By: Mr. Wonderful
If women being turned into men weren’t shocking enough, now these modern-day Frankenstein’s monsters are having babies!
I’m sure you’ve all heard about “Pregnant Man,” as it’s the talk of the town and the latest cause célèbre for the left. Thomas Beatie, a female who had a sex change operation to become male but decided to keep its reproductive organs is now pregnant and expecting a daughter with its wife, Nancy Roberts, in July. This is great news for the liberals who see it as the final frontier in challenging the status quo. Those with common sense who are concerned with the child’s welfare, however, might see things differently.
Now, the facts: Beatie, who was born Tracy Lagondino, underwent a female-to-male sex change operation yet opted to keep its female reproductive organs. As it stated in a recent issue of “The Advocate,” since its wife is unable to conceive, Thomas took it upon itself to bear the couple’s child. The two modern mad scientists purchased donor vials from a sperm bank and Thomas was inseminated at home. (I don’t even want to know how they did that!) And now, Beatie is having a baby!
This issue has people divided, as can be expected. Predictably, the liberals will defend Beatie’s decision. After all, there can be no special interest group more special than a transgender person with child. And of course, there will be the collective “oohs” and “ahhs” from the crowd as Beatie is seen as a loving husband who wants to help its wife have a child when she is unable to do. Most importantly, they’ll champion Beatie’s unnatural childbirth as a clear-cut case of “individual rights.”
But let’s hold the fanfare, ticker-tape parade and guest spot on Dr. Phil for just one second.
Let’s talk about individual rights. While all the well-intentioned whiners with a higher moral purpose might be focusing on Beatie’s rights, has anyone taken into consideration the rights of this unborn child as an individual? What kind of home life will these two really provide for the child? Really? It’s questionable if Beatie is even mentally and emotionally prepared for the demands of raising a child. Given the amount of obvious gender confusion, how could it possible be a good role model – male or female – to its child? Beatie and Roberts are forcing a lifestyle, which is bizarre to say the least, onto this child. And while lesbians with children can utilize “Heather Has Two Mommies” to help explain their situations; they don’t exactly make a children’s book to explain this!
And please don’t try to tell me they should have a child “simply because they can. Alcoholics, drug addicts, prostitutes and relatives living in the state of West Virginia can all have children, but it doesn’t mean they should. And the “it should be done because it’s scientifically possible” argument is equally absurd. Animals with four asses can no doubt be created in a lab; but again, this doesn’t exactly mean that they should.
If Beatie wants to get a sex change - or in liberal terminology, a “sexual reassignment” - that’s fine. If it wants to marry a woman, that’s fine too. But deciding to bear its own child under such bizarre circumstances, to me, is taking things a bit too far.
It’s like my Uncle Glenn always used to say, “You can’t have it both ways.” Of course, he never knew Thomas Beatie!
R.I.P. Steven Malcolm Anderson
I dunno. I'm not sure where this is coming from, and perhaps because I'm really pro-life, but I tend to think the issue is settled once conceived and it's not very, um, productive to second guess it at this point.
There's a child on the way. The baby is wanted. And that's a cause for joy. Welcome the baby, ignore the nuttiness of the parents, hope for the best. Isn't that what we all do anyway?
It must be bad.
At least this baby is wanted. He/She is ahead of the game as far as I am concerned.
Live and let live.
After seeing him on Oprah and hearing him talk about his discomfort with femininity after his mother died, I think he had more of an issue with the expectations and roles of being a woman than an actual biological error in feeling trapped in the wrong body. He could've just been a butch dyke (which in actuality he is, with special sauce and an extra somethin' somethin') and not had the surgery.
I do wonder how this kid will turn out socially. They won't be able to keep the reality of his or her birth since they decided to put their business out there. Maybe the family will luck out and shroud themselves in a liberal haven of non-judgement and acceptance. I'm about as open and accepting as they come, but this whole thing doesn't sit well with me...
First: If you grew up in the wrong body and went through all the hoops and the surgery to correct the biological error that gave you the wrong body in the first place; then you shouldn't be keeping your uterus and any other "wrong" organs. If he is truly a man inside then why keep the female parts? It calls into question the idea that maybe he's not stable or even that he really wasn't born in the wrong body.
