An unfortunate juxtaposition of interests rectified?

jp.
In this story I have to agree with the blogger in that sometimes the "common good" does outweigh personal rights...however the same blogger will on another day be complaining that government interference under any circumstances is wrong. The same blogger will be arguing that he shouldn't have to pay for the tests via "taxation" when it is not his wife and child.
It may well have been a typo however it is not just an opinion about HIV testing. It is an anti "liberal" opinion, which is why I think it is possible that the use of the word "wit" may have been intentional as a derogatory comment on liberal thinking............ because liberals "just don't understand common sense"

now I would have used Ockham's razor instead.

I would like to also raise the point that the author speaks and writes American and not English. The old saying about two countries separated by a common language is often true.

Edit: yes I know it has two acceptable spellings

Vid-

You are arguing a baby/bathwater scenario:

The author is a liberal-baiting louse with whom I am familiar, and he has no coherent message; I recommend his blatherings be rejected on this basis.

I have said many times that, on the occasion I offer a column up for purposes of gathering opinion, it is meant as a stand-alone affair.

I read MANY columns, everyday-there are MANY pundits whose columns I would risk life and limb to read, but the bulk of them are take 'em or leave 'em propositions.

This column struck me, and I offered it fairly, or, at least I thought I did.

Without having really parsed the column, or pronounced upon it, you have (as is your habit) denounced it's legitimacy owing to it's author's questionable (your opinion) ideology.

For someone who swears a regular oath upon the altar of rigorously independent thought, you sure spend a lot of time defending the liberal school of reasoning, and also attacking as conservative people whose opinions you don't like.

J2

quite the opposite.

On this occasion I agreed with the authors opinion on the HIV testing, it was the well from which it flowed that led me to wonder if the usage of the disputed word (wit) was intended. And it was only that which I questioned on this article.
and it was only to convey why i feel it may have been intended that i made any mention of conservative bloggers.


Edit:

It was JP that questioned the legitimacy of this article...not I

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vidcc

J2

quite the opposite.

On this occasion I agreed with the authors opinion on the HIV testing, it was the well from which it flowed that led me to wonder if the usage of the disputed word (wit) was intended. And it was only that which I questioned on this article.
and it was only to convey why i feel it may have been intended that i made any mention of conservative bloggers.


Edit:

It was JP that questioned the legitimacy of this article...not I

---

I don't know about all the semantics of this "wit" shit but I agree with you vid.

I agree with the authors opinion of HIV testing but at the same time don't think for a minute I missed, not the wit, but the author's liberal group slamming in conjunction with the topic starter. :dry:

Painfully obvious and propaganda ridden.

J2 Quote:This column struck me, and I offered it fairly, or, at least I thought I did.

**********************************************************

I thought it was interesting, and thanks for sharing it. You are right about the author.

This article pointed out to me that yet another one of our elected officials is ready to step outside their party lines when they feel it is necessary. :)

Also, none of us want to give up any of our rights to privacy. And yet there are times, such as in the HIV testing above, when it can benefit our society to do so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vidcc

J2

quite the opposite.

On this occasion I agreed with the authors opinion on the HIV testing, it was the well from which it flowed that led me to wonder if the usage of the disputed word (wit) was intended. And it was only that which I questioned on this article.
and it was only to convey why i feel it may have been intended that i made any mention of conservative bloggers.

---

Ah, the flowing well escape...

Oh, well.

One of these days, vid-one of these days.

'Rose-

As usual, you are the only one to tumble to my intent without questioning my motivation.

Well done.

B-

As you have piled on the same heap as vid, I gather you suffer from the same brand of "independent thought" as he does.

I should think you would quickly grow irritated by the fact of the upper-most strand of barbed wire from the fence upon which you perch slipping, thong-like, into your ass-crack.

Neither of you can pick any side of an issue without giving in to your in-bred urge to attempt to hoist any opinion-giver upon the petard of ideology, as if it were some duty assigned as your birthright.

