other than PW; that is, the agreement would have precluded me from posting here on politics.
I care more about my autonomy than I do about following someone else’s guidelines.
If that means ultimately that the site can’t sustain itself, so be it. My choice.
And THAT is trusting in the market.
OUTLAW!
Discovering Assumptions
Adapted from “101 Words I Don’t Use.”
by Paul Niquette, 1996
And I knew that, Jeff, and as much as I love you being here, I think it was dumb.
But I’m glad. For me.
WHAT THE FUCK DO YOU WANT US TO DO, PRAXIS BOY? We are dim. Please spell it out.
I was scrolling through the comments, and just got to #66, and immediately started laughing hysterically. What a tard.
Amongst those words: “clarity”, “explication”.
Not nice, JD. ‘Tards are more open, honest, and clearer in expressing their point.
Now, apologize.
I have a sick son, a friend who had surgery today, and I’m wasting my time with Warren Bonesteel.
No more. Life is too short.
Unless you’re Warren Bonesteel. Then it’s interminable.
Bite Me
Adapted from “Eat Me.”
by Penguins 2009
Well, Dan, I am not a journalist, don’t want to be a journalist, and don’t want anyone confusing me with one.
I write what I want here. I like that freedom. If it doesn’t pan out and I can’t afford to do so anymore, that’s life.
Now I have to go get a “Fuck Life” tee-shirt?
Goddamit, that’s not going to go over well at the plenary indulgence.
I’m not missing anything important, right?
I’ve got tickets too see “Coraline” tonight, and I loves me some Neil Gaiman.
Rob C – To all of the tards out there, I apologize. I should not have insulted you in such a way. It was rude and inconsiderate of me to lump a pompous arrogant pedantic prick in with you. This douche would have to learn how to make a point and defend one, and be able to walk and chew gum at the same time, before he could ever dream of being elevated to your level.
Warren
I read a couple great books today, thought you could add them to your bibliography
How To Win Friends and be a Douchenozzle, by Keith Olberman with forward by Andrew Sullvian (Harpers, 2009)
Bibliographies are the Shiznit, by the International Association of Libraries and Snoop Dog (Death Row Records, 2008)
How to Write 8925 Words and Never Make A Point, by Warren Boner (Innerturbes 2009) – oops, you are prolly familiar with this one already.
I wanted to see Friday the 13th. Forgot. Shit.
Discovering Assumptions
Adapted from “101 Words I Don’t Use.â€Â
I’ll take “Things that have no Spine” for $1,000 Alex.
Alex: “What psuedo intellectual dropped and then misplaced his ball sack while commenting on the site “Protein Wisdom?”
See you tomorrow.”
I’d recommend Coraline simply because the novella was/is so good. And the director is the guy that Tim Burton worked with on The Nightmare Before Christmas.
“Well, Dan, I am not a journalist, don’t want to be a journalist”…
Damnit Jim I’m a Doctor, not a journalist*
*for maggie.
Has anyone else noted that Warren is a right fucking bore?
Goodbye, cb53!
Warren is a right fucking bore
How dare you try to oppress his sovereignty! Fascist!
Comment by cb53 on 2/13 @ 9:25 pm
Looks like someone has been hitting the box wine a bit. Payday and all…
Just so you know, guys, if you’re going to lavish me with sympathy, I’d prefer you do so because my wife was out of town on business and I couldn’t go see Friday the 13th.
Sympathy for my friend’s surgery, or for my son being sick, that’s secondary — though the point remains that both of those things are higher on my priority list than responding any more to Warren Bonesteel.
Wait. “Coraline” is Gaiman-meets-Burton?
Oh.
This I must see.
Dallas Morning News gave the new 13th a D-. Your probably better off renting the old one. Save some coin.
Sorry you couldn’t see Friday the 13th, Jeff.
On the other hand, wasn’t Michael Bay involved in making it? How big fiery explosions will fit in at Crystal Lake is kinda confusing to me.
The whole bibliography thing seems to me to be a tacit admission on Warren’s part that he can’t communicate well.
He’s saying, “I can’t effectively string words together properly, so quit asking me to do it and just go read these damn books.”
It’s a cry for help people and we should all be a little ashamed for ignoring it and further for belittling his problem. Really, it’s kind of brave when you think about it….
…..
NAH!
cb53, in case you’re reading, you picked a really shitty time to level that accusation, since I’ve been aware of Tony’s shit for awhile, and knew of the other stuff prior to Warren’s virulent outbreak. Not to put too fine a point on it, but you suck.
