The Mental State of the Country

[dismal]

Not really a helpful explanation.

I guess you don't have one.

Interesting guess but I actually did understand his comment.

Then you shouldn't have any trouble explaining it. Yet it seems you do.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Interesting guess but I actually did understand his comment.

Then you shouldn't have any trouble explaining it. Yet it seems you do.

I understood his comment. You did not. It is not my responsibility to explain it to you.

 

[dismal]

Then you shouldn't have any trouble explaining it. Yet it seems you do.

I understood his comment. You did not. It is not my responsibility to explain it to you.

OK. Since you seem to have plenty of time on your hands to make worthless posts, I'll just assume that means you can't.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

I understood his comment. You did not. It is not my responsibility to explain it to you.

OK. Since you seem to have plenty of time on your hands to make worthless posts, I'll just assume that means you can't.

You could ask him nicely to explain it to you or you are free to assume whatever you want or you could keep posting things to me.

 

[Malintent]

Just doing his job, ma'am.

Actually, "dogs hear it but people don't" is a rather central and important feature of dogwhistles. Indeed it's the defining feature.

If it's a whistle that everyone hears we call it a "whistle".

The term "dog whistle" (the expression, not the thing) is not about dogs hearing it and humans not hearing it. It is about the reaction dogs have to the sound of the whistle... rabid barking...

fucking obviously (to literate folks)... That one can respond to its use by distinguishing between man and dog, rather than between 'instant negative reaction' and 'thoughtful response' is indicative of an extremely poor education, if English is the first language, or of extreme dishonesty in light of having no rational argument.

 

[laughing dog]

I understood his comment. You did not. It is not my responsibility to explain it to you.

OK. Since you seem to have plenty of time on your hands to make worthless posts, I'll just assume that means you can't.

For someone who routinely whines about personal comments, that one broke every irony meter in the universe.

 

[dismal]

Actually, "dogs hear it but people don't" is a rather central and important feature of dogwhistles. Indeed it's the defining feature.

If it's a whistle that everyone hears we call it a "whistle".

The term "dog whistle" (the expression, not the thing) is not about dogs hearing it and humans not hearing it. It is about the reaction dogs have to the sound of the whistle... rabid barking...

fucking obviously (to literate folks)... That one can respond to its use by distinguishing between man and dog, rather than between 'instant negative reaction' and 'thoughtful response' is indicative of an extremely poor education, if English is the first language, or of extreme dishonesty in light of having no rational argument.

Not so obvious to the dictionary writers I guess.

dog whis·tle
noun
noun: dog whistle; plural noun: dog whistles
- a high-pitched whistle used to train dogs, typically having a sound inaudible to humans.
- a subtly aimed political message which is intended for, and can only be understood by, a particular group.
"dog-whistle issues such as immigration and crime"

https://www.google.com/search?q=dog...0j69i57j0l4.4255j0j8&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

 

[ZiprHead]

Yippee! Another thread dismalized.

 

[jab]

Just doing his job, ma'am.

Actually, "dogs hear it but people don't" is a rather central and important feature of dogwhistles. Indeed it's the defining feature.

If it's a whistle that everyone hears we call it a "whistle".

Different dogs respond differently to dogwhistles, depending on each pooch's breed, training, and predilections. The thing is, they are" deniable".

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Trump then gave the simpleton answers to the hard questions.

Dave Rubin had a great monologue about this that nailed it perfectly. The country had become so politically polarized that actual discussion could no longer take place. If a reasonable conservative said something liberals don't agree with, they were shouted down or silenced or branded a bigot, etc. So no reasonable conservative could be hard. If a reasonable liberal said something conservatives don't agree with, they were dismissed as snowflakes. So no reasonable liberal could be heard. With no room for actual discussion in the public eye of complicated issues, that only leaves room for the simpleton easy answers of somebody like a Trump.

Moore-Coulter.

 

[jab]

You really don't get it?

No. Explain as best you can.

I mean, I get see a lot of delusional behavior around here from you guys so I assume it's more of that. But the specifics of how you are processing this particular input to get that particular outcome might be interesting.

more dismal disingenuousness

 

[Malintent]

The term "dog whistle" (the expression, not the thing) is not about dogs hearing it and humans not hearing it. It is about the reaction dogs have to the sound of the whistle... rabid barking...

fucking obviously (to literate folks)... That one can respond to its use by distinguishing between man and dog, rather than between 'instant negative reaction' and 'thoughtful response' is indicative of an extremely poor education, if English is the first language, or of extreme dishonesty in light of having no rational argument.

Not so obvious to the dictionary writers I guess.

dog whis·tle
noun
noun: dog whistle; plural noun: dog whistles
- a high-pitched whistle used to train dogs, typically having a sound inaudible to humans.
- a subtly aimed political message which is intended for, and can only be understood by, a particular group.
"dog-whistle issues such as immigration and crime"

https://www.google.com/search?q=dog...0j69i57j0l4.4255j0j8&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Whistle - verb

To pucker one's lips and blow, producing a high pitched sound.

Dogs don't have lips, you idiot... a "dog whistle" can't exist.


Stupid dictionary writers... don't even know what a (scientific) Theory is.

 

[Malintent]

No. Explain as best you can.

I mean, I get see a lot of delusional behavior around here from you guys so I assume it's more of that. But the specifics of how you are processing this particular input to get that particular outcome might be interesting.

more dismal disingenuousness

Glad you didn't step in the Troll Shit. Perhaps dismal can explain, in full detail, what is being asked for... providing examples and many paragraphs of detailed explanation... so we can find a single word, and list an alternative and out of context definition for him that has no connection to the intent... and then ask him to fully explain the issue he might have with that response... with pictures and full research papers.

 

[dismal]

Stupid dictionary writers...

Yeah, if only they were more literary they'd probably know it's fucking obvious what "dog whistle" means.

Instead of agreeing with me.

And making you look silly.

 

[dismal]

Perhaps dismal can explain, in full detail, what is being asked for...

What I asked for was why this post was "proof the OP was on target".

https://talkfreethought.org/showthr...of-the-Country&p=449339&viewfull=1#post449339

This appears to be one of those unanswerable questions.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Perhaps dismal can explain, in full detail, what is being asked for...

What I asked for was why this post was "proof the OP was on target".

https://talkfreethought.org/showthr...of-the-Country&p=449339&viewfull=1#post449339

This appears to be one of those unanswerable questions.

How things appear to you are not necessarily reality. You can ask the user for more details, though, if you like. Feel free.

 

[dismal]

What I asked for was why this post was "proof the OP was on target".

https://talkfreethought.org/showthr...of-the-Country&p=449339&viewfull=1#post449339

This appears to be one of those unanswerable questions.

How things appear to you are not necessarily reality. You can ask the user for more details, though, if you like. Feel free.

I did ask him. In English that's what "Huh? In what way?" means. And then I asked you since you seemed to suggest that you "get it" or at least find it odd that I didn't.

Lest we forget:

Proof the OP is on target.

Huh? in what way?

You really don't get it?

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

You really don't get it?

 

[dismal]

You really don't get it?

At this point I'm not convinced anyone does.

But it's not like this is a discussion forum where people might be expected to explain and defend their posts or something.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

You really don't get it?

At this point I'm not convinced anyone does.

But it's not like this is a discussion forum where people might be expected to explain and defend their posts or something.

I try not to make the point of my posts to "argue" and I realize that this doesn't always have the desired effect but it's my choice.

Getting back to the op...is there something in it you'd like to discuss?