See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Comments

1. #601
   On December 4th, 2009 at 12:11 pm, purealchemy said:

   Grow some thicker skin, honestly. That was no insult. There will be no question when I start the insults. Observe the way WE82 gets it

   In case you haven’t noticed, the people here who get most upset about your attacks on Christianity are usually women.
   There’s a bunch of you guys here who are rough and tumble with your insults. Fine. We get it that you are just sparring. Those fights are usually about something purely factual.
   Religion is much more emotional.
   You can’t tell someone they are wrong to have an emotion.

2. #602
   On December 4th, 2009 at 12:23 pm, chapoutier said:

   There’s a bunch of you guys here who are rough and tumble with your insults. Fine. We get it that you are just sparring.

   I’m not. I have true contempt for WarEagle, atheling and right4life. Any insult directed at them is very personal. I hope they take it that way.

3. #603
   On December 4th, 2009 at 1:02 pm, zeroangel said:

   Pure:

   The first was an analogy, not a sweeping generalization or insult to all Christians

   The second is just a fact.

   The third, also rather likely a fact.

   The fourth, as I said, Christians would say the same about any other religion. In fact it is regularly said about Islam on this site.

   In case you haven’t noticed, the people here who get most upset about your attacks on Christianity are usually women.

   Maybe, of course, frostrt is an exception.

   Religion is much more emotional.

   No kidding.

   You can’t tell someone they are wrong to have an emotion.

   As I said, it is regularly said here that Islam is just plain wrong. Sorry, but you can’t blame me for saying the same thing about Christianity. That is not insulting and certainly not on the same level as saying atheists are prone to immorality. Where have I ever made a blanket statement like that about Christians?

   I’m not. I have true contempt for WarEagle, atheling and right4life. Any insult directed at them is very personal. I hope they take it that way.

   Yup, I’m with Chap. Those three are just horrible. Though honestly, I think WE82 is just a tiny bit more pitiful as opposed to just plain nasty and stupid. I don’t know why I feel that way, maybe it’s just because he is just so obviously pathetic and likely has real self-esteem issues. At least the other two aren’t that pathetic.

4. #604
   On December 4th, 2009 at 1:37 pm, purealchemy said:

   The second is just a fact.

   The third, also rather likely a fact

   Wrong in both cases. Granted there are some people who would have those attitudes but not necessarily all.
   Speaking for myself, as a Christian, it is not the case. You never even bothered to ask me. You don’t listen. You don’t care to learn or understand anyone.

5. #605
   On December 4th, 2009 at 1:38 pm, purealchemy said:

   Maybe, of course, frostrt is an exception.

   Agreed. That’s why I said most, not all.

6. #606
   On December 4th, 2009 at 1:40 pm, purealchemy said:

   As I said, it is regularly said here that Islam is just plain wrong. Sorry, but you can’t blame me for saying the same thing about Christianity.

   I don’t have a problem with that kind of statement. I have a problem with you attacking individuals for their personal faith, telling them they are stupid and wrong.
   You can’t tell someone they are wrong to have a feeling, a preference.

7. #607
   On December 4th, 2009 at 1:44 pm, purealchemy said:

   Yup, I’m with Chap. Those three are just horrible. Though honestly, I think WE82 is just a tiny bit more pitiful as opposed to just plain nasty and stupid.

   Between the three of you, I’d say you are equally bright in different ways.
   WarEagle has more tradtional and patriotic values but that doesn’t make him stupid. He is also extremely creative.

8. #608
   On December 4th, 2009 at 1:46 pm, purealchemy said:

   The fourth, as I said, Christians would say the same about any other religion.

   Then you don’t necessary know that much about all Christians.
   There are many ways up the same mountain. Ultimately, we all might be praying to the same God but it expresses itself in different ways in different cultures.
   You always presume to know what others think who are not like you.

9. #609
   On December 4th, 2009 at 2:02 pm, zeroangel said:

   Pure:

   Granted there are some people who would have those attitudes but not necessarily all.

   Ref. the 2nd quote, where did I say “all?” Concerning the 3rd, obviously all religions can’t be right. It is implicit in saying that you follow some religion that the others are wrong.

   I have a problem with you attacking individuals for their personal faith, telling them they are stupid and wrong.

   That is exactly what is said about Islam by those same people. I’m sorry, I don’t call individuals or even a group stupid. Consider, John D. I have repeatedly told him I don’t think he is stupid at all. I am certain he is a rather smart person, however when it comes to certain ideas about certain topics he is just ignorant. Ignorant doesn’t always mean stupid and just because a person might have a stupid idea it doesn’t mean they are stupid.

