RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (2) < [1] 2 >   
  Topic: Ann Coulter and Anti-evolution, Is she good for the movement?< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
The Ghost of Paley



Posts: 1703
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 18 2006,09:33   

I just saw a discussion about PZ's favorite gal on Lawrence Auster's blog. It appears that she's very controversial within conservative circles, and a notorious figure outside them. Here's the question: Regardless of your personal opinion of Ms. Coulter, do you think she's a good thing for the anti-evo movement from a strategic point of view? Furthermore, do you think her opinions are sincere? My opinion is that her trampy clothes, cocky attitude, and unbalanced prose do the creationist/ID movement no good. Furthermore, I suspect that she's only passionate about repealing gun-control legislation, and only espouses creationist ideas for $$$. Others obviously disagree, and I'm certainly willing to listen to their point of view. Flint, AFDave, Eric, Wes, and others -- what do you think? Dave, I'd like your opinion in particular.

--------------
Dey can't 'andle my riddim.

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 18 2006,09:37   

GOP, aren't you supposed to be off somewhere proving geocentricity?

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
The Ghost of Paley



Posts: 1703
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 18 2006,09:41   

A.C.:
Quote
GOP, aren't you supposed to be off somewhere proving geocentricity?

If you read my latest post in that thread, you'll see my response to Eric as well as a very important reference. My model's in better shape than ever.

--------------
Dey can't 'andle my riddim.

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 18 2006,09:43   

Uh huh. Sure.

Okay, answer me this then. How does it make you feel when AC advocates killing US Congressmen? Good? Bad? Neutral? Bored? Amused?

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
The Ghost of Paley



Posts: 1703
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 18 2006,09:57   

Quote
Okay, answer me this then. How does it make you feel when AC advocates killing US Congressmen? Good? Bad? Neutral? Bored? Amused?


Don't forget the staff of the New York Times.  :D

Well, comments like this suggest that she's putting on an act; if she isn't, then she's obviously dangerous. But I think it's an act because I remember how rational she used to be (she was always a hothead, though). Anyhoo, you might want to reread the title of this thread......this discussion calls for cool, abstract reasoning, not jump-the-gun posturing.

--------------
Dey can't 'andle my riddim.

  
Flint



Posts: 478
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 18 2006,10:00   

At one time, I enjoyed watching boxing matches. Often ehough, it was a home-town boy against someone far superior from elsewhere. The superior fighter would humiliate and finally knock out the local boy.

At which point, the referee would stop the fight, raise the unconscious local boy's arm in the air and declare him the winner! And the local fans LOVED it. They were ecstatic.

Coulter's target audience is exactly the same. Coulter may have her facts wrong (and incomplete), her logic wrong, her language vicious, her arguments without exception dishonest and unfair, her footnotes may fail to support the argument being made where they were cited, and so on ad nauseum.

But she is lying for Jesus, and that makes everything better than OK, it makes it holy. She's almost surely well aware that creationists continue to get full mileage out of arguments so thoroughly discredited even AiG cringes.

And so as the boxing matches demonstrate, it doesn't matter how flagrantly you cheat so long as the right guy wins. I often suspect the the more flagrant the cheating, the more popular the decision. Shows what matters.

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 18 2006,10:05   

Quote (The Ghost of Paley @ June 18 2006,14:57)
Quote
Okay, answer me this then. How does it make you feel when AC advocates killing US Congressmen? Good? Bad? Neutral? Bored? Amused?


Don't forget the staff of the New York Times.  :D

Well, comments like this suggest that she's putting on an act; if she isn't, then she's obviously dangerous. But I think it's an act because I remember how rational she used to be (she was always a hothead, though).

Do you disapprove of it, tho? Do you think it's irresponsible? Would you be so blase about it if someone on the left did it? You don't seem to hold it against her, and I'm curious why.

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
The Ghost of Paley



Posts: 1703
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 18 2006,10:17   

Quote
Do you disapprove of it, tho? Do you think it's irresponsible? Would you be so blase about it if someone on the left did it?