I liked the remake of Texas Chainsaw Massacre done by the same team. Nothing that approached the original, but still.
I think I’ll bust out the original FT13th DVD and watch that after I put the kid to bed. I’m also in the mood for Vision Quest and French Connection.
Long night ahead!
I want to add one thing, for any trolls who might read this. I appreciate your right to suck Obama’s cock on bended knee. I’m not such a homophobe that I’ve got a problem with that. Your right to lie and backbite, though, is circumscribed by my personal judgment of how badly you suck, and whether or not you add any entertainment value to this site. So, I reserve the right to deny any of you service for not wearing pants. It’s a personal hang up.
Ex’s one time boss on Beloved and Cradle Will Rock got his start in the biz as the charge scenic on Friday 13th. He used to regale us with stories about how the thing was made on a shoe string with almost no-one in charge having any idea what the hell they were doing and the final astonishment at how popular it became.
What accusation is that, Dan?
Do you know who this cb guy is? I mean, I have a pretty good guess, but I’m just wondering.
Was your ex that Borg chick? Because if so, I wanted to biff her. I know it’s wrong. I’m sorry.
The accusation that every time you have an issue you use the pretense of other people’s problems you’re attending to as a shield. That’s what fuckwad said.
She’s a hottie, but not an on-screen hottie Dan. Just a scenic painter, braless in a wife-beater if you catch her in the summertime.
Jared Padalecki is teh awesome.
I haven’t thought about it in depth enough to have a suspicion. Honestly, I don’t care enough.
Neil Gaiman is teh awesome.
I’m going to hang around and nuke stupidity for awhile. I suggest you all move to Darleen’s thread, which is much cooler.
wearing pants is teh awesome.
Trolls like that are such small pathetic sad little people.
Strange accusation after I responded 10 times, including a rather lengthy reply that launched this thread.
Once I respond once, am I committed to respond forever? Or am I allowed to attend to other concerns.
Mentioning those other concerns I know I’m allowed to do — this being my site and all. But I sometimes wonder what’s expected of me by twats like that cb quim.
Bwahaha, hf. STOP making me laugh. It’s unseemly. NTTAWWT.
cb 53…that had Chris Rock in it. Man, that was bad.
Jeff, your kiddo and your buddy in surgery get all the prayers we PW’s can muster (and we obviously have the free time to pull off some good prayers).
I don’t care that your wife is out of town.
You can do the dishes without help from the Lord.
cb quim and the like want you to apologize for all the times you’ve gainsaid them. Then, after they do their little dance, they’d like you to put a shotgun in your mouth and pull the trigger. Then, they’ll laugh and laugh.
“The men and women who fought and continue to fight in Iraq and Afghanistan (and all over the goddamn place) shouldn’t be saddled with us.”
On the contrary, LYBD – I rather enjoy having you around.
Oh, bits like “So be kind, put a dollar in his cup and let him find the release that only MD 20/20 can bring” and “I know I talk big but I hate it when tasty goodness gets all passive aggressive like that” are a joy to read. Well, that and Jeff’s rather good and pointed remarks. Thats some good reading too.
Oh, gosh, the feeling’s so mutual that I’m nuking your comment. Ciao, bello!
I had to go back and read #158 again. I don’t see how this cb got that from Jeff’s post. Seemed to me that Jeff was just saying he had other priorities.
BTW, Jeff, I feel for you. Sick kids are no fun. Sick kids with Mother out of town is really no fun. Funny, you can sleep through a thunderstorm, but the footsteps of a small child on carpet, wide awake. Hope he feels better.
He’s feeling better now that I bought him Megatron. But he’s had a low grade fever for 6 days now. Missed an entire week of school. Didn’t eat dinner.
Whatever this thing is, it lingers.
Dan —
Before you nuke, check the IP and see if this twat has posted here under other names. I’ve tried to do that twice now and the comment is gone.
Due diligence. Do.
You know, when my kids were sick, I used to say stuff to them, like, “Why are you no fun? What’s your fucking problem? You feel sick? I don’t care, I am entitled to amusement!” Then the community organizer woman came by and explained that was wrong, so now I just hit them.
