Polyticks: Bob Butler's Perspective

An alternate home for the community from the legacy Fourth Turning Forum
Clarkmod
Posts: 184
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2021 10:15 am

Re: Polyticks: Bob Butler's Perspective

Post by Clarkmod »

Tom Mazanec wrote:
Wed Nov 30, 2022 11:00 am
He vehemently defends what he believes. So do I. Is he a troll and I'm not just because you agree with me on this issue?

Clarkmod
Posts: 184
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2021 10:15 am

Re: Polyticks: Bob Butler's Perspective

Post by Clarkmod »

FullMoon wrote:
Wed Nov 30, 2022 11:07 am
thomasglee wrote:
Wed Nov 30, 2022 8:15 am
Bob Butler wrote:
Wed Nov 30, 2022 1:20 am


It really is odd that some people have trouble understanding what they don’t want to be true. I knew people defended their own mindset, but the inability to see another’s point of view? No wonder an Atlanta or Hiroshima sort of event is needed to change a culture. That much force is needed to penetrate a thick skull. Could it be a difference between trying to understand history and needing to prove one's politics is right?
The problem people have with you is that you *think* you’re never wrong and you’re often narcissistic about it. You really should examine yourself.
Well put.
It's the conceited, narcissistic tendencies of the bigoted self righteous "group" who seem to be intentionally ruining everything in the name of "good". That's what I take issue with. 'Liberal' no longer applies to them. They openly advocate hatred, violence and destruction. They have become the degeneracy which will be eliminated after the crisis.

Clarkmod
Posts: 184
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2021 10:15 am

Re: Polyticks: Bob Butler's Perspective

Post by Clarkmod »

FullMoon wrote:
Wed Nov 30, 2022 11:12 am
Tom Mazanec wrote:
Wed Nov 30, 2022 11:00 am
He vehemently defends what he believes. So do I. Is he a troll and I'm not just because you agree with me on this issue?
He deliberately stirs up trouble and tries to offend people by talking down to them. This is what a troll does. That's why he got his own section. And probably where he should stay.

Clarkmod
Posts: 184
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2021 10:15 am

Re: Polyticks: Bob Butler's Perspective

Post by Clarkmod »

Bob Butler wrote:
Wed Nov 30, 2022 12:06 pm
FullMoon wrote:
Wed Nov 30, 2022 11:07 am
It's the conceited, narcissistic tendencies of the bigoted self righteous "group" who seem to be intentionally ruining everything in the name of "good". That's what I take issue with. 'Liberal' no longer applies to them. They openly advocate hatred, violence and destruction. They have become the degeneracy which will be eliminated after the crisis.
Which faction is advocating criminals, insurrection, bigotry, intense division of wealth, profiting of government policy and implementing religious doctrine by the government? By fighting these things, others are wrong, ruining everything? Advocating rule of law, equality and freedom seems problematic somehow? Are we the ones pushing hatred of minorities and walking into minority places with assault weapons. What are we supposedly destroying? Read to recent definition of projection, please. You are projecting your own behavior on others.

While there are many issues that could be enhanced by a conservative viewpoint, you really should be aware of how others see you. Sure, shoot the messenger and ignore the message if you have to, but the cardboard halos aren’t believable.

Clarkmod
Posts: 184
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2021 10:15 am

Re: Polyticks: Bob Butler's Perspective

Post by Clarkmod »

Higgenbotham wrote:
Wed Nov 30, 2022 12:12 pm
From my perspective, Bob has deliberately calibrated the volume to keep it a little bit lower than the threshold I called him on several months ago, posted below. It's my belief that this is an attempt to keep his posts in this thread because he is aware that his Polyticks thread doesn't get read very much. Note that the below was at the time John hadn't been signed in for many days and was not posting on or moderating this news thread. It will be interesting to see how clever Bob tries to get in denying this. It's also my belief that Bob felt himself very clever in his ridiculous discussion of "sentience" and trying to use that to justify moving the line on abortion from one year after birth to minus 3 months in an attempt to fool people into thinking that he was being "conservative" and "reasonable".