Second: For those of you that think he did it as the ultimate act of love for his wife, then why is he on the Talk Show circuit? Why is he public? Great acts of love don't require a trips to Oprah, Maury and Larry King. There is no way that child isn't going to know where he/she came from and that is the fault of the very selfish and grandiose behavior of his HeMom. Kids have it hard enough...
By the way folks. He's appearing on Oprah, not Dr. Phil. But you'd never know that because Mr. W is a lousy blogger and didn't provide us with a link or context for this rant.
Really Rose. It's one thing to tease up some controversy by slanting current events. It's quite another to sit here and read such hostility and naked bigotry every time your co-blogger logs on. I don't read Kim duToit for that reason. Nor do I scour white supremacist blogs -- and that's what I see here every time this guy takes your stage.
This would have a fine subject for a mainstream media critique, the bread and circuses distraction stories that fill time instead of reports on some of the Food Riots around the world or the personal involvement of Bush and Cheney in detailed authorization of waterboarding and other "harsh interrogation (torture) methods that just came to light and are duly ignored by everyone but The Daily Show.
But I don't really see this as something that has become a "cause célèbre for the left." Save for MW's bald assertion, I haven't read or heard anything of the sort.
Rose, this guy doesn't honor even the basics of blogging. He really is terrible when you consider he has no appreciation of who his audience is let alone your own stated positions on this particular subject which he has ignorantly gone out of his way to insult. But the real problem is he doesn't even try to be factual by even trying to offer a quote or statistic or any damn thing that makes this a right/left issue but his own fear and prejudice. It's sloppy.
Where's the link? Not one link. Traditional blogging protocol demands that he at least offer one link to show he's not talking completely out of his ass and has some arguably legitimate factual basis for his ridiculous opinion. He doesn't even link an original story about this guy. It's called Google. Use it.
Where's the link to a liberal blog that even discusses this story? Shakespear's sister talks about it, did KOS? I dunno, I only have their front pagers in my google reader which I used google to search out any references from the leftie blogs I susbscribe to. No Kos link on this.
How about that reliable gang of Marxists at Democratic Underground? Did the left's version of the Freepers talk about this? I dunno. How about Media Matters? They did a critique of some bombastically insensitive remarks from the right, like those that appear on this front page, as did Think Progress. Newsbusters has a media critique that ABC (The All Bitter Channel) only talked about the positive and not negative aspects of this story. (Go figure)
At least MW could have linked and/or quoted a blurb from the the two stories at Huffington Post -- one also a media critique and one actually of substance on kids adjusting to a transgender parent.
I'd link all these things I found in about 30 seconds, but sourcing material properly evidently is not something that needs to be done on this blog. So you'll just have to take my word for it.
You also should believe me when I tell you we caught bin Laden at Tora Bora and have kept him at Gitmo ever since, the Bush approved "principles" Cheney, Rice and Rumsfeld having thought it would be useful for the fear factor to hide the fact that he was no longer at large and break out phony recording before the '04 election would seal the deal. Then they plan to have him "captured" right before the next election -- by John McCain's son serving in Afghanistan.
Don't believe me? Look it up for yourself.
It's not just that the guy is full of shit, Rose. He's embarrassingly lazy. Uncle Glen is cute, but not legitimate source material.
Oh, and to head off the inevitable stupidity from Mr. W. that I just hate him because I disagree with him, I don't believe I've expressed an opinion one way or another with his take on transgender parenting as much as try to point out that his ridiculously insulting style and factually void presentation -- his lazy knee-jerk bigotry -- has truly degraded the legitimacy and entertainment value of this domain.
If it's so damn easy, then why don't you do it yourself, lazybones?
You're a moron W. A childish characterization of a conservative blogger, an embarrassment to your side. Not fit for prime time.
No. I'd appreciate it if you didn't. I have nothing to apologize for to anyone. Mr. Wonderful's editorials are his.
He wrote the opinion, he stands by the opinion. He also knows where I stand on the issue of Transgenders as does everyone else.