Funny that neither of you can be bothered to do this when the author is liberal....oh, yeah-I forgot.

Liberal pundits do not exist-either that, or none on their opinions are sufficiently weighty to warrant a cut-and-paste here. :D

J2

If you ever post something that doesn't come from the "the trouble with liberals" or "this is typical of liberal thinking" stable then I won't call it.

It's odd that you can't credit us with actually agreeing with this blog even though it is tainted with the above.

you told me once that you don't join in with criticising Bush even when you don't agree with him because you just didn't want to join "the crowd" then criticise us when we agree with an anti liberal blogger

Quote:

---

Funny that neither of you can be bothered to do this when the author is liberal....oh, yeah-I forgot.
Liberal pundits do not exist-either that, or none on their opinions are sufficiently weighty to warrant a cut-and-paste here

---

we tend to put our own words instead of the words of others


I have read many blogs from both sides of the fence but never take them as being fact as they are purely opinion. As soon as I see the blog turn from opinion into a rant I tend to stop reading. I have yet to see the words "the trouble with conservatives" .... "what conservatives don't understand" when it is the case they do understand...they just disagree..... or "typical conservative thinking"


by rant I mean an opinion that says why someone has that opinion with the need to insult or dismiss the other side as being stupid or misinformed.

if you wish to remove the element of "knowing from where the author resides" perhaps you should put the opinion in your own words

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vidcc

J2
I have read many blogs from both sides of the fence but never take them as being fact as they are purely opinion. As soon as I see the blog turn from opinion into a rant I tend to stop reading. I have yet to see the words "the trouble with conservatives" .... "what conservatives don't understand" when it is the case they do understand...they just disagree..... or "typical conservative thinking"

if you wish to remove the element of "knowing from where the author resides" perhaps you should put the opinion in your own words

---

I don't think anyone in this entire forum has spent as much time making use of his/her own words/opinions/reasonings than yours truly.

Please forgive a tired old warrior for laying off some of the load.

BTW-

Your statement about "both sides of the fence" I will take as the best indicator yet of your steadfast positioning athwart the ideological aisle. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

Ah, the flowing well escape...

Oh, well.

One of these days, vid-one of these days.

'Rose-

As usual, you are the only one to tumble to my intent without questioning my motivation.

Well done.

B-

As you have piled on the same heap as vid, I gather you suffer from the same brand of "independent thought" as he does.

I should think you would quickly grow irritated by the fact of the upper-most strand of barbed wire from the fence upon which you perch slipping, thong-like, into your ass-crack.

Neither of you can pick any side of an issue without giving in to your in-bred urge to attempt to hoist any opinion-giver upon the petard of ideology, as if it were some duty assigned as your birthright.

Funny that neither of you can be bothered to do this when the author is liberal....oh, yeah-I forgot.

Liberal pundits do not exist-either that, or none on their opinions are sufficiently weighty to warrant a cut-and-paste here. :D

---

Well j2 I am not part of a hive-mind.

I also don't copy and paste much and yes the independent thought is there, bones. Unlike you, I have demonstrated not to be one-sided so I don't get where I should pick a side.

I deal in logic and not your propaganda...both of which made up your copy and paste project.

It's a rarity but I agree with vid and JP for that matter. Logic without the bullshit (except for the "wit" thingie; I couldn't be bothered with the semantics).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

I don't think anyone in this entire forum has spent as much time making use of his/her own words/opinions/reasonings than yours truly.

---

Well...your own words are somewhere in there. To me, you have been becoming somewhat more defined as of late but not definitive.

People know, for instance, where I might stand on an issue because I don't lollygag and pussyfoot around about it. Simple and direct.

For example, my original post only touched on the logic of the article.

Your postings are eye-openers for I might have missed the articles in the paper (or Fox News)...thank you.....
...or as Everose might say, "I try to read differing points of view", which really goes without saying. :dry: