The kind of smug, self-righteous ignorance and bigotry this woman displays is frighteningly common, I’m afraid. It’s the one thing that makes me worry about the outcome of the election.
Pharyngula
Evolution, development, and random biological ejaculations from a godless liberal
Sorry for the introduction of a typo into my quote of Moronales — my first cut and paste missed and I tacked on a second, but accidentally overlapped, one.
You really don’t know the first thing about blood sugar, insulin levels, and feedback loops, do you?
The far left and far right are both morally bankrupt. When all three branches of the Federal government are under the control of the Dems you will get to see their true stripes and it is not for the working class.
On the Christian Right, people of faith believe that God will provide.
On the Socialist Left, people of faith believe that Economics is not a science.
Somewhere in the middle hopefully we can struggle to maintain the qualities that has made America a beacon of freedom, increasing equality, and a moral authority on human rights in the world.
Do you lack access to a dictionary with more than one definition?
What he lacks is the intellectual habit of checking his oh so dubious assumptions. What he lacks is the humility of imagining he’s wrong — even when it was so obvious. Really, one must live a very intellectually isolated life to make such a claim about the meaning of a common word.
Hm. A cavil from someone who decries “the difference between cause and description” as applied to the term “cretin”. Heh.
If you don’t consider that using “cretin” as a pejorative is no different to using “fat” as such, how is that not hypocritical?
When all three branches of the Federal government are under the control of the Dems you will get to see their true stripes and it is not for the working class.
Evidence? Argument? Anything?
On the Socialist Left, people of faith believe that Economics is not a science
“People of faith”? Your belief that “Economics is a science” is a radical dogma — the capitalization is a big clue. And the socialist left is virtually invisible in this country — it certainly isn’t “the Dems”.
Morales, if you would at least admit that your claim that “cretin” is not a synonym for “idiot” was wrong, you might stand a chance of not looking like you have the intellectual scruples of John McCain, you stupid fucking asshole.
If you don’t consider that using “cretin” as a pejorative is no different to using “fat” as such, how is that not hypocritical?
Because, cretin, “fat” is being used a pejorative towards fat people. It puts people down for being fat. Whereas I’m putting you down for being obtuse.
One of my favorite comments by this horrible person was how she couldn’t imagine having a president with a name like “Barack Obama”. I’m paraphrasing and I won’t watch it again to make sure I get that quote exactly right. I guess she’s got some special god-given ability to know the worth of a person by what their parents named them.
One can only imagine what she would think of someone named Kareem Rashad Sultan Khan. “Muslim Terrorist!” I’m guessing.
Proof of character isn’t in a name though. It’s in actions. I wonder what the vomitous mass who headlines this video ever sacrificed for her country.
http://time-blog.com/swampland/2008/10/kareem_rashad_sultan_khan.html
tm, I admit is that cretin is used as a synonym for idiot in the vernacular, but I hold you to higher standards.
BTW, I do love words (but am not a philologist :), and my standard dictionary is the OED*.
I do tend to be overly literal (to the point of pedantry), and therefore recognise that “moron” refers to someone with the mental age of a child, and “idiot” technically refers to a layman/ignorant person.
Care to respond to the challenge that you’re being hypocritical in when using words normally perceived as insulting (yet with distinct meanings) whilst decrying those who do the same with other words?
*I am a nationalised Australian, so I follow the English tradition moreso than the American one.
#498- I do understand the difference between cause and description, but by defering to ad hominem tactics (with respect to Tracy) you only corrode the validity of your criticism.
You’ve also, ironically, performed the exact transgression of which you accused me. You extrapolated a meaning from my words which was certainly not intended.
tm:
OK, I admit it. It is a synonym for such in the same manner as “way” is a synonym for “very”, i.e. in the vernacular.
Happy now?
By the way, I wonder what 18th-century French Christians called Jews with a thyroid deficiency.
tueur du Christ avec une insuffisance thyroïde?