“One can study randomness, at three levels: mathematical, empirical, and behavioral. The first is the narrowly defined mathematics of randomness, which is no longer the interesting problem because we’ve pretty much reached small returns in what we can develop in that branch. The second one is the dynamics of the real world, the dynamics of history, what we can and cannot model, how we can get into the guts of the mechanics of historical events, whether quantitative models can help us and how they can hurt us. And the third is our human ability to understand uncertainty. We are endowed with a native scorn of the abstract; we ignore what we do not see, even if our logic recommends otherwise. We tend to overestimate causal relationships. When we meet someone who by playing Russian roulette became extremely influential,
wealthy, and powerful, we still act toward that person as if he gained that status just by skills, even when you know there’s been a lot of luck. Why? Because our behavior toward that person is going to be entirely determined by shallow heuristics and very superficial matters related to his appearance.”
“Learning to Expect the Uniexpected”
Apr 8, 2004, NYT OpEd
Nassim Nicholas Taleb
NYU Polytechnic Institute
“A Talk with Nassim Nicholas Taleb”
John Brockman, Edge.org
related:
You Try to Live on 500K in This Town
By ALLEN SALKIN
Published: February 6, 2009, NYT
—-
I stopped answering loaded questions and ignoring insults some time ago. As for the ‘bibliography’ and my ability to communicate? The problem isn’t in my ability to communicate. People from PhD’s to high school graduates have understood exactly what I was saying. I’ve been providing you folks the references and resources to figure it out for yourselves.
In this thread I’ve provided references and resources that offer the proofs explaining why some of you simply cannot understand simple English. …or even accept the idea that someone might actually have a rational argument for disagreeing with you.
As with your ideological opponents, you operate under the assumption that anyone who isn’t just like yourselves, who doesn’t live just like yourselves, you doesn’t speak just like yourselves, and who disagrees with you, however rational their argument, they must be crazy. Not that you lack intelligence or an outward form of education, but any other idea is currently beyond your comprehension.
Megatron – what? Optimus Prime not available? I’m more a Minicon guy m’self.
You got it, Jeff. Due is what I’ll do. Dooby dooby doo.
Bwahahaha! and Bonesteel shows up.
I’d like to believe that was hyperbolic, but I can guarantee you that there are those who do in fact pray for my death.
I know this, because they’re often kind enough to email me to tell me so.
I routinely remind them that I’m a poor black child. Puts them in a bit of a pickle.
I keep missing the cb thing. And who’s Darnell anyway? How do I miss so much stuff?
Bonesteel, I just curled around yogically and fucked myself in the ass. I hope that’s proof that I’m as flexible as you are.
Warren – I suggest giving it a rest for a few days here. Please.
Also, I typed this at the same time. Top that!
Warren —
Either make an argument or shut up already. If that argument is that we refuse to recognize your intellectual greatness, though, save it: we surrender and you win.
“Try not to get 3000 of us killed via sneak attack next time.”
?
A little early in the evening to be dipping the ganja in teh PCP, isn’t it?
I missed the cb deal too hf but then I think probably I didn’t really miss much of anything at all, since I’m guessing I’ve seen it before in another guise.
we still act toward that person as if he gained that status just by skills, even when you know there’s been a lot of luck.
that’s called being polite, Warren. It’s not a character flaw.
Jeff, all I’m going to say is that this site is pretty much the only blog I read these days, let alone send cash to.
cancerboy.53@yahoo.com, ISP 209.9.237.182
oh. prolly assclown maybe?
FOAD, cb53
“Learning to Expect the Uniexpected†(I love it when pompous arrogant pedantic asshats cannot spell)
Apr 8, 2004, NYT OpEd
Nassim Nicholas Taleb
NYU Polytechnic Institute
“A Talk with Warren Boners Sphincterâ€Â
A Sphincter says what?, Edge.org
related:
You Try to Live with this complete lack of social skills
By Warren Boner
Published: February 6, 2009, NYT
It used “bipartisan mole” in another thread.
I smell a weasel.
hah. I see you!
Time to hit the heavy bag. Back later.
and
Oh. And thanks SDN. And Big D. An
Why do Bonesteel’s comments just seem like an airport terminal speed bump.
I slowed down for a minute…and…then, yeah, I’m passed it.
Where’s the gate?
I gotta pick up thor at the gate in 15 minutes. He’s got a heard of Urdu speaking camels we have to get from Pakistan to the Afghan border day after tomorrow.
They talk those camels!
Big bucks!
That sonufabitch thor knows how to work a trust fund.
“I smell a weasel.”
I smell post-Katrina New Orleans.
I love it when Jeff does that.
these, those, them, that, who’s, what’s, damn, can’t a guy get an antecedent once in awhile?
hf, re: Darnell
Urban dictionary definition of parsnip #3.
It’s not nice at all. Repulsive in fact.
