| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"J Young" |
| Date: |
22 Nov 2007 12:02:59 AM |
| Object: |
San Francisco Approves ID Cards That Exclude Gender |
Is there any suprise that it's San Francisco we're talking about?
http://www.cnsnews.com/ThisHour.asp#San%20Francisco%20Approves%20ID%20Cards%20That%20Exclude%20Gender
San Francisco Approves ID Cards That Exclude Gender
(CNSNews.com) - Starting next year, San Francisco will issue municipal
identification cards showing the usual name, birth date and photo, but not
the bearer's gender, USA Today reported. "The card really makes gender a
non-issue," said Kristina Wertz, legal director of the Transgender Law
Center in San Francisco. City departments must accept the ID, except where
state or federal law requires otherwise. Critics object to the notion that
gender identity is flexible. City Supervisor Tom Ammiano, who introduced the
measure, says illegal immigrants will benefit most from the city-issued ID
cards. Read News on the Web
--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
------->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com<<<<<<------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access
.
|
|
| User: "Frank Arthur" |
|
| Title: Re: San Francisco Approves ID Cards That Exclude Gender |
22 Nov 2007 09:11:20 AM |
|
|
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:47451c76$0$26022$b9f67a60@news.newsdemon.com...
Is there any suprise that it's San Francisco we're talking about?
Are the people living in San Franscisco all identical in thought,
beleif & ideology? Amazing!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Syd M." |
|
| Title: Re: San Francisco Approves ID Cards That Exclude Gender |
22 Nov 2007 10:28:37 AM |
|
|
On Nov 22, 10:11 am, "Frank Arthur" <A...@Arthurian.com> wrote:
"J Young" <youngopini...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:47451c76$0$26022$b9f67a60@news.newsdemon.com...
Is there any suprise that it's San Francisco we're talking about?
Are the people living in San Franscisco all identical in thought,
beleif & ideology? Amazing!
Only in neocon and rabid fundies imaginations..
PDW
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "elizabeth" |
|
| Title: Re: San Francisco Approves ID Cards That Exclude Gender |
24 Nov 2007 12:59:30 PM |
|
|
On Nov 22, 7:11 am, "Frank Arthur" <A...@Arthurian.com> wrote:
"J Young" <youngopini...@aol.com> wrote in message
Is there any suprise that it's San Francisco we're talking about?
Are the people living in San Franscisco all identical in thought,
beleif & ideology? Amazing!
Not at all . .. I'm pro death penalty, anti illegal immigrants, anti
politically correct "progressives" who sold out the City to developers
while cutting emergency services (and there will be a big quake, may
DiFi and Pelosi live long enough to be here when it happens) . ..I
like trannies just like any other group, iow, what they are as a
person, not as a label . ..
and I'm praying that the Supremes toss out local gun control laws.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Allen" |
|
| Title: Re: San Francisco Approves ID Cards That Exclude |
22 Nov 2007 09:40:02 PM |
|
|
J Young wrote:
Spam reported to
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: San Francisco Approves ID Cards That Exclude Gender |
22 Nov 2007 12:48:29 AM |
|
|
On 22 nov, 07:02, "J Young" <youngopini...@aol.com> wrote:
Is there any suprise that it's San Francisco we're talking about?
And this is a problem because........?
http://www.cnsnews.com/ThisHour.asp#San%20Francisco%20Approves%20ID%2...
Why do you keep quoting sites without credibility? Because you're an
imbecile or because you like to have your ***** kicked?
.
|
|
|
| User: "655321" |
|
| Title: Re: San Francisco Approves ID Cards That Exclude Gender |
22 Nov 2007 01:57:34 PM |
|
|
In article
<bdab1c87-e9f2-43a4-8139-2ca0908caafd@v4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
wrote:
Why do you keep quoting sites without credibility?
He and Fred Stone sure know how to do their research. Bookmark a
handful of wingnut blogs and pick the biggest doozies among the articles
posted on them.