   I attack ideas, not people. As I see it, religious ideas are no more off limits then politics. You seem to be stuck in this mode where you think discussing the rightness or wrongness of certain religions is off-limits, it is not.

   Look, if you can’t take the heat, get out of the kitchen. This is what open debate and discussion is about. Religion is not off limits in my mind.

   There are many ways up the same mountain. Ultimately, we all might be praying to the same God but it expresses itself in different ways in different cultures.

   The claims of different religions are incompatible! Either Jesus died for our sins or Buddha showed us the way to Nirvana, they can’t both be right. Sorry.

10. #610
    On December 4th, 2009 at 2:03 pm, zeroangel said:

    Pure:

    On the other hand, you say outright that atheists are prone to immorality and selfishness.

    You show me where I ever said anything at all like that about Christians.

11. #611
    On December 4th, 2009 at 2:41 pm, purealchemy said:

    On the other hand, you say outright that atheists are prone to immorality and selfishness

    You’ve got to listen to the exact way I word it.
    In my life experience, I have found that people without religious faith tend to be not as trustworthy in terms of their values and morals. They are less likely to be guided by higher principles. I’m not saying there’s a consistent, glaring difference.

12. #612
    On December 4th, 2009 at 2:43 pm, purealchemy said:

    The claims of different religions are incompatible! Either Jesus died for our sins or Buddha showed us the way to Nirvana, they can’t both be right. Sorry.

    If that is your impression then I strongly challenge that with the works of
    Joseph Campbell, especially “The Power of Myth”.

13. #613
    On December 4th, 2009 at 2:46 pm, purealchemy said:

    I don’t call individuals or even a group stupid.

    Yup, I’m with Chap. Those three are just horrible. Though honestly, I think WE82 is just a tiny bit more pitiful as opposed to just plain nasty and stupid.

    zero, maybe you should start taking ginkgo for memory.

14. #614
    On December 4th, 2009 at 5:21 pm, zeroangel said:

    Pure:

    I guess this is OK then:

    In my life experience, I have found that people without with religious faith tend to be not as trustworthy in terms of their values and morals. They are less likely more likely to be guided by higher principles from an evil deity. I’m not saying there’s a consistent, glaring difference.

    If that is your impression then I strongly challenge that with the works of
    Joseph Campbell, especially “The Power of Myth”.

    Ummm, so what? They are incompatible, it doesn’t matter that people can compartmentalize.

    zero, maybe you should start taking ginkgo for memory.

    Fair enough. A handful of lunatics get called stupid, but I certainly don’t blanket generalize an entire religion or non-religion, like you do. As I said, I don’t criticize John D. simply because he is a Christian and I don’t do that to WE82 either. Are you taking offense because I called a person that happens to be Christian, stupid? Would you get mad if I said Fred Phelps is stupid?

15. #615
    On December 4th, 2009 at 5:26 pm, zeroangel said:

    Joseph Campbell, especially “The Power of Myth”.

    Myth! Not reality. Jeeezzz…

16. #616
    On December 4th, 2009 at 5:36 pm, purealchemy said:

    I guess this is OK then:

    No that is not okay.
    Why don’t you ask me first if that’s what I think instead of always assuming?

17. #617
    On December 4th, 2009 at 5:37 pm, purealchemy said:

    Ummm, so what? They are incompatible, it doesn’t matter that people can compartmentalize

    It’s on too sophisticated a level for you.
    Never mind.

18. #618
    On December 4th, 2009 at 5:39 pm, purealchemy said:

    . Are you taking offense because I called a person that happens to be Christian, stupid?

    I take offense because you constantly tell people they are wrong and stupid to believe in God.
    But sure, a Christian could be stupid in other ways.

19. #619
    On December 4th, 2009 at 5:42 pm, zeroangel said:

    Pure:

    No that is not okay.

    Then why is what you said OK? They are the same.

    It’s on too sophisticated a level for you.

    Riiight… believe me, it’s not.

    I take offense because you constantly tell people they are wrong and stupid to believe in God.

    Once again, ideas don’t get respect for no reason other than they are religious ideas. That is exactly what the Muslims say. Sorry, your religion isn’t special.

20. #620
    On December 4th, 2009 at 5:44 pm, purealchemy said:

    BTW, your pal Jeddite is totally getting his ass kicked on the Kevin Jennings thread but I’ve been very nice to him.
    Maybe you’d like to come to his defense there also.

21. #621
    On December 4th, 2009 at 5:45 pm, purealchemy said:

    It’s on too sophisticated a level for you.

    Riiight… believe me, it’s not

    Just giving you a little taste of your own medicine.

