tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592514.post5698898415898634927..comments2023-10-24T03:46:41.971-07:00Comments on Contingencies: Jhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11567400697675996283noreply@blogger.comBlogger19125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592514.post-75628468542247563002007-10-20T10:23:00.000-07:002007-10-20T10:23:00.000-07:00""""The guy isn't even a scientist. He's a columni...<I>""""The guy isn't even a scientist. He's a columnist for Fox News."""</I><BR/><BR/>The Typical NW irrelevant character attack, if not some strange eco-baptist-buddhist moralism (like that of Al Jr. hisself). Read the Wiki entry. <BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Milloy" REL="nofollow">Milloy</A><BR/><BR/><I>“”"”"Milloy holds a B.A. in Natural Sciences from Johns Hopkins Jhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11567400697675996283noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592514.post-65825978097888869632007-10-19T16:42:00.000-07:002007-10-19T16:42:00.000-07:00Rather limited sample, but somewhat accurate. Joe ...Rather limited sample, but somewhat accurate. Joe Duck's not that gonzo though: he seems fairly scholarly at times. AS is Contingencies. And DailyKOS is mostly pseudo-gonzo. Way too moderated and the soccer-mommy quotient rather high for real gonzo. <BR/><BR/>Now, here's <BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://zaiusnation.blogspot.com/" REL="nofollow">Gonzo.</A><BR/><BR/>(Actually a bit too PC for Gonzo).<BRJhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11567400697675996283noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592514.post-42461614972626027722007-10-19T15:01:00.000-07:002007-10-19T15:01:00.000-07:00Let me try this.Gonzo expressionism:The Daily Kos,...Let me try this.<BR/><BR/>Gonzo expressionism:<BR/>The Daily Kos, Contingencies, New Worlds, Joe Duck<BR/><BR/>Academic Writing:<BR/>Journal of Astrophysics, Biochemical Review, anything by Chomsky<BR/><BR/>Close?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592514.post-35130622111872003892007-10-19T13:39:00.000-07:002007-10-19T13:39:00.000-07:00Another non sequitur. I provided the link to Joe D...Another non sequitur. I provided the link to Joe Duck and other skeptics, such as the Counterpunch writers (where Nader sometimes appears): I think it's funny you chose to respond to Duck instead of say to Cockburn's detailed arguments, or Cockburn's sources, such as Rancourt, Hug, Glassman, Noble, etc. (Joe's an intelligent and nice guy, but rather tame).<BR/><BR/> It was Contingencies who Jhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11567400697675996283noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592514.post-74388770520811778492007-10-19T12:23:00.000-07:002007-10-19T12:23:00.000-07:00Not merely harsh, wrong. You say you have an inter...Not merely harsh, wrong. <BR/><BR/>You say you have an interest in objectivity and progressive politics? Why not post some essays against those nefarious "neo-cons" that routinely appear on your site. Not some little waffler-journalist like Hitchens (who denies being a neo-con, or GOPer), but say a real neo-con, like Podhoretz:<BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://www.opinionjournal.com/federation/feature/?Jhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11567400697675996283noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592514.post-38789681534445150832007-10-19T12:17:00.000-07:002007-10-19T12:17:00.000-07:00"You 'spun' Gore and GW, I believe."I congratulate..."You 'spun' Gore and GW, I believe."<BR/><BR/>I congratulated him on his honor in receiving the award. Joe Duck provided some thoughtful context, as did Zubrin. This does not change my opinion that the prize was well-deserved. No need for spin, and certainly not for vitriol.<BR/><BR/>BTW- emotionally-driven speech is still a right in this country. I continue to insist that it has validity and Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592514.post-79877199693041487152007-10-19T11:47:00.000-07:002007-10-19T11:47:00.000-07:00"Our conversation is about to end" Oops. Pre-caffi...<I>"Our conversation is about to end" </I><BR/><BR/><BR/>Oops. Pre-caffiene. <BR/><BR/><BR/><I>""""I'm just curious if you're aware how many times you've said this.<BR/><BR/>Face it. You're addicted. FWIW, apparently so am I."""</I> <BR/><BR/>Maybe, but it's more like I am sort of interested in how bloggers are spinning politics and other issues (like global warming). You "spun" Gore and GW, I Jhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11567400697675996283noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592514.post-61020147850337965722007-10-19T11:41:00.000-07:002007-10-19T11:41:00.000-07:00"note you allowed more ad hominems and personal at..."note you allowed more ad hominems and personal attacks against me on your site"<BR/><BR/>I did feel 'motya's words were a little harsh. That's why I defended you.<BR/><BR/>Keep in mind, there's only one person on NW I filter. You have that singular honor, and you know exactly why.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592514.post-65533073948208996652007-10-19T11:33:00.000-07:002007-10-19T11:33:00.000-07:00You missed the point on the poli-BS-meme. Regardle...You missed the point on the poli-BS-meme. Regardless of what Hart says, his own thoughts might be slightly different. But I don't think the Hartian vision and Gorean sort of pseudo-progressivism are compatible. <BR/><BR/>I note you allowed more ad hominems and personal attacks against me on your site, and allowed some cheesy two-bit psych. profiling from your ESL student buddymotya. I am probablyJhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11567400697675996283noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592514.post-39032371442948729232007-10-19T11:01:00.000-07:002007-10-19T11:01:00.000-07:00Careful how fast you're backtracking there- might ...Careful how fast you're backtracking there- might run into something. It was you that said "I wager Gary Hart thinks Gore quite a oaf..." right?<BR/><BR/>Hold fast, he might agree with you completely, ya never know.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592514.post-52422812525722324882007-10-19T10:54:00.000-07:002007-10-19T10:54:00.000-07:00I'm not a Hart "fan" but I respect his writing, an...I'm not a Hart "fan" but I respect his writing, and even his "vision." But I doubt he's really qualified to offer some insights into the GW/IPCC controversy. However he might have some insights into Gorean politics, though anything he says should be filtered through a "poli-BS-meme." He may not say what he really thinks, but what plays well with the audience (see Mencken quote above). <BR/><BR/>IJhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11567400697675996283noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592514.post-14376533298247398312007-10-19T09:56:00.000-07:002007-10-19T09:56:00.000-07:00"I wager Gary Hart thinks Gore quite a oaf as well..."I wager Gary Hart thinks Gore quite a oaf as well."<BR/><BR/>You know I'm a huge Hart fan, right? I met him years ago and <A HREF="http://new-worlds.org/blog/?p=46" REL="nofollow">blogged about</A> my shameful experience that day.<BR/><BR/>I don't know if he'll remember me, but I just emailed him to find out what he thinks about Gore. If he responds, you can be sure I'll share his thoughts on Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592514.post-28768123723872793262007-10-19T08:40:00.000-07:002007-10-19T08:40:00.000-07:00He'll fool millions of idiots into voting for him,...<I>He'll fool millions of idiots into voting for him, too. Hopefully, this time a majority of people will be sane enough to do otherwise.</I><BR/><BR/>Now, there's a real issue, which we raised months ago, and you sort of ignored, though BerthaRon spouted the usual preacher-speak and said anyone who questions the popular vote is a........nazi---overlooking the fact that thinkers from Plato to Jhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11567400697675996283noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592514.post-36435398482825492432007-10-19T08:05:00.000-07:002007-10-19T08:05:00.000-07:00Who said Gore was even qualified to be a politicia...Who said Gore was even qualified to be a politician? He's not that great of an orator, he's certainly not a scientist (he nearly flunked out of Harvard), and his record should irritate progressives (which you might have noted had you read Cockburn's essays for content, instead of reacting when some writer doesn't follow your PC niceness rules, even though Alex is a real progressive) Read for Jhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11567400697675996283noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592514.post-68564360096703427082007-10-18T22:41:00.000-07:002007-10-18T22:41:00.000-07:00Well, it's run by an emoto-crat. Emotion is part o...Well, it's run by an emoto-crat. Emotion is part of what makes us human and nothing to be ashamed of. Without it- we'd be living a hellish, Stepfordlike existence. Screw that.<BR/><BR/>Balance is the key. Not detachment from emotion, but integration of emotion, of soul if you will, into human discourse in a civilized way. You can call it demagoguery perhaps, but great movements are driven by Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592514.post-90482037614277837982007-10-18T22:17:00.000-07:002007-10-18T22:17:00.000-07:00That's the whole thing. You seem to respond to bl...That's the whole thing. You seem to respond to blogs and writers emotionally, and not too critically. Insisting that "Gore is a great green Hero" and not paying attention to facts does not help real progressivism. Global warming does NOT need people preaching for it. Precisely the opposite. Verifying global warming claims (or possibly modifying or falsifying those claims) requires cool heads, Jhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11567400697675996283noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592514.post-29964035146201125722007-10-18T21:30:00.000-07:002007-10-18T21:30:00.000-07:00Interesting. I suppose one person's "nauseating, s...Interesting. I suppose one person's "nauseating, self-aggrandizing egotistical crap" is another person's bold, poetic, statement of beliefs. I find I enjoy Byron's perspective but to you it's repellent. Obviously, neither of us is likely to sway the other on this. Seems like basic human courtesy, though, not to run around mouthing off to nearly total strangers trying to get them to agree to your Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592514.post-85961505404722716192007-10-18T19:32:00.000-07:002007-10-18T19:32:00.000-07:00That you just brush away EgoRon's endless stupid d...That you just brush away EgoRon's endless stupid drama also irritates. The GW debate is fairly weighty, and somewhat interesting. There's quite a bit at stake. And Crichton, for one, already dealt with many of Gore's claims, and more or less called into question the entire GW business. <BR/> It's made weightier IF Gore can be proven to be wrong, or at least shown to greatly exaggerating the Jhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11567400697675996283noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592514.post-47929098264543049222007-10-18T19:07:00.000-07:002007-10-18T19:07:00.000-07:00Once more, with feeling... peace, man.Yeah well th...<I>Once more, with feeling... peace, man.</I><BR/><BR/>Yeah well that starts when you ban your crass, retarded, untalented hysteria-driven PalRon, whose snipes, insults, and defamations and general irrationality (as with the Gore thread on your site) are 10x what we have done. <BR/><BR/>Subtracting the spam from your B-friend, Cont. gets about as much traffic as ye do, McClueless.Jhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11567400697675996283noreply@blogger.com