tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post5069627171216572635..comments2024-03-18T21:33:35.309-07:00Comments on One Cʘsmos: Jimmy Carter: Miserable Failure, Vicious Anti-Semite, or Just Plain Stupid?Gagdad Bobhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14249005793605006679noreply@blogger.comBlogger96125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-76985531184283731012021-07-28T05:24:45.488-07:002021-07-28T05:24:45.488-07:00Pagalmovies is a torrent website<a href="https://nates-website0.yolasite.com/" rel="nofollow"> Pagalmovies</a> is a torrent websiteAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-81115541456065151742021-01-07T04:33:12.541-08:002021-01-07T04:33:12.541-08:00Dedicated Remote Resource Provider<a href="https://maps.google.co.ve/url?sa=t&url=https%3A%2F%2Fnockcode.com%2F" rel="nofollow">Dedicated Remote Resource Provider</a><br />Nock Codehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11269466749381592587noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-63314485424334696222020-12-30T05:31:23.415-08:002020-12-30T05:31:23.415-08:00Difference between Java and JavaScript<a href="https://bitsourceit.com/differences-between-java-and-javascript/" rel="nofollow">Difference between Java and JavaScript</a><br />Nock Codehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11269466749381592587noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-35970026065387490262009-10-13T18:52:42.632-07:002009-10-13T18:52:42.632-07:00It is more than likely that politicans like Obama ...It is more than likely that politicans like Obama and Carter know the evil of their intentions and are not just acting on good will like one person wanted to say here. How is there good intentions in: allowing people to kill innocent babies (abortion), willing to reason with uncivilized peoples with words who only know violence, allow the murderers to go free and/or be in jail to harm other citizens (no against capital punishment), not allow citizens to defend themselves against intruders with weapons (strict gun control not allowing citizens to have guns in home)...I mean really. You cannot be just ignorant and support these things. Maybe mentally retarded, but that's a different story and I am sure that we can all agree that Carter and Obama are not mentally retarded. Maybe tools, but these tools know exactly what kinds of jobs they are doing for their master designer.ndh777https://www.blogger.com/profile/04678661187765064528noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-54602126516384760122009-09-18T21:05:01.141-07:002009-09-18T21:05:01.141-07:00butters said "I only say what I think is corr...butters said "I only say what I think is correct, and usually expect (or at least hope) that I get a civilized, non-antagonistic response."<br /><br />This has probably already been done to death, but I am a flogger, so... here I go again. <br /><br />Obviously I am pleased to engage in an argument, but I don't take the gloves off without having first perceived (of course I could be wrong, happens) rudeness having been initiated on the other's part. My first comment here in One Cosmos a few years ago, was in disagreement with a post dealing unflatteringly with the Greeks. I'd been reading awhile, and although I wasn't quite sure what was up with the Petey poltergeist (sorry Petey), or comfortable with the religious nature of the blog at the time, but I could see that there was a whole different way of viewing these things than I'd imagined before, and was interested. Anyway, while the post had some very good points, the Greek ref got my goat a bit, but I managed to state my case without being insulting or rude, there was some back and forth, and I think we all understood each other's position without having fully agreed with each other. Occasionally here, some of our opinions on the Greeks, the Enlightenment, Ayn Rand related ideas and so forth, won't mesh, and while we don't see eye to eye on them, there's will be several comments back and forth - usually illuminating (speaking of which, where's Will gotten to again?), even though without reaching full agreement. <br /><br />The point of all that (you may occasionally see 'long winded' thrown in my direction), is that the combative, pouncing, etc, is nearly always brought in by the first commenter. There are areas where many of us disagree with each other (Nomo, can I get a "Yep!"?), without being insulting, or feeling we need to defeat the other.<br /><br />"Being rude to people and attacking them does amount to silencing"<br /><br />Again, entering rudely (you may not have seen it as such, but I think you can tell that a number of regulars here disagree with your assessment) will get a gleeful whacking. Whether or not that 'amounts to silencing' is up to you.<br /><br />"where members would respond to a correction or a challenge with love and respect"<br /><br />Yeah. Good luck with that. Personally I'll return love and respect with love and respect. I am aggressive and persistent, I will return dig for dig, and will escalate when I detect rudeness, deliberate insult, evasion and BS... sometimes I may get a wee bit enthusiastic - and will usually say sorry afterwards... but rolling over meek and mild - it ain't gonna happen. <br /><br />"... which is better humility than the mere placement of an 'H' in IMO"<br /><br />I used to write it as "IMHO (pause for laughter)", but don't bother anymore - it isn't terribly applicable, however it is something like a "excuse me," or "pardon me"... a civility (yes, coming from me, pause for laughter) not terribly significant in and of itself, but noticeably marked by its absence.