Banned By Vivian Paige!!

would you mind briefly explaining this "democrat party" thing?

Well, Jack, it would be like referring to you as Jac or the Republican Party as the Republic Party or perhaps members of the Republican Party as Publicans.

And, I suspect, you did it (or maybe you "do it," as in the present tense) just to tweak off Ms. Paige.

I'd suggest the civility and a lack of ad hominem will take your point-of-view and perspective much further. Just a thought.

eter,

o cours you righ, bu wha ca yo expec fro a publican?!

I really don't know what the problem is. I am a Republican, in the Republican Party. She is a Democrat in the Democrat Party. What's the problem? (One explaination is that it is a noun vs. adjective issue, but she has no problem with a "woman" (rather than "female") Speaker of the House.)

Sure, it's a tweak, but hardly an ad hominem attack. Meanwhile, she has accused me of "repeating lies" (http://blog.vivianpaige.com/2007/01/21/another-view-on-the-apology/) while refusing to cite a single example, and called me "clueless" in a post (http://blog.vivianpaige.com/2007/01/25/hb-3157-making-it-harder-to-run-for-office/) in which she says she wants the clueless to vote!

Amazing.

Et tu, Vivian? The Democrat Party members have officially become completely unglued.

I thought she was one of the smart ones. Well I guess I will give her the benefit of the doubt and allow a temporary insanity defense.

This is a mental illness. I cannot believe Vivian has been afflicted.

We need to be wearing ribbons, Jack, to draw attention to this crisis.

I propose they be colored gray, to symbolize the gray area that "Democrats who cannot bear being called, er, Democrats" surely occupies.

They won both houses of Congress and yet are reduced to quivering puddles of ectoplasm when someone leaves the "ic" off the name of their party.

This isn't thin-skinned. This is just skinned. They are falling apart. They've been imbibing the mythology of oppression for so long they will never be able to function without it.

Prediction: If the Democrats win everything - Presidency, Congress, Supreme Court, Pulitzer, Grammies, Golden Globes, Miss Universe, Sheriff of every town in America and Donald Trump's next Apprentice, and every Republican in the land moves to Alberta, Canada - Democrats would commence to suing each other over windmill farms and broken pre-nups.

Because that is what they do. If they can't take offense over actual offenses, they will need to invent them.

I wonder if there are any remaining sensible Democrats. I hope some will speak up about this insanity. Because I am extremely close to launching a new category here, "Wrath of the Democrat Party," just to track this stuff.

I can't imagine the recriminations. They might actually begin calling my party the "Republic Party." Now that would leave a mark.

Jack, thanks for running point, and exposing the fact there's a little dunderhead in all of us, even Vivian Paige.

(Bravo to Puft - This deserves a new post, I think)

BTW, Puffy, I like you as a friend, but....

if I ever got a knock on the head....

Maybe we're onto something, Joe. I've always thought some Democrats were "icky," now we discover that the "ic" is more important to them than the "democrat."

Perhaps that's why they get upset when "anti-icky" ballot initiatives such as the Marriage Amendment are put before the "demos."

You came into Vivian's house and she asked you to take off your dirty shoes. You argued with her and told her she had no reason for concern, because your shoes really aren't dirty. She asked you again to take off your dirty shoes. You wanted to debate the matter. She asked you to leave and not come back. Surprised?

On her blog, Vivian accused me of "repeating the oft-spoken lies about black folks" without providing even a single example of my doing so. She has called me "clueless." I have been called a "troll," a "closed-minded dunce," and a "liar or idiot," by other posters. I have been told, "shut your piehole." Have those posters been banned, or even chastized? Can you explain how "Democrat Party" comes close to that level?

Jack,

Just a suggestion: Why don't you choose not do that, since you know - having been told - that the term is the Democratic Party? Why is this so difficult?

Regardless of the behavior of other commenters, either you are interested in having a reasoned conversation or you are interested in something else. You and only you are responsible for your own behavior. Changing the subject doesn't help.

As you'll recall, you had the same problem at our blog. If you don't understand why something you've said is disrespectful, at least you can accept that it's our house and refrain from saying it.

First, I was not just speaking of other commenters, but also of ad hominem attacks by Vivian herself.

You, at least, I could understand as not distinguishing between what you do and what you are -- a common misconception. But can you explain how the term "Democrat Party" is insulting? (Tweaking, sure, but insulting?)

David, I can give one good reason why Jack might choose not to follow the "DemocratIC" rule - because it's stupid. On top of that, it reveals the very thin-skinned character of those who insist on the precise terminology.

It's a party of DEMOCRATS, for cryin' out loud. DEMOCRATS. That equals, in my reading of things, a DEMOCRAT PARTY.

So when these uptight DEMOCRATS decide "Oh, er, but that leaves out the fact we are operating as the beneficiaries of a dual-meaning such that we are also truly quite democratIC and we want THAT exact terminology to be employed" I have to laugh.