#227 – you mean dese, dose, dem, dat, whoze, whuts. Right? I’ll be over be ‘dere having a beef sammich if you needs me.
ummmmmmmmmmmmm, sammich. but no swiss rolls.
Wait. “Coraline†is Gaiman-meets-Burton?
No Burton involved. The director is the same as the one who actually directed “Tim Burton’s” Nightmare Before Christmas, though, so if that’s what you’re after you should be good.
oh. gack.
You can say that all you want, it doesn’t make it true.
May I make a suggestion? When a dozen people are saying they don’t get the point you’re trying to make, the problem isn’t on their side.
geoffb – My sincere apologies. My introduction of said defintion may have left some unintended scars.
Rob C – It is pointless. Point and laugh.
That’s cool! Dipshit!
cb53 – I am so sorry that you have such a tiny insignificant pathetic existence. I wish I could help you. Naaaaahhhhhhh …
Spies,
That Zotero is nice.
Thank you.
I wish I were Jeff and people cared about me.
But spending my Friday evenings bugging people who don’t want anything to do with me is almost the same.
I FEEL SO FULFILLED!
Damn, the blog just ate a post with the community bibliography we’ve all been working on. Dan or Jeff, any chance you could recover it?
Spies,
That Zotero is nice.
It’s friggin’ awesome, is what it is.
Bonesteel obviously doesn’t have a copy.
JD,
I’m hardened. Just can’t picture the mind behind it. Even DeSade wasn’t quite so….
I mean, I’ve been in that situation. I had totally misjudged my audience’s level of background knowledge in what to me was an extremely basic area. Result: dumb-founded stares.
It never occurred to me to blame the audience, to consider them ignorant or mentally or emotionally inadequate. I realized I’d screwed up, that I had made a mistake, and so had lost my audience.
Had my reaction to losing my audience been giving them citations on information theory, Nyquist sampling, signal processing, etc I wouldn’t have been doing anything to inform the audience — I’d have been losing them even more.
Aw, SBP, where is it supposed to be?
I dunno? Spam filter?
No biggie, I’ll just post a link and observe again that Bonesteel has the crappiest bibliographic non-style that I’ve ever seen.
Any student who brought me some shit like that would get graded with SuperSoaker full of red ink.
I’m not super-anal about it — MLA, APA, Turabian, it’s all good, and I don’t really care if your commas are in the right font or similar bullshit. Just pick a style and stick with it, and make sure that there’s sufficient bibliographic data that I can find the item if I so choose.
People from PhD’s to high school graduates have understood exactly what I was saying.
Probably because they’re doing the same drugs you’re doing.
I prefer that you spell it out. And my sense of economy sort of requires that you do it in less than an Atlas Shrugged speech’s worth of words. If you’re not going to say what you mean, please stop wasting my fucking time.
I think your idea of “proof” doesn’t quite meet my standards of rigor. Sorry, but all of this assertion-avoidance is just mental masturbation. Just say it, man.
I’m fine with someone disagreeing with me. I just prefer that when they disagree, they actually make a point. So far, you’re sadly deficient in points.
Not true. Hardly a one of us has failed to disagree with another, sometimes to the point of throwing a few elbows. As for you, I have no idea whether you’ve disagreed with me, because you’ve done nothing but plop do-it-yourself argument kits on us, only without assembly instructions.
Even with instructions, I’m disinclined to help you make your arguments. It’s kind of rude to demand that people build your points for you. Not to mention lazy and intellectually shoddy.
You have no idea. Really. You don’t know any of us. Just about the only thing we have in common is that we’re fresh out of patience with your bullshit.
Yes. Thank you for providing us with a rallying point, waffle of twat. You’re a uniter.
And here my copy of 1599 arrived today and all I’ve read is to page 20. Arrgh, PW addiction.
Jean-Paul Sartre stated ‘man is condemned to be douchey because once thrown into the world he is responsible for every douchey thing that he does.’
Warren, snippy and thor are here for a reason.
On this sad day note that some justice was done. H/T to Patterico.
I’m pretty sure Warren is simply saying you are whiny, infantile, hateful little bitches. Which is exactly what I’ve been saying. So, word up.
Well you and Warren are so easily misunderstood. Probably because you’ve got Obama’s balls in your mouth. Or each others’.
Sorry, I didn’t catch that. Too gurgly.
Still nothing. And you’ve still got a little Warren on your chin there.
Isn’t it time to go into one of your tantrums where you get so mad that you spit out one of Warren’s balls?
