On 27/08/11 16:53, d wrote:
On Sat, 27 Aug 2011 11:14:37 +0100
The Real wrote:
them, but don't waste time taking them seriously. And don't go away on

Yes, much easier to put your head in the sand than admit to how a lot of
people in this country really feel isn't it. You can only ignore or suppress
grievances of the majority population for so long.

Yadda yadda yadda yadda. You're falling into your old trap of assuming
that all members of groups you choose to identify think the same. The
basic problem, though, and I come to this conclusion after some
consideration, is not that you're homophobe (though you clearly are), a
racist (ditto) or a religious bigot (ditto) but that you are, frankly,
as thick as pig****.

Rarely has the Dunning-Kruger effect been more clearly demonstrated.

Ian

On 27/08/11 20:35, Paul Corfield wrote:
I might not like the Daily Mail "view" of life (or even views more
extreme than that) but I have to recognise a lot of people think that
way and you won't shift them from that position. It's why we regularly
elect Conservative governments in this country. Boltar is just one of
many who holds such views.

For me, it's less about politics and more about civility. For example,
anyone who writes:

: Oh boo hoo. Grow a pair you wuss.

as Boltar did upthread, should be ignored because he's a jerk, not
because he reads the Daily Mail.

T

On 27/08/11 20:35, Paul Corfield wrote:
I might not like the Daily Mail "view" of life (or even views more
extreme than that) but I have to recognise a lot of people think that
way and you won't shift them from that position.

“Just think of how stupid the average person is, and then realize half
of them are even stupider.” - George Carlin

Ian

On 28/08/11 04:35, Tom Nicholls wrote:

For me, it's less about politics and more about civility.

I don't think these nutcases even have much political importance. Sure,
they make a lot of noise on the comments pages of the Telegraph, Mail,
BBC (Speak You're Branes) and so on, but if they vote at all it will
almost certainly be for the lunatic fringe: UKIP, BNP etc.

My own infallible test for wackjobs is the use of "so-called": as soon
as you see references to "so-called experts" or the "so-call Human
Rights Act" you know that the author has significant problems with reality.

Ian

On Aug 28, 8:39*am, The Real Doctor wrote:

On 28/08/11 04:35, Tom Nicholls wrote:

For me, it's less about politics and more about civility.

I don't think these nutcases even have much political importance. Sure,
they make a lot of noise on the comments pages of the Telegraph, Mail,
BBC (Speak You're Branes) and so on, but if they vote at all it will
almost certainly be for the lunatic fringe: UKIP, BNP etc.

My own infallible test for wackjobs is the use of "so-called": as soon
as you see references to "so-called experts" or the "so-call Human
Rights Act" you know that the author has significant problems with reality.

ITYM "so-called reality"...

On Sat, 27 Aug 2011 20:17:46 +0100, The Real Doctor
wrote:

On 27/08/11 16:53, d wrote:
On Sat, 27 Aug 2011 11:14:37 +0100
The Real wrote:
them, but don't waste time taking them seriously. And don't go away on

Yes, much easier to put your head in the sand than admit to how a lot of
people in this country really feel isn't it. You can only ignore or suppress
grievances of the majority population for so long.

Yadda yadda yadda yadda. You're falling into your old trap of assuming
that all members of groups you choose to identify think the same. The
basic problem, though, and I come to this conclusion after some
consideration, is not that you're homophobe (though you clearly are), a
racist (ditto) or a religious bigot (ditto) but that you are, frankly,
as thick as pig****.


OT: but to "The Real Doctor": thank you.

Rarely has the Dunning-Kruger effect been more clearly demonstrated.

Ian

On Sat, 27 Aug 2011 20:17:46 +0100
The Real Doctor wrote:
On 27/08/11 16:53, d wrote:
On Sat, 27 Aug 2011 11:14:37 +0100
The Real wrote:
them, but don't waste time taking them seriously. And don't go away on

Yes, much easier to put your head in the sand than admit to how a lot of
people in this country really feel isn't it. You can only ignore or suppress
grievances of the majority population for so long.

Yadda yadda yadda yadda. You're falling into your old trap of assuming
that all members of groups you choose to identify think the same. The
basic problem, though, and I come to this conclusion after some
consideration, is not that you're homophobe (though you clearly are), a
racist (ditto) or a religious bigot (ditto) but that you are, frankly,
as thick as pig****.

You don't agree with me, can't find a way to win your argument, ergo I'm
"as thick as pig****". Yeah, great debating technique you've got there. Really
ads gravitas to your arguments.

Rarely has the Dunning-Kruger effect been more clearly demonstrated.

Oh look, you can use wikipedia. Have a scooby snack.

B2003

On Sat, 27 Aug 2011 20:35:50 +0100
Paul Corfield wrote:
way and you won't shift them from that position. It's why we regularly
elect Conservative governments in this country. Boltar is just one of
many who holds such views.

And thats what scares Ian so he pretends we don't exist. As I said, head
in the sand. But the real world doesn't give a damn what little lefties like
Ian think. A fact he'll probably discover the hard way one day.

B2003

On Aug 27, 8:35*pm, Paul Corfield wrote:
...

I might not like the Daily Mail "view" of life (or even views more
extreme than that) but I have to recognise a lot of people think that
way and you won't shift them from that position. It's why we regularly
elect Conservative governments in this country. Boltar is just one of
many who holds such views.
--
Paul C

We don't regularly elect Conservative governments any more, they've
not won a majority in nearly 20 years and the current House, at a
particularly low ebb for Labour, has clear majorities in favour of,
for example, keeping the present human rights legislation and abortion
limits. There's a graph around the net of the Tory share of the vote
since the war and it's clearly declining, which possible explains why
they're so keen on eroding democracy.

It's also possible to over-estimate the prevalance of this brand of
mouthbreathing Mail-reader idiocy based on how often one comes across
it on the Internet, where I suspect it's found in the older, more time-
rich user (who's also more likely to have had a secure job and a
decent retirement income, I'd point out, in contrast to today's
generation who they so often decry as not having it tough enough).
Furthermore, concentrating on this masks a newer and more worrying
political trend of libertarian-derived selfishness amongst younger
people which is more of a worry, to be honest, and stems from failing
to realise that things like local democracy, planning laws, the NHS,
the welfare state and state education (and rail subsidies, to move
back on topic) are not permanent features of British life but
political constructs. I blame the teachers.

(Also, I'm not entirely sure anyone who, apparently straight faced,
suggests the UK will be like Bosnia in the future has any tangible
connection between brain and keyboard whatsoever - what's going to
happen, ethnically cleansing the Welsh?).

Tom

On 29/08/11 09:23, d wrote:
On Sat, 27 Aug 2011 20:17:46 +0100
The Real wrote:

You don't agree with me, can't find a way to win your argument, ergo I'm
"as thick as pig****". Yeah, great debating technique you've got there. Really
ads gravitas to your arguments.

As I wrote, I came to the "thick as pig****" conclusion after some
consideration. It's clearly impossible to win any argument with you:
neither would I wish to try. I have more important things to do with my
life than convincing a deluded idiot that he's a deluded idiot, and what
in any case would convincing the deluded idiot that he's a deluded idiot
achieve?

Ian