And you may recall that I had plenty of cobloggers that wrote things that were OBVIOUSLY CONTRARY to my own beliefs and intolerant of many in this cherished community. Remember: Tim, Shep, and Kevin D?
Also, he does have an idea of who my audience is. My audience and my reliable regular commenters are not one and the same. I have between 6k and 8k daily unique readers and that is up from where it was when Mr. Wonderful started writing here.
My audience has more than doubled since his first piece and has been traveling upward ever since.
Want me to cite you? Gladly.
Nor do I scour white supremacist blogs -- and that's what I see here every time this guy takes your stage.
How does a blog about transgender parenting equate to white supremacy? That's a mighty mighty big accusation for you to make with absolutely no proof whatsoever to back it up. Or in other words, you got a battleship mouth to compliment that rowboat ass.
Unless you have photos of me garbed in white sheets, burning crosses and lynching black folk, you better lay off these types of baseless accusations, Marky Mark. It's bad enough you call me "racist," but to take it to the next level and blatantly call me a "white supremacist" with absolutely no proof outside of your emotional reaction to my blogs is tantamount to being in third grade and you saying I have "cooties" because you don't like me.
And furthermore: bullying behavior is a red flag that a blogger has not learned to control his or her aggression. A blogger who bullies needs counseling to learn healthy ways to interact with people. Professional counseling can guide a blogger through discovering why bullying is hurtful. Through this process, a counselor can encourage the blogger to develop empathy, which is being sensitive to and understanding the feelings of others. Counseling has been shown to help reduce anger and improve interpersonal relationships in bloggers with bullying behavior.
I'm Mr. Wonderful and I approve this message.
Of course, I update so infrequently and intermittently that I've managed to keep my readership in the teens despite links by USA Today (got 50k hits a day for about a week after that), Columbia Journalism Review, the Peace Corps Web site, and a host of prominent blogs and bloggers.
I covet the readers too - they bring in the advertising.
;-)
Now let's not presume here. From what I read, no one has more problems with their sexual and gender proclivities than "conservatives".
I see irrational hate, bigotry and xenophobia, raw and unfiltered from Kim du Toit, White Supremecists and Mr. W. Whom they choose to hate is not as boorish as the unsourced, prejudiced intolerance I see.
You're a bigot W, at least you write like one. And your opinions are baseless primarily because you don't do your homework. You create your opinions out of whole cloth and ignore the world around you.
Um, I'm pretty sure that "inside" refers to his/her emotional status. What difference do the parts make?
"Great acts of love don't require a trips to Oprah, Maury and Larry King. There is no way that child isn't going to know where he/she came from and that is the fault of the very selfish and grandiose behavior of his HeMom."
Going on Oprah is very selfish and grandiose behavior? Man, are a lot of people going to pissed to find that out. Anyway, better than even money the child won't grow up being bound by the kind of conventional thinking and morays which make some people so uncomfortable about it's moth..., er, whatever.
Mark:
For someone who chastises me about posting opinions with no links or facts to back it up, you sure are doing the same thing with your white supremacy allegations.
Perhaps you can step down off your soapbox long enough to dig out the photos of Mr. Wonderful walking arm in arm with David Duke? Where's the photos of me burning crosses or getting swastikas tattooed up and down my arms? Don't worry ... I'll wait.
But then again, I seem to remember us having this discussion before - you made an outrageous claim and I asked you to prove it. Instead of doing so, you fell silent for a while, allowing your fellow members of the Unholy Alliance pop in and do your fighting for you. (Your father must be so proud!) Then, when you finally mustered up the courage to reply, you said you would no longer argue with me because I'm a cartoon character, etc.
I asked you earlier to prove I'm a white supremacist and the best you could do was offer a defenseless claim. I believe it is YOU whose opinions are baseless. It is YOU who creates your opinions out of whole cloth and ignores the world around you.
In other words, don't let your long hair cover up that red neck, boy!