Actually, I'm quite offended by her comments....I even had to put one of her books down in the middle of a passage because I couldn't stand her rhetoric any longer. To me, she's a very prominent example of the decline of Western Civilisation; after all, if conservatives don't uphold civilisational norms, then who's left to protect our heritage? If I seem to go easy on her, it's because I remember a very different Coulter: at one time, she seemed to have a bright future. That's one reason why conservatives remain divided on All Things Ann.

Arden, you do understand the point of this thread, don't you?

--------------
Dey can't 'andle my riddim.

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 18 2006,10:29   

Quote (The Ghost of Paley @ June 18 2006,15:17)
 
Quote
Do you disapprove of it, tho? Do you think it's irresponsible? Would you be so blase about it if someone on the left did it?

Actually, I'm quite offended by her comments....I even had to put one of her books down in the middle of a passage because I couldn't stand her rhetoric any longer. To me, she's a very prominent example of the decline of Western Civilisation; after all, if conservatives don't uphold civilisational norms, then who's left to protect our heritage? If I seem to go easy on her, it's because I remember a very different Coulter: at one time, she seemed to have a bright future.


I would urge you not to judge her on that basis anymore.

Quote
That's one reason why conservatives remain divided on All Things Ann.

Arden, you do understand the point of this thread, don't you?


Of course, it's just not what I was most interested in hearing about.

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
Ichthyic



Posts: 3325
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 18 2006,10:41   

First:

I think Coulter is best described as a combination of Paris Hilton and Pat Robertson.

that said:

 
Quote
do you think she's a good thing for the anti-evo movement from a strategic point of view? Furthermore, do you think her opinions are sincere?


the only reason she exists in the public arena is BECAUSE of the religious right.  She is just a firebrand, self created but whipped into a frenzy by republicans who need to mobilize their political base a few months before major elections.

so in that sense, yes, she's obviously a useful tool for the right, with anti-evo as a just another hot-button issue.

do i think her opinions are sincere?

I think she believes she is doing the right thing, but the specifics of her stated opinions are irrelevant to the issue.

so, yes in the large sense, no on the specifics.

oh and...

Quote
My model's in better shape than ever.


what model?  still haven't seen it yet.

--------------
"And the sea will grant each man new hope..."

-CC

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 18 2006,11:30   

I can't believe that Coulter can be good for the antievolution movement. She has zero credibility as a scholar, and she's pissed away whatever sociopolitical credibility she might have had by her scorched-earth approach and enthusiastic advocating of the murder of anyone who displeases her. She seems to be taking the Bushian political approach that it's better to have a small core of people who absolutely slavishly follow her than a broader base of people who largely agree with her. That is, she seems to be sacrificing broadness of support in favor of intensity among those who are left. And no, I don't think the sales of her books contradict this theory.

That said, I don't think she'll necessarily be BAD for the antievolution movement, either. Her followers support her no matter what, and after she's winnowed out moderates, her effect will simply be neutral. I can't imagine she's 'converted' enough to people to antievolution -- or turned enough people off of it -- to make a net difference. She's not a political advocate of any kind -- she basically is a kind of wingnut minstrel show, there to make the True Believers feel good, but aside from book sales, she really doesn't accomplish anything.

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
Ichthyic



Posts: 3325
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 18 2006,11:54   

Quote
I can't believe that Coulter can be good for the antievolution movement. She has zero credibility as a scholar,


how can you read the daily screed of AFD and say that with straight face?

zero credibility as a scholar has never mattered to followers of Robertson or GW.

remember the "wise" words of Ray Mummert.

Quote
I can't imagine she's 'converted' enough to people to antievolution -- or turned enough people off of it -- to make a net difference


interesting.  I myself have no problem imagining that she has in fact, served as a great source of inspiration to those already looking for reasons to turn off their minds.

example:

remember Randy?  He came to PT to poo-poo the ToE because of something he read in Coulter's book.

It's hard for any rational mind to initially "imagine" how an irrational stream of drivel like coulter's could influence others... until you see it happen over and over again.

then the sheer weight of evidence tends to start to be convincing.

--------------
"And the sea will grant each man new hope..."

-CC

  
Glen Davidson



Posts: 1014
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 18 2006,12:02   

I'm guessing that Coulter is reasonably helpful to ID as a political movement at this point in time.  It's the old, "there's no bad publicity" idea.