--
655321
"We are heroes in error" -- Ahmad Chalabi
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: San Francisco Approves ID Cards That Exclude Gender |
22 Nov 2007 03:43:27 PM |
|
|
655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote in news:DipthotDipthot-
38623D.11573422112007@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net:
In article
<bdab1c87-e9f2-43a4-8139-2ca0908caafd@v4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
parsifal50@gmail.com wrote:
Why do you keep quoting sites without credibility?
He and Fred Stone sure know how to do their research. Bookmark a
handful of wingnut blogs and pick the biggest doozies among the articles
posted on them.
They're more factual and honest than the New York Times.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
http://images.cafepress.com/product/124910883v3_150x150_Front.JPG
.
|
|
|
| User: "655321" |
|
| Title: Re: San Francisco Approves ID Cards That Exclude Gender |
22 Nov 2007 10:58:47 PM |
|
|
In article <Xns99F0A9833D8BDfreddybear@216.151.153.21>,
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote in news:DipthotDipthot-
38623D.11573422112007@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net:
In article
<bdab1c87-e9f2-43a4-8139-2ca0908caafd@v4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
parsifal50@gmail.com wrote:
Why do you keep quoting sites without credibility?
He and Fred Stone sure know how to do their research. Bookmark a
handful of wingnut blogs and pick the biggest doozies among the articles
posted on them.
They're more factual and honest than the New York Times.
Why make such a comparison?
--
655321
"We are heroes in error" -- Ahmad Chalabi
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: San Francisco Approves ID Cards That Exclude Gender |
23 Nov 2007 09:16:59 AM |
|
|
655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote in
news:DipthotDipthot-992754.20584422112007@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com:
In article <Xns99F0A9833D8BDfreddybear@216.151.153.21>,
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote in
news:DipthotDipthot-
38623D.11573422112007@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net:
In article
<bdab1c87-e9f2-43a4-8139-2ca0908caafd@v4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
parsifal50@gmail.com wrote:
Why do you keep quoting sites without credibility?
He and Fred Stone sure know how to do their research. Bookmark a
handful of wingnut blogs and pick the biggest doozies among the
articles posted on them.
They're more factual and honest than the New York Times.
Why make such a comparison?
Because it's the truth.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
http://images.cafepress.com/product/124910883v3_150x150_Front.JPG
.
|
|
|
| User: "655321" |
|
| Title: Re: San Francisco Approves ID Cards That Exclude Gender |
23 Nov 2007 06:19:47 PM |
|
|
In article <Xns99F1683A96083freddybear@216.151.153.14>,
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote in
news:DipthotDipthot-992754.20584422112007@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com:
In article <Xns99F0A9833D8BDfreddybear@216.151.153.21>,
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote in
news:DipthotDipthot-
38623D.11573422112007@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net:
In article
<bdab1c87-e9f2-43a4-8139-2ca0908caafd@v4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
parsifal50@gmail.com wrote:
Why do you keep quoting sites without credibility?
He and Fred Stone sure know how to do their research. Bookmark a
handful of wingnut blogs and pick the biggest doozies among the
articles posted on them.
They're more factual and honest than the New York Times.
Why make such a comparison?
Because it's the truth.
It's not, but you just don't care, do you?
You just get off from making noise. You were *never* interested in
engaging in an exchange of ideas or in providing factual bases for your
strong opinions.
I get it. You hate people who disagree with you. You don't want to
talk to them; you just want to sling mud at them.
I get it. Do you?
--
655321
"We are heroes in error" -- Ahmad Chalabi
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: San Francisco Approves ID Cards That Exclude Gender |
23 Nov 2007 08:40:17 PM |
|
|
655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote in
news:DipthotDipthot-62299E.16194423112007@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com:
In article <Xns99F1683A96083freddybear@216.151.153.14>,
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote in
news:DipthotDipthot-992754.20584422112007
@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com
:
In article <Xns99F0A9833D8BDfreddybear@216.151.153.21>,
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote in
news:DipthotDipthot-
38623D.11573422112007@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net:
In article
<bdab1c87-e9f2-43a4-8139-
2ca0908caafd@v4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com
,
parsifal50@gmail.com wrote:
Why do you keep quoting sites without credibility?
