In Weird News, Canadian “I don’t date teh women” Cynic lectures (and lectures and lectures) Matthew and myself for writing mean-spirited, thoughtless posts, like this one. Instead, he’d like for us to write more thoughtful and substantive posts, like this one!
Are we done here? Oh good.
mahmood wrote:
I read that crappola and fell out of the chair, laughing and crying simultaneously.
Well I’ll be snookered…”Canadian Cyntie, the lecturer”…to get a real sense of cyntie, read her “Wanda Watkins” tribute…wonderful stuff, her mother must be sooo proud.
Posted on 20-Feb-08 at 6:53 am | Permalink
Aaron Unruh wrote:
“I read that crappola and fell out of the chair, laughing and crying simultaneously.”
I wish I could have responded that way. Do you realize that we’re likely dealing with the least self-aware people alive today?
Posted on 20-Feb-08 at 6:58 am | Permalink
Red Tory wrote:
Do you realize that we’re likely dealing with the least self-aware people alive today?
LOL. Now there’s some pretty rich irony.
Posted on 20-Feb-08 at 7:43 am | Permalink
Smarter than Ezra wrote:
I find this post rather ironic, given that there has been very little substance at thepolitic, as of late. Even more so, since I know that Greg has been trying to clean this place up and to inject some new blood into the writing pool. Indeed, the last real post on anything remotely close to the stated mandate of thepolitic was on Feb 5th from CA - the rest have just sorta been bitch sessions disguised as commentary or about some religious teaching or other that the rest of the world is woefully ignorant of. So again, I find it ironic that Aaron comments on his own post by saying that “we’re likely dealing with the least self-aware people alive today” when he constantly and publicly demonstrates his ignorance of Greg’s vision for the site. Is he above thepolitic? Has Aaron somehow reached a state of consciousness that surpasses the average joe in the inter-sphere? Or is his sef-awareness just plain narcisism? Indeed, this post is a perfect example of what I am talking about. What we have here is a blogger, who blogs about another blogger blogging about a blogger - but to what end? While this continues, the world seems to pass thepolitic by: Afganistan and military spending on used German tanks for spareparts that don’t really fit the tanks currently in use, candidate nominations in the US, upcoming federal Budget speculations, provincial budgets being passed, introduction of a carbon tax in BC, the impact of the high dollar on Canadian exports - and China now surpassing Canada as the leading exporter to the US, etc, etc, etc, etc.
I truly hope that Greg can pull this site back to what he invisioned a few years ago - a group weblog devoted to insight and original commentary on Canadian and American politics. Where are the days when quality bloggers such a Jon Koch wrote for thepolitic?
So use your super-capacity and ultimately awareness, Aaron, to answer this: how does the above posting fit with what Greg invisioned? No wonder Greg cannot recruit any new bloggers to thepolitic; who would want to be thrown in with a lot like this bunch? Maybe you should have stuck with your decision to leave thepolitic, and give Greg a chance to rebuild what so many of you have worked so hard to tear down.
Posted on 20-Feb-08 at 8:14 am | Permalink
Scott from Winnipeg wrote:
About The Politic:
“Our intention is to provide an intellectually honest viewpoint on the topics of which we write, in order to nurture public discourse and the free flow of information which all of our contributors cherish as the foundation-stones of a free society. It is our sincere hope that readers of this weblog will leave with new ideas, new viewpoints and new avenues of thought.”
About CC:
“Left-leaning, progressive snark” and “sarcasm - it’s just another service I offer”
The least self-aware people alive today? Based on the above, I’d say one site is on brand, and the other isn’t.
I’ve asked before, but after a comment like that, it really begs to be asked again “This site is parody, right?”
Posted on 20-Feb-08 at 8:27 am | Permalink
dalton wrote:
It would be interesting to hear Matthew expand on the “intellectual honesty” of his PZ smear, or the way in which his contemptuous dismissal of respectful disagreement as “trolling” constitutes “nurturing public discourse”.
There are two different kinds of bloggers posting at ThePolitic. Unfortunately, contributions from the folks who actually seemed committed to those ideals listed above have dropped off catastrophically, in terms of both posts and participation in the threads.
I don’t blame them - no-one wants to wallow in a cat litter box, except small dead animals. But the farther they let this slide, the harder it’s going to be to re-establish any credibility. And that’s a shame, because there have been some great posts and good writers here.
Posted on 20-Feb-08 at 8:33 am | Permalink
CC wrote:
Let’s go, Aaron — time to put up or shut up:
http://canadiancynic.blogspot......lllly.html
I’m waiting …
P.S. You know, this site could really use a Preview button for comments.
Posted on 20-Feb-08 at 8:58 am | Permalink
Cräbgräšš wrote:
Mahmood, what is “Cyntie” supposed to mean? I honestly don’t get it.
Am I missing something?
Posted on 20-Feb-08 at 9:04 am | Permalink
James Goneaux wrote:
Well, I came to blogging quite late, mostly because I spent far too much time over on UseNet back in “the day”:
http://preview.tinyurl.com/yvj63v
Over in that neck of cyberspace, much the same cognitive dissonance is displayed in every thread. I mean, when someone calls himself a metaphorical streetfighter, or “ass kicker”, then complains when he gets HIS ass kicked, its hilarious.
In other words, “typical dork: bringing a knife to a gunfight”.
In other, other words: they can dish it out, but they can’t take it…
Posted on 20-Feb-08 at 9:38 am | Permalink
dick wrote:
“In Weird News, Canadian “I don’t date teh women” Cynic lectures (and lectures and lectures) Matthew and myself for writing mean-spirited, thoughtless posts, like this one.”
I followed the link to the Cynic post and found a criticism of your dishonesty. Did Cynic change the post after you linked to it, or is this another example of the dishonesty of which he speaks?
Posted on 20-Feb-08 at 9:41 am | Permalink
CC wrote:
Dick:
As is my custom, that post of mine is still word-for-word the way it went up there this morning.
So, yes, Aaron’s lying again. If you’re new here, you might want to get used to that.
Posted on 20-Feb-08 at 10:50 am | Permalink
Harebell wrote:
Yup I noticed two things
1: your complaint about CC is spurious in the least. CC seems to have been honest about their intent.
2: thepolitic’s idea of new and interesting political issues seems to be mimicking the direction talk radio did in the states 8 years ago.
Way to stay current, Hannity and Rush and the like have been shown to be liars, arse kissers and water carriers for other liars.
It’s not a new direction it’s a discredited one.
Posted on 20-Feb-08 at 11:20 am | Permalink
ThePolitic.com » The Politic Ignores Politics? wrote:
[…] One of our most loyal commenters comments: While this continues, the world seems to pass thepolitic by: Afganistan and military spending on used German tanks for spareparts that don’t really fit the tanks currently in use, candidate nominations in the US, upcoming federal Budget speculations, provincial budgets being passed, introduction of a carbon tax in BC, the impact of the high dollar on Canadian exports - and China now surpassing Canada as the leading exporter to the US, etc, etc, etc, etc. […]
Posted on 20-Feb-08 at 11:38 am | Permalink
Kelseigh wrote:
You know, I grew up on a farm, and I learned two important things about swearing. The first was not to be afraid of it. It’s not going to hurt you, and if it does, you’re about as strong as a piece of wet kleenex. The second is when to use it appropriately, which for the most part CC does, and in an appropriate place, with appropriate targets.
However, swearing has a disadvantage. And that disadvantage is that it creates an “out” for pathologically dishonest cretins like…well, like you!…to wriggle out of actually having to address points or stand up for what you’ve written with anything but the casual disregard for truth and discourse that fools like Matthew have shown so often. A pity, because swearing is so useful otherwise, when used properly.
Posted on 20-Feb-08 at 6:09 pm | Permalink
mahmood wrote:
…and ThePolitic has problems?…sheeeesh.
Posted on 20-Feb-08 at 6:22 pm | Permalink
Shane Edwards wrote:
My opinion: swearing in public discourse is much the same as a computer swinging a whifflebat. It takes an otherwise intelligent and thoughtful person and makes him look like an uneducated clown.
If you want to engage in public dicsussion, learn to express yourself without coarse language. There are 99 995 other words in the English language: use them.
Posted on 21-Feb-08 at 11:41 am | Permalink
George Freeman wrote:
Kelseigh is on to something interesting with respect to swearing, granted, more as a tool of mockery, one necessary for shocking people out of the stupor of their own stupidity. For myself, I have made use of ad hominem argument on a few occasions, finding the practise thereof rather delightful. That said, I agree with with the thrust of Mr. Edwards’ point as well.
Not unlike Don Cherry, Aaron Unruh is a truth teller, the arch enemy of cynicism. And truth tellers derive their strength from their sceptical appreciation for the antics of others in the real and common world. Cynics, on the other hand, express a depressed and depraved humanity, one that is both earnest, unloving and self-flagellating; they possess rationale but have no reason for being. Reason requires an admission of love for the world and one’s place in it, the appreciation of which a truth teller seeks out.
Posted on 26-Feb-08 at 10:25 am | Permalink