<br /><br />"Take, for example, Anna's comments..."<br /><br />Each of us see different things, and respond accordingly. I personally, pay attention when someone, Julie, Anna, etc, do give a more careful response to someone I'd whacked. Maybe they saw something I missed, sometimes I'm wrong. Sometimes I'm wrong on the other end too. I held back on mtraven long after Gagdad and all else saw he was a two bit troll... I thought I saw some care and interest for truth and justice... I was <i>big time</i> wrong, and after the several dodges, evasions and flat out prevarications, I threw in the towel and now whack at him and his sock puppets right off the bat, they deserve nothing better.<br /><br />Again, if you want to disagree, I've no problem with that, and look forward to it, but condescension, patronizing or being rude - as opposed to hearty debate - will get responded to. Whether that is 'silencing' or not, is up to you.Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-60349221297532348932009-09-18T16:22:39.446-07:002009-09-18T16:22:39.446-07:00Van,
Nope, I haven't 'looked for a fight&...Van,<br /><br />Nope, I haven't 'looked for a fight' since I was 16. I only say what I think is correct, and usually expect (or at least hope) that I get a civilized, non-antagonistic response. Sometimes I ask questions out of curiosity, or let it be known that an alternative or dissenting view exists.<br /><br />But it depends on the crowd, at the end. There was a Buddhist online community, for example (I'm not a Buddhist but this is just an example), where members would respond to a correction or a challenge with love and respect. Nobody was silenced in that community.<br /><br />Being rude to people and attacking them <i>does</i> amount to silencing. It is silencing when it is aggressive, and done by a group (i.e. a group of people attack an individual). This was both.<br /><br />You can disagree with someone without attacking them. Take, for example, Anna's comments, which contain no personal attacks. Though I did attack Godwin subtly in my original comment, it was a mosquito bite compared to the barbaric behaviour certain other people have shown.<br /><br />And at the end of the day I admitted I was wrong about my original point, which is better humility than the mere placement of an 'H' in IMO. It is one thing to assert you're humble, but another thing to actually be humble (not that I'm saying I am, necessarily, but merely that placing 'H' in IMO is not a final measure, or a measure at all, of actual humility).Buttershttp://faithfullyagnostic.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-55567481984863486202009-09-18T16:03:47.522-07:002009-09-18T16:03:47.522-07:00"...like Van and hoarhey (especially Van, who..."...like Van and hoarhey (especially Van, who is very devoted..."<br /><br />Uh Hoarhey... I think you let me get top billing there, and Cuz didn't even get an honorable mention... what's up with that?<br /><br />;-)Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-78442191733675821342009-09-18T15:59:35.502-07:002009-09-18T15:59:35.502-07:00butters said "On the contrary I did listen to...butters said "On the contrary I did listen to the other side, and admitted I was wrong. It is the other side that did not listen to me."<br /><br />Ah. That and your "IMO" 's deliberate dropping of the "H", I think sum it up well. You came in looking for a fight, or at the very least, to be deliberately abrasive, and received the appropriate tone in response. <br /><br />Well, Julie has already taken the main points, so I'll just address the leftovers.<br /><br />"Plus, it's not like I'm the first person who's been called a troll..."<br /><br />Personally, I didn't take you for a troll. I saw your profile when you first entered a week ago, and from that I saw no reason to treat you as a troll, though it looked likely that we'd not agree on much. Disagreement, or even making foolish statements doesn't make you a troll. Blatant asshatery and blatant evasion of backing up your statements with any reasoned arguments, does. See the long history of yee-hah, godinpotty, mtraven, and the like for reference. What I did take you for, was being very young and full of sophistry - you've yet to demonstrate otherwise. <br /><br />Your initial comment, and later 'admission' shows you to see no further than narrow particulars, deliberately (or ignorantly) avoiding principles... not a good recipe for respectful consideration. However, if you do intend to attempt to support your positions with something other than assertions, and not evading arguments or evidence (did I miss your response to my comment including the House link ref... or are you still thinking about that...?), well, I look forward to it (other's may tire of us quickly, but we'll see).<br /><br />"I see the way dissent is silenced on this blog, with some exceptions (you, Anna, and a few others)."<br /><br /><i>Dissent? Silenced?