Warren’s book is a place. And a time and a place and becomes a habit and a place. It’s a place and a time. It’s a friendly place. It’s a place out of our past. A timeless place and a home. It’s community.
Mr. Coherent, he’s not.
aw, thanks. now, if you could come see the show I’m in and loudly hoot for me at the end, that would be great. added bonus would be the two small glasses o’ champagne I can’t drink (because of my meds, not because it’s bad)
Seems Bonesteel is privy to what’s held privately?
Is this guy Roger’s pet pit bull?
..or is he simply grasping at whatever straw-men he can on his way out the door?
Hi there, buttfuckeroo Phil.
Hot tears again? Mmm, mmm, mmm, you sure are a buttsore showerhead.
my dad tried something similar, way back when. brought a kitteh home from work.
I guess what I’m getting at is that’s a nice caring dad thing to do. I still remember it all these years later. course it could be cause we didn’t get to keep the kitteh because he couldn’t figure out the litter box. so he went back to the golf course.
Not to worry, thor, no grandkids for you; your pussy can’t get pregnant.
Shame about the piles, tho..
What is wrong with Warren. I think he must be mad.
Reuters is reporting that Barack Obama is the cause of the recent outbreak of Münchausen syndrome in Tennessee.
He’s rather unable to connect his bibliography above with anything anyone has actually written here.
Or unwilling. Peculiar, that dancing around as if words were for mincing. Instead of meaning, and all.
Uncle is reporting that Barack Obama is the cause of the recent outbreak of gun buying in Tennessee.
There. Fixes that.
Oh, and most other states as well.
There’s a good use for that $400? $500?, whatever it was rebate.
Just so you know, guys, if you’re going to lavish me with sympathy, I’d prefer you do so because my wife was out of town on business and I couldn’t go see Friday the 13th.
Two words, Jeff: Net. Flix.
Dan: thanks for the dose of surrealism. Nothing like reading responses to nuked posts. Not that I have any room to talk, given that I nuke anything by thor on general principles.
As with your ideological opponents, you operate under the assumption that anyone who isn’t just like yourselves, who doesn’t live just like yourselves, you doesn’t speak just like yourselves, and who disagrees with you, however rational their argument, they must be crazy.
I’d like to amend my amateur-but-accurate diagnosis from #95: Warren is definitely a cerebral narcissist, but it would also appear that he’s got some scant bits of psychosis going on, too. Not a pretty sight unless you’re amused by mental illness.
Notice that they have attempted the same thing wrt myself and the last two posts that have been made with direct reference to me.
See, that there is the delusion of reference.
But to be fair…
But Roger’s response to those who spoke about the dissolution  and let’s face it, he was aiming some of that my way  showed poorly on him.
Jeff, Jeff, Jeff… Sometimes you become the thing you fight. :D
Oh, @$$clown, check this out. Predictability, u haz it.
If a post exposes what an embarrassing nut you are that’s when you begin nuking posts. You’re not Dan or Jeff; you talk to plants for a reason, and it’s not the healthy-type of reason. While they are opinionated, you’re severely insular and petty.
What’cha gonna do, goober, pop off some rounds at tin cans or at that junked car in your back yard?
As if anyone gives a coon skin skullcap why the eff you be buyin’ yo guns, Elvis.
And sometimes you fight because you’d hate to become that thing.
Actually, Joe, I can’t think of a single reason you’re here. I wouldn’t assume a chowderhead like even knows who Sartre is, much less his discourses. You come across as owning one particular Proustian trait, I’ll grant you that.
And sometimes you thing because fight the hate.
Not true. Hardly a one of us has failed to disagree with another, sometimes to the point of throwing a few elbows.
Ain’t that the truth. How ’bout the time Slart starting dissing “Stinkfist” … he’s lucky he came out of that one alive.
thor understands Warren.
As with your ideological opponents, you operate under the assumption that anyone who isn’t just like yourselves, who doesn’t live just like yourselves, you doesn’t speak just like yourselves, and who disagrees with you, however rational their argument, they must be crazy. Not that you lack intelligence or an outward form of education, but any other idea is currently beyond your comprehension.
There’s that, Warren. But why are you indicting your own behavior?
#243 Rob – it isn’t just misunderstanding the level of background information in the audience, it is even simpler: basic communication skills.
Introduction, thesis statement, paragraph of fact backing up your argument. Repeat if necessary. Conclude.