Higgenbotham wrote:
Wed Aug 03, 2022 1:52 pm
Bob Butler wrote:
Mon Aug 01, 2022 11:22 pm
In addition, Trump’s attempts to steal the election are being exposed just as the mid terms are coming up.
This type of statement is what I call "shitbombing". This is what liberals do for entertainment. I've seen liberals do this many times. It's the equivalent of taking a big pile of shit, attaching a fuse to it, lighting the fuse, leaving the room and waiting for the pile of shit to explode all over everybody else.
Bob Butler wrote:
Tue Aug 02, 2022 2:44 pm
I could easily see this shifted to its own thread. Feel free to create one.
Then create one. You're the one who created this issue with the above statement. Why should someone else who had nothing to do with it be given the task of creating a thread for an issue you created? Who are you?
Bob Butler wrote:
Tue Aug 02, 2022 8:10 pm
Appreciated and agreed. I assume those that resort to name calling and insults can’t respond with logic and fact. If they could, they would. I sort of smugly smile when I see someone throwing around insults as is see it as admitting he has lost the intellectual debate.
That's a bad assumption. I could respond with logic and fact but you're so utterly delusional, I can see that there is no use.
Bob Butler wrote:
Tue Aug 02, 2022 8:10 pm
Chasing weird perspectives is what I do. You never know where thinking alien will take you. John has collected a bunch of folk that from my perspective think alien. The Republican Rural Religious mind set is just another alien way of perceiving things. I’m doing my best so figure it out.
You're not doing your best to figure it out. You haven't even begun an honest attempt to figure it out. All you've done is put an inappropriate label on it that suits your fancy.
Bob Butler wrote:
Wed Aug 03, 2022 1:01 am
If some people read insult when none is intended, what can one do?
What you can do is try to figure out how you are insulting people. Because that's what you are doing.
Bob Butler wrote:
Wed Aug 03, 2022 1:01 am
John has traditionally censored by moving stuff between threads. He keep his own threads pure to follow his values without returning the courtesy, disrupting other’s threads. I figure this may return shortly, but am used to it. Until then, I am responding to comments made.
Go back to my first comment and read it again. And don't respond to any of my comments.

Clarkmod
Posts: 184
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2021 10:15 am

Re: Polyticks: Bob Butler's Perspective

Post by Clarkmod »

Higgenbotham wrote:
Wed Nov 30, 2022 3:14 pm
Starting at page 1156, I counted the number of posts from each poster in this thread. These are listed from most to least:

Bob Butler - 13
Full Moon - 10
Tom Mazenec - 9
Cool Breeze - 5
spottybrowncow - 3
John - 2
Guest - 2
Higgenbotham - 2
Dakardii - 1
Xeraphim1 - 1
tim - 1
Dickie doo - 1
thomasglee - 1

This thread is Generational Dynamics World View News created by John » Tue Jan 22, 2019 2,574,828 views - this averages to 1,829 views per day.

For comparison, Bob Butler's thread is Polyticks: Bob Butler's Perspective created by Bob Butler » Thu Jan 14, 2021 127,665 views - this averages to 186 views per day.

It seems reasonable that posters who have created threads and have perspectives that are objectively of less interest to the viewing public not try to dominate threads created by others during a time when others may have less ability to post and may be posting less for whatever reason.

The original intent of this thread was not to espouse the leftist viewpoint of Bob Butler. The intent is stated in the title of the thread.

Clarkmod
Posts: 184
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2021 10:15 am

Re: Polyticks: Bob Butler's Perspective

Post by Clarkmod »

Higgenbotham wrote:
Wed Nov 30, 2022 4:05 pm
Tom Mazanec wrote:
Wed Nov 30, 2022 3:56 pm
Higgenbotham:
And most of my posts are probably my trying to answer BB's defense of fetus-killing or news link collections like this (that John has thanked me for):
I agree. In fact, most everyone's recent posts (large numbers and small) have been in response to Bob's attempt to dominate this thread.

