Quote:
Quote:
Maybe you're just not very good an doing research? I don't think _ww.KKK.com qualifies as a "secret little club" as you put it Brad.


First off, I'm not really sure how any of this came up. I'll need to re-read some of the first page posts. My point was simply that from the news reports I read every day (usually Reuters, AP or my local news feeds that get sent to my home page everyday) I see far more violence conducted against Jews in Europe (France in particular) than I do in the US.


Fair enough. That may have been your point, but that has nothing to do with the claim you made relating to anti-Semitism in the United States.

Quote:

Yes, the KKK have a web site. So does my neighbor's kid's band. Probably about as sophisticated. I think that doing a LexisNexis (or however you spell it) news seach would be more insightful than seeing who has a web page.

But the point is, the KKK is a joke. Ever since they lost in civil court (and IIRC a black woman who lost her son to KKK violence was awarded all of their property) the KKK is limited to Jerry Springer episodes and getting spit on while trying to be included as part of some city's local parade.

And I didn't look into that www .americannazi. com link, but I did see in the news yesterday they are wanting or did adopt some local road. Yep, they're striking fear into the hearts of litterbugs! Again, these people are a joke. Does that mean that we should condemn them or keep an eye on them? Absolutely not.


So could you please explain in detail how them being a joke (which I'm sure is an opinion that would go over quite nicely at the Auschwitz rememberance) equates to them not being anti-Semetic? Because you know, it's possible to clean up a highway and still hate Jews. And your original statement had nothing to do with the level of respect you have for people such as this; you stated that we "we don't have as much anti-Semitism and it's certainly not tolerated" which is, sadly, simply not true. We have plenty and it is tolerated.

And your neighbor's kid's band is not under discussion here, nor debate. I understand it was an attempt to dismiss the argument, but it doesn't serve that purpose. After all, nobody ever said that we "certainly don't tolerate Brad's neighbor's kid's band", did we?

Quote:
Quote:
And by the way, maybe I'm wrong, but I think "neo-" also goes quite nicely with:

-lithic
-classical
-futurist
-phyte
-tropical
-impressionism
-natal


Again, this was a minor side comment I made and I think we're wasting time discussing it when we're supposed to be talking about how Dr. Rice is a parrot for President Bush (oops, I mean for the people who are secretly running the White House through the conduit of President Bush), however I clearly said that the "casual observor" might make that association. I also said that those two terms were the only two that have been popularized. Not only do none of your excellent finds have anything to do with politics, I doubt that the average person is well versed in neophyte religious studies.



I disagree. You actually went into a fair bit of detail as to your feelings about the term. And, yes, you also pointed out that people were welcome to "toss the 'neo' in there so that the casual observer might associate it with 'neo-nazi'.." Kind of a non-sequiter if you ask me (I personally never made that association until you brought it up), but that's just my opinion. You also stated later, in response to Rob, that "the only two 'neo-anythings' that have popular meaning are neo-con and neo-nazi" which is a sweeping generalization, and one that has the added benefit of being incorrect. You may want to reconsider; not everyone is confused by the above terms. Pretty much everyone in my circle could explain any of them. If you're right, and the general populace of the US can't, then we're in deeper trouble than I thought.

As to us wasting time when we're "supposed to be talking about how Dr. Rice is a parrot...", I would humbly submit that we are addressing side arguments you've made in relation to the central argument. Did you yourself not say that the cabinet is there to carry out the president's policies and not be at odds with them? What exactly is that, if not parroting? And if that is what she does, your argument regarding her qualifications is pointless; you don't need to be qualified to do and say what you're told to do and say.

And by the way, neophyte does not just refer to religous pursuits. It can apply to pretty much anything. Including politics, as in "Though he was a neophyte, the new congressman showed promise". You can even use it in regards to cogent argumentation.

Quote:
Quote:
But I quess you're right. If you do nothing but watch US broadcast media for your information, you might not have beenexposed to some of those.


Perhaps you'd prefer I Tivo the BBC or CBC broadcasts?



Might not be a bad idea. Is there something wrong, in your opinion, with having more than one source of information? Or is that just a myth perpetrated by the liberal media?

Quote:
Lots of documentaries on neoimpressionism that I'm missing out on? Perhaps a new reality show on neolithic studies that's all the rage?


It strikes me as odd that you seem to be making fun of any kind of intellectual pursuit. And yeah, you're missing out on them. Give the Discovery networks a shot once in the while. I know they don't bash on "liberals", but still, they're ok if your're up for learning about more than how to argue about who's right or wrong....

Quote:

And thanks. You're um.. decent too.


Hrm.. I say thank you, and I really mean that. But I get the idea from the way you put that that there may be some confusion as to the meaning of the word "decent". It's not dismissive; it's a compliment. Hopefully you understood my intention when I said you were decent.
_________________________
Dave