The Four Color Media Monitor

*Sigh* I'll be responding via my own post later today.

Don't you idiots ever tire of hearing your own voices? Most people don't agree with you FOR A REASON! Society has passed you. Whay can't you evolve with everyone else?

Could you guys cry more? Why not just get off your high horses and shut up, let Ron or whoever say whatever they want (since America IS apparently a free country) and take your bs elsewhere.

@AnnoyedCanadian: This was posted on the internets. Your argument is invalid.

Are you idiots gonna miss the point like Busiek, Marz, Waid, et. al.?

And it is beyond laughable that a Canadian lectures America on free speech. Be careful -- or you may be tried and convicted by one of your lovely "human rights" tribunals.

Sorry AnnoyedCanadian. I read your response wrong. I completely agree with you. ;)

Oh gosh, did Busiek unleash his minions on us like he did before?

How "brave."

@Hube: Miss the point how?

watson: Maybe if you read through the threads in question before you open your idiotic mouth, you won't be so clueless.

Maybe this will explain my personal a bit better.

I DID read the threads in question. I AGREE with Ron Marz and Kurt Busiek, as do most people in the US. Conservative hate speech and blame game is getting really old. Your ideas are outdated. Few agree with you. Go back to your caves and stfu.

Oh, I see. So when a conservative exercises his free speech -- when controversial -- it's "hate" speech. Therefore, it isn't "free." B/c idiots like watson say so.

Of course, when people like Waid tell people to "STFU" when defending gun rights, that isn't at all hateful ... b/c "progressives" agree with it.

And one more thing, dolt: If conservative ideas are that "outdated," why is it that approx. half the nation agrees with them?

Oops.

The hilarious thing about Busiek is that he once said speech should be dealt with with more speech. Not boycotts or anything. But it's perfectly OK when it's against someone you disagree with. Or, fighting with more speech isn't a good idea when average joes get a means (like blogs) to rebut the big soapbox people like Kurt has. Then, peole to tell you to "shut up" and block you from reading their Twitter feeds.

Yeah, nice "exchange of ideas" there.

LMAO! Half the nation? Your idiot Republican Party and it's members LOST the country in the last election even though your messiah Fox News told you all that there was no chance of a Democrat win. Half of the people did NOT vote for Romney in spite of all the GOP propaganda and the tons of money used to fund the campaigns of the far right. The majority disagrees with you. Who's the dolt again?

LMAO! Half the nation?

Yep, approx. half the nation. Even on the issue of gay marriage.

Look, it's obvious you don't want a real discussion; you just want to call everyone Fox/Limbaugh/Hannity/etc. acolytes to somehow pretend you have an intellect. It's boring already. If you can't even accept the FACT about what I said about half the country due to your ingrained insane dogma, there's no use engaging you. You're way too far gone.

Blow, already.

51% over 47% is a majority. Sorry you didn't learn that in school. Blow? No. Maybe you want to?

So, let me catch up.

Busiek wrote, "Our lesson for today seems to be that expressing conservative opinions is free speech but expressing liberal opinions is bad."

Watson then follows up with posts that expressing leftist opinions is free speech, but expressing conservative opinions is bad.

Was today's exercise to illustrate irony?

(And that's before we get to where he thinks Woodrow Wilson's philosophy is "evolution" instead of tired, failed fascism.)

51% over 47% is a majority.

Reading is fundamental. What part of "approx. half the nation" didn't you understand?? That's what I said, after all. Twice.

Did they teach you how to read (among other things) in school?

Blow? No. Maybe you want to?

Is that you making a cute homophobic quip like Marz did in the convo in question?

Since you've already shown you can't read, FYI: "blow" in the context I used it means "leave."

On the plus side, Hube, at least, you weren't called "racist"? Heh.

I'd just say, "Shoo fly, don't bother me."

51% is a majority? Maybe, but it's a slim one. And yet, the Democrats keep telling us that we should love minorities... unless it depends on the minority, naturally.

Anyway, nice takedown, Hube, as usual.

Sorry. Since you all seem to have issues accepting fact, I will leave the conversation. I feel sorry for you and hope that if you MUST reproduce, your offspring show more intelligence and compassion for their fellow man. Here's to hoping your blinders aren't the death of you.

On the plus side, Hube, at least, you weren't called "racist"? Heh.

Lol ... indeed. I feel quite fortunate! :-P

Sorry. Since you all seem to have issues accepting fact, I will leave the conversation.

Translation: I didn't expect anyone to rebut me, so I'll still act like I made a real point so as not to look 100% silly.

Sorry -- didn't work. Adiós.

If YOU must reproduce, watson, please send your kid to a school where they teach:

-- reading
-- comprehension
-- logic
-- debate skills
-- acceptance of other PsOV

Lol. It's easy for you to claim to respect other points of view when the only people who are responding now share your closed-minded backward pov. As I said I feel sorry for you and your family.

Lol. It's easy for you to claim to respect other points of view when the only people who are responding now share your closed-minded backward pov.

YOU responded, did you not? You must really have a problem with cognition. Geez. And consider HOW you came in here: Calling us "idiots" and telling us to "evolve."

As I said I feel sorry for you and your family.

Don't make it personal, you prick. You don't know the slightest bit about me, or anyone else here. You wanna make outrageous generalizations? Fine. Do it somewhere else. (Hopefully you'll read this time.) If you insist on doing it here, I'll certainly be happy to oblige your need for familial insults.

I stand by everything I've said here. Yes I responded because I have to call out idiocy when I see it. The problem, as I've come to realize, is that you can't talk sense with Republican cavemen. Best course of action is that you die out like the rest of the neanderthals. I still feel sorry for your family. I know I'd be ashamed to be related to someone with such a closed mind. Also, I know I'm a prick. I have to be or crude ignorant individuals like yourselves will continue to spew idiotic nonsense unopposed. I can't let that happen.

stand by everything I've said here.

99.9% of which is total horseshit.

Yes I responded because I have to call out idiocy when I see it.

You cannot call what others say "idiocy" when 1) You don't have the slightest fucking idea what you're talking about nor what I or anyone else believe, and 2) you can't even fucking read.

The fact is, you'll raise your microcephalic offspring (that is, if you ever manage to get laid) to accept only what YOU deem acceptable. Such is the way of authoritarian fascists.

And yes, I said "fascists." Don't pretend that the term is the exclusive realm of the right-wing. In the circular political spectrum model, the extremes of both sides eventually merge. IOW, you're not one iota better than someone like Orson Scott Card.

Oh, and one last thing. You said several comments ago that you were leaving. I guess we can chalk you up as a liar as well as an idiot.

Watson387, please kindly mind your manners. If you continue to spout nasty blather, I'll have to mark you as spam or sweep it away altogether. Your narrow views of what conservatives are like is simply going too far.

I think we really are living in the Twilight Zone. So I point out that Ron seems to only see a group as a "special interest" when he doesn't agree with it ... he then responds by making childish jokes at the expense of the gay community — and suddenly I'm accused of being the caveman?

Hube tries to have a rational debate, and suddenly he's accused of calling liberal speech "bad" speech (when he did no such thing)?

What the heck?

What if my position is that the federal government shouldn't be in the marriage business to begin with? Oops, that doesn't compute to guys like Watson, who paint anyone who doesn't agree 100% with them on gay issues as a hate monger.

I suppose President Obama was a hate monger until about six months ago, when his official position was exactly the same as most of the GOP?

I DON'T CARE if a comic book writer or artist is liberal. But I do care when they act like anyone who has a different point of view on a subject, be it taxes or guns or gay people, should be treated like dirt.

I DO care when I try and have an adult conversation with a comic book writer or artist, and they respond by essentially saying I'm a star struck kid who just wants to be retweeted. Get over yourself...

"Best course of action is that you die out like the rest of the neanderthals."

Ah, yes. There's that compassion you were lecturing us on.

I believe I compared your views to Woodrow "Eugenicist" Wilson's progressivism (i.e., fascism). Thank you for illustrating why. Again.

Why is it impossible for modern-day leftists to have even a civil debate?

Because modern-day rightists are of the same mindset and that there are no "reasonable" figures on either side to try debating.