Otoh, deliberately turning ID into a flaming political issue suggests that the attempts to turn ID into a serious idea have been abandoned.  Dembski will probably gain financially from Coulter's antics, while even his followers start to question how serious he is about ID intellectually.

Really, turning ID over to Coulter is about the last thing that a promoter of serious ideas would do.  And don't think that I disagree across the board with Coulter--I don't.  Some of her stuff is not that far off from Carl Schmidt's Political Theology and the writings of other leftist and rightist political criticism.  But in her hands, even the legitimate claims are turned into a screed, and trivialized in the minds of anyone who isn't impressed by pulpit denunciations.

With even O'Reilly writing against her style (and note how many more listen better to him than to Coulter) and personal attacks, making her the most prominent antievolutionist out there represents the abandonment of the campaign to make ID into something other than mere politics.  It will fanaticize the core, yet it will further marginalize ID, and particularly Dembski.  

I think that ID has turned even more into a shambles than it was.  IDists who want to be taken seriously will have to answer for Coulter (and Dembski) for some considerable time, making their presentations into even more of a defense, and not the offense that they would like to mount.  ID will receive even less of the little hearing that it has previously been given at universities.

Dembski is, understandably, bitter and angry, and wants to cement his standing with the core fanatics, while lashing out at PT and the science establishment.  He has damaged intellectual claims made for ID considerably by latching onto the screeching Coulter, while achieving his own desires in probably the best way that he could.  It's the sort of thing that evolutionary scenarios and game theory predict--under certain circumstances--while his more measured allies ought to be very displeased with his sell-out to tabloid tactics.

--------------
http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p....p

Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of coincidence---ID philosophy

   
ericmurphy



Posts: 2460
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 18 2006,19:37   

Bill, you and I probably agree (for once) on something. Ann is a horse's ass. I mean, she doesn't just look like a horse's ass (which she does). She literally is a horse's ass.

She's not just bad for creationism; she's bad for any position she takes on any subject.

Now—what do you think would happen if you did the double-slit experiment using planets instead of photons or electrons?

--------------
2006 MVD award for most dogged defense of scientific sanity

"Atheism is a religion the same way NOT collecting stamps is a hobby." —Scott Adams

  
The Ghost of Paley



Posts: 1703
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 19 2006,07:26   

Yeah, the Wizard choked on a chicken bone when he collaborated with The Harpie. Why pick Ann when this lady's around:



<sigh............>

--------------
Dey can't 'andle my riddim.

  
GCT



Posts: 1001
Joined: Aug. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 19 2006,07:35   

Um, GoP.  She doesn't look white.  Won't your KKK brothers look down on you for this?

  
The Ghost of Paley



Posts: 1703
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 19 2006,07:41   

GCT:
 
Quote
Um, GoP.  She doesn't look white.  Won't your KKK brothers look down on you for this?

<yawn>......Quit stealing Dean's act. You may share his ignorance, but it's his style you lack.

--------------
Dey can't 'andle my riddim.

  
Chris Hyland



Posts: 705
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 19 2006,09:22   

Is she good for the antievolution movement? For the people that still think this is still a scientific debate then definately no. But on the other hand if by antievolution movement you mean the movement to discredit evolution as a barrier to increasing the influence of Christian fundementalism in America then probably yes. I have not read her book, but I imagine that she trots out the standard stuff about evolution being responsible for gays. abortions etc, and so probably exposes these arguments to people that agree with her, but haven't really thought about evolution before.

Hopefully one day people will realise that a lot of the stuff people like Ann Coulter say about Democrat politicians is true AND a lot of the stuff people like Michael Moore say about Rebublican politicians is true. Then we can all be united in the understanding that politicians are practially all incompetent and corrupt by their very nature, and liberals and conservatives can join hands in peace.

Maybe...

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 19 2006,13:53   

Quote (GCT @ June 19 2006,12:35)
Um, GoP.  She doesn't look white.  Won't your KKK brothers look down on you for this?

I guess GoP will overlook racial deficiencies if the girl is wingnutty enough.