The pleasure was all yours,
Mr. Wonderful
You know, since I've no idea what rock Rose found you under and you remain conveniently anonymous, not even google could help me find dirt on you. But since you've left the impression not only with me but with others that you'd be more than comfortable swigging moonshine at the next Klan rally, why don't you prove you aren't a bigot beyond mere faux outrage that anyone could think such a thing.
Even though I am fully aware that proof isn't your strong-suit, you set for me an impossible task while you should be able to reasonable prove my impression wrong -- if you have any facts to back it up.
You write like a bigot. You may not be one in real life. In person, like most cowardly bullies and wife-beaters, you may be perfectly charming. But dude, when you get into your blogging character that cloaks your hidden identity, you unleash some fairly disgusting bottom-feeding tendencies.
Now I can't tell from the written word whether you are playing a part or using the comfort of anonymity to protect you personally from your deep-seated prejudicial instincts. But I find it hard to believe the readily comprehended inferences you invite are not deliberate.
See it's really not even what your take is on an issue anymore, and note I still don't have a dog in the hunt on what I agree with or disagree with in this daddy/mommy story. I take issue with your personal demeaning style. I don't even bother with your substance or (as in this case) complete lack thereof.
And again, it's not about who you hate, it's that you hate. See, we don't even know your age and if you should be forgiven because you express yourself in a manner more fitting for someone in his 80's and grew up to fear the "negroes" or "queers" back when gay meant fun and not an indication of sexual preference.
So it's impossible to prove or disprove anything about you, and I've long since figured out that 90% of the time it is useless to argue with you in a reasonable manner on the merits since you refuse to consider inconvenient facts and don't read linked material. So I'm left with stating my opinion about how utterly bad your blogging style is.
And Dude, you really have room for improvement.
If you can get past your petty feelings and stop taking it so personally that I think your writing abilities really suck, you might discover that I've put in a lot of constructive criticism here.
If you take it to heart, learn to research and link stuff, take a breath every time you think your latest insult is too clever by half and scale it back just a little bit, just enough so that you don't look worse that your target, maybe, just maybe you won't suck so much.
I'm madder than a Real Man in San Francisco about this, Mr. W. Tell me more.
I think your Uncle Glenn would probably agree: you only get one chance at a first impression.
So when you implied, early on, that Barack Obama wanted to "kill whitey," well, that first impression of you wasn't a good one. At least not for me.
Nor is it yours, dear boy.
I'd debate you, but debating with a hypocrite is largely a pointless gesture. I restate my original point, though. You call me names - racist, Klansman, bigot, 80s throwback, etc. - with absolutely no proof beyond your own, perosnal emotional reaction to my words. (Obviously, I've offended your delicate, San Francisco sensibilities!)
And who says I hate? I mean, besides you, Your Majesty? Do I hate? Can you prove that I hate? And what's the definition of hate? You didn't put up a link or a reference. How dare you be so inconsiderate!
I'm Mr. Wonderful and I approve this message.
Actually, he has the actual meaning of the words you write to judge you by (shame about that). Any emotions tend to come afterward.
Perhaps, but the key word in all of that is "judge," is it not, Shep? I mean, it's very hard for anyone to take the members of the Unholy Alliance seriously when you go and do the very thing you condemn others for doing.
But I understand your reasoning, of course. You have righteousness and a higher moral purpose on your side, so it's perfectly fine for the blood to be spilled and the bodies to be trampled - so long as you're doing it, of course.
Fortunately for you, sometimes the emotion is simple pity. You sound...daft.
Wait. You mean that you want to post your thoughts, but you don't want anyone to form an opinion of those thoughts?
I don't get it.
Yeah, well listen, Whitey, that ship has left the dock. Maybe Rose can delete the comment for you.
I'd debate you, but debating with a hypocrite is largely a pointless gesture.
Probably. It's like debating a Holocaust denier -- it just dignifies them with the response they don't merit.
Do I hate? Can you prove that I hate?
Jaysus, man. No one can even prove you exist. Isn't that the whole point of using a pseudonym?
You have righteousness and a higher moral purpose on your side, so it's perfectly fine for the blood to be spilled and the bodies to be trampled - so long as you're doing it, of course.
I dunno -- it was Mr. Wonderful said "kill whitey."