</i> Please. You're not going to find many deleted comments here that weren't deleted by the author. And of course Ignorance and stupidity are gleefully whacked, but it in no way silences dissent - it's a blog, deal with it. Warren & I have disagreed often, Joseph as well, Lance? You out there? and others... principled disagreement, enjoy (sometimes perhaps too enthusiastically, true, but, sorry, fun is fun), I in no way want to 'silence' disagreement with me (or Gagdad), I enjoy it thoroughly... but I'm sure as heck not going to ignore what I disagree with, or what appears to be flat out foolish or taunting. Don't like it? Oh well, maybe you just enjoy talking a good game and aren't up to backing it up..?<br /><br />"Good example of this phenomenon are characters like Van and hoarhey (especially Van, who is very devoted), who do not wait even a few minutes to personally attack anyone who questions Infallible Godwin."<br /> <br />Heh, Gagdad doesn't need me to defend him. I am however <i>very</i> devoted to defending what I see to be "The Good, The Beautiful and The True"... attack or offend that... and I'll be be in your font asap.<br /><br />Prove me wrong, and I'll happily & gratefully admit and apologize... doesn't happen often, but it has, and I don't mind one bit.<br /><br />Otherwise, unless Cuz asks me to tone it down or mosey on, I fully intend to enjoy whatever opportunities you or anyone else provides for an enjoyable round of recreational slamming.Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-34061685103287165862009-09-18T12:26:31.028-07:002009-09-18T12:26:31.028-07:00Anna - yep.Anna - yep.juliehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15975754287030568726noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-54449130008700333422009-09-18T11:48:52.619-07:002009-09-18T11:48:52.619-07:00Julie,
Right. Also, money isn't going to sol...Julie,<br /><br />Right. Also, money isn't going to solve all of schools' problems. Think of what can be accomplished with paper and pencil. Fancy computer-aided overhead power point systems won't substitute for sound, inspired, innovative, real teaching. I know there is something to be said for good and adequate tools but it's not the end-all-be-all, at all. So the dire "need" for the money funding those organizations like you mentioned is even more a matter for question. But attention to dilapitated buildings is one thing that is very important (black mold, for one, is a danger) and to think that they remain tattered and unimproved even with a lot of funding is scandalous.Annahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16900344453710081874noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-5468871159138691492009-09-18T11:41:30.118-07:002009-09-18T11:41:30.118-07:00On the contrary I did listen to the other side, an...On the contrary I did listen to the other side, and admitted I was wrong. It is the other side that did not listen to me.<br /><br />My initial comment was not combative, it only contained a subtle insult, and that's really not enough to qualify it as trolling. Subsequent comments changed the tone from civilized-with-one-vaguely-snarky-sentence-at-the-end to truly combative and insulting.<br /><br />Plus, it's not like I'm the first person who's been called a troll. I see the way dissent is silenced on this blog, with some exceptions (you, Anna, and a few others). Good example of this phenomenon are characters like Van and hoarhey (especially Van, who is <i>very</i> devoted), who do not wait even a few minutes to personally attack anyone who questions Infallible Godwin.Buttershttp://faithfullyagnostic.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-40045202514058646952009-09-18T11:33:20.057-07:002009-09-18T11:33:20.057-07:00And one more point to consider is quality of educa...And one more point to consider is <i>quality</i> of education. If you look at elementary ed in this country, for instance, it's basically at the mercy of the NEA. Looked at a certain way, how is the situation any different from that of a third world country that depends on foreign aid, only the aid never quite gets where it's supposed to be going while the organizers and the local thugocracy seems to be living pretty fat? They <i>need</i> those people to stay poor, or else well-intentioned Americans won't fork over the dough.<br /><br />Over and over, we hear about how more money is needed for our precious schools, but the state of the schools never really seems to get any better, at least to hear about it. I bet the state of the NEA's expense accounts is doing just fine, though. Maybe they could use another admin building here or there, or some more team-building exercises in exotic locations... yeah, that'll improve the quality of education around the country...juliehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15975754287030568726noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-75966665326353122272009-09-18T11:16:46.521-07:002009-09-18T11:16:46.521-07:00Julie,