It might be noted that the most frequently used word in my last few posts has been "attempt". Since we have been parsing words like "sentient", "attempt" is parsed by Webster's as:

ATTEMPT, TRY, ENDEAVOR, ESSAY, STRIVE mean to make an effort to accomplish an end.

ATTEMPT stresses the initiation or beginning of an effort.

Enough said.

I would add that John has been quite tolerant of and welcome to various viewpoints, as are many others here. That's one thing that makes this forum what it is. There's a fine line between welcoming various viewpoints and allowing the use of language and tactics which attempt to dominate a thread.

Clarkmod
Posts: 184
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2021 10:15 am

Re: Polyticks: Bob Butler's Perspective

Post by Clarkmod »

Bob Butler wrote:
Wed Nov 30, 2022 4:46 pm
I will respond to comments directed to me or naming me in the thread that originated the comment. A lot of them are slander and ad hominem. If no one habitually practiced these here, I could not reply here. There is a forum rule not to address people who requested not to be addressed. I’ll officially request Full Moon, Cool Breeze and Spottybrowncow to not to post to me or slander me. If they actually make a serious post, I may forgive them. Of late, I have sometimes not replied in spite of the slander and ad hominem.

If someone makes a serious post that belongs here, I will respond as any other member of the board. Tom’s and Xeraphim’s views on abortion seem to count, though it could have been moved elsewhere. The merits of conflicting viewpoints should always in my opinion prevail. There should not be attempts or censorship to make sure one perspective dominates.

Clarkmod
Posts: 184
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2021 10:15 am

Re: Polyticks: Bob Butler's Perspective

Post by Clarkmod »

Higgenbotham wrote:
Wed Nov 30, 2022 6:49 pm
Bob Butler wrote:
Wed Nov 30, 2022 4:46 pm
There should not be attempts or censorship to make sure one perspective dominates.
We are not going to go round and round with your same bullcrap.

Luckily, I don't have to explain it to you. All I need to do is cut and paste. Reminder:
John wrote:
Mon Jan 18, 2021 7:19 pm
** 18-Jan-2021 World View: Why are you here?
Bob Butler wrote:
Mon Jan 18, 2021 1:38 pm
> I am against censorship, but this is mostly practiced by John. The
> crackdown is on criminal activity which is not a civil liberty.
No, I haven't censored anything of yours. Hijacking other people's
threads with offensive garbage is not a civil liberty, and cracking
down on it is not censorship. Every offensive piece of garbage you've
posted is still online, unedited. That's not censorship. So that's
your lie #1.

You say you're against censorship, but then in the next sentence you
say that censorship is fine when it's about "criminal activity," which
is the excuse that all violent dictators use. The First Amendment
says nothing about "criminal activity." So that's your lie #2.

You say that members of this forum "regularly complain about the
crackdown on criminal activity." I asked you for specific examples,
with links, but you can't. That's your lie #3.

Furthermore, shutting down Donald Trump's twitter feed is clearly
censorship having nothing to do with so-called criminal activity. So
that's your lie #4.

Ironically, you're right about one thing. The Democrats, the
mainstream media, and social media all colluded to institute a massive
censorship effort to censor Hunter Biden's criminal activity. But of
course, that's the opposite of what you mean. That wasn't censorship
of criminal activity. That was censoring reports of Hunter Biden's
criminal activity.

> There is no evidence of a rigged election.

No, there is plenty of evidence of a rigged election. Talk to Warren
Dew in the other forum. That's your lie #5.

> The violence over the summer was not by any organization
> affiliated with the Democrats.