There you go again, a typical plea for equivalence while inferring you are being unfairly victimized. Shep is correct, I interpret (judge if you will) the character you portray by the script your typist writes. I have nothing more to go on and for evidence I refer to your entire body of posts and comments on this blog.
It is self-evident, and for justification of my conclusion -- which by no means are written in stone but modifiable as your author gets better at character development -- I simply would direct you to everything you have written here to date. Every time you set finger to keyboard you reinforce my point, save one instance deep down in a previous comment thread where you dropped your guard and acted reasonably -- for which I gave you credit.
I hardly need to link the one rare instance where you didn't act the fool to prove I have ample evidence of your underdeveloped understanding of how to be a productive blogger, do I? However it might behoove you to search it out if you think it would challenge my thesis.
I think the real problem is that you are triple-thinking this whole role you took on. You are playing the part of a transparently two-dimensional conservative blogger who has a biased and ill-informed perspective on what he thinks we liberals think a conservative thinks. Follow? You're three, maybe four-steps removed from reality and making this whole thing way too hard on yourself. There's simply too much room for error and you continue to make rookie mistakes since you don't know the territory well enough.
Pop some stuff out and invite reactions, and then challenge reactions you think are wrong AFTER you find out what people really thing. Don't keep attacking the straw men, because in the end they put Don Quixote away for his delusions.
More attempts at understanding what you wish to ridicule and less knee-jerk, tried-and-true cartoonishly predictable reactions will make you much better at this. And them maybe some day some of us will consider you a worthy adversary and engage you on the merits, reasonably and with respect -- but you gotta at least try to earn it.
Try it. Quit acting like you're acting like you think you should react to what you think we think. Respect your audience and see what happens. You might be surprised. Then again, winged simians might emerge from your anal pore.
Oh ... I'm sorry. Did you say something? I must've dozed off somewhere in the middle of your meaningless diatribe.
My bad, yo!
Mr. Wonderful
Self reflection is the first step towards enlightenment grasshopper.
You're absolutely right. To wit:
bullying behavior is a red flag that a blogger has not learned to control his or her aggression. A blogger who bullies needs counseling to learn healthy ways to interact with people. Professional counseling can guide a blogger through discovering why bullying is hurtful. Through this process, a counselor can encourage the blogger to develop empathy, which is being sensitive to and understanding the feelings of others. Counseling has been shown to help reduce anger and improve interpersonal relationships in bloggers with bullying behavior.
Learn it. Live it. Love it.
Again, this is hackneyed victimization most transparently shallow wingnuts have been using for decades. Try another tact, this is too easy.
Further, while it may give you solace, I would not be here if I was angry. I would have followed my initial instinct and have boycotted your posts, even before Mr. Wonderful said "kill whitey." This is ironically amusing, just as DPU said it would be.
Sorry, but if your intent was to get me angry, you've failed miserably. If that is the impression I gave then I suggest you're just looking for someone to share your hate of "other" people.
Hahahahahahahahahahah! Sensitivity and "understanding the feelings of others" on a post calling a gender-confused future mother a "Frankenstein's monster," no less.
OK, DPU, I finally get it. It has got to be a parody of a rightly imbecile. No one could possibly be that self-unaware unless it's a gag.
See Shep, what you've got to do is think of this like a video game. From Mario Brothers to Doom to the Final Fantasy series, thousands of video games feature some kind of deadly maze you must survive while navigating lethal obstacles, gaining health points, weapons and gagets along the way that assist you in defeating some over-the-top outrageous "Boss" or ridiculous monster (often complete with horns and red skin) at the end that must be eliminated to compete the level and move on.
That's got to be what this guy thinks he is, a set piece in a game. And of course it's a fools game to play by his rules. Most serious gamers eventually will resort to game cheats, codes that let you play on, many of which are put in the game by the designer him/herself.
Think of it like a Kobiashi Maru scenario, a no-win fantasy, a zero-sum-gain situation where you can't change the rules and there are no cheat codes available, thus like in War Games, the only winning move is not to play.
A better, more entertaining choice than to debate a mannequin is to examine the metagame within which the dummy resides. It's not a question of winning, but of avoiding a loss. After all, winning an argument with a marionette is hardly rewarding -- but to get the puppeteer so frustrated he tangles his lines, that's a challenge.
This is just an in-your-face version of what this place has always been, just less graciously than Rose usually does it.
Like when you said Obama wanted to "Kill Whitey?"
Sorry buddy, no can do. Other than Asteroids and numerous flight simulators, I never got the swing of it - you know, I'll learn the "game cheat" when I'm dead. Right now, I'd prefer to drink up, laugh at the funny humans and drive around or over the stupid animals which run out in front of me. That's what call lethal obstacles.
I'm appaled at your behaviour, Shep. Those animals are living creatures and all life is precious. How dare you kill defenseless animals for your amusement and pleasure.
Rose ... as a co-blogger on this site, I DEMAND that Shep be banned!
Boo-Hoo!
Bioengineering is the next phase. People will be able to simply grow a uterus if they want to experience childbirth.
It won't be cheap as Mr. Garrison discovers, but market demand will drive applications.
Politics will eventually become 3D, biopolitics will become the third axis.
What scientists call the "yuck factor" gets worn away with exposure until it becomes commonplace and acceptable.
I myself, welcome our transhuman future.
;)
Fantastic. Your future is indeed a wondersplific place.
Which is a good thing because I'd hate to see his sweet ass get ruined because you want to play mad scientist!
True, I've already wasted far too much of my life on the flightsims. Hopefully, it at least helps me avoid the stupid animals.
Eh, couldn't do much worse.
...as far as we know.
I'll be sure to show up in nothing but my birthday suit and a smile.
Does your mother tell you everything, double?
HOLY SHIT! I had no idea that gerbils were hung like tree trunks. What are they like those retractable Craftsman tape measures?
A massive cock that retracts inside their little bodies. Christ, I thought gerbiling meant that people shoved the entire gerbil in their ass...I had no idea they actually got fucked by the massive retractable gerbil cock.
You learn something new everyday...
Otherwise, there had to to be some way to explain the apparent complete lack of blood flow to the brain. Congratulations, you and Ron Jeremy are brothers in kind.
So Rose, you telling us you're Fucking Wonderful, I mean, well ... you know what I mean. You know.
I thought you swore off picking up losers in bars.
My mistake. And Rose's (again).
Are you talking about Rose or Mr. Wonderful?
Oh honey, you have to say that or it causes performance anxiety.
Really? I've never had to say anything. Hmmm, that explains my marriage then...
Luckily, I've never experienced it henceforth. I always have a massively Wonderful time.
And what would you say if you didn't?
I want a divorce....
Hah. But that takes a few years to get around to, doesn't it?
I take off for a week and a half to get surgery to have kidney stones taken out of me, and this is what I come back to.
I've had enough issues with my own penis over the past week to need to hear about anyone else's.
It's nice to see that the Mr. Wonderful "issue" has been resorted to a dick measuring contest. How very mature of both sides.
Hey! When in Rome, and all that ...
More like South Jersey.
Glad to have you back ... minus the kidney stones, of course.
You can take the girl out of Westland, but you can never take Westland out of the girl. Besides, don't you live with your mom?
Isn't there a similar canard about an Armenian and an outdoor lavatory?
It's about time.
LOL. What is that a joke? The comment section hasn't been classy in ...actually, it's never been classy.
If I had the time and inclination to go back through all the attempted insults, injuries and degradations voiced by the Unholy Alliance, I'm sure your actions would prove to be about as "classy" as a fart in church.
Again, it's your serve. It may take some time, but things will never change unless you start down a new course. You can only control your actions. No one is forcing you to act like a jerk, but you get the reactions you deserve here as in the real world.
And expect me to respond ... in spades.
Type it, but sit back for a bit before you hit send. And maybe on occasion resist the urge to hit that button at all, or at least edit it to soften the impact and invite retaliation yourself. The writing itself can be cathartic, but if you really want to prove you're the better man, be the better man.
You can't control what others do, but only you can exhibit the self-control that marks you as either mature enough to discuss thing in a reasonable manner or simply incapable of resisting your inner demons.
