D. Spencer Hines

Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper

Svar
Gjest

D. Spencer Hines

Legg inn av Gjest » 01 aug 2005 21:09:02

Please inform just what in hell any of the following has to do with Medieval
Genealogy or anything beside a wild Liberal rant.
I
Gordon Hale
Grand Prairie, Texas
"The end of the human race will be that it will
eventually die of civilization."

-Ralph Waldo Emerson



n a message dated 8/1/2005 3:00:59 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
predone@NOSPAMeticomm.net writes:

On Sat, 30 Jul 2005 06:54:59 -0500, Grey Satterfield
<grey.satterfield@oscn.net> wrote:

On 7/29/05 5:49 PM, "James Toupin" <jtoupin@telus.net> wrote:

Hey! Come on now guys. I disagree with Hines too, but this is
simply unnecessary cruelty. We all have episodes and failures in our
lives that we would rather not have splashed all over the internet.
Disagree with him, argue with him, point out the flaws in his reasoning,
and express your own point of view but the personal attacks just
makes everyone in any newsgroup look like petty, childish fools. Let
us have discourse and debate, not insults and debasing.

I agree. It's possible to go too far, even on Usenet, and this is one of
those times.

I don't know about "too far," but what the hell does it gain? Insult
(when it's done with some wit) is quite entertaining, and can rise to
the level of art if it's literate and reasonably original. I mark it
apart from attack on an intimate personal basis, which is not only
off-topic (and thereby leads truly to the fallacy of *argumentum
ad hominem*, or "disbelieve this asshole because he's an asshole,
not because his position is bullshit") but also anti-intellectual.

Let's say we had ourselves a dispute with a reasonably articulate
adolescent - some barely pubescent teen weenie with little or no
"street cred" whatsoever; no life experience, no academic credits
other than the abysmal crap taught in the local Government Indoc-
trination Centers putatively offering "public education." Let's say
that this kid were capable of putting forth lucid and reasonably
well-articulated arguments on a topic of interest in any of the
various Usenet groups to which we're cross-posting right now.

And let's say that - contravening the old "On the Internet, nobody
knows you're a dog" practice - the kid is honest enough to admit
his age and education right up front. We *know* that he's a kid,
working from a kid's general fund of knowledge. (Or a police
officer, "trolling the 'Net" in an air-conditioned office instead of
getting out there in the community and pretending to protect
people's lives and property, in which case we'd have to cut the
stupid bastard even more slack.)

Would we automatically dismiss that kid's arguments simply
because the *source* is a person whom we might otherwise
consider contemptible?

So with Mr. Hines. He is beyond doubt irritating most of the
time, and I hold his purblind Republicrat political sentiments
perfectly representative of much that is reprehensible about
the whole "conservative" movement in these United States,
but I read his posts with regularity, and there is much to be
found (particularly in his cut-and-paste posts) that is either
interesting, amusing, or both. I'm rather grateful for his time
and effort, and I wish the best for him.

------------------------
[T]hroughout its long, dismal history, the Republican Party has,
time after time, promised to support individual liberty, and
promptly betrayed it. There wouldn't be a Libertarian Party if
that wasn't true. On that account, if no other, we're not buddies,
friends, allies, or fellow travelers. We're enemies, as surely as
we're enemies to Democrats. We've always been enemies, but
it was on an almost friendly basis until ...

Until when, exactly?

For me, it may have been until then-Senator Robert Dole, with no
discernible motivation except his longstanding and utterly Nixonian
loathing of freedom, helped the Clinton Administration ram the Brady
Bill through, and with it (just as it was becoming clear that armed
individuals were reducing crime by double digits) an unconstitutional
prohibition on efficient personal weaponry and magazines of adequate
capacity.

Or it might have been until "revolutionary" Republicans tucked their
tails between their legs and slunk away, instead of seeking truth and
justice in the matters of Ruby Ridge, Waco, and Oklahoma City.

Or it may have been until the same "revolutionaries" failed, like the
Eisenhower and Reagan Administrations before them, to stamp out every
remnant of the New Deal and run government on a constitutional basis.

Or it might have been ... to hell with that. The Republican Party was
born for no other purpose than to oppress Americans. It has done
nothing but that since the War between the States. The GOP is the
party of conscription, the income tax, the loyalty oath, fiat money
inflation, political censorship, and the midnight knock on the door.
The only reason they got away with it is that Democrats were so
much worse.

That's all over now. Doing exactly opposite of what's really needed to
ensure "homeland security", Republicans have turned this country's
airports into rape zones where, if you protest at what they do to you,
you're guaranteed a thorough anal probing as punishment for exercising
your First Amendment rights. In the past year, Republicans have
trampled the Bill of Rights at home until it's unrecognizable, while
bombing, shooting, and otherwise terrorizing helpless peasants all
over the planet in a bald attempt to corner the world supply of
petroleum.

As hard as it may once have been to conceive, from the standpoint of
individual liberty, Republicans are vastly worse than Democrats.
George Junior has managed to make Bill Clinton look like a statesman.
The only strategy libertarians ought to follow -- the only one that
works for us, apparently -- is to prevent the election of as many of
these goose-stepping imbeciles as possible. If it were up to me, I'd
dedicate all of the Libertarian Party's resources to that and nothing
else.