22. #622
    On December 4th, 2009 at 5:47 pm, zeroangel said:

    Pure:

    BTW, your pal Jeddite is totally getting his ass kicked

    I sincerely doubt that.

    To clarify, when i said:

    That is exactly what the Muslims say.

    I was refering to taking offense over being told they are wrong to believe in their god.

23. #623
    On December 4th, 2009 at 5:48 pm, purealchemy said:

    Did you know Jeddite is gay?

24. #624
    On December 4th, 2009 at 5:49 pm, zeroangel said:

    Pure:

    Just giving you a little taste of your own medicine.

    It doesn’t bother me because I know the book you quoted isn’t sophisticated at all and I am more than capable of understanding it’s point (which is almost certainly silly if it implies what you suggest).

25. #625
    On December 4th, 2009 at 5:49 pm, zeroangel said:

    Did you know Jeddite is gay?

    Are you serious? Of course. He’s said it several times now.

26. #626
    On December 4th, 2009 at 5:49 pm, purealchemy said:

    t doesn’t bother me because I know the book you quoted isn’t sophisticated at all

    HA!

27. #627
    On December 4th, 2009 at 5:51 pm, purealchemy said:

    I wasn’t around when he mentioned it.
    Anyway, several people are directly attacking his homosexuality there.

28. #628
    On December 4th, 2009 at 5:58 pm, purealchemy said:

    It’s actually written from a humanistic perspective. He considers all religions to be essentially myths and shows the similarities between the stories and characters of various religions.

29. #629
    On December 4th, 2009 at 6:02 pm, zeroangel said:

    Pure:

    He considers all religions to be essentially myths

    Then he must be an atheist, perhaps he is prone to being selfish and immoral.

30. #630
    On December 4th, 2009 at 6:06 pm, purealchemy said:

    WOULD YOU KNOCK IT OFFF!!!!!

    GEEZZ!!!

    Meanwhile, chaps is going to bat for Jeddite but not in a particularly effective way.

31. #631
    On December 4th, 2009 at 6:09 pm, purealchemy said:

    Do you really intend to offer me an olive branch or just keep beating me with it?

32. #632
    On December 4th, 2009 at 9:14 pm, purealchemy said:

    In case zero ever shows his face here…

    you should be more like Jeddite.

    He is a better person than you.

33. #633
    On December 5th, 2009 at 6:44 am, purealchemy said:

    zero, I figured out the code.

    .ysae oot saw tI

    Did the “gay” thread get shut down? There’s no option to post there now.
    I wanted to thank Jeddite for the interesting music he left for me.

34. #634
    On December 5th, 2009 at 7:27 am, zeroangel said:

    Pure:

    zero, I figured out the code.

    Congrads!

    Did the “gay” thread get shut down?

    It appears so. The last set of comments involved me reposting a flame from Chap to WE82 referencing a famous scene from the movie Deliverance. I guess this place is moderated to some extent after all.

35. #635
    On December 5th, 2009 at 10:50 am, purealchemy said:

    It appears so.

    I don’t know why everybody thought it was boring.
    It thought it was funny as hell!

36. #636
    On December 5th, 2009 at 10:52 am, purealchemy said:

    On December 5th, 2009 at 9:53 am, happyscrapper said:

    On December 5th, 2009 at 9:06 am, jangar said:
    Off topic:

    Thank you Michelle Malkin for closing down the comment thread on the Schools Czar posting. The usual suspects hijacked it and flew it into the ground.

    Yes! I went over there to see if it was still going and saw that I couldn’t comment. I was going to chastize those kids for getting unruly. The most boring thread ever…although I didn’t read all the comments because they seemed to be pretty trite. I wonder how often the same people can continue to hijack threads and still retain their posting privileges!

37. #637
    On December 5th, 2009 at 11:07 am, zeroangel said:

    I thought it was hysterical.

38. #638
    On December 5th, 2009 at 12:03 pm, purealchemy said:

    zero, I just left a couple more comments on that other thread.
    How come happy targets “the usual suspects” (pretty sure that means you, chaps and WE )but not much was said about the pileup on Jeddite on the earlier part of the thread?

39. #639
    On December 5th, 2009 at 12:18 pm, purealchemy said:

    On December 5th, 2009 at 12:20 am, chapoutier said:
    zero, I looked back on that entire “wine pairing thread.” Good times…good times…

    TOTALLY ROFLMAO!
    Gotta quit reading the stuff so I can keep a straight face at work.

