From: perez@mgr.hjf.org (Charles Perez)
Newsgroups: misc.legal,alt.politics.correct,rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: Marx Brothers
Date: 31 Aug 92 00:50:06 GMT
Organization: HJF AIDS Research Project, Washington DC

In article <1992Aug29.221236.10609@fid.morgan.com> sethb@fid.morgan.com (Seth Breidbart) writes:
>In article <1992Aug29.174516.24763@Princeton.EDU>
>egnilges@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Ed Nilges) writes:
>>In article <1992Aug29.083509.23522@nocusuhs.nnmc.navy.mil> perez@mgr.hjf.org (Charles Perez) writes:
>>>In article <1992Aug28.233006.15783@midway.uchicago.edu> thf2@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>Hey Ted!  Who was Julius Marx?  Oh well, White Men Can't Proofread, huh?
>>>>>Did ya mean to say Groucho?  Wanna post some C code for my collection?
>>>>
>>>>Given that Julius was "Groucho," I fail to see the proofreading error.
>
>>  I submit that despite
>>the high quality of the Marx Brothers, their real names are trivial with
>>respect to the issues under discussion,
>
>Funny how they were more important when you though Ted was wrong than
>when he proved you were wrong.
>
>> including Frank's love of racist
>>vaudeville routines.
>
>Racist?  Oh, sorry, I forgot.  Whether they were Irish, Italian,
>German, or Jewish is irrelevant; they're white, therefore (according
>to Nilgeanism) they're racist.
>
>>  Again, you and he only reinforce my point re the
>>fact that forty years of TV has resulted in a widespread inability to
>>make distinctions, whether between Viktora and Martin Luther King, or
>>Amos 'n Andy and Spike Lee.
>
>It hasn't prevented people from being able to distinguish between
>correct argument and Ed Nilges's drivel, so I guess that difference is
>even greater.
>
>>  It has, it is evident in folks like you and
>>the Tedster, resulted in people who literally are unable to make value
>>judgements, who see all things as residing at the same low level.
>
>Funny, I notice them making value judgements all the time.  Charles
>and Ted, what do you consider the accuracy level of Ed Nilges's
>postings?  (That's a value judgement, Ed, unless you'd rather admit
>that it's just a fact.)

Does accuracy even figure toward deliberate obfucations? Ed does not
want to do the hard work it takes to master the facts of any given
situation. He does not want to exercise the discipline of checking
the facts or holding his tongue. Instead, he tries to use out-of-
context quotes, non-sequiturs, blatant assertions and misdirection
to make himself seem like an intellectual authority. If you can read
this, Ed, it's not working. You should be able to see that almost
everyone on the net knows you for the pinhead you are.

>
>>Fifth graders pride themselves on being able to one-up each other with
>>trivialities that are irrevelant in the long run.
>
>Again, I quote from earlier in this article:
>
>>>>>Hey Ted!  Who was Julius Marx?  Oh well, White Men Can't Proofread, huh?
>>>>>Did ya mean to say Groucho?  Wanna post some C code for my collection?
>
>Any child psychologists out there want to estimate the grade level of
>the preceding comment?

I'm not a child psychologist, by my best guess is Kindergarten.


-- 
==========================================================================
That which is necessary is never evil. If an evil seems necessary, look
to your context; that's where its root lies.  - Charles Perez
==========================================================================
Xref: sparky misc.legal:16753 talk.politics.misc:43009