This is the basic structure of themes, at least as I learned them, and even in my legal writing use that basic structure so the audience (judge) who has a legal background also may understand what it is I am driving at. It’s merely common-sense and common courtesy to assist the audience/reader by explaining fully what you are doing and why before diving in with the citations.
So…how many page views have ya had on these threads? How many people had the opportunity to read references and resources they never saw before? How many people had the chance to think thoughts they never thought before?
OUTLAW
Function:
noun
Etymology:
Middle English outlawe, from Old English ūtlaga, from Old Norse ūtlagi, from ūt out (akin to Old English ūt out) + lag-, lǫg law  more at out, law
Date:
before 12th century
1: a person excluded from the benefit or protection of the law2 a: a lawless person or a fugitive from the law b: a person or organization under a ban or restriction c: one that is unconventional or rebellious3: an animal (as a horse) that is wild and unmanageable
 outlaw adjective
:O)
Memetic engineering. It’s easy…if you don’t give a rip what other people think…
Guess what I am thinking, Warren?
Is that what you fancy is your special skill? Because my guess is you’ve turned people off entirely with your strategy, so much so that they simply skim over your bibliographical posts.
Me, were my thing “memetic engineering” (and everyone already knows I don’t give a rip what other people think), I’d include actual links to any pieces available online, and do so in the context of making a compelling argument replete with specific points and the evidence necessary to back those points up.
But then, I guess that’s why I have people reading me — and why you have people skipping over your “work” like it was some steaming pile in the middle of a cobblestone walkway left by a self-absorbed chattel horse.
For memes to work, they need to be spread.
It also helps if they are at least marginally coherent.
s that what you fancy is your special skill? Because my guess is you’ve turned people off entirely with your strategy, so much so that they simply skim over your bibliographical posts.
Another one of Jeff’s fancy skills is that he can read minds over the internet. It aint a guess, man. You’re prescient.
Your usual Outlaw type had chosen to turn away from the Law, which in the meantime had remained in a presumed general stasis, fit, and unchanged to the purposes of the society which created it.
What’s going on today strikes me as a mirror reversal of that ordinary situation. It is the Law which has turned away in this instance, where those labeled Outlaws under this new scheme have remained in a general stasis (with human nature, I’ll presume), fit and unchanged to the purposes(?) wrought by human life.
“Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.”
– Saul Alinsky. “Rules for Radicals” 1971
If you are not doing this to those who disagree with you, then what have you done? Is this not the tactic of your ideological opponents? A tactic that you decry in others, but practice yourselves?
You’ve gone a long way past confronting their ideas and their behaviors, you’ve embraced their ideology and tactics yourselves.
Where did you learn to do this? At your Mother’s knees? No. Perhaps not. In the schools and institutions which you know have been infiltrated by socialists via their ‘long march’ through those institutions? The same institutions that you attend and use daily? (The media being one of those institutions.)
If you use their practices and thus approve of their tactics, are you not like them? Yet, you claim that you are somehow different. By doing so are you not hypocrites?
You say that you are Classical Liberals, yet your words and deeds, support socialism and use the tactics of socialist Marxists.
Alinsky began his career in education in the 1920’s. Others like him had already infiltrated our educational and even theological institutions by that time.
You decry those like him – including the NEA and the various and numerous teachers unions – but the theoretical foundations of your own education was and is based upon the precepts of the works of men and women just like him.
You are that which you claim to hate. By your actions and words are you known.
“Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.”
You practice this tactic each and every day…
It is not a tactic of men of reason or that of free and sovereign men and women who describe themselves as Classical Liberals.
Who in Christ’s world are you referring to Warren? Again man, be specific. Are you addressing JeffG? Then name him. Are you addressing someone else? Then name them.
As to your claim that “…the theoretical foundations of [y]our own education was and is based upon the precepts of the works of men and women just like him [Saul Alinsky].” you simply do not know what you are talking about.
Thoughts I never thought before?
Oh, Warren. You poor fool.
Dicentra, I’ll play garafalo neuroscience and indict his temporal lobes.
Memetic engineering? More like emetic engineering, Boney. I’ve never seen a sculpture of puke to compare…. especially since I Trollhammered thor.
Warren, I have to say that I’m just really confused. Disagreement does not Alinsky’s rules make. Most confusion is this:
You say that you are Classical Liberals, yet your words and deeds, support socialism and use the tactics of socialist Marxists.
Honestly, you’re not supposed to drink the bongwater.
In closing,
Although not as well written or typed as I may have done for a more formal presentation, you will find that my comments here over the last two weeks are a comprehensive narrative, with a beginning , a middle and an end. There is even a bibliography, although far from complete and in the wrong place.