He and Fred Stone sure know how to do their research. Bookmark
a handful of wingnut blogs and pick the biggest doozies among
the articles posted on them.
They're more factual and honest than the New York Times.
Why make such a comparison?
Because it's the truth.
It's not, but you just don't care, do you?
You just get off from making noise. You were *never* interested in
engaging in an exchange of ideas or in providing factual bases for
your strong opinions.
I get it. You hate people who disagree with you. You don't want to
talk to them; you just want to sling mud at them.
I get it. Do you?
I get it. You don't. But don't let that bother you. You've already
decided that you don't have to care about the truth. The New York Times
lies to you and you believe them.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
http://images.cafepress.com/product/124910883v3_150x150_Front.JPG
.
|
|
|
| User: "655321" |
|
| Title: Re: San Francisco Approves ID Cards That Exclude Gender |
24 Nov 2007 01:24:56 PM |
|
|
In article <Xns99F1DCD1FBC56freddybear@216.151.153.45>,
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote in
news:DipthotDipthot-62299E.16194423112007@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com:
In article <Xns99F1683A96083freddybear@216.151.153.14>,
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote in
news:DipthotDipthot-992754.20584422112007
@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com
:
In article <Xns99F0A9833D8BDfreddybear@216.151.153.21>,
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote in
news:DipthotDipthot-
38623D.11573422112007@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net:
In article
<bdab1c87-e9f2-43a4-8139-
2ca0908caafd@v4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com
,
parsifal50@gmail.com wrote:
Why do you keep quoting sites without credibility?
He and Fred Stone sure know how to do their research. Bookmark
a handful of wingnut blogs and pick the biggest doozies among
the articles posted on them.
They're more factual and honest than the New York Times.
Why make such a comparison?
Because it's the truth.
It's not, but you just don't care, do you?
You just get off from making noise. You were *never* interested in
engaging in an exchange of ideas or in providing factual bases for
your strong opinions.
I get it. You hate people who disagree with you. You don't want to
talk to them; you just want to sling mud at them.
I get it. Do you?
I get it. You don't. But don't let that bother you. You've already
decided that you don't have to care about the truth.
I hear an echo.
Your "truth" is a cartoon.
The New York Times
lies to you and you believe them.
I don't even read the New York Times. However, I do know the difference
between journalists who do research and checks facts -- and who get
fired from their papers when they are discovered lying -- and shrill
noisemakers like Malkin who can't be bothered with the rigors that go
with getting a story even close to correct, especially at the cost of a
few illegitimate jabs at their ideological opponents... who are also
cartoons of real people.
But that's how you like it. Cartoons picking fights with other cartoons.
--
655321
"We are heroes in error" -- Ahmad Chalabi
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: San Francisco Approves ID Cards That Exclude Gender |
24 Nov 2007 05:25:39 PM |
|
|
655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote in
news:DipthotDipthot-49750A.11245224112007@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com:
In article <Xns99F1DCD1FBC56freddybear@216.151.153.45>,
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote in
news:DipthotDipthot-62299E.16194423112007
@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com
:
In article <Xns99F1683A96083freddybear@216.151.153.14>,
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote in
news:DipthotDipthot-992754.20584422112007
@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com
:
In article <Xns99F0A9833D8BDfreddybear@216.151.153.21>,
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote in
news:DipthotDipthot-
38623D.11573422112007@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net:
In article
<bdab1c87-e9f2-43a4-8139-
2ca0908caafd@v4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com
,
parsifal50@gmail.com wrote:
Why do you keep quoting sites without credibility?
He and Fred Stone sure know how to do their research.
Bookmark a handful of wingnut blogs and pick the biggest
doozies among the articles posted on them.
They're more factual and honest than the New York Times.
Why make such a comparison?
Because it's the truth.
It's not, but you just don't care, do you?
You just get off from making noise. You were *never* interested in
engaging in an exchange of ideas or in providing factual bases for
your strong opinions.
I get it. You hate people who disagree with you. You don't want
to talk to them; you just want to sling mud at them.
I get it. Do you?
I get it. You don't. But don't let that bother you. You've already
decided that you don't have to care about the truth.
