EAA Going After AOPA's Market

docmirror said:
Well, I have no interest in your politics, but I am concerned that everyone at AOPA is about six degrees to the left of Stalin. That's what were talking about here.

world < you > world. Revolve as needed.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, I have no idea what you are saying. Could you please restate it? In your penultimate post you imply that AOPA is right-wing ("According to the leftists, AOPA = NRA") but in your last post you say that "everyone at AOPA is about six degrees to the left of Stalin". So putting aside the fact that Stalin was hugely anti-liberal, what exactly are you talking about?
 
Tommy3 said:
Say false things and I'm going to point out that they're false. If you going to hold yourself to loose rhetorical standards that is your own affair.
Click to expand...

So you're interested in the real estate the? Great ocean view, just outside located in the Phoenix suburbs.

We can discuss a price, but please try the 38s the 36s seem to be a little tight.
 
bartmc said:
So you're interested in the real estate the? Great ocean view, just outside located in the Phoenix suburbs.

We can discuss a price, but please try the 38s the 36s seem to be a little tight.
Click to expand...

I don't know what you are talking about. What are 38s? What are 36s?
 
bartmc said:
I think your huggies might be on a little tight.
Click to expand...

I also don't know what this means. I do not mean this pejoratively, but are you a child? I feel like maybe I should have my kid gloves on.
 
bartmc said:
I know.

Do you find it hard to operate the controls of an airplane with your condition?
Click to expand...

What, as a well-educated, successful, and eminently rational person who has enjoyed wealth and success as a result of his natural talents and hard work?

I mean, not "hard". But challenging. I do find aviation challenging.
 
Tommy3 said:
What, as a well-educated, successful, and eminently rational person who has enjoyed wealth and success as a result of his natural talents and hard work?

I mean, not "hard". But challenging. I do find aviation challenging.
Click to expand...

No, your small hands. Seems that would make things difficult. Did you have to get an SI for that?
 
bartmc said:
No, your small hands. Seems that would make things difficult. Did you have to get an SI for that?
Click to expand...

I have pretty normal-sized hands, I think. What is an SI? Again, what are you talking about?
 
Tommy3 said:
I have pretty normal-sized hands, I think. What is an SI? Again, what are you talking about?
Click to expand...

You said you were going to put your kid gloves on, one would deduce that you have underdeveloped hands? Were you lying?
 
bartmc said:
You said you were going to put your kid gloves on, one would deduce that you have underdeveloped hands? Were you lying?
Click to expand...

Oh, no, I'm sorry. "Kid gloves" is an expression, meaning to treat with care, special caution, that sort of thing.
 
Tommy3 said:
Oh, no, I'm sorry. "Kid gloves" is an expression, meaning to treat with care, special caution, that sort of thing.
Click to expand...

Oh sorry. If you are going to hold yourself to loose rhetorical standards that is your own affair.
 
bartmc said:
Oh sorry. If you are going to hold yourself to loose rhetorical standards that is your own affair.
Click to expand...

What's wrong with using expressions and figures of speech? There's a difference between saying something false and saying something that someone else, potentially, does not understand. (But really, is "kid gloves" such an unusual phrase?) Do you not understand the semantic distinction here?
 
Tommy3 said:
What's wrong with using expressions and figures of speech? There's a difference between saying something false and saying something that someone else, potentially, does not understand. (But really, is "kid gloves" such an unusual phrase?) Do you not understand the semantic distinction here?
Click to expand...

Do you not understand that when someone ends a statement with "in the world" for something as subjective as being the most liberal "rag" it is only being used to emphasize a point and not to be taken literally? Even 4 year olds do it ("My dad is the strongest man in the world), and understand the concept. Do you not understand the semantic distinction here?
 
Tommy3 said:
What's wrong with using expressions and figures of speech? There's a difference between saying something false and saying something that someone else, potentially, does not understand. (But really, is "kid gloves" such an unusual phrase?) Do you not understand the semantic distinction here?
Click to expand...

You mean like saying that you are the most thin skinned person in the world...it's an expression. Do you not understand the semantic distinction here?
 
bartmc said:
Do you not understand that when someone ends a statement with "in the world" for something as subjective as being the most liberal "rag" it is only being used to emphasize a point and not to be taken literally? Even 4 year olds do it ("My dad is the strongest man in the world), and understand the concept. Do you not understand the semantic distinction here?
Click to expand...

Do you not understand that he is not right in the extreme but not even generally correct? That The Atlantic is not, in any meaningful sense, a "liberal rag"? That it was founded by noted individualist Ralph Waldo Emerson (okay, so perhaps liberal there)? That it has a conservative owner? If you say things that are false you will be called upon them. It is that simple. You are given a little leeway for rhetoric but very little.
 
JeffDG said:
You mean like saying that you are the most thin skinned person in the world...it's an expression. Do you not understand the semantic distinction here?
Click to expand...

Do you know what "semantic" means? We are talking about truth conditions. You're welcome to use any locution you like as far as I'm concerned as well as you are telling the truth.
 
Tommy3 said:
Do you not understand that he is not right in the extreme but not even generally correct? That The Atlantic is not, in any meaningful sense, a "liberal rag"? That it was founded by noted individualist Ralph Waldo Emerson (okay, so perhaps liberal there)? That it has a conservative owner? If you say things that are false you will be called upon them. It is that simple. You are given a little leeway for rhetoric but very little.
Click to expand...

You mean like when you claim the TSA has stopped a ridiculous number of terrorists, but when asked for proof, you won't provide it?
 
EdFred said:
You mean like when you claim the TSA has stopped a ridiculous number of terrorists, but when asked for proof, you won't provide it?
Click to expand...

I never claimed that. If you think I am going to talk to you on the Internet about that sort of thing you are out of your ****ing mind.
 
Tommy3 said:
Do you know what "semantic" means? We are talking about truth conditions. You're welcome to use any locution you like as far as I'm concerned as well as you are telling the truth.
Click to expand...

Maybe from your viewpoint, the Atlantic is "middle of the road", but by almost any objective standard, they're a liberal rag.

Personally, I consider National Review to be middle of the road. Your mileage may vary.
 
JeffDG said:
Maybe from your viewpoint, the Atlantic is "middle of the road", but by almost any objective standard, they're a liberal rag.
Click to expand...

No. This is a statement made by an ideological partisan, which you are but I am not.
 
Last edited:
Tommy3 said:
No. Now you are lying.

"They have stopped terrorists" does not imply "the TSA has stopped a ridiculous number of terrorists".

Do you really not see that? Do you really not understand how rigorous argument works? I really fear for our democracy sometimes.
Click to expand...

So if not a ridiculous number how many have they stopped? Please enlighten us.

BTW, we are a Republic, not a Democracy.
 
Last edited:
EdFred said:
So if not a ridiculous number how many have they stopped? Please enlighten us.
Click to expand...

I'm not talking to you any more about this. I have no idea who you are. If you have access to classified systems pass me your e-mail.
 
Tommy3 said:
I'm not talking to you any more about this. I have no idea who you are. If you have access to classified systems pass me your e-mail.
Click to expand...

Hey, you're the one that made the claims. Back it up. You want everyone else to do so. But when you're called on it, you use some lame excuse.
 
EdFred said:
So if not a ridiculous number how many have they stopped? Please enlighten us.

BTW, we are a Republic, not a Democracy.
Click to expand...

BTW we are both. Do you really not know this? Have you not read Mill? Or John Locke? Or the Articles of Confederation?

Jesus ****ing Christ, man. Just . . . Jesus.
 
Tommy3 said:
BTW we are both. Do you really not know this? Have you not read Mill? Or John Locke? Or the Articles of Confederation?

Jesus ****ing Christ, man. Just . . . Jesus.
Click to expand...

Evidently hands aren't the only thing you possess that's diminutive.
 
Tommy3 said:
Do you not understand that he is not right in the extreme but not even generally correct? That The Atlantic is not, in any meaningful sense, a "liberal rag"? That it was founded by noted individualist Ralph Waldo Emerson (okay, so perhaps liberal there)? That it has a conservative owner? If you say things that are false you will be called upon them. It is that simple. You are given a little leeway for rhetoric but very little.
Click to expand...

I appreciate your benevolence in allowing the leeway. I'm sorry but I'm not up to date on the current political leanings of Emerson or his current status within the organization, probably the last thing I read of his was written at least a century ago. I've read enough of The Atlantic articles before and they pass as "liberal" with my smell test. I wouldn't call them the most liberal rag in the world ( I was forced to read motherjones.com the other day ). But, if you can find it in your heart to allow me to grant doc a little leeway with the phrase "in the world" , I would let it go as "not literal".
 
Last edited:
EdFred said:
Evidently hands aren't the only thing you possess that's diminutive.
Click to expand...

Oh I see. And since you can't have a rational, pleasant debate you are going to resort to name calling. Nice.

Let me recommend that you spend less time talking about things you know nothing of and more time reading the foundational documents from which our nation was born and from which our essential character derives. I am happy to provide a bibliography if you desire.
 
bartmc said:
I appreciate your benevolence in allowing the leeway. I'm sorry but I'm not up to date on the current political leanings of Emerson or his current status within the organization, probably the last thing I read of his was at least a century ago. I've read enough of The Atlantic articles before and they pass as "liberal" with my smell test. I wouldn't call them the most liberal rag in the world ( I was forced to read motherjones.com the other day ). But, if you can find it in your heart to allow me to grant doc a little leeway with the phrase "in the world" , I would let it go as "not literal".
Click to expand...

Leeway granted. Might want to recalibrate that "smell test", though.
 
Tommy3 said:
BTW we are both. Do you really not know this? Have you not read Mill? Or John Locke? Or the Articles of Confederation?

Jesus ****ing Christ, man. Just . . . Jesus.
Click to expand...

Why do you insist on taking the Lords name in vein? If you want civil discourse with folks, try not to do what a lot of people consider one of the worst sins.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top