No, I said the antifa-blm fascist violence was SUPPORTED BY the
Democrats -- and by you -- in the name of "social justice." That's
supporting the antifa-blm violence, whether antifa-blm is an
organization affiliated with the Democrats or not. That's your lie
#6.

> John has persistently misrepresented my position.

No, I've represented your position as FAR LEFTIST THINKING, in
contrast to what you call "tribal thinking." And then I stated the
FAR LEFTIST THINKING policies. You haven't repudiated any of those
policies. The ones you mention at all you don't repudiate, but give
Baghdad Bob excuses for. Even if there are one or two of those
policies that you disagree with, you certainly agree with FAR LEFTIST
THINKING as a whole, so I didn't misrepresent your position. That's
your lie #6.

How many lies can you pack into a single post?

Those are truly evil policies, and the Democrats support them and you
support them. That makes the Democrats evil people, for supporting
evil policies. Just like Xi Jinping and the CCP are evil people, for
supporting the arrest, torture and enslavement of millions of Uighurs.
Democrats like Eric Swalwell, Dianne Feinstein, Hunter Biden and Joe
Biden are all totally compromised by the Chinese and Chinese money and
Chinese honeypots, so the Chinese Communist evil extends to the
Democrats.

But that's not the main problem. If you could rationally and lucidly
and inoffensively defend FAR LEFTIST POLICIES, that would be one
thing. But you don't do that. You're incapable of defending those
evil policies because they're evil. Instead, you attack and offend
members of this forum with the moronic accusation of "weird tribal
thinking" because they don't agree with your FAR LEFTIST POLICIES.
It's your behavior that's the problem -- your extremely offensive
behavior.

I've asked you several times -- why are you here? You're not going to
change any minds. So what are you trying to accomplish?

Answer the question:

Why are you here?
Why are you here?
Why are you here?
Why are you here?
Why are you here?
Why are you here?

Clarkmod
Posts: 184
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2021 10:15 am

Re: Polyticks: Bob Butler's Perspective

Post by Clarkmod »

Bob Butler wrote:
Wed Nov 30, 2022 8:37 pm
Higgenbotham wrote:
Wed Nov 30, 2022 6:49 pm
Why are you here?
Why are you here?
Why are you here?
Why are you here?
Why are you here?
Why are you here?
Hmm. I had written a response to that last question before it was asked…

On the main stream media in general and MSNBC in particular, they have been making a big deal of recent seditious conspiracy cases. One major issue is how hard it is to prove such a case, to prove a motive, to convey to the jury beyond a reasonable doubt what the defendants were attempting to do.

People say what they think I am attempting, but am I? Could my alleged motive be proven?

To start with, trying to convert a devout catholic would be silly. They have a complete and consistent worldview. Many are committed to it. Absurdly few would change. That would be an impossible thing to attempt. The best you could do is try to make people think.

On the other had, I am a turning fanatic. Every four score and seven years a lot of folk will see a flaw in the culture, fix it, and create new values to prevent the flaw from happening again. If you believe in turning theory, you have to believe that one aspect of history at least is progressive. It is hard for me to advocate S&H without spinning the progressive nuance. Every four score and seven years there will be a new birth of freedom. You can look at a set of crisis issues, predict that the force advocating change and growth will dominate, and how the issue will resolve.

Yah. 'Attempt' almost fits. Guilty as charged? Even if a dedicated conservative will try to wiggle around it? Even if you half expect the wiggle to succeed, at least in the other’s mind and heart? Is a dedicated conservative any more or less committed to his ideas than a catholic or a turning theory believer? Should either of the three argue less than his best for his perspective or to expect anybody to change? Should anyone be throwing ad hominids or proposing censorship when they don’t convince each other?

And from my perspective, turning theory is an attempt at a scientific theory. Do you disprove it by proposing Jesus was more holy than Strauss? Do you propose a referendum on the next ballot on whether it is true or not? No, you argue that what it predicts is not what occurs, that the data doesn’t match the prediction. Different types of worldviews are criticized in different ways.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests