Page 12 of 16 < 1 2 ... 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 >
Topic Options
#279761 - 05/11/99 03:47 PM Re: Oh I see...
Kim Thompson Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 11/29/05
Posts: 0
My response to Nadine: Oh, please. Don't tell me this board is now an irony-free zone. In that case, I quit.

I also think you missed the sarcasm in my comment: "Still, sensitivity toward ethnic and sexual minorities is an exciting new development in the evolution of the American right (like the sympathy right-wing columnists now deploy for those poor, poor Black people oppressed by welfare and affirmative action), and I guess I shouldn't be mocking it."

For the record: Of COURSE this "sensitivity" is 100% self-serving, cynical, and fully deserving of mockery, just like the "Anita-Hill-is-a-lying-slut" Right-Wingers' opportunistic embrace of Paula Jones and sexual-harassment laws is a crock of shit. If she'd picked on one of the Bushes instead she'd have been demonized as the Whore of Babylon on the cover of every other issue of the SPECTATOR (or totally ignored). I mean, is there even any DOUBT about this?

If anyone seriously read that "sensitive flowers" comment as a condemnation of "sensitivity" in males and therefore by extension as an anti-gay slur...well, I still want to hear from someone who WAS offended, not from some selfless empath, a member in good standing of the Nice Police, who wants to explain to me why someone MIGHT have been offended.

I leave you with the OED's definition of "sensitive plant": "possessed of a high degree of irritability, causing the leaflets of the bipinnate leaves to fold together at the slightest touch." Which seems like a perfectly apt description of the Sams and Fanboy99s on the board, and clean, so far as I can see, of any negative sexual stereotyping. And "leaflets folding together" suggests, rather charmingly, closing a comic book.

Incidentally, down in the Gutters, someone pulled the anti-Kim-Thompson hatefest up to the fore, and on rereading it I discovered --quelle surprise!-- that three mainstays on this thread (which occurred LONG before ANY gun-control debate) were...Fanboy99, Bill Lange, and Sam Catalino! Hard to justify the idea that you're just engaging in reasonable, measured debate with someone when a week or two earlier, you joined in a thread whose sole purpose was an ad hominem shriekfest aimed at that same person, isn't it? (And by "shriekfest," which suggests higher-pitched voices, as in women's voices, I don't mean to imply that this sort of behavior is feminine, or to impugn the sexuality of the participants.)

Marc, it's the XVIIIth Amendment, not the XVIIth, and look it up yourself. You can do it in about seven seconds with any good search engine. I mean, how lazy is that? (And when I say "lazy," I don't mean that as a slur against all the people who suffer from legitimate conditions that make such an exertion...oh, forget it.)

Footnote: In this morning's NEW YORK TIMES, a reader wrote in and cleaned some gun control opponent's clock for him on the Switzerland example. The battle never ends...

Top
#279762 - 05/11/99 04:39 PM Re: Oh I see...
Bill Lange Offline
Member

Registered: 02/04/99
Posts: 238
Loc: Waynesboro,Pa.
Hi,

Nadine:
The Playboy thing was a bad joke.
Sorry.

Kim:
The whole name calling thing in the Gutters was just joking after you posted that thing about Marc and Fanboy.
It was kinda fun, because I took the middle ground. I think I made fun of every one evenly.
I stopped because it got too damn serious.
Poking fun is one thing. Calling someone a "homophobic" was too far (and yes, that's a quote from me. I admit when I'm stupid.).
For my part I'm still againest tighter gun laws, but you have made me think about a few things. I hope that in this mess of a thread that is not lost.
Yea, I got Sam into this. As I said, if someone wanted me to help the pro-gun control side I would have done the same this.
Sam just took this thing with Kim a level I didn't want to go by the end.
Marc & Fanboy99:
You have the floor.
I've got other things to worry about.
Have fun guys.

It's Been A Long Week,
Bill Lange


[This message has been edited by Bill Lange (edited 05-11-99).]

Top
#279763 - 05/11/99 05:24 PM Re: Oh I see...
Fanboy99 Offline
Member

Registered: 03/15/99
Posts: 344
Kim, remember, YOU started that thread in the Gutters. We just responded in kind. And my part was just for fun, no real malice intended. I still don't like the way look down on everyone who disagrees with you, but I did agree on some of the points you made.