'Honorary White person', as it were.

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
normdoering



Posts: 287
Joined: July 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 19 2006,14:17   

Quote (The Ghost of Paley @ June 18 2006,15:17)
Actually, I'm quite offended by her comments....

"Frag Congressman Murtha? Why not? He's one of the enemy now. People who understand Coulter can see these things clearly," - a letter-writer to WorldNetDaily.
-- Hat tip,Andrew Sullivan
World Nut Daily

  
The Ghost of Paley



Posts: 1703
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 19 2006,14:35   

A.C.:
         
Quote
I guess GoP will overlook racial deficiencies if the girl is wingnutty enough.

'Honorary White person', as it were.


Actually, it's unfalsifiable junk like this that made me give up liberalism for good. I think you know deep down that conservatism is no more racist than liberalism (in fact, I suspect it's less racist, since it doesn't hold that certain races are, by definition, more morally despicable than others.) Conservatives in general don't care about someone's race unless they tie their biological identity to a dysfunctional culture. If lovely Michelle equated being Asian with being a thug, and her racial comrades took her seriously, I would be the first to complain. Loudly. But she doesn't, and the only Asians who identify with criminality are immature teens parroting rap music. Asians frustrate liberals because:

1) Their success absolutely falsifies liberalism. Asian and Jewish hyperprosperity flatly contradicts liberal tenets. So the fallback position becomes, "Well, these minorities may succeed, but it's only because they're house niggers. The Man gave them Honorary membership in his Exclusive Club. Yeah, that's the ticket."

2) Their achievement seems to correlate with their embrace of Judeo-Christian values. Look at them as a group: they strive to do well in school, they're into marriage, they tend not to engage in destructive lifestyles. How budgie! How.....whitebread.

3) Their success doesn't seem to bother conservatives. Why, conservatives even marry them for goodness sakes! And <gulp> have children with them!

Faced with cognitive dissonance, the libs turn mean. But that's OK, hoss, I understand. Your principles are falling one by one, and I'm a patient man with a sense of humour. Good luck.  ;)

--------------
Dey can't 'andle my riddim.

  
normdoering



Posts: 287
Joined: July 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 19 2006,14:55   

Quote (The Ghost of Paley @ June 19 2006,19:35)
I think you know deep down that conservatism is no more racist than liberalism ...

He's right, conservatism is no more racist than liberalism, it's conservatives who are more racist than liberals.

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 19 2006,14:58   

You're right, Paley. Republicans and Conservatives in genrally really are racially enlightened. I don't know how I could have overlooked this, when the American South provides us with such a splendid example. I guess the fact that most nonwhites in America vote Democrat must just show how lamentably confused they are about Conservatives. They just fail to realize that only Conservatives have their best interests at heart.

Quote
Their success absolutely falsifies liberalism. Asian and Jewish hyperprosperity flatly contradicts liberal tenets.


Paley, just last month you were amazed to find out that 'liberals' aren't all worshipping Foucault and Derrida. You obviously base your opinions of liberals on this rich fantasy world you've built around them. Why should we think you have any idea AT ALL what 'liberal tenets' are?

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
The Ghost of Paley



Posts: 1703
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 19 2006,14:59   

Quote
He's right, conservatism is no more racist than liberalism, it's conservatives who are more racist than liberals.

Says the liberal, pontificating in the middle of his lily-white neighborhood....

A.C.
Quote
Why should we think you have any idea AT ALL what 'liberal tenets' are?

Because I was one.....

[gotta go home to my non-lily white neighborhood. See ya tomorrow!]

--------------
Dey can't 'andle my riddim.

  
normdoering



Posts: 287
Joined: July 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 19 2006,15:03   

Quote (The Ghost of Paley @ June 19 2006,19:59)
 
Quote
He's right, conservatism is no more racist than liberalism, it's conservatives who are more racist than liberals.

Says the liberal, pontificating in the middle of his lily-white neighborhood....

Not just me. Scientific studies have shown that conservatives are stupid and ignorant biggots who have a lot of nightmares with a significant number of them being closet homosexuals in deep denial.

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 19 2006,15:11   

So Paley, why DO blacks overwhelmingly vote as Democrats, when it's so obvious to you that Liberals are horribly racist and Conservatives are the only nonracists in America? What's your explanation?

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 19 2006,15:54   

Quote (normdoering @ June 19 2006,19:17)
Quote (The Ghost of Paley @ June 18 2006,15:17)
Actually, I'm quite offended by her comments....

"Frag Congressman Murtha? Why not? He's one of the enemy now. People who understand Coulter can see these things clearly," - a letter-writer to WorldNetDaily.
-- Hat tip,Andrew Sullivan
World Nut Daily

I used to think this stuff was sick but didn't mean anything, but over the last 6 years, wingnuts have gotten so bold with this 'kill liberals' (or anyone who opposes Bush) rhetoric that it's hard not to wonder how more years it'll be before some LGF type actually does pull some kind of act of violence like that.

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
Ichthyic



Posts: 3325
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 19 2006,17:44   

Quote
(in fact, I suspect it's less racist, since it doesn't hold that certain races are, by definition, more morally despicable than others.)


except in the South, and some midwestern states...

You're overarching view of conservatism and liberalism is beyond simplistic.

and what's it got to do with the topic of discussion?

Is Ann Coulter racist too?

based on the current political hotbutton regarding the immigration issue, I'm going to go out on a limb and say she has something bad to say about Hispanic immigrants that at least borders on racism.

anybody know?

--------------
"And the sea will grant each man new hope..."

-CC

  
GCT



Posts: 1001
Joined: Aug. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 20 2006,01:05   

Quote (The Ghost of Paley @ June 19 2006,19:59)
Quote
He's right, conservatism is no more racist than liberalism, it's conservatives who are more racist than liberals.

Says the liberal, pontificating in the middle of his lily-white neighborhood....

A.C.
Quote
Why should we think you have any idea AT ALL what 'liberal tenets' are?

Because I was one.....

[gotta go home to my non-lily white neighborhood. See ya tomorrow!]

I think this is one of those, "I can't be a racist because I know a black person" kind of arguments.

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 20 2006,06:45   

Quote (GCT @ June 20 2006,06:05)
Quote (The Ghost of Paley @ June 19 2006,19:59)
 
Quote
He's right, conservatism is no more racist than liberalism, it's conservatives who are more racist than liberals.

Says the liberal, pontificating in the middle of his lily-white neighborhood....

A.C.
 
Quote
Why should we think you have any idea AT ALL what 'liberal tenets' are?

Because I was one.....

[gotta go home to my non-lily white neighborhood. See ya tomorrow!]

I think this is one of those, "I can't be a racist because I know a black person" kind of arguments.

It must have been when he was one himself that he knew all those liberals who worshipped Foucault.

Incidentally, how does GoP magically know what kind of neighborhood normdoering lives in?

And why do wingnuts always assume that liberals live in 'lily white' neighborhoods? I lived for about 10 years in a neighborhood that was around 60% black and 40% white. In my experience, conservatives are FAR MORE likely to live in 'lily white' neighborhoods.

Another part of this big collection of canned fantasies Paley has about 'liberals' I guess.

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
stevestory



Posts: 10127
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 20 2006,07:18   

I live in Durham, NC. This apartment complex is about 80% black. Unless Paley lives in Compton, his area's more lilly-white than mine.

   
Stephen Elliott



Posts: 1754
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 20 2006,07:41   

Why are people calling Ghost a racist? So far I have not seen any evidence for that label to be aplicable.

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 20 2006,08:11   

Quote (Stephen Elliott @ June 20 2006,12:41)
Why are people calling Ghost a racist? So far I have not seen any evidence for that label to be aplicable.

Past stuff he's said in old threads.

Also, he once cited some stats on black-on-white crime that came from some white supremacist site or other, which, uh, put a few people off. His defense was that as long as the study was 'valid', it doesn't matter who posted it or sponsored it.

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
The Ghost of Paley



Posts: 1703
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 20 2006,09:27   

A.C.:
   
Quote
   
Quote
(Stephen Elliott @ June 20 2006,12:41)
Why are people calling Ghost a racist? So far I have not seen any evidence for that label to be aplicable.


