Talk:Politics of personal destruction

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Inappropriate Image

The use of the "Looney Left" image on this page is childish, and inappropriate for an encyclopedia. Unless it can be justified, it will be removed. --DinsdaleP 11:09, 11 December 2008 (EST)

  • And in your humble opinion, Dinsdale, just who are you to threaten removal of anything? Do you dispute the fact that the radical (looney) left practices the politics of personal destruction, as documented by hundreds of media sources and political observers? I will ignore your harsh and threatening incivility this once. --₮K/Talk! 11:24, 11 December 2008 (EST)
Is the image meant to be ironic? -DrSandstone 11:26, 11 December 2008 (EST)
Perhaps so, Doctor. Tragic Irony, or Dramatic Irony. The (lack of) logic employed by the left towards Bork and Lieberman is so stunning, as only to be explained by lunacy, conservatives feel. This article is a stub, and as more examples are added, I am sure even liberal editors will see the use for the image. --₮K/Talk! 11:39, 11 December 2008 (EST)
I apologize for appearing harsh, TK - I was following the rules by bringing this up on the Talk page first, instead of doing something truly uncivil like removing it without discussion. I don't feel it's my place to add opinions to encyclopedia articles myself, but posting a cartoon that involves namecalling doesn't appear appropriate or professional for the encyclopedic section of CP. Frankly, I'm seeing many of these Politics of personal destruction tactics used here on CP to attack Barack Obama, but these are sanctioned by the leadership because of Obama's positions. I don't dispute what happened to Bork at all, but the use of the cartoon seems unnecessary and lowers the credibility of this article. If you insist on it remaining, this will be my last word on the subject. --DinsdaleP 11:44, 11 December 2008 (EST)
Well, thanks DinsdaleP. Encyclopedia's, especially on line ones, have to provide facts and readability. If a catchy graphic draws the attention of our users, and makes a conservative point (here on this self-labeled conservative encyclopedia) than it has a purpose. Conservatives don't draw back from the truth, obfuscate language to sugar-coat the obvious facts. The examples cited are indeed nutty or looney, if you will. I do want you to know, reading your work, I don't consider you to be a part of the "looney left" as characterized by the examples so far! --₮K/Talk! 11:53, 11 December 2008 (EST)
Ah, lastwordism. Yet another tool in the liberal avoiding-debate arsenal. - Rod Weathers 12:52, 11 December 2008 (EST)
I believe that Dinsale wasn't firing some kind of Parthian shot, but saying that he doesn't intend to keep debating this into the ground. That's not last-wordism at all. Corry 15:08, 11 December 2008 (EST)
Continue to debate - blocked. Acknowledge the authority of TK to have it as he wants it - engaging in last wordism. Awesome. Aziraphale 13:17, 11 December 2008 (EST)
  • Pretty cheap shot, Azi. Where is the last-wordism in my post? --₮K/Talk! 15:13, 11 December 2008 (EST)
He was referring to RodWeather's post, not yours. --DinsdaleP 15:32, 11 December 2008 (EST)
Yup yup. You didn't have anything to say about last-wordism, T. Aziraphale 15:49, 11 December 2008 (EST)

Potential example

Would the smears/character assassination of the Covington Catholic students count as an example of the Politics of Personal Destruction? --1990'sguy (talk) 19:30, 21 January 2019 (EST)