When I stated my opinions, it was just that, ME stating MY opinions. I wasn't trying to drum up support or anything. And you keep saying about me wanting to execute minors. I said only if they kill someone. If they have the foresight to get a gun, plan the whole thing and execute it, then they should have the sensability to know that it's wrong, and they should be able to be sentenced to death, same as anyone else. I'm not talking about 8 year olds who accidentally shoot their friend while playing with their stupid parents gun. I'm talking about kids like in Colombine, and that other school where the kids sat outside and picked off their classmates like target practice. If they have the foresight to plan that kind of crap, then they should be given the same punishment as an adult. Especially since the prison system seems to MAKE better killers than rehabilitate them. And those "young, impressionable minds" will really be able to learn a lot in prison or die inside from the beatings and rape, or come out with even more tortured minds then when they went in.



------------------
"I'm rubber, you're glue..."

Top
#279764 - 05/11/99 07:15 PM Re: Oh I see...
Kim Thompson Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 11/29/05
Posts: 0
Ah. I see, Fanboy. You only want to execute minors if they commit capital crimes. Hah! Well, that's entirely different, and sure shoots my arguments down.

Incidentally, almost all of the minors on death row, or that have been executed, (a) have an IQ of less than 90, (b) were severely, traumatically abused as children, and (c) are non-White. (More data from the Hitchens article.)

Fairness compels me to report that my "Gutters" thread (a joke) was started in direct response to a "Gutters" thread that was 100% dedicated to people saying how much they hated me and wanted me to go away (started by ANL lover Marc Deering).

No hard feelings, Bill. Let me know if there's anything I said to you you thought was out of line. Although if someone brings a dog to a party and the dog shits on the carpet, the owner does end up with at least part of the blame. Don't forget the baggie next time you take Sam C. out for a romp.

Top
#279765 - 05/12/99 09:46 AM Re: Oh I see...
MarcDeering Offline
Member

Registered: 01/28/99
Posts: 719
Loc: Newport News, VA.
Thanks for the advice on the search engine, Kim, it was fairly easy and now I could kick myself for not recognizing the damn thing in the first place.
Prohibition. DUH!!

No, I'm not lazy I just have work to do and sometimes I forget the amount of info at my finger tips and the speed in which I can get it.
Not all of us have the luxury of sitting at a computer all day typing these witty responses.

FOR THE RECORD!!
Yes I started the whole rip on Kim in the gutters.
Why?
Because his treatment of the fans is deplorable. Anyone who disagrees with him, he considers and ignorant moron, who doesn't know a good comic from his a-hole. That's all.

The whole "sensitive flowers" thing is really stupid.

I'm outta here.

What was this thread about again?
_________________________
Marc Deering
Inking is Sexy

Top
#279766 - 05/12/99 11:47 AM Re: Oh I see...
Kim Thompson Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 11/29/05
Posts: 0
No, no, some of the people who disagree with me are very knowledgeable morons. I want to make that crystal clear.

(Tempted, for the first time in my life, to use a smiley-face icon.) (Temptation resisted.)

I don't think people who disagree with me are idiots. (Are necessarily idiots, I should say.) I think that's a hallucination on the part of those who aren't used to being argued with on any level more exalted than "sez-you." I'll admit that once in a while I come across an opinion that is so beyond the pale (KRAZY KAT is a bad strip; CATHY should have been on the Top-100 list; Switzerland is a poster boy for no gun control) I might become testy, but just because I think a particular opinion is idiotic I don't think the person who voiced it is an idiot. (Although after five consecutive dumb opinions there's room for doubt.)

Believe me, Gary Groth and I have had arguments that make this whole thing look like a genteel tea party. Check out some of the slugfests between me and Domingos on the Comics Journal board -- and I think he's a smart guy and a swell fella. It's just that if anyone disses FANTASTIC FOUR or RIO BRAVO to me, he's in for it.

Besides, admit it: my posts are more entertaining than anyone else's here. And some of you must appreciate the occasional missive from someone who can spell foreign words and knows how to use a semicolon, if only for the novelty value.

Top
#279767 - 05/12/99 03:17 PM Re: Oh I see...
Andrew Debly Offline
Member

Registered: 12/15/98
Posts: 244
Loc: Calgary, AB Canada
Kim said:

"Believe me, Gary Groth and I have had arguments that make this whole thing look like a genteel tea party."