Past stuff he's said in old threads.

Such as.........?
   
Quote
Also, he once cited some stats on black-on-white crime that came from some white supremacist site or other, which, uh, put a few people off. His defense was that as long as the study was 'valid', it doesn't matter who posted it or sponsored it.

Ahhh...the Color of Crime study derived from Federal crime data. But did you remember a recent thread (the "liberal bias" thread, I think) in which I directly calculated the violent-crime ratio and came up with figures that matched Jared's? And how Russell and Faid didn't say a word, even though it involved nothing more than multiplication and division, so it was well within their mathematical domain? Slip your mind, did it? Besides, Arden, I'm confused. If we can directly check Jared Taylor's claims, then wouldn't it be better to do that instead of bitching about what a racist he is? In fact, wouldn't a blanket rejection of Jared's claims be, like, a logical fallacy? Number Nine, help me out here....
S.S.
Quote
I live in Durham, NC. This apartment complex is about 80% black. Unless Paley lives in Compton, his area's more lilly-white than mine.

But I notice that liberals who can afford to live in lily-white neighborhoods usually do. Why is this, Mr. Story?
Quote
I think this is one of those, "I can't be a racist because I know a black person" kind of arguments.

Which, among other things, renders the "racist" charge unfalsifiable.

--------------
Dey can't 'andle my riddim.

  
The Ghost of Paley



Posts: 1703
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 20 2006,09:55   

By the way Arden (or anyone else), if you want to play the race ("racist"?) card, why don't you bring it to "A Modest Proposal"? I'm trying to keep this thread on topic. If you don't back up your assertion in that thread, then I will assume that you can't, and will remind you of your failure when you make similar accusations. I enjoy confronting bullies, and I want to show the lurkers how to deal with Liberal McCarthyism.

--------------
Dey can't 'andle my riddim.

  
stevestory



Posts: 10127
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 20 2006,11:21   

Quote
But I notice that liberals who can afford to live in lily-white neighborhoods usually do. Why is this, Mr. Story?


Because black neighborhoods have more crime? Because liberals prefer being around other liberals, while blacks are more socially conservative? Because liberals tend to be richer than conservatives, so if you buy an expensive house it's more likely to already be situated in a richer, liberaler area? Could be any number of reasons. I'm plenty liberal, and make plenty of money, but I prefer to be at this very convenient, and very black, location w/r/t food, shopping, and work, so don't accuse me of being racist.

In any case, I'd have to see some thorough, and well-controlled, statistics to be convinced that liberals racially self-segregate more than conservatives. Simply because many of the conservatives I know are racist, and very few of the liberals I know are.

   
Stephen Elliott



Posts: 1754
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 20 2006,11:30   

Quote (Arden Chatfield @ June 20 2006,13:11)
Quote (Stephen Elliott @ June 20 2006,12:41)
Why are people calling Ghost a racist? So far I have not seen any evidence for that label to be aplicable.

Past stuff he's said in old threads.

Also, he once cited some stats on black-on-white crime that came from some white supremacist site or other, which, uh, put a few people off. His defense was that as long as the study was 'valid', it doesn't matter who posted it or sponsored it.

Are you certain about this? I do not want to sound like a GoP fan here as I disagree with so much he says. However you normally supply evidence when you make claims (example would be the excelent way you destroy afdave) just calling gop a racist and then hand waving is not the way you normally argue.

  
The Ghost of Paley



Posts: 1703
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 20 2006,11:59   

s.s.:
       
Quote
       
Quote
 
But I notice that liberals who can afford to live in lily-white neighborhoods usually do. Why is this, Mr. Story?



Because black neighborhoods have more crime?


OK. But if liberals are allowed to recognise this fact and act on it, then why are conservatives racist for doing the very same thing? And why am I racist for making this empirical point?
     
Quote
Because liberals prefer being around other liberals, while blacks are more socially conservative?

Notice, lurkers, that Steve concedes (contra Arden) that Blacks are ideologically closer to white Republicans on social issues. And does this mean that "culture" is not necessarily a code word for race? Because if it does, you've just undercut a major criticism of my political model: i.e that "Western" Culture = White people.
     