I hear an echo.
Your "truth" is a cartoon.
Sometimes a cartoon illustrates the truth.
The New York Times
lies to you and you believe them.
I don't even read the New York Times. However, I do know the
difference between journalists who do research and checks facts -- and
who get fired from their papers when they are discovered lying -- and
shrill noisemakers like Malkin who can't be bothered with the rigors
that go with getting a story even close to correct, especially at the
cost of a few illegitimate jabs at their ideological opponents... who
are also cartoons of real people.
But that's how you like it. Cartoons picking fights with other
cartoons.
Ah, but "shrill noisemaker" isn't a cartoon or an ad-hominem in your
universe?
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
http://images.cafepress.com/product/124910883v3_150x150_Front.JPG
.
|
|
|
| User: "655321" |
|
| Title: Re: San Francisco Approves ID Cards That Exclude Gender |
24 Nov 2007 06:45:55 PM |
|
|
In article <Xns99F2BB778F95Bfreddybear@216.151.153.47>,
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote in
news:DipthotDipthot-49750A.11245224112007@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com:
In article <Xns99F1DCD1FBC56freddybear@216.151.153.45>,
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote in
news:DipthotDipthot-62299E.16194423112007
@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com
:
In article <Xns99F1683A96083freddybear@216.151.153.14>,
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote in
news:DipthotDipthot-992754.20584422112007
@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com
:
In article <Xns99F0A9833D8BDfreddybear@216.151.153.21>,
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote in
news:DipthotDipthot-
38623D.11573422112007@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net:
In article
<bdab1c87-e9f2-43a4-8139-
2ca0908caafd@v4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com
,
parsifal50@gmail.com wrote:
Why do you keep quoting sites without credibility?
He and Fred Stone sure know how to do their research.
Bookmark a handful of wingnut blogs and pick the biggest
doozies among the articles posted on them.
They're more factual and honest than the New York Times.
Why make such a comparison?
Because it's the truth.
It's not, but you just don't care, do you?
You just get off from making noise. You were *never* interested in
engaging in an exchange of ideas or in providing factual bases for
your strong opinions.
I get it. You hate people who disagree with you. You don't want
to talk to them; you just want to sling mud at them.
I get it. Do you?
I get it. You don't. But don't let that bother you. You've already
decided that you don't have to care about the truth.
I hear an echo.
Your "truth" is a cartoon.
Sometimes a cartoon illustrates the truth.
Usually not. As in this case.
The New York Times
lies to you and you believe them.
I don't even read the New York Times. However, I do know the
difference between journalists who do research and checks facts -- and
who get fired from their papers when they are discovered lying -- and
shrill noisemakers like Malkin who can't be bothered with the rigors
that go with getting a story even close to correct, especially at the
cost of a few illegitimate jabs at their ideological opponents... who
are also cartoons of real people.
But that's how you like it. Cartoons picking fights with other
cartoons.
Ah, but "shrill noisemaker" isn't a cartoon or an ad-hominem in your
universe?
It isn't an ad hominem, by definition.
Describing a person in a certain way is *not* an ad hominem per se. An
ad-hominem attack is a means of argument, a distraction by way of
attacking the person rather than the thesis that he or she presents.
In this case, I am not responding to an argument by Ms. Malkin; I am
commenting on Malkin herself and her default MO of "journalism."
If she were to actually change her practices, I would retract my
descriptive. Of course I'm not holding my breath. There's money in
being a cartoon character on TV.
Especially when you make yourself up to look like a kewpie doll and
flirt with Bill "I (heart) Playboy Bunnies and Girls Gone Wild" O'
Reilly.