What it says to me is, they are not very democratIC at all. They are the party of censorship.

By the way, Shaun Kenney blogged about this today:

http://www.shaunkenney.com/2007/01/verboten.htm

Update: Vivian has closed the comments for that post! Defenders of free speech, indeed.

Heh, yeah I noticed that. Somebody on their side of the fence is going to have to stand up and say "enough, we're acting like a bunch of idiots."

Don't get your hopes up. Being a liberal means never having to say you're sorry. (Or that you are wrong.) Just ask Joe Biden.

"What it says to me is, they are not very democratIC at all. They are the party of censorship."--Joe

"Don't get your hopes up. Being a liberal means never having to say you're sorry. (Or that you are wrong.)"--jack

Joe, please, no one has sought to redefine things more than. . .politcians. The repubs have got this in SPADES as well, only it's not about the name of their party, it's about things like torture, WMD's, rules of war, etc.

Jack, shut your piehole. (Sorry)

NOOOOOOO! No No No No No! I will not countenance your absurd, demented, insidious, detrimental, inflammatory, race-baiting and, frankly, upsetting use of that horrible abbreviated form of my party's name, and if you ever do it again by the time I get through with you the only thing you'll be brewing is dandylion wine on the porch of your one-room shack on the WRONG side of the railroad tracks. When you talk about MY party you say "Republican", and you say it loudly and clearly, and you puff your chest out a bit to let the entire WORLD know there's a swagger to THIS party that even Vivian Paige can't muster enough pride to match.

THAT'S how you talk about MY party and I am just the man to tell you so.

You're right, I was wrong, the correct term is republican.

Wow. "I was wrong" and "sorry". I guess I'm not much of a liberal.

I'd rather like to try dandylion wine though, I hear it's the bees knees.

Oh, you betcha, good for what ails ya!

No, Kevin, you are not much of a liberal -- you have too much of a sense of humor!

Incidentally, Superman Was Black is maturing quite well. I have to admit I've been following the progress a little, if you know what I mean.

Actually, I have no idea what you're talking about.

ha ha ha! Oh, dear. Ha haha!

http://thecrackup.blogspot.com/2007/01/superman-was-black-part-troiscome-on-in.html

Kevin, don't blame you. Maybe you should keep a bottle of grain around to stave off the temptation.

Joe, I'm going to stand up and tell my fellow Republicans: enough, we're acting like a bunch of idiotic spoiled brat children.

Republicans started using "Democrat" party to make a point that we thought they were not very "Democratic". But Republicans aren't very "Republican" either, and anyway their name is the "Democratic Party".

Republicans seemed to understand this when they complained about Democrats using Allen's full name, calling him George Felix Allen -- and that was his real name. We knew they were trying to make fun of the sound of his middle name.

So count me out on this absurd argument to be allowed to insult people over a name. We can make fun of Democrats by repeating their policy positions, or quoting what they say.

They started the hullabaloo over Bush's speech, right? And as you noted, he did not do anything wrong. I'm sorry Charles, but many of these people do a lot of name calling themselves so to learn so many are so thin-skinned is quite a revelation. The behavior deserves ridicule. I thnk Jack's getting banned deserves ridicule. I'm sure I'll get bored of it in another day or two.

It's kind of hard to believe you're not bored with it now - but then this probably *is* easier than having a serious dialog about the minimum wage bill.

I personally don't see this behavior as insulting so much as ignorant and illiterate. It's the simple distinction between a noun ("Democrat") and an adjective ("Democratic Party").

I truly don't understand the difficulty here, but whatever.

Of course, I cannot have a serious dialog about the minimum wage on Vivian site, because I am banned. However, I am indeed working on a post on the topic, and I hope to have it up later today. Please join the conversation.

As I said earlier, no-one seems to have a problem with a WOMAN Speaker of the House. Can anyone explain this hysteria from the "Democrat(ick) Party"?

Now that you mention it, the boredom has snuck up on me. I think we took that about as far as it can go for now.

...especially since Charles came in and sucked all the fun out of the conversation, as is his wont.

Last word: See Slantblog.

http://slantblog.blogspot.com/2007/01/fee-fi-mo-mush-bush.html

Nuff said.

That's a really stupid post, David. Bush NEVER said "Democrat Party," he said "Democrat majority."

Bush and the Republicans were not protecting us on 9-11, and we aren't a lot safer now. We may be more afraid due to george bush, but are we safer? Being fearful does not necessarily make one safer. Fear can cause people to hide and cower. What do you think? Is killing thousands of innocent civilians okay when you are doing a little government makeover?
Are we safer today than we were before?
The more people that the government puts in jails, the safer we are told to think we are. The real terrorists are wherever they are, but they aren't living in a country with bars on the windows. We are.