Quote
Because liberals tend to be richer than conservatives, so if you buy an expensive house it's more likely to already be situated in a richer, liberaler area? Could be any number of reasons.

Ahhhh.....so there are several explanations for an individual's behavior, so no one should assume racist intentions behind a person's actions without cause. And since behavior follows thought, can we extend that generalisation to political points of view as well? In other words, if somone prefers a monocultural nation, we can assume this preference is just as nonracially motivated as a choice of neighborhood?
 
Quote
I'm plenty liberal, and make plenty of money, but I prefer to be at this very convenient, and very black, location w/r/t food, shopping, and work, so don't accuse me of being racist.

I don't accuse you of being anything. I do accuse most liberals of hypocrisy. Most does not = all, as you know. I'm glad that you're an exception.
 
Quote
In any case, I'd have to see some thorough, and well-controlled, statistics to be convinced that liberals racially self-segregate more than conservatives. Simply because many of the conservatives I know are racist, and very few of the liberals I know are.

No. I accuse liberals of holding conservatives to a "moral" standard (by force of law, whenever possible) that they themselves have no intentions of meeting. By the way, my experiences are the exact opposite: I find liberals, on average, much more racist than conservatives.

S. Elliot:
Quote
Are you certain about this? I do not want to sound like a GoP fan here as I disagree with so much he says. However you normally supply evidence when you make claims (example would be the excelent way you destroy afdave) just calling gop a racist and then hand waving is not the way you normally argue.


Thanks. But you know what the funny thing is? Even if I really was the despicably racist, anti-semitic, pony-beating, child-eating swine that this board pictures me as, it wouldn't affect the truth of my claims. Why most liberals can't see this, I'll never know.

--------------
Dey can't 'andle my riddim.

  
stevestory



Posts: 10127
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 20 2006,12:41   

Quote


OK. But if liberals are allowed to recognise this fact and act on it, then why are conservatives racist for doing the very same thing?
I presume the people who are calling you racist are acting on much more than a simple claim that black neighborhoods have more crime. I haven't read all your rantings, or even most of them, but several people here have called you racist, and I'll take their word for it, because they also call you things like 'idiot geocentrist', and whaddya know, you are in fact an 'idiot geocentrist'.

(Well, you claim to be. You and I both know you're just screwing around.)

   
The Ghost of Paley



Posts: 1703
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 20 2006,14:29   

Quote
I presume the people who are calling you racist are acting on much more than a simple claim that black neighborhoods have more crime.

Not really. The charge of racism comes primarily from my citation of The Color of Crime, a study carried out by two white nationalists (racists, in other words). Whatever you may think of the study's authors (and I've whacked Jared Taylor on occasion meself), the study's claims remain mind-numbingly empirical, and can be readily falsified by checking the Dept. of Justice's database. In fact, I replicated at least one of their calculations in the "Liberal Bias" thread.
   In addition, my views on immigration have also churned a lot of  liberal stomachs. Are these views racist? I don't see how. My plan limits immigration to culturally compatible groups (East Indians, Jews, N.E. Asians), while barring access to groups who fit poorly with a Western lifestyle. I have never argued that biology determines cultural incompatibility, and given the evidence, I don't see how I could. Why, for example, are the Jews more Westernised, than, say, Arabs? Can't be race. Why East Indians and not Pakistanis? From a racial point of view, my plan is incoherent: but take a look at the culture and the pieces converge. The ironic thing is, I'm willing to make these decisions on a case-by-case basis, and rely strictly on the evidence. If the evidence shows that Jamaicans assimilate more readily than Russians (and they may very well, for all that I know), then I would choose the former to the latter. Objective, empirical criteria are not only welcome, but needed.
  Aye, but there's the rub -- liberals know that objective standards would lead to a de facto exclusion of certain groups, and rather than offer foreign aid to smooth cultural deficiencies (if the host nations so desire), they would rather ignore the descrepancies and waste a lot of money trying to acclimate the groups after they cross the borders, while strangling civil liberties in the process. Clearly, this is insane. Clearly, this is unnecessary. And that's why I proposed the PaleyPlan.

