Comments on: Conversation conditional

By: Venise Alstergren

Venise Alstergren — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 07:31:47 +0000

Tee: Thank you so much for the lecture re my comment. I’m flattered that you should have taken so much time and effort with my humble entry.:)
As you will notice this comment is being written about two weeks after your lengthy corrections. Perhaps, if you had got my name halfway right I would have seen your comment before this.

Venise

26 July 2009

By: Catsidhe

Catsidhe — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 23:48:59 +0000

My name is Legion, for I am many.

My point being that in my experience, ‘Ratbag Right’ refers to precisely that subset of The Right which is unreliable, ad hominem, frothy, reactionary, and unable to spell syllogism, let alone to construct one. ‘Ratbag Right’ deserves a title, as it is an identifiable proper subset of The Right. And I say ‘we’ because when I use the term, others around here seem to understand me perfectly well. Except when some people decide to try and play semantic games, and get it wrong.

So, in summary: in my understanding, which is to the best of my knowledge the common understanding in this place, ‘Ratbag Right’ is a term referring to a subset of the Right, that subset being of the worst, less-intelligent-than-they-think-they-are, provocative-for-its-own-sake, noisy useful idiots. The need for a special term for same explicitly supposes the existence of the non-ratbag right, which is more than Bolt and Blair (inter alia) are capable of doing for the Left.

And of course there is a Ratbag Left. But they don’t tend to come comment here.

By: baldrick

baldrick — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 13:51:56 +0000

haranguemikey@35: “I could read his stuff with my hair on fire.”

So he has anaesthetic properties???

By: baldrick

baldrick — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 13:49:47 +0000

Catsidhe@34 – now we have the royal “our”??? You speak for many young Skywalker….

The ultimate point I was trying to make is that I dislike abuse of people who see themselves as the right (that’s anywhere from the centre to the far right) as much as I dislike abuse of people of the left (same definition).

Call someone a ratbag?? Go for it. Back it up. But tarnishing supposed political leanings as monkey did is a bit rich. For every “ratbag right” I can easily show you a “ratbag left”…most of them write for GLW! I expected discourse to be a little bit more mature here.

By: Partisan Hackery « Angry Young Centrist

Partisan Hackery « Angry Young Centrist — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 07:22:01 +0000

...] just repeats Hartigan’s opinion on blogs without adding anything new). Crikey seems to be trying to point out by implication how The Punch is not really part of a ‘conversation’, [...

By: haranguemikey

haranguemikey — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 00:59:47 +0000

Guy Rundle is one of the best writers in Australia today, both from command of the issues and technical ability to write. I could read his stuff with my hair on fire.

By: Catsidhe

Catsidhe — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 00:41:20 +0000

Thing is, Baldrick, when we use the term Ratbag Right, it is, in our minds anyway, to define someone of the right who “can’t mount a cogent argument, [and so] resort to abuse.”

If that’s a title you’re happy to live with, given that this is practically a term of art in this community, then fine. It at least gives notice that we don’t need to take notice of a single thing you say.

If you have a different definition for the term, please let us know so that we can translate out of your language.

By: baldrick

baldrick — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 00:10:46 +0000

Yes Catsidhe…that it. You nailed it in one.

By: bpobjie

bpobjie — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 23:51:44 +0000

“What half way decent and intelligent person ever commit in public to reading Adele Horin’s garbage?”

I think you just did.

By: Catsidhe

Catsidhe — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 22:46:19 +0000

So, Baldrick: you claim to be not just Right, but explicitly of the ratbag Right?

Glad we’ve cleared that up, then.