This clown cannot see it. He has a problem, he’s typical of many liberals, the world revolves around him and his stupid “debate skills” as he likes to say. What an a$$hat.

I thought you had “more important” (your words) things to do than go back and forth with me — a fight you started, btw. Apparently, you actually don’t.

Oh — and for the record, I’m a she.

Ta, ta. I doubt I’ll be on again today, as I have a thing called A Life. You should look into getting one.

You know, I always love it when you guys show yourselves for Precisely. Who. You. Really. Are. And frankly, it always happens.

Well, well, well. Who called the Thought Police? If you’ve got a problem with dialect or parody find a dull, humorless site where you’ll feel at home.

NYK, your words betray you.

Also, for future reference, try to avoid quoting me if you’re trying to rebut me. You can see why that’s not an effective strategy, no?

Guess you missed Debate Club.

I have more important things to worry…

Then stop playing on the Internet — which seems particularly childish for someone with as many responsibilities as you — and do what you need to do. Sheesh.

I guess the NYK troll doesn’t get that some of us have things to do during the day and can’t devote our entire life to him/her.

You say that, and yet you’re the one who instigated the back-and-forth. Your attempts to appear (as opposed to actually being) above the fray are undermined (alas) by the text you actually post. Your words, that is, betray you.

The way I read the “hizzy” and “chilluns” remark was as a tongue in cheek reference to the starkly different way that liberals have to address “black culture” audiences and “white culture” audiences separately

I think you’re giving him (and people like him) FAR too much credit. I highly doubt this is a multi-layered, Swiftian form of satire. It’s the naked ignorance it seems to be.

At any rate, Brian, as always, you genuinely are able to have intelligent discourse. And although we beg to differ on nearly every point, it’s nice to differ with someone (unlike others) who can do so while remaining civil and mature.

I find them malicious and base. Guess we have a difference of opinion.

I can’t disagree with base, but such is popular culture, for many years now.

And I can’t speak for Texas Tiger either. The way I read it, TT finds it ironic that a full-time campaigner is a “mother first.” The way I read the “hizzy” and “chilluns” remark was as a tongue in cheek reference to the starkly different way that liberals have to address “black culture” audiences and “white culture” audiences separately (Hillary and Obama in the pulpit vs. before the Knights of Columbus, Oprah talking to Beyonce vs. Nicole Kidman on the couch, etc.)

If I had used TT’s example, I would intend it as satirical humor, not with malice, and certainly not because I hate Michelle O because she is black.
But again, that’s me.

I certainly wasn’t “hateful,” but my political opinions had me labeled as a “troll” and resulted in my banishment and my wireless address advertised on their sight as punishment, all in one day!

That’s extreme. And speaking as a “leftist,” I’d have to say it’s pretty ridiculous. These sites are supposed to encourage political debate, not toss people off when their opinion differs from the majority.

We’ll have to agree to disagree on the content of the previously mentioned texts. I think implying that MO is a “nappy headed ho,” as the commenter who made the Imus joke did, is just so distasteful; using “street speak,” just because the person you’re writing about is black (does the poster really think MO uses the words “chilluns?”) — and make no mistake, the poster wouldn’t have used that wording if she weren’t — is meant to be provocative in the exact way it was. I find them malicious and base. Guess we have a difference of opinion.

The comments on this site, I’m afraid, have in many cases only served to reinforce some of the worst (of what I previously thought were) stereotypes I held.

I’m sorry you feel that way. I notice a lot of ideological fights being picked here, but I don’t sense the “horrible racism” that you find, anymore than the pithy references to cultural phenomenon (Imus, urban dictionary dot com lexicon, etc.) that exists in comment sections on both sides of the political aisle.

My only negative blogger experience was when I pulled a benign form of lgm “wise-ass-devils-advocacy” on a leftist site. I certainly wasn’t “hateful,” but my political opinions had me labeled as a “troll” and resulted in my banishment and my wireless address advertised on their sight as punishment, all in one day!

I haven’t seen anything close to that on MM’s site.

If I am sticking my nose into someone else’s fight, than I apologize. But I am not comfortable with your sweeping generalizations of this site and its contributors.

Brian, you’re always considerate and thoughtful — whether we disagree or not. But there are lots of people here who aren’t, who post things that are so amazingly objectionable I literally somtimes email them to friends to prove I’m not making it up about this site, who say horribly racist things. I see it here EVERY. SINGLE. DAY. I stand by what I said: 1) they don’t do much to destroy the idea that this is somehow an inherent part of conservative philosophy and (for the record, I don’t believe it is) 2) those comments are not anomalous (I’m not ever surprised by them anymore).
Honestly, I started reading this site because I assumed my views on conservatism were too reductive and essentialist — I wanted to read what actual conservatives had to say. The comments on this site, I’m afraid, have in many cases only served to reinforce some of the worst (of what I previously thought were) stereotypes I held.

In the future, just tell me when you need things explained to you. I’m happy to comply.

Please. As a reader and contributor here, I’m concerned with some of your sweeping generalizations:

1. I always love it when you guys show yourselves for Precisely. Who. You. Really. Are.
2. And frankly, it always happens.
3. …your comments make arguing about your most objectionable stances wholly unnecessary.
4. After a more than a year of reading this site and seeing daily (erroneous) use of words like “Marxist,” “communist” and even “Muslim,”
5. There are comments like those I cited here ALL THE TIME.
6. They aren’t unique; they’re typical, and they destroy conservatives’ arguments about what they DON’T stand for.
7. …the kind of hateful talk that you get away with on more “permissive” (read: conservative) sites.

If your fight is with #23, #44 and #45, then there isn’t much I can do about that, but I have appropriately used words in the past, which you claim to have seen used inappropriately on this site (Marxist, communist, Muslim, etc.)

If I am sticking my nose into someone else’s fight, than I apologize. But I am not comfortable with your sweeping generalizations of this site and its contributors.