40. #640
    On December 5th, 2009 at 3:39 pm, purealchemy said:

    In case chaps shows up here, for what it’s worth, I found this not at all pretentious:

    Barbera d’Asti would be the worst choice. It is light, fruity and actually slightly effervescent. It really does pair best with Italian, tomato based dishes where the high acidity of the wine will accentuate the tomatoes.
    I’ve never had a SA merlot. I imagine it would pair fairly well, but if I am staring a a tempranillo or a Rhone, I would choose one of them. Probably the Rhone. They tend to go well with grilled and game food. London Broil isn’t game per se, but I think it possesses of the same characteristics.
    Rhone it is. Or finish that and drink the Tempranillo too. That solves your problem nicely

41. #641
    On December 5th, 2009 at 4:25 pm, jangar said:

    So much for Christmas here…

42. #642
    On December 5th, 2009 at 4:55 pm, purealchemy said:

    Uh, oh. Chaps, this is what set off WE82, not the previous item:

    On July 20th, 2009 at 11:10 am, chapoutier said:

    Interestingly enough this site (http://www.italianmade.com/wines/DOC10038.cfm) pairs Barbera D’Asti with a veal, beef and chicken dishes.

    Look on the back of just about any freaking bottle of wine and see what they say it will pair with. Surprise!!! Just about anything!!! Of course, they would have zero motivation for saying that…nor would the Italian Trade Commission.

    Ignore the fact that I have tried dozens of barbra d’astis and probably upward of 100 Cotes du Rhones in my life. Forget that I was President of the winetasting club at Georgetown. Ignore the fact I have read about 10 books on wine. Ignore the fact that you solicited advice from the board and I gave you genuine, sound advise.

    Please. Drink the Asti. I hope for your guests sake it won’t totally suck with a london broil (it probably won’t) but if it did, you would get what you deserved for being a tool

43. #643
    On December 5th, 2009 at 4:57 pm, purealchemy said:

    On December 5th, 2009 at 4:25 pm, jangar said:

    So much for Christmas here…

    Guess it’s just a matter of time for this thread to be shut down.

    But if Chaps shows up, we could discuss wine for Christmas.

44. #644
    On December 5th, 2009 at 5:32 pm, zeroangel said:

    Pure:

    How come happy targets “the usual suspects” (pretty sure that means you, chaps and WE )but not much was said about the pileup on Jeddite on the earlier part of the thread?

    Come on, you know the answer to that. Happy has a personal problem with me, likely the same with Chap. She only attacks people whose politics she disagrees with. I don’t remember her going after WE82.

    Jangar:

    So much for Christmas here…

    Happy Yule!

45. #645
    On December 5th, 2009 at 6:05 pm, purealchemy said:

    zero, in case you haven’t noticed, in spite of your insistence that I have this horrible attitude about atheists, the people I usually tag along with here include you and chaps and maybe now Jeddite.

46. #646
    On December 5th, 2009 at 6:21 pm, chapoutier said:

    pure, that comment of mine was only AFTER WE82 saw i had given advice and scoured the Internet for something to try to make me look like I didn’t know what I was talking about. He made that nasty, not me. Which actually is almost always the case. I rarely the first to engage him, usually because he rarely has a salient or original point. 9 times out of 10 he makes some stupid comment that makes sense only in the context of him trying to get a rise, and I respond.

47. #647
    On December 5th, 2009 at 7:57 pm, purealchemy said:

    Wow! Glad to see you back here, chaps!

    If we get banned on here, am I allowed to mention your presence here on your Facebook page?

48. #648
    On December 5th, 2009 at 8:00 pm, zeroangel said:

    zero, in case you haven’t noticed, in spite of your insistence that I have this horrible attitude about atheists, the people I usually tag along with here include you and chaps and maybe now Jeddite.

    Fair enough.

49. #649
    On December 5th, 2009 at 8:10 pm, purealchemy said:

    zero, and in case you haven’t noticed but probably you are, I am on the front lines with this fight STANDING BY YOU!

50. #650
    On December 5th, 2009 at 8:24 pm, zeroangel said:

    Yes, this did not go unnoticed.

51. #651
    On December 5th, 2009 at 8:47 pm, purealchemy said:

    I like swede. Swede is a friend of mine.

    BUT

52. #652
    On December 5th, 2009 at 9:00 pm, zeroangel said:

    …but swede is being a little tattle-tale, and an inconsistent one at that.

53. #653
    On December 6th, 2009 at 5:38 am, purealchemy said:

    He made that nasty, not me. Which actually is almost always the case. I rarely the first to engage him, usually because he rarely has a salient or original point. 9 times out of 10 he makes some stupid comment that makes sense only in the context of him trying to get a rise, and I respond.

    Yeah, he does tend to show up loaded for bear and then accuses you of being “loaded”. LOL