--
655321
"We are heroes in error" -- Ahmad Chalabi
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: San Francisco Approves ID Cards That Exclude Gender |
24 Nov 2007 07:37:07 PM |
|
|
655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote in
news:DipthotDipthot-6AB8EB.16455524112007@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net:
In article <Xns99F2BB778F95Bfreddybear@216.151.153.47>,
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote in
news:DipthotDipthot-49750A.11245224112007
@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com
:
In article <Xns99F1DCD1FBC56freddybear@216.151.153.45>,
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote in
news:DipthotDipthot-62299E.16194423112007
@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com
:
In article <Xns99F1683A96083freddybear@216.151.153.14>,
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote in
news:DipthotDipthot-992754.20584422112007
@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com
:
In article <Xns99F0A9833D8BDfreddybear@216.151.153.21>,
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote in
news:DipthotDipthot-
38623D.11573422112007@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net:
In article
<bdab1c87-e9f2-43a4-8139-
2ca0908caafd@v4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com
,
parsifal50@gmail.com wrote:
Why do you keep quoting sites without credibility?
He and Fred Stone sure know how to do their research.
Bookmark a handful of wingnut blogs and pick the biggest
doozies among the articles posted on them.
They're more factual and honest than the New York Times.
Why make such a comparison?
Because it's the truth.
It's not, but you just don't care, do you?
You just get off from making noise. You were *never* interested
in engaging in an exchange of ideas or in providing factual
bases for your strong opinions.
I get it. You hate people who disagree with you. You don't
want to talk to them; you just want to sling mud at them.
I get it. Do you?
I get it. You don't. But don't let that bother you. You've already
decided that you don't have to care about the truth.
I hear an echo.
Your "truth" is a cartoon.
Sometimes a cartoon illustrates the truth.
Usually not. As in this case.
Except that it does. In this case.
The New York Times
lies to you and you believe them.
I don't even read the New York Times. However, I do know the
difference between journalists who do research and checks facts --
and who get fired from their papers when they are discovered lying
-- and shrill noisemakers like Malkin who can't be bothered with
the rigors that go with getting a story even close to correct,
especially at the cost of a few illegitimate jabs at their
ideological opponents... who are also cartoons of real people.
But that's how you like it. Cartoons picking fights with other
cartoons.
Ah, but "shrill noisemaker" isn't a cartoon or an ad-hominem in your
universe?
It isn't an ad hominem, by definition.
Describing a person in a certain way is *not* an ad hominem per se.
An ad-hominem attack is a means of argument, a distraction by way of
attacking the person rather than the thesis that he or she presents.
In this case, I am not responding to an argument by Ms. Malkin; I am
commenting on Malkin herself and her default MO of "journalism."
If she were to actually change her practices, I would retract my
descriptive. Of course I'm not holding my breath. There's money in
being a cartoon character on TV.
Ah, of course, you want her to be more like HuffPo or one of the other
lefty gullible idiot sites that suck up to Democrats instead of holding
them accountable for their falsehoods.
Especially when you make yourself up to look like a kewpie doll and
flirt with Bill "I (heart) Playboy Bunnies and Girls Gone Wild" O'
Reilly.
And another insult which I should pretend isn't an ad-hominem dismissal
of O'Reilly's arguments.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
The books that help you most are those which make you think that most.
The hardest way of learning is that of easy reading; but a great book
that comes from a great thinker is a ship of thought, deep freighted
with truth and beauty.
.
|
|
|
| User: "655321" |
|
| Title: Re: San Francisco Approves ID Cards That Exclude Gender |
25 Nov 2007 02:16:56 PM |
|
|
In article <Xns99F2D1C222E10freddybear@216.151.153.47>,
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote in
news:DipthotDipthot-6AB8EB.16455524112007@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net:
In article <Xns99F2BB778F95Bfreddybear@216.151.153.47>,
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote in
news:DipthotDipthot-49750A.11245224112007
@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com
:
In article <Xns99F1DCD1FBC56freddybear@216.151.153.45>,
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote in
news:DipthotDipthot-62299E.16194423112007
@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com
:
In article <Xns99F1683A96083freddybear@216.151.153.14>,
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote in
news:DipthotDipthot-992754.20584422112007
@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com
:
In article <Xns99F0A9833D8BDfreddybear@216.151.153.21>,
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote in
news:DipthotDipthot-
38623D.11573422112007@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net:
In article
<bdab1c87-e9f2-43a4-8139-
2ca0908caafd@v4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com
,
parsifal50@gmail.com wrote:
Why do you keep quoting sites without credibility?
He and Fred Stone sure know how to do their research.
Bookmark a handful of wingnut blogs and pick the biggest
doozies among the articles posted on them.
They're more factual and honest than the New York Times.
Why make such a comparison?
Because it's the truth.
It's not, but you just don't care, do you?
You just get off from making noise. You were *never* interested
in engaging in an exchange of ideas or in providing factual
bases for your strong opinions.
I get it. You hate people who disagree with you. You don't
want to talk to them; you just want to sling mud at them.
I get it. Do you?
I get it. You don't. But don't let that bother you. You've already
decided that you don't have to care about the truth.
I hear an echo.
Your "truth" is a cartoon.
Sometimes a cartoon illustrates the truth.
Usually not. As in this case.
Except that it does. In this case.
It does by virtue of your assertion?
The New York Times
lies to you and you believe them.
I don't even read the New York Times. However, I do know the
difference between journalists who do research and checks facts --
and who get fired from their papers when they are discovered lying
-- and shrill noisemakers like Malkin who can't be bothered with
the rigors that go with getting a story even close to correct,
especially at the cost of a few illegitimate jabs at their
ideological opponents... who are also cartoons of real people.
But that's how you like it. Cartoons picking fights with other
cartoons.
Ah, but "shrill noisemaker" isn't a cartoon or an ad-hominem in your
universe?
It isn't an ad hominem, by definition.
Describing a person in a certain way is *not* an ad hominem per se.
An ad-hominem attack is a means of argument, a distraction by way of
attacking the person rather than the thesis that he or she presents.
In this case, I am not responding to an argument by Ms. Malkin; I am
commenting on Malkin herself and her default MO of "journalism."
If she were to actually change her practices, I would retract my
descriptive. Of course I'm not holding my breath. There's money in
being a cartoon character on TV.
Ah, of course, you want her to be more like HuffPo or one of the other
lefty gullible idiot sites that suck up to Democrats instead of holding
them accountable for their falsehoods.
This is what I want by virtue of your assertion? I don't read the
Huffington Post, either. Care to try again?
Especially when you make yourself up to look like a kewpie doll and
flirt with Bill "I (heart) Playboy Bunnies and Girls Gone Wild" O'
Reilly.
And another insult which I should pretend isn't an ad-hominem dismissal
of O'Reilly's arguments.
Where's the insult? Which of O'Reilly's arguments -- or Malkin's -- is
being dismissed?
--
655321
"We are heroes in error" -- Ahmad Chalabi
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: San Francisco Approves ID Cards That Exclude Gender |
25 Nov 2007 03:40:40 PM |
|
|
655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote in
news:DipthotDipthot-7C3D5A.12165625112007@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net:
In article <Xns99F2D1C222E10freddybear@216.151.153.47>,
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote in
news:DipthotDipthot-6AB8EB.16455524112007
@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net
:
In article <Xns99F2BB778F95Bfreddybear@216.151.153.47>,
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote in
news:DipthotDipthot-49750A.11245224112007
@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com
:
In article <Xns99F1DCD1FBC56freddybear@216.151.153.45>,
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote in
news:DipthotDipthot-62299E.16194423112007
@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com
:
In article <Xns99F1683A96083freddybear@216.151.153.14>,
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote in
news:DipthotDipthot-992754.20584422112007
@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com
:
In article <Xns99F0A9833D8BDfreddybear@216.151.153.21>,
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote in
news:DipthotDipthot-
38623D.11573422112007@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net:
In article
<bdab1c87-e9f2-43a4-8139-
2ca0908caafd@v4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com
,
parsifal50@gmail.com wrote:
Why do you keep quoting sites without credibility?
He and Fred Stone sure know how to do their research.
Bookmark a handful of wingnut blogs and pick the
biggest doozies among the articles posted on them.
They're more factual and honest than the New York Times.
Why make such a comparison?
Because it's the truth.
It's not, but you just don't care, do you?
You just get off from making noise. You were *never*
interested in engaging in an exchange of ideas or in
providing factual bases for your strong opinions.