You mean you and Gary G. Groth really are two different people? Hmmm....

"Besides, admit it: my posts are more entertaining than anyone else's here. And some of you must appreciate the occasional missive from someone who can spell foreign words and knows how to use a semicolon, if only for the novelty value."

Yes, your posts are right up there with Rick Veitch's and Stephen Bissette's for entertainment value, I'll admit. But unlike theirs, yours are pretty caustic, Kim. Readers should be warned that your posts may cause indigestion (and ulcers for those with sensitive stomachs). I take it you are saying that you are aggressive towards people in order to liven up a thread and not because that's just the way you are.

So you do it for shock value. I see. Boy, can you ever push people's buttons.

Kim Thompson: the Howard Stern of Comicon.com

You know, Stern actually ran for governor of New York (or was that mayor? whatever...) It would be cool to see an outsider like you debate with the professional politicians in a campaign race. What a news story that would make.

Gary can be your running mate (or sidekick - to use a comicbook term (I'm sure he would appreciate that)).

So you really aren't a nasty person after all. I should write Mark Oakley and let him know that you were just joshin' with him. I'm sure you will welcome him back into the fold with open arms.

Top
#279768 - 05/12/99 04:00 PM Re: Oh I see...
Kim Thompson Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 11/29/05
Posts: 0
If I have given anyone the impression that I'm as caustic or confrontational as I allegedly am (which I still say is not that much -- I mean, look at some of the goobers down in the the Gutters if you don't believe me) for shock or entertainment value, I'm sorry.

With the exception of the occasional deliberate needling, rhetorical flourish, or Modest-Proposal-style devil's advocacy, these are my opinions, straight and true. No act. If anything, I'm being restrained and gentle here.

Top
#279769 - 05/12/99 04:30 PM Re: Oh I see...
Fanboy99 Offline
Member

Registered: 03/15/99
Posts: 344
Oh I see...

When the great and powerful Oz speaks, he speaks his opinions "...straight and true. No act." but when others with opinions express them straight and true, no act, we get called "twits", "cretins", "gun-nuts", etc.. That's what you did to me. I made no mention of gun controls being good or bad, no mention of me either being a member of, or not, the NRA, no mention of whether I thought YOUR opinions were right or wrong, but I only expressed MY opinions, straight and true, and you jumped ALL over me and called me names. That is why I loathe you so much Kim. You have double standards regarding everyone here. If they express an opinion close to yours, then it's allright, but heaven forbid anyone disagree with, or express their opinions that don't jibe with yours, because then those people are dismissed as kooks, nitwits, and cretins. I never said anyone should embrace my thinking. I never said mine was the only way. I just expressed MY opinions, straight and true. No act. And you went out of your way to chastize me and say MY OPINIONS are ludicrous and I'm a twit and a cretin. We all have the right to our own opinions and you should not think that those opinions are wrong just because you disagree with them. That's what you do ALL the time.

(Well I guess your Cosmic Defender "buck futter" will pop up now since school's out to defend your honor. I'm surprised you haven't fully endorsed this nutbag since he thinks everything you say is gospel)

"A sharp tongue is no indication of a keen mind."

Top
#279770 - 05/12/99 06:20 PM Re: Oh I see...
Kim Thompson Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 11/29/05
Posts: 0
Apparently you didn't get the memo, Fanboy99. We're all friends here now.

I'm still confused as to why my thinking I'm right (which I do, I humbly confess) is different from your thinking you're right (which I assume you do, although maybe you don't and that's the problem), and I assume everyone who posts an opinion here thinks he or she is right, but I'm always pleased to see someone edge his way into more nuanced thinking (however baffling it may be to me).

Unless I'm very wildly mistaken, the first ad hominem sallies in our tempestuous relationship sprang forth from your mighty keyboard entirely unprovoked by me, and I think if someone were to go and tally them, the weight would be predominantly on your side. (I do concede I was the first to call you a "twit" on this particular thread, although I didn't realize all the insult odometers were reset to zero with every new thread.)

I console myself with the thought that my sagacious and wise posts have contributed to making you the better person you are today. No need to thank me. Say hi to Futter.

[This message has been edited by Kim Thompson (edited 05-12-99).]

Top
Page 12 of 16 < 1 2 ... 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 >