Posted: 10/27/2010 1:33:25 PM EDT
I checked for a prior posting and couldn't find one.  |
|
Now look at them yo-yo's that's the way you do it
You play the guitar on the MTV That ain't workin' that's the way you do it Money for nothin' and chicks for free Now that ain't workin' that's the way you do it Lemme tell ya them guys ain't dumb Maybe get a blister on your little finger Maybe get a blister on your thumb We gotta install microwave ovens Custom kitchen deliveries We gotta move these refrigerators We gotta move these colour TV's See the little faggot with the earring and the makeup Yeah buddy that's his own hair That little faggot got his own jet airplane That little faggot he's a millionaire We gotta install microwave ovesns Custom kitchens deliveries We gotta move these refrigerators We gotta move these colour TV's I shoulda learned to play the guitar I shoulda learned to play them drums Look at that mama, she got it stickin' in the camera Man we could have some fun And he's up there, what's that? Hawaiian noises? Bangin' on the bongoes like a chimpanzee That ain't workin' that's the way you do it Get your money for nothin' get your chicks for free We gotta install microwave ovens Custom kitchen deliveries We gotta move these refrigerators We gotta move these colour TV's, Lord Now that ain't workin' that's the way you do it You play the guitar on the MTV That ain't workin' that's the way you do it Money for nothin' and your chicks for free Money for nothin' and chicks for free |
|
conversational terrorisum
http://www.vandruff.com/art_converse.html http://www.vandruff.com/art_converse_mail2.html |
|
Argument from Intimidation
There is a certain type of argument which, in fact, is not an argument, but a means of forestalling debate and extorting an opponent’s agreement with one’s undiscussed notions. It is a method of bypassing logic by means of psychological pressure . . . [It] consists of threatening to impeach an opponent’s character by means of his argument, thus impeaching the argument without debate. Example: “Only the immoral can fail to see that Candidate X’s argument is false.” . . . The falsehood of his argument is asserted arbitrarily and offered as proof of his immorality. In today’s epistemological jungle, that second method is used more frequently than any other type of irrational argument. It should be classified as a logical fallacy and may be designated as “The Argument from Intimidation.” The essential characteristic of the Argument from Intimidation is its appeal to moral self-doubt and its reliance on the fear, guilt or ignorance of the victim. It is used in the form of an ultimatum demanding that the victim renounce a given idea without discussion, under threat of being considered morally unworthy. The pattern is always: “Only those who are evil (dishonest, heartless, insensitive, ignorant, etc.) can hold such an idea.” The Argument from Intimidation dominates today’s discussions in two forms. In public speeches and print, it flourishes in the form of long, involved, elaborate structures of unintelligible verbiage, which convey nothing clearly except a moral threat. (“Only the primitive-minded can fail to realize that clarity is oversimplification.”) But in private, day-by-day experience, it comes up wordlessly, between the lines, in the form of inarticulate sounds conveying unstated implications. It relies, not on what is said, but on how it is said—not on content, but on tone of voice. The tone is usually one of scornful or belligerent incredulity. “Surely you are not an advocate of capitalism, are you?” And if this does not intimidate the prospective victim—who answers, properly: “I am,”—the ensuing dialogue goes something like this: “Oh, you couldn’t be! Not really!” “Really.” “But everybody knows that capitalism is outdated!” “I don’t.” “Oh, come now!” “Since I don’t know it, will you please tell me the reasons for thinking that capitalism is outdated?” “Oh, don’t be ridiculous!” “Will you tell me the reasons?” “Well, really, if you don’t know, I couldn’t possibly tell you!” All this is accompanied by raised eyebrows, wide-eyed stares, shrugs, grunts, snickers and the entire arsenal of nonverbal signals communicating ominous innuendoes and emotional vibrations of a single kind: disapproval. If those vibrations fail, if such debaters are challenged, one finds that they have no arguments, no evidence, no proof, no reasons, no ground to stand on—that their noisy aggressiveness serves to hide a vacuum—that the Argument from Intimidation is a confession of intellectual impotence. http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/argument_from_intimidation.html |
|
1) Guy in video says pretty much exactly what I say in such situations
2) Guy in video even kind of looks like me 3) Guy in video could definitely not be me, though, because the video did not end at the two minute mark with one of those chairs cracked over that witch's head. _MaH |
|
Quoted:
1) Guy in video says pretty much exactly what I say in such situations 2) Guy in video even kind of looks like me 3) Guy in video could definitely not be me, though, because the video did not end at the two minute mark with one of those chairs cracked over that witch's head. _MaH followed by hot hate sex? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
1) Guy in video says pretty much exactly what I say in such situations 2) Guy in video even kind of looks like me 3) Guy in video could definitely not be me, though, because the video did not end at the two minute mark with one of those chairs cracked over that witch's head. _MaH followed by hot hate sex? If I recall correctly, instead of "hot hate sex" she preferred to use the phrase "aggravated rape". Yet another thing we disagreed about. 
_MaH Okay, that was a horrible joke to make, but the door was wide open so I had to walk through  
|
|
I have nothing against racism and bigotry. But it's annoying when people deny it. Honestly, how is being against a whole group of people not bigoted?
We have the right to hate and intolerance so just suck it up and admit it, you're acting within your right as an American. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
1) Guy in video says pretty much exactly what I say in such situations 2) Guy in video even kind of looks like me 3) Guy in video could definitely not be me, though, because the video did not end at the two minute mark with one of those chairs cracked over that witch's head. _MaH followed by hot hate sex? If I recall correctly, instead of "hot hate sex" she preferred to use the phrase "aggravated rape". Yet another thing we disagreed about.
_MaH Okay, that was a horrible joke to make, but the door was wide open so I had to walk through I loled |
|
There is a reason I call myself a Monarchist when arguing with liberals. I tell them they don't have a right to free speech because they are intellectual terrorists who seek to rape and destroy society... and kill black people. I can normally cause a complete melt down and have them writhing on the floor foaming at the mouth and murmering something about Bush. Then getting confused because I said I was a Monarchist. |
|
Quoted:
I have nothing against racism and bigotry. But it's annoying when people deny it. Honestly, how is being against a whole group of people not bigoted? We have that right so just suck it up and admit it. You're probably moments from being attacked. Wonder if anyone in here can apply the lessons to, say, this typical arfcom beat-down thread: Sharia Law in Oklahoma jumps the shark |
|
Quoted: There is a reason I call myself a Monarchist when arguing with liberals. I tell them they don't have a right to free speech because they are intellectual terrorists who seek to rape and destroy society... and kill black people. I can normally cause a complete melt down and have them writhing on the floor foaming at the mouth and murmering something about Bush. Then getting confused because I said I was a Monarchist.  That cracked me up |