I get it. You hate people who disagree with you. You don't
want to talk to them; you just want to sling mud at them.
I get it. Do you?
I get it. You don't. But don't let that bother you. You've
already decided that you don't have to care about the truth.
I hear an echo.
Your "truth" is a cartoon.
Sometimes a cartoon illustrates the truth.
Usually not. As in this case.
Except that it does. In this case.
It does by virtue of your assertion?
It does by virtue of the truth.
The New York Times
lies to you and you believe them.
I don't even read the New York Times. However, I do know the
difference between journalists who do research and checks facts
-- and who get fired from their papers when they are discovered
lying -- and shrill noisemakers like Malkin who can't be
bothered with the rigors that go with getting a story even close
to correct, especially at the cost of a few illegitimate jabs at
their ideological opponents... who are also cartoons of real
people.
But that's how you like it. Cartoons picking fights with other
cartoons.
Ah, but "shrill noisemaker" isn't a cartoon or an ad-hominem in
your universe?
It isn't an ad hominem, by definition.
Describing a person in a certain way is *not* an ad hominem per se.
An ad-hominem attack is a means of argument, a distraction by way
of attacking the person rather than the thesis that he or she
presents.
In this case, I am not responding to an argument by Ms. Malkin; I
am commenting on Malkin herself and her default MO of "journalism."
If she were to actually change her practices, I would retract my
descriptive. Of course I'm not holding my breath. There's money
in being a cartoon character on TV.
Ah, of course, you want her to be more like HuffPo or one of the
other lefty gullible idiot sites that suck up to Democrats instead of
holding them accountable for their falsehoods.
This is what I want by virtue of your assertion? I don't read the
Huffington Post, either. Care to try again?
This is what you want by virtue of what you have already said.
Especially when you make yourself up to look like a kewpie doll and
flirt with Bill "I (heart) Playboy Bunnies and Girls Gone Wild" O'
Reilly.
And another insult which I should pretend isn't an ad-hominem
dismissal of O'Reilly's arguments.
Where's the insult? Which of O'Reilly's arguments -- or Malkin's --
is being dismissed?
Ah, I see, in your world those were high praise, right? All of them.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
The books that help you most are those which make you think that most.
The hardest way of learning is that of easy reading; but a great book
that comes from a great thinker is a ship of thought, deep freighted
with truth and beauty.
.
|
|
|
| User: "655321" |
|
| Title: Re: San Francisco Approves ID Cards That Exclude Gender |
25 Nov 2007 05:05:54 PM |
|
|
In article <Xns99F3A9D40F26Bfreddybear@216.151.153.48>,
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote in
news:DipthotDipthot-7C3D5A.12165625112007@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net:
In article <Xns99F2D1C222E10freddybear@216.151.153.47>,
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote in
news:DipthotDipthot-6AB8EB.16455524112007
@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net
:
In article <Xns99F2BB778F95Bfreddybear@216.151.153.47>,
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote in
news:DipthotDipthot-49750A.11245224112007
@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com
:
In article <Xns99F1DCD1FBC56freddybear@216.151.153.45>,
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote in
news:DipthotDipthot-62299E.16194423112007
@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com
:
In article <Xns99F1683A96083freddybear@216.151.153.14>,
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote in
news:DipthotDipthot-992754.20584422112007
@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com
:
In article <Xns99F0A9833D8BDfreddybear@216.151.153.21>,
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote in
news:DipthotDipthot-
38623D.11573422112007@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net:
In article
<bdab1c87-e9f2-43a4-8139-
2ca0908caafd@v4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com
,
parsifal50@gmail.com wrote:
Why do you keep quoting sites without credibility?
He and Fred Stone sure know how to do their research.
Bookmark a handful of wingnut blogs and pick the
biggest doozies among the articles posted on them.
They're more factual and honest than the New York Times.
Why make such a comparison?
Because it's the truth.
It's not, but you just don't care, do you?
You just get off from making noise. You were *never*
interested in engaging in an exchange of ideas or in
providing factual bases for your strong opinions.
I get it. You hate people who disagree with you. You don't
want to talk to them; you just want to sling mud at them.
I get it. Do you?
I get it. You don't. But don't let that bother you. You've
already decided that you don't have to care about the truth.
I hear an echo.
Your "truth" is a cartoon.
Sometimes a cartoon illustrates the truth.
Usually not. As in this case.
Except that it does. In this case.
It does by virtue of your assertion?
It does by virtue of the truth.
So you assert.
For what it's worth.
The New York Times
lies to you and you believe them.
I don't even read the New York Times. However, I do know the
difference between journalists who do research and checks facts
-- and who get fired from their papers when they are discovered
lying -- and shrill noisemakers like Malkin who can't be
bothered with the rigors that go with getting a story even close
to correct, especially at the cost of a few illegitimate jabs at
their ideological opponents... who are also cartoons of real
people.
But that's how you like it. Cartoons picking fights with other
cartoons.
Ah, but "shrill noisemaker" isn't a cartoon or an ad-hominem in
your universe?
It isn't an ad hominem, by definition.
Describing a person in a certain way is *not* an ad hominem per se.
An ad-hominem attack is a means of argument, a distraction by way
of attacking the person rather than the thesis that he or she
presents.
In this case, I am not responding to an argument by Ms. Malkin; I
am commenting on Malkin herself and her default MO of "journalism."
If she were to actually change her practices, I would retract my
descriptive. Of course I'm not holding my breath. There's money
in being a cartoon character on TV.
Ah, of course, you want her to be more like HuffPo or one of the
other lefty gullible idiot sites that suck up to Democrats instead of
holding them accountable for their falsehoods.
This is what I want by virtue of your assertion? I don't read the
Huffington Post, either. Care to try again?
This is what you want by virtue of what you have already said.
No doubt you won't bother to prove that. Or you will misrepresent
something I said earlier in an attempt to do so.
Oh, well... it's your choice.
Especially when you make yourself up to look like a kewpie doll and
flirt with Bill "I (heart) Playboy Bunnies and Girls Gone Wild" O'
Reilly.
And another insult which I should pretend isn't an ad-hominem
dismissal of O'Reilly's arguments.
Where's the insult? Which of O'Reilly's arguments -- or Malkin's --
is being dismissed?
Ah, I see, in your world those were high praise, right?
Playing your game:
It's neither an insult nor "high praise,"
but the unvarnished truth.
Fred, your obsession with extremes is boring.
All of them.
As I said before, that's not how ad hominem arguments work.
Not that you are concerned about that. It's just another flaccid weapon
you try to use against people who disagree with you.
--
655321
"We are heroes in error" -- Ahmad Chalabi
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: San Francisco Approves ID Cards That Exclude Gender |
24 Nov 2007 07:58:58 PM |
|
|
In article <Xns99F2D1C222E10freddybear@216.151.153.47>,
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
[...]
Ah, of course, you want her to be more like HuffPo or one of the other
lefty gullible idiot sites that suck up to Democrats instead of holding
them accountable for their falsehoods.
have you ever noticed how extremist, right wing, neocon crazies say
things like that when some gop'er is under scrutiny?
[...]
--
"New York Times has all ready sent me a response stating you have
been warned."
-- prison clerk heishman lying as "Osprey" <noneedtok...@mail.com>
in news:2rCdnZNy7LA5OojdRVn_iw@comcast.com
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: San Francisco Approves ID Cards That Exclude Gender |
22 Nov 2007 04:17:10 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 21 Nov 2007 22:48:29 -0800, parsifal50 wrote:
On 22 nov, 07:02, "J Young" <youngopini...@aol.com> wrote:
Is there any suprise that it's San Francisco we're talking about?
And this is a problem because........?
But when somebody says "San Fransisco", you're supposed to be so
terrified, you faint...
--
Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
------------------------------------------------------------
βIt is one of the Christian delusions that Christianity
brought charity into the world. It did no such thing.
There were plenty of agencies for taking care of the
poor and helpless long before Christianity was heard
of, and even before Judaism. Both Christianity and
Judaism have converted charity into a sort of pious racket.β
- H. L. Mencken
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
