Text 19281, 154 rader
Skriven 2006-04-22 19:09:20 av Ed Hulett (1:123/789.0)
  Kommentar till text 19246 av JOHNJWILSON (1:123/140)
Ärende: And ANOTHER one!
========================
On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 07:27:46 -0400, JOHNJWILSON -> ED HULETT wrote:


 J>>> My gawd, you are the age of my dsughter. Surely you do know better.

 ->> I am 53. I have no idea how old your "dsughter" [sic] might be.


 J> You mentioned your age in another post.
 J> She is 53.

Ok.


 ->> You know nothing about me.

 J>  From your posts here, I know far too much about you.

Actually, you don't. You may think you do, but all you see are words on
your screen.

 ->> I'm not. I do know that when a US expat uses such spelling it isn't
 J> from -> learning to spell that way. When Canadians don't even use such
 ->> affectations it makes the US expat look superficial. ->

 J>>> British spelling  is not obligitory. :-) -> -> You use it like
 J> you think it is.

 J> Two silly opinions.

Huh? Your mangled replies are sometimes very difficult to follow.

 J>>> Nor is it frowned upon. Ask your a some people. :-) -> -> It is
 J> when it is used by native US citizens just because they live north -> of
 J> the border.

 J> Well, you just frown away...:-)

Native Canadians are the ones doing the frowning.



 J>>> He has lectured widely on linguistics, philosophy as well as
 J> politics. I
 J>>> count thirteen books on politics alone. -> -> Good for him. That
 J> doesn't make him an expert...

 J> What would?

Your creative editing aside, I said it doesn't make him an expert about
politics or foreign policy.

His expertise is in *Linguistics*.

 J> , nor does it require
 ->> everyone to swoon at his name.

 J> Swoon? :-)

Yes, like you do whenever you mention his name.

 J>>> Commenplace. Sure, comparaed with your reasoned, superbly well
 J> thought
 J>>> out analysis. :-)

 ->> I wasn't comparing him to me...

 J> No kidding!

You have no point since you have to creatively edit my reply in order to
make it.

 J>   I am humble that I "know no more" as my sig
 ->> line says.

 J> You seem to know enough to appraise Chomsky's worth -- 'blathering, etc.

I know enough about his politics. Sheesh, are you always this thick?

 J> Your humility is probably in evidence elsewhere. I hope. :-)

Not being in awe of Chomsky is a lack of humility?

 J>>> (I have yet to read his international best-seller "9/11") -> ->
 J> Go for it. I'm sure that in it he will blame the US for the attacks. ->
 J> You ARE sure of things you guess at.

He has already come out and blamed the US for the attacks.

 J>>> Doin' pretty good for a blathering, pedestran thinker. :-) -> ->
 J> Pedestrian WRT politics.

 J> And your conclusion is reached how? Assiduous study, understanding and
 J> knowledge?

It is from observing him, reading his political opinions. Unlike you, I
don't automatically accept someones opinion simply because they have a
couple degrees.




 ->> Then, why do you worship his "towering intellect?" -> -> Worship?
 J> Just respect. A comcerpt evidently foreign to you.

I respect his right to voice his opinion, but I don't have to embrace it
as more important than my own.

 J>>>>> Chomsky became impressive to me in the fifties, as I tried to
 J>>> follow his
 J>>>>> excursions into lingustics and sewmantics...it was years later
 J>>> before I
 J>>>>> paid much attention to his polemics political,,, -> -> ->  J>
 J>>> (Which are filled with facts, citations, references... which are
 J> hard to
 J>>>>> dispute...

 ->>>> Hahahahahahahahaha!!!!

 J>>> Now there is a cogent reaction. :-) -> -> Chomsky is an avowed
 J> socialist who espouses a certain political view -> shared, unfortunately
 J> for our young people, by too many of his -> contemporaries. -> And where
 J> did you acertain that he is an 'avowed socialist'?

From his own words.


 ->> You effort to insult me into embracing Chomsky's ideology is failing.
 J> I -> prefer to think for myself.

 J> I have never suggested that you enbrace anything.

I didn't say you did "suggest" a thing.

 J> Try to remain truthful,

I *AM* being truthful. You, OTOH, have to creatively edit my words to make
your point. Now, *who* is not being truthful?


 ->> Anyone who is "proud" of their own accomplishments is an ignorant
 J> fool. ->
 J> That's me. :)

I tell them as I see them.

Ed

-- 
Knowledge is proud that he has learned so much; Wisdom is humble that he knows
no more. -- William Cowper

--- Pan/0.14.2.91 (As She Crawled Across the Table (Debian GNU/Linux))
 * Origin: Veritas Vos Leberabit! (1:123/789.0)