P.S. “ASAP”? At your convenience will do. :-)
tm@513: a sense of humor is a good thing. I chuckled.
tm, I admit is that cretin is used as a synonym for idiot in the vernacular, but I hold you to higher standards.
I use the word in the sense in which they are most often used. As for “the vernacular”, what the fuck language do you think we’re speaking here? Certainly I am speaking in the vernacular — these aren’t journal papers. If you hold me to a higher standard, then you’re being a cretin. More likely you’re just being an intellectually dishonest weasel who can’t admit that you said something stupid. Not only is “cretin” a synonym for “idiot”, but you knew that’s how I meant it.
Care to respond to the challenge that you’re being hypocritical in when using words normally perceived as insulting (yet with distinct meanings) whilst decrying those who do the same with other words?
I already did, idiot. Using “fat” as a pejorative is like using “black” or “Jew” as a pejorative — it’s used that way by bigots, who are attacking people for the mere fact that they are fat/black/Jew. But when I call you a cretin, I’m only attacking you for being obtuse and dishonest — I’m not attacking people with thyroid deficiencies, moron (unless you have one, in which case I’m sorry to hear it).
Happy now?
I told you what the consequence would be, and it didn’t have anything to do with my happiness. But you didn’t get there because you’re not sincere, with this “vernacular” and “higher standard” bullshit.
I’ve wasted way too much time on you, you silly ass, and I’m not happy about that.
Laura, I think you misunderstood my post. I wasn’t referring to you, I only used your comment as a jumping off point — thus my “as well as”.
OK, I admit it. It is a synonym for such in the same manner as “way” is a synonym for “very”, i.e. in the vernacular.
A more clever example would be “really” as a synonym for “very”, as in “I’m really proud of my country”.
As for “the vernacular”, that’s the language we all speak, almost all the time: “plain, everyday, ordinary language”, as given by a reference that you seem to rarely consult. To refer to it as if it were exceptional is downright illiterate.
Bye.
Absolutely, truth machine. Bye.
Morales,
Vos es bardus. Perge modo.
SC, thanks (I think).
Vulgate for “You’re an idiot. Suck it up.” I gather.
Inscitus sanamus autem bardus usquequaque est.
Sharing, from the Urban Dictionary:
Well, SC, it’s often some combination of both, so we may be able to get them part way.
SC, my native language is Spanish and my quotidian one is English; however I have no training whatsoever in Latin.
The first one I read as “You’re facile with words, but how”, half guessing.
The second one is [ahem] way beyond me, but if I make it right (and I’m in my cups) it’s to the effect that I know a lot of words, but am generally ignorant. That’s probably true.
Anyway, glad to amuse.
tm, that was a short bye; be cheered by the fact that my wife and I have deliberately chosen not to reproduce, hence “…In addition, they seemingly interbreed with other cretins, ensuring that their cretinous genes continue long after they end up dead…” is inapplicable to me.
One of my favorite comments by this horrible person was how she couldn’t imagine having a president with a name like “Barack Obama”. I’m paraphrasing and I won’t watch it again to make sure I get that quote exactly right. I guess she’s got some special god-given ability to know the worth of a person by what their parents named them.
She actually (if my memory is accurate — missing a plugin on this machine) said (dripping with disdain in an exaggerated way that you mostly see from a comedian in an SNL skit, but apparently is part of her everyday repertoire) “Obama”, not “Barack Obama” — so it’s not about what his parents named him, but about what his parents were named — even worse, if one can compare such levels of vileness.
I wonder what the vomitous mass who headlines this video ever sacrificed for her country.
It’s also vile to judge people based on their mass, and the talk of sacrifice gets close to McCain’s blather about Obama never serving in the military (that the U.S. wasn’t directly engaged with warfare at the time might have something to do with it) — those just aren’t relevant.
John,
Stick to the vernacular(s) :). tm’s translation of the first @ #521 is accurate. For the second, well, it only takes a moment to look it up. This was Google/Wikipedia/online-translator Latin – I haven’t had it since prep school. There may well be errors.
Anyway, I’m just teasing, but really I’m not sure what’s going on with you. You high or aomething?
The second one is [ahem] way beyond me
That’s because the first one, which I already translated for you, is true, and the second one explains that you will therefore always be so incompetent. And I speak nothing but English, and have forgotten most of my high school French.
SC, yup. Mild alcohol and nicotine intoxication, to be specific. No other psychotropic drugs.
OTOH, I preview my comments and correct typos without recourse to a spellchecker, so I can’t be too badly affected…
Anyway, I’m just teasing
I’m not.
but really I’m not sure what’s going on with you. You high or aomething?
In his cups, he says. Dunno what he finds of value there.
OTOH, I preview my comments and correct typos without recourse to a spellchecker, so I can’t be too badly affected…
Yeah, cuz correct spelling proves intellectual competence.
OTOH, I preview my comments and correct typos without recourse to a spellchecker, so I can’t be too badly affected…
So they’re pigs with unsmudged lipliner.
I’m not.
I know. This is the first thread on which I’ve seen him display such doltishness, though. And I’m sweeter than you.
“And I’m sweeter than you.”
:) Not a difficult task, that.
Anyway, the dolt is signing off now.
This is the first thread on which I’ve seen him display such doltishness, though.
Not me, but I have seen much better from him.
And I’m sweeter than you.
Meet me in Boston and you’ll see my other side. :-)
In his cups, he says. Dunno what he finds of value there.
*pauses*
*glances at rum & Coke on coffee table*
*chooses not to respond*
rum & Coke
I expected higher standards.
Anyway, the dolt is signing off now.
‘night, dolt. :)
Meet me in Boston and you’ll see my other side. :-)
I’ll still be sweeter. (Note tense.)
Yow, I thought I was responding to JM. Well, you can hold yours, so it doesn’t matter. :-) (Actually that doesn’t make much sense but I can’t think of a better way out of this jam. I guess I’ll go pour myself something.)
I’ll still be sweeter. (Note tense.)
Yum. :-)
Who the fuck ever suggested any such thing?
Good lord some people are dense.
Well, truth machine, you do seem to have a thing for misdirected rage and being a world class arsehole at the drop of a hat. I suggest you should save it for the Creationists, where at least your smug sense of superiority is deserved.
Earlier on the thread I was jumped on and insulted for making what was actually a trivial statement, based on the article posted. It seemed to me that people were ignoring the fact that the majority of people were obese because of over-eating/lack of exercise simply because of a minority who were not. Even if this impression were mistaken, I certainly didn’t deserve abuse for it.
As far as I’m concerned, you come across strongly a flaming troll who happens to be on the right side of the debate when it comes to Creationism. I assume that you must have posted something genuinely thoughtful at some point to earn your OM, but I’ve certainly never seen any of it myself.
Holy crap McCain’s going to win if all the crazy (religion nutters) are like her!
Chris #542,
well no, because crazy religion nutters like her (despite there being far too many) represent less than 50% of Americans.
Well, truth machine, you do seem to have a thing for misdirected rage and being a world class arsehole at the drop of a hat. I suggest you should save it for the Creationists, where at least your smug sense of superiority is deserved.
I have plenty go around. And you deserved what you got.
As far as I’m concerned
I care not.
but I’ve certainly never seen any of it myself.
You’re in denial.
Elitist.
DrFrank @541:
Well, truth machine, you do seem to have a thing for misdirected rage and being a world class arsehole at the drop of a hat.
No SHIT!!
Whenever you try to present an overview of the forest, you can count on Truth Machine to find one goddam plant or fern that doesn’t fit with your generalization, then hammer you with it until you relent.
He’s an OCD fact freak, but at least he’s up front, hence FACT MACHINE, machine being the operant descriptor.