Not to mention that many private colleges ...Julie,<br /><br />Not to mention that many private colleges and universities accept subsidies. I think, even, that schools who opt out of that ring also aren't eligible for federal student financial aid programs. I'm not certain, but there might be something to it. I'd have to check.<br /><br />The article about tuition and financial aid I posted yesterday pointed out also that intellectual independence is potentially compromised by so much subsidy and aid. I only skimmed it but was pleasantly surprised that it started by referencing Hayek.Annahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16900344453710081874noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-28794335294715948682009-09-18T10:49:27.854-07:002009-09-18T10:49:27.854-07:00Anna - that's how it seems, because that's...Anna - that's how it seems, because that's how it is. It's a tautology that any state-funded institution gets its money from taxpayers. Since individual taxpayers are not given the option to pick and choose how their money is spent (which is unfortunate - how awesome would it be to just check a box next to stuff you want to pay for, and actually have your taxes allocated where you say? Free market tax distribution...) all taxpayers subsidize the cost of education at every level. And if you or your kid decide to go to a private school or no school, your money is still spent to cover the cost of the education of others.<br /><br />Furthermore, state monies are generally given on a "use it or lose it" basis. It should go without saying that universities virtually never willingly choose to cut back, but there are plenty of incentives to come up with new ways to get and spend more. <br /><br />Butters,<br />again with all due respect because you seem like a nice person, here's the thing:<br /><br />Read your first comment again. You chose a weak argument on a niggling point, missing the much larger context of the post; you dissed a mountain for a fissure. You are also, simply, incorrect, but we've already established that you aren't willing to change your mind about tuition. Enough said on that score, imho.<br /><br />Your initial comment was combative in tone: <br /><br />"I should have gotten the clue from your excessive protestations against the Left's connectedness to reality, that this is a case of protesting too much."<br /><br />You could have made your argument about tuition without the <i>ad hominem</i>. You yourself set the tone of the ensuing discussion.<br /><br />So when you say this: <br /><br />"That is why I do not post comments that are insulting to the blog poster, except in response to an attack." <br /><br />you're just beclowning yourself.<br /><br />There's really nothing more I can offer you. Either you'll take my earlier suggestions in the spirit in which they're given, or you won't, it's no skin off my nose.<br /><br />But if you continue to pick stupid arguments, refuse to listen to the opposing side, and then complain when you're not taken seriously, I'm going to look into acquiring state funding for your own personal Waaahmbulance.<br /><br />Is this how you act in class discussions at school? And if so, how's that working out for you?juliehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15975754287030568726noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-2589182465967030262009-09-18T09:59:54.183-07:002009-09-18T09:59:54.183-07:00Butters,
The problem is that the sticker price ...Butters, <br /><br />The problem is that the sticker price is relative. Any government can foot any amount of hidden cost and keep the price to the student the same or nil. But in the US, the government doesn't absorb all of that so the price for the student does actually go up over time. Earlier this week actually, coincidentally, I was looking up the history of college tuition on Wikipedia (whatever anyone thinks of Wikipedia aside, but there were some interesting charts and graphs) and it really has gone up - a lot. The universities don't temper their wants with what people would be willing to pay, they present those budgets to the state which feeds into it. A quick-shod explanation, but that is how it seems to me. The real cost is transferred to the tax payer who isn't the one partaking of the service but who is 'commanded' by the state to pay for it. Like I said, this is how it seems to me. What would keep a university from asking for more money in that case? Just curious. And whether or not it would necessarily raise the cost, it does seem to have happened here.Annahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16900344453710081874noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-66925704487753865942009-09-18T09:38:06.155-07:002009-09-18T09:38:06.155-07:00Sorry, previous link was broken. Here it is again:...Sorry, previous link was broken. Here it is again:<br /><br />http://www.portal.mohe.gov.my/<br />portal/page/portal/ExtPortal/<br />Agencies/Cost_of_Living/<br />Tuition_Fees<br /><br />I put spaces in there, so you'll have to paste it into one line and then remove the spaces.Buttershttp://faithfullyagnostic.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-57817174447997548662009-09-18T09:33:51.954-07:002009-09-18T09:33:51.954-07:00An additional point about the term 'troll'...An additional point about the term 'troll':<br /><br />I agree with Godwin and others who are critical of Leftists, that they have the tendency to silence disagreement. I find that generally speaking those who are Center-Right, or just Center, are the most open to discussions with those who disagree with them. However, the use of the term 'troll' to describe anybody who disagrees with a blogger IMO is contrary to the spirit of the marketplace of ideas.<br /><br />A blog should be a place where ideas can be exchanged, as long as a certain level of civility is maintained. That is why I do not post comments that are insulting to the blog poster, except in response to an attack. That, IMO, is not trolling, but is rather civilized disagreement. Trolling is disruptive, not merely inquisitive or even dissenting; and if mere disagreement or a question are seen as disruptive, this seems to reflect underlying insecurity and an intolerance for dissenting ideas on the part of the person feeling disturbed.