It's OK to think for yourself, guys......don't be intimidated! If you don't stand up for yourself now, the vice of Political Correctness will continue to tighten as reality opposes fiction. Look, as a white American man, I'm going to be loathed by much of the world regardless of my actions. So I might as well embrace reality and be hated, rather than appease and still be hated. At least I won't loathe the person staring back in the mirror.

--------------
Dey can't 'andle my riddim.

  
Ichthyic



Posts: 3325
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 20 2006,14:49   

child-eating swine?

Can't recall anybody here labeling you such.  is this something you might actually label yourself?

are you a pig that eats youngsters?

anyway, it's fast becoming obvious that your whole reason for starting this thread had nothing to do with Coulter, and everything to do with yet another attempt by yourself at spewing your idiotic political screeds.

Didn't you get enough love growing up?

Why the desperate need for attention?

--------------
"And the sea will grant each man new hope..."

-CC

  
GCT



Posts: 1001
Joined: Aug. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 21 2006,00:44   

Quote (The Ghost of Paley @ June 20 2006,19:29)
(and I've whacked Jared Taylor on occasion meself)

Fighting the urge not to make a gay joke right now...

  
Mr_Christopher



Posts: 1238
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 21 2006,07:12   

Yeah paley, you're a persecuted, white lunatic.  No story here...

--------------
Uncommon Descent is a moral cesspool, a festering intellectual ghetto that intoxicates and degrades its inhabitants - Stephen Matheson

  
The Ghost of Paley



Posts: 1703
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 21 2006,07:24   

OK, Ok, we're derailing the thread. Could we please get back to Ann Coulter's impact on the anti-evo movement? I think it's a fascinating subject, and I have to admit that the Wizard let me down. Does anyone care to speculate why Dembski/Berlinski chose this particular mouthpiece? Not only are these two men far above Coulter's level, their personalities don't even mesh with hers. I'd hate to think they bowed to commercial pressure, but Dembski in particular has been worrying me lately. I think this is a huge tactical blunder in the long run, regardless of whatever short-term publicity it might provide. Is this an overreaction to the Dover decision?

--------------
Dey can't 'andle my riddim.

  
Mr_Christopher



Posts: 1238
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 21 2006,07:27   

Anne coulter is the best thing that ever hapopend to IDC but she gives tranvestites a bad name.

Happy?

--------------
Uncommon Descent is a moral cesspool, a festering intellectual ghetto that intoxicates and degrades its inhabitants - Stephen Matheson

  
The Ghost of Paley



Posts: 1703
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 21 2006,07:35   

Quote
Anne coulter is the best thing that ever hapopend to IDC but she gives tranvestites a bad name.

Happy?

I know this was intended as a joke, but if you do think her presence helps the cause, could you explain why? Just curious.

--------------
Dey can't 'andle my riddim.

  
Mr_Christopher



Posts: 1238
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 21 2006,07:38   

People look at Anne Coulter and mistakenly think ALL transvestites are like her.  THAT is terrible for the transvestite cause.

--------------
Uncommon Descent is a moral cesspool, a festering intellectual ghetto that intoxicates and degrades its inhabitants - Stephen Matheson

  
improvius



Posts: 807
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 21 2006,10:40   

Quote (The Ghost of Paley @ June 21 2006,12:24)
Does anyone care to speculate why Dembski/Berlinski chose this particular mouthpiece?

That's pretty obvious.  They wanted to help their own book sales.  And since that's really the heart of the ID movement, I think it's a fantastic idea.

--------------
Quote (afdave @ Oct. 02 2006,18:37)
Many Jews were in comfortable oblivion about Hitler ... until it was too late.
Many scientists will persist in comfortable oblivion about their Creator ... until it is too late.

  
improvius



Posts: 807
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 21 2006,11:24   

Can you tell the difference between Ann Coulter and Adolf Hitler?

--------------
Quote (afdave @ Oct. 02 2006,18:37)
Many Jews were in comfortable oblivion about Hitler ... until it was too late.
Many scientists will persist in comfortable oblivion about their Creator ... until it is too late.

  
  48 replies since June 18 2006,09:33 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (2) < [1] 2 >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]