You will find that narrative to be reasonable and rational and completely free of personal attacks. I did asked questions about some folks’ motivations and explored possible – and rational – reasons for their actions.
I have been working on spreading this meme for nearly nine years now. More than seven million words – most of which can be found in the internet archives, if ya know where to look, and more three hundred thousand emails and thousands of hours on the phone. Those words have gone around the world to the people and leadership of more than one hundred nations. Each message was specifically tailored to the individual or group I approached. Hopefully, I have achieved more good than ill. That was and has been my purpose, anyway.
That meme was and remains a message of hope, of personal empowerment and of freedom. You don’t need massive amounts of resources, great wealth or powerful friends in high places to do this. You don’t need peer groups or committees. You don’t even need friends and family to do this. You don’t need any one else’s approval. You can ignore any and all criticisms and personal attacks. You don’t need to wait for a “Great and Powerful Leader” to lead you anywhere. All you need is time, knowledge (research) and a good work ethic.
Normally, I would have used a much more subtle and long-term approach here, but in this specific venue and for a variety of reasons, a more confrontational approach seemed necessary. One of those reasons being that world events have forced me to become ever more aware of the now time-critical nature of what I refer to as my ‘mission.’
The great thing about spreading memes? No one has to take you seriously or believe a thing you say. Memetic engineering just works, regardless.
Have fun, kids. May your days be long and your life well spent.
Warren:
You have made an assertion, that the commenters here are using Alinsky’s tactics in addressing people that disagree with them. In support of your assertion you put forth a number of questions and you make assertions about the education that the commenters here have received.
At nopoint have you actually brought forth any facts to support your assertions. Speculation as to motivation or early education are not facts. Assertion is not argument.
Alas, I am not in the office today so I cannot get the actual cite or the quote, however there is a Michigan Supreme Court case, Mitchum v Detroit, in which Justice Voelker addresses a number of issues that the appellant had brought up but had not supported. Justice Voelker stated that it is the duty of the appellant to support his asserted issues with fact and cites of law to support them, that it was not the business of the court to investigate those claims, research them, and make the arguments. ‘The appellant must first prime the pump, only then does the well begin to flow.’
Similarly, you must first back up your assertions with fact and argument – it is not our business to answer your accusations and investigate for you whether they are true or not. It seems to me that you are the one that is using Alinsky, “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.â€Â
You have come here, you are making your unsupported assertion, you are accusing each person here of it, and you are attempting to use that as a club to shut-down people here. You have not supported your assertions. As Justice Voelker said, you cannot come here and expect us to research your support and make your argument for you – you have to prime the pump first. And dropping a bunch of cites without any explanation of their relevance is just what the appellant did in Mitchum.
Try again, if you can.
Good luck with your mission, Mr. Bonesteel. Our little country is in big big trouble and besieged by anti-American socialists. This is definitely not a good situation.
I want to collect together all of Warrens comments just to see if a “comprehensive narrative, with a beginning , a middle and an end.” really does exist.
It might have the effect on my mind that tripping on acid and seeing a Yuggoth creature would.
Oh, the thinks you will think!
And you will find that you just haven’t been paying attention; what most of us have been saying is: no, your comments have been everything but comprehensive, and certainly vague and pointless.
The only fact I need to support my assertion is that there’s no point in your arguments, other than a whole lot of ipse dixit. We’re a bunch of closet socialists? Fine. Prove it. Out with your evidence. Don’t hide your light under a bushel basket like that; it’s freakin’ pitch black out here.
And if you don’t want to do that; if you’re uncomfortable with folks insisting that you be specific, and that you tell us what you think and why you think that, instead of pointing to what a lot of other folks think and expecting us to piece your argument together for you, well, don’t let the screen door hit you in the ass too hard.
Thesis != argument. You’ve given us a thesis that’s been cut into a jigsaw puzzle, but no argument. You’ll find that most of us are a lot more receptive to evidenced argument (note: this is different from an argument with phonebook-length bibliography) than to argument by assertion.
So, try us. My patience with you is just about gone. Not that you should care, but if your aim is to persuade, you’re about ready to lose an opportunity to do just that. If on the other hand you’re just aiming at being a different facet of aspiring meme-warrior a la Nishi, shields up. You both suck at it.
Those words have gone around the world to the people and leadership of more than one hundred nations. Each message was specifically tailored to the individual or group I approached. Hopefully, I have achieved more good than ill.