What the hell, what do you loose if you at least try? I've rarely seen you try, but I have seen it. You have the ability. If you want to be taken seriously, act serious instead of like a parody. Keep in mind behind the words you read here are thinking, feeling human beings with whom in the long run you have much more in common than you have differences.
It down't work all the time, and you can't always control emotions either, but others out here have emotions and egos as well.
It's the Golden Rule, dude. My or anyone else's bad behavior does not give you a license to act that way. You've dug a large hole at this point, so it's going to take time to earn the respect to which you feel entitled. But it will never, ever come unless you start trying and stop acting and acting out.
You make that sound like a bad thing?
And expect me to respond ... in spades.
Kill Whitey said "spades!!?" Heh.
You almost had me, Mark. I mean, really. All this new-age, happy-crappy, touchey-feely stuff. I mean, for a minute there, I almost believed you. But then, I considered the source of said "information," and it was immediately invalidated.
For the record, I'm not really hurt or wounded by the words of my detractors - the Unholy Alliance. I consider it all part and parcel to my work here as a social critic (not necessarily political pundit). By stating an opinion that is more in line with traditional, conservative thought (in most cases), I fully expect a backlash. And I enjoy giving as good (or in most cases, better) as I get. All part of the game, etc.
And I won't even get into all the nasty things that have been said to me by the UA. As my Queen suggested, I should just come to grips with the fact that you will never allow yourself to be held accountable for the words you speak and the accusations you make. Apparently, you have a higher purpose - one that seems to include "saving me from myself" - and thus, you can insult, degrade and accuse me of things I am not, because it's all in the name of your glorious cause. I guess what I'm trying to say is that my arms grow wearing beating the drum of your own hypocrisy because it's obvious you will never hear the tune.
Which brings me to this neo-Christian, semi-Buddhist, faux-Dr. Phil side of you. I'm sure it sounds a lot like what the Romans told my Celtic and Slavic ancestors as the Centurions moved in to burn their villages, rape the women, kill the men and annihilate their pre-Christian cultures.
"Don't worry, you savages ... we're doing this for your own good. We're trying to save you. And remember what Jesus said - 'Turn the other cheek.'"
I think I'll pass ...
I'm Mr. Wonderful and I approve this statement.
Stunning.
Curious also that you and Rose spell out an agenda for you, a job specifically designed (transparently so) to defeat an agenda you think I have, which you cannot coherently identify and only vaguely describe based on mere conjecture.
You want to know what I think my agenda is, since I'm closest to the source of something you cannot possibly know without getting into my head? I consider Rose a friend. She was pretty decent to me in the past. I also consider Ara a friend who has made the effort to meet both of us in real life.
You aren't just messing with people's minds in some kind of a game. You are messing with people who have a relationship built upon over a period of years. And it's shameful.
Consider the source? Dude, you don't even know me. Who the fuck are you to judge? Good advice is good advice, even if it comes from the Devil himself.
Funny ... the exact same question was implied in my last post to you.
And as far as doing onto others goes, well ... I do onto others as they do unto me. Those who treat me with kindness, love, decency and respect get the same from me. Those who bark, whine, needle and criticize get called out on their own hypocrisies, half-baked arguments, and general, boorish behavior.
And to address this "agenda" you mentioned. My Queen is a conservative blogger ... it says so in her headline, for crying out loud. I, too, am a proponent for conservative thought. Abrasive though I may be at times (admittedly), and my apparent willingness to slaughter any and all of the liberals "sacred cows" (again, guilty as charged), I would think that the my place here would be self-evident, being that this is a conservative blog, etc.
Lastly, and I wasn't going to address this but I will - don't think that hiding behind your friendship with my Queen will keep me from retaliating against your critiques of my contributions here.
As always, the pleasure was all yours,
Mr. Wonderful
Look at it this way. If your purpose is to be persuasive, I respectfully submit that your tactics are undermining your strategic goal.
And I respectfully won't be purchasing that oceanfront property in Arizona you keep trying to sell me on.
You are awesome, keep striking fear into the hearts of these infidels!!