I’ve been waiting around for him to fumble one of his nit-picks and slam his arrogant ass, but unfortunately, his facts are consistently in line.
Every thriving discussion group needs their school marm, and Truth Machine is Pharyngula’s
I salute him, grudgingly.
To Elizabeth #483
Hey, Liz, after reading that post I now have another thing to add to my list of the most useless of god’s (if I may) creations:
1. mosquitos
2. flies
3. chiropractors
4. And NOW christians-actually they’ve been on the list. I just have this habit of forgetting about them ;-).
It’s hard to believe people as vile and ignorant as her even exist, but what gets me the most is she’s one of a million, if not more. Anyone remember Marguerite Perrin?
Listening to this woman it is difficult to bear in mind that she is a victim, that her ignorance and superstition are being exploited by those who are far more astute and financially empowered. The sad and frightening fact is that there is no way to reason with someone holding those “values.” Ironically, she claims that Obama’s Christianity is not the Christianity of the Bible. Five will get you ten she hasn’t a spent a moment actually examining her faith nor has the slightest clue or interest in knowing about its founding and development. These people are to be abided and pitied, but as evidenced by the last eight years, they can’t be ceded control of the direction of America.
Hmmm… now I’m going to lay awake nights trying to come up with a cocktail recipe that somehow incorporates arugula!
More generally, I find it interesting that so much of this thread has been devoted to arguing over anti-fat prejudice. We all harbor prejudices; the best of us struggle against them. That so many otherwise thoughtful, humane commenters immediately fell into snarky references to this woman’s ugliness suggests, to me, not that they judged her ideas based on her physical appearance, but rather they were moved to note her physical appearance because of the a priori ugliness of her ideas.
That doesn’t excuse, of course, the equation of superficial physical appearance with moral worth, but it does suggest something other than garden-variety sexism or fat-hating is going on here.
The real scary portion is that this couple, this breeding couple to be more explicit, is setting an example of intolerance, ignorance and stupidity based upon a morality system that was handed down- aka child brainwashing theologies- to her most likely through previous generations, influencing like-minded individuals to react in like-minded ways.. hence the term “sheeple”. It is truly a sad discourse of a prevalent cultural problem here in the “west” and unfortunately most prevalent in our southern states were education takes a back seat to indoctrination.
I’ve been waiting around for him to fumble one of his nit-picks and slam his arrogant ass, but unfortunately, his facts are consistently in line.
I have the humility to check my beliefs against the available evidence. It’s those who think that their opinion is valid just because it’s theirs — like the woman in this video and far too many here — who are arrogant.
A series in People Who Should Not Be Allowed To Vote #1 I cannot imagine a more vile human being.
The scary thing is that there are millions more just like her! Yikes. Oh well, that’s something you have to live with if you are in a democracy I guess.
That doesn’t excuse, of course, the equation of superficial physical appearance with moral worth, but it does suggest something other than garden-variety sexism or fat-hating is going on here.
What I think is going on is that people feel safe expressing their bigotry against an enemy of the tribe. It’s their vile attitudes, normally unexpressed, that were a priori.
Does anyone else feel some sort of sympathy for this woman? I don’t know why, but the look in her eyes seems more fearful than hateful. She looks like she’s in some sort of pain.
Does anyone else feel some sort of sympathy for this woman?
Try reading a few posts back.
Agh. I was feeling sorrier and sorrier for the husband as the clip went on.
As I said to a friend earlier after seeing this, sure our forefathers of this country came from religious persecution, but in today’s day in age, I think they would be rolling in their graves if they knew how narrow-minded we have become in regards to electing the person who can manage this country and strengthen our resolve as Americans. Woman needs to be enlightened by something other than her God, clearly she has much to learn in regards to God and Country. Perhaps looking at the works the candidates and their future proposals …otherwise…I suppose she just needs to be like the majority of religious fanatics and close their cockholster and live life. Ramble Ramble Ramble..