Hopefully your tailoring fit all them other folks a little better than you managed over here.
But, whatever happens, that will be the effect, that will be claimed to have been the objective, all along.
Whatever your future is, whatever thoughts you think, he planned it all to happen just that way. He controls the horizontal, he controls the vertical. We are entering the Outer Limits.
It appears that Warren is the only one here who holds his rodomontade in high regard, even though it is written in a more consumable form than SEK’s polysyllabic profundity. The issue, plainly exposed by Jeff and others, is that when you unpack Warren’s writing, there isn’t any “there” “there.” I think he should have said his policy prescriptions were locked away in a Nigerian bank vault and he needed a little help getting them out, send the following information…… and then you will know all!
“Comment by Warren Bonesteel on 2/14 @ 11:54 am #
In closing,…”
Don’t let the door hit ya where the good lord slpit ya.
“Comment by pledgepolish55 on 2/14 @ 12:09 pm #
I want to collect together all of Warrens comments just to see if a “comprehensive narrative, with a beginning , a middle and an end.†really does exist.”
No, no, don’t do that, you’d create the Black Hold of Stupidity, a singularity which would suck in the entire internet!
Shorter Warren:
I win.
See, I think Warren doesn’t compare well to SEK. When SEK has a point to make, he tends to put in some effort toward making it. Warren’s approach is pretty much coloring in a little area around his point, and then being baffled as to why we’re so dense as to not see exactly what the point is.
“I have been working on spreading this meme for nearly nine years now. More than seven million words – most of which can be found in the internet archives, if ya know where to look, and more three hundred thousand emails and thousands of hours on the phone. Those words have gone around the world to the people and leadership of more than one hundred nations. Each message was specifically tailored to the individual or group I approached. Hopefully, I have achieved more good than ill. That was and has been my purpose, anyway.”
Did the tool create a blog where the world could benefit from his delivered wisdom or did he toil away in secret? No books or speeches, television appearances? Warren, why did you deprive the wider world of your greatness?
Fear of ridicule I think is the answer to 302.
daleyrocks:
That is a wonderful quote, and so telling. The narcissicist comes through loud and clear. And here comes the response: “So they ignored you? Because I don’t hear or read of anyone repeating the Words of Wisdom of Warren Bonesteel.”
Really, the way everything is written reminds me of conspiracy theory cranks who have precisely calibrated and calculated the level of incidents of (whatever) proving beyond all refutation, with the support of (cites here) that (some group somewhere) is going forward with its mutli-faceted plan for (world domination, whatever).
And then it babbles on and on and on. There will be a library of books, neatly underlined, and reams of written material proving the existence of this massive conspiracy. You used to find these cranks at some conventions/shows, or in particular hobby stores or gun stores. With the internet, you don’t have to leave your favorite comfy chair at home to find them – The Weird Is At Your Fingertips!
And yes, Warren, I called you a conspiracy theorist weirdo, and as proof I cite your posts. Go read them and decide for yourself.
Fact is, I always responded to Warren. By addressing his assertions and asking him to flesh them out.
Evidently, asking someone of Warren’s stature to explain himself is so outrageous that it must be a plot to isolate him. We are all Alinskys now.
— Well, except for the rest of his secret cabal of lurkers who, like Warren, have access to the Loom of Fate.
Sorry we failed you, Warren. Luckily for you, there are others worth saving. Go forth and conquer. Illuminate. TURN ON YOUR HEARTLIGHT, WARREN!
Jeff – The world has failed Warren.
We are not worthy.
He is ahead of our time.
True.
You want to have some fun, pick up Herodotus’ “Histories”. Heck, anything of equal antiquity would probably do as well. Where we’re used to information being presented in the pattern of AABBCCDD, the ancients went for ABCDDCBA. All the same elements were there, but in the middle of, say, a discussion of Hellenic colonies in North Africa you’d get a digression into nature of sub-Saharan Africans. Then, once the digression was over, you’re right back to the Hellenic colonies in North Africa as if you’d never left the topic.
A bit of a mind-stretch to get used to.
Ya know, I’m starting to think that the unironic use of the word “meme” is the surest evidence of an intellectual lightweight.
“Meme” is just a trendy way to say “idea”. The reason to avoid saying “idea” is to avoid the word’s baggage. When you tell someone you have an idea, they’ll ask how it worked out — they expect you to either have tried the idea out or to have subjected it to analysis. If you say someone you have a “meme”, well, I guess it’s easy to convince yourself that the blank stare is one of admiration or stupefaction, rather than contempt.