The truly silly thing is that all the Republicans have to do to
eliminate the terrible threat that we libertarians represent is to be
better than we are on the issues that count. Put a stop to the current
War on Everything. Call the troops home for good. End the evil War on
Drugs. Outlaw "civil forfeiture". Repeal 25,000 gun laws. Seriously
reconsider taxation -- extortion and theft -- as a means of funding
government.

The ball is in their court and always has been.

-- L. Neil Smith,
"Why Michael Medved Needs Glasses"

(http://www.ncc-1776.com/tle2002/libe199 ... 18-02.html)

Todd A. Farmerie

Re: D. Spencer Hines

Legg inn av Todd A. Farmerie » 01 aug 2005 22:54:52

GRHaleJr@aol.com wrote:
Please inform just what in hell any of the following has to do with Medieval
Genealogy or anything beside a wild Liberal rant.

Unfortunately, Mr. Hines decided that a post of his was too insightful
to be limited to a single audience, and hence he crossposted it to:

rec.sport.pro-wrestling
alt.history.british
alt.books.tom-clancy
soc.genealogy.medieval
sci.military.naval

As this is not the first time he has made such a decision, the typical
response followed in the form of insults directed toward him, the
propriety of such insults, and now a discussion of insults in general.
Most of it has likewise been crossposted among the five groups. It
never had anything to do with medieval genealogy, and the participants,
with one exception, have never posted to soc.gen.med except when brought
into it by such crossposts and most likely don't know where their posts
are going. Likewise, complaining about it on GEN-MED will have no
effect, because your complaint will not be seen by posters in the other
groups.

taf

Todd A. Farmerie

Re: D. Spencer Hines

Legg inn av Todd A. Farmerie » 02 aug 2005 01:20:35

D. Spencer Hines wrote:
Dead Wrong....

I certainly did no such thing.

taf, are you drinking and posting again!

You know you promised not to do that anymore.

Now get back on the wagon.

Veni, Vidi, Calcitravi Asinum.

DSH

"Todd A. Farmerie" <farmerie@interfold.com> wrote in message
news:42ee9a2c@news.ColoState.EDU...

| GRHaleJr@aol.com wrote:
|
| > Please inform just what in hell any of the following has to do with
| > Medieval Genealogy or anything beside a wild Liberal rant.
|
| Unfortunately, Mr. Hines decided that a post of his was too insightful
| to be limited to a single audience, and hence he crossposted it to:
|
| rec.sport.pro-wrestling
| alt.history.british
| alt.books.tom-clancy
| soc.genealogy.medieval
| sci.military.naval...

I retract. In this case, it was an author calling himself "The Ikon
That Can Still Go" who found himself so insightful that he expanded a
thread discussing Mr. Hines in rec.sport.pro-wrestling to include
several other groups to which Mr. Hines had crossposted in the immediate
past. The effect is the same - a thread upon which complaints in
GEN-MED can have no possible effect.

taf

D. Spencer Hines

Re: D. Spencer Hines

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 02 aug 2005 01:30:02

Dead Wrong....

I certainly did no such thing.

taf, are you drinking and posting again!

You know you promised not to do that anymore.

Now get back on the wagon.

Veni, Vidi, Calcitravi Asinum.

DSH

"Todd A. Farmerie" <farmerie@interfold.com> wrote in message
news:42ee9a2c@news.ColoState.EDU...

| GRHaleJr@aol.com wrote:
| >
| > Please inform just what in hell any of the following has to do with
| > Medieval Genealogy or anything beside a wild Liberal rant.
|
| Unfortunately, Mr. Hines decided that a post of his was too insightful
| to be limited to a single audience, and hence he crossposted it to:
|
| rec.sport.pro-wrestling
| alt.history.british
| alt.books.tom-clancy
| soc.genealogy.medieval
| sci.military.naval...

| taf

D. Spencer Hines

Re: D. Spencer Hines

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 02 aug 2005 02:34:01

Thank you kindly, Todd.

And a Good Day to you.

Aloha,

DSH

"Todd A. Farmerie" <farmerie@interfold.com> wrote in message
news:42eebc54@news.ColoState.EDU...

| D. Spencer Hines wrote:

| > Dead Wrong....
| >
| > I certainly did no such thing.
| >
| > taf, are you drinking and posting again!
| >
| > You know you promised not to do that anymore.
| >
| > Now get back on the wagon.
| >
| > Veni, Vidi, Calcitravi Asinum.
| >
| > DSH
| >
| > "Todd A. Farmerie" <farmerie@interfold.com> wrote in message
| > news:42ee9a2c@news.ColoState.EDU...
| >
| > | GRHaleJr@aol.com wrote:
| > | >
| > | > Please inform just what in hell any of the following has to do
with
| > | > Medieval Genealogy or anything beside a wild Liberal rant.
| > |
| > | Unfortunately, Mr. Hines decided that a post of his was too
insightful
| > | to be limited to a single audience, and hence he crossposted it
to:
| > |
| > | rec.sport.pro-wrestling
| > | alt.history.british
| > | alt.books.tom-clancy
| > | soc.genealogy.medieval
| > | sci.military.naval...
|
| I retract. In this case, it was an author calling himself "The Ikon
| That Can Still Go" who found himself so insightful that he expanded a
| thread discussing Mr. Hines in rec.sport.pro-wrestling to include
| several other groups to which Mr. Hines had crossposted in the
immediate
| past. The effect is the same - a thread upon which complaints in
| GEN-MED can have no possible effect.
|
| taf

Svar

Gå tilbake til «soc.genealogy.medieval»