<br /><br />Thus, instead of dismissing or insulting people by calling them trolls, I suggest people's questions be answered or their criticism addressed; and the term 'troll' be reserved for people who are actually using verbal violence and not merely disagreeing.Buttershttp://faithfullyagnostic.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-69654937219457468282009-09-18T09:27:28.263-07:002009-09-18T09:27:28.263-07:00Very few people actually addressed my point, but s...Very few people actually addressed my point, but sifting through all the personal insults and presumptuous pronouncements of my ignorance, I found one final refutation of my point:<br /><br /><i>"Bob: Or that subsidizing college increases the cost of tuition?<br /><br />Butters: the fact remains that the statement: 'subsidizing University education increases tuition fees' is demonstrably false.<br /><br />But Bob never said tuition fees increase. He said the cost of paying tuition increases. This includes the subsidization the government is doing to cover tuition, as well as the other costs of this subsidization (remember, he did not say the "price" of tuition, which could be interpreted as the sticker tag, but the cost of paying it)."</i><br /><br /><i>This</i>, ladies and gentlemen, is a good point, and I now concede that I was wrong. However, none of what was said elsewhere even got to my point, instead making general economic remarks about how subsidization is ultimately more expensive. Just because somebody fails to convince somebody else, doesn't mean the other person is ignorant or stubborn.<br /><br />Furthermore, I'm not a Leftist, and I have not stated where I stand on various issues. I did not even question 'economic wisdom', merely that subsidizing education increases tuition fees, which it turns out was not what Godwin was asserting. <br /><br />If it <i>was</i> what he was asserting, however, he would be wrong; and it has been demonstrated as false already by the lower tuition fees in countries that have subsidized education (Germany, for example, has no tuition fees at all). Here is one piece of proof:<br /><br />http://www.portal.mohe.gov.my/portal/page/portal/ExtPortal/Agencies/Cost_of_Living/Tuition_FeesButtershttp://faithfullyagnostic.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-34429024273864711272009-09-18T07:18:56.010-07:002009-09-18T07:18:56.010-07:00I don't know how many more ways I can say that...I don't know how many more ways I can say that I believe you are sincere.Gagdad Bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14249005793605006679noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-39674701747498925012009-09-18T07:02:37.974-07:002009-09-18T07:02:37.974-07:00Bob, we can look throughout history and find examp...Bob, we can look throughout history and find examples of how misguided you are. <br /><br />But seriously, for everything you claim, you never actually back it up with any real world examples. You just keep talking, as if your words enough are proof of the concepts.<br /><br />Personally, you're bullshit.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-27542372829578637782009-09-18T06:14:02.174-07:002009-09-18T06:14:02.174-07:00Susannah:
Feel free to share away. I don't m...Susannah:<br /><br />Feel free to share away. I don't mind attracting the right people, only the wrong ones. In fact, I'm a little intrigued at how popular the blog suddenly becomes when I write about politics for several days in a row -- like two or three times the traffic. Things like the Charles Johnson parody always cause a surge in readership. I'm kind of curious about how far it will go, so I think I'll stay on politics for awhile, and then drop a big spirit bomb and drive them all away -- although perhaps a dozen new readers will stay on for the other stuff.Gagdad Bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14249005793605006679noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-55059826658114748822009-09-18T05:46:02.694-07:002009-09-18T05:46:02.694-07:00Hey itchy, Don't worry.
Susannah... you were ...Hey itchy, <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3QCZ_bv9aLc&NR=1" rel="nofollow">Don't worry</a>.<br /><br />Susannah... you were saying?Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-50132845380588695632009-09-18T05:32:24.780-07:002009-09-18T05:32:24.780-07:00ninnyTazingtItchySatan said "...carrier of ba...ninnyTazingtItchySatan said "...carrier of bad vibrations and are the puppet ..."<br /><br />Poor sock puppet, sounds like he needs some Dr. Scholl's foot powder and some <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nC2gZMNkyJo&feature=fvw" rel="nofollow">Good Vibrations</a>.Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-4653067359517004272009-09-18T00:01:02.457-07:002009-09-18T00:01:02.457-07:00Weirder and weirder. http://hotair.com/archives/2...Weirder and weirder. http://hotair.com/archives/2009/09/17/great-news-in-class-rings-get-your-obama-tag-now/Susannahhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16381272662339466736noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-26405375379380561172009-09-17T23:06:45.939-07:002009-09-17T23:06:45.939-07:00Er, Satan.Er, Satan.Susannahhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16381272662339466736noreply@blogger.com