What Does Bipartisan Really Mean?

from the not-what-Congress-wants-you-to-believe dept

Idea from this Techdirt article.

Filed Under: , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “What Does Bipartisan Really Mean?”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

Yes, Mike / Nina have nothing better to do than wait for you to post something retarded and based on no facts and then post an article a few hours later just to make you look like an idiot. /s

You poor deluded troll. You really think the world revolves around or gives a shit about your “observations”? I got some bad news for you, Sunshine. It doesn’t.

Carry on indeed. We know you will. With the incessant comments that state nothing factual.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:4 Re:


Rabid idealogue? Have you looked around this place? Mike is still harboring the idea that the silly first amendment challenges to copyright are valid – even after the court slapped Lessig down so hard that he hasn’t been heard from on it since.

Techdirt is an idealogue blog, plain and simple. Anyone who disagrees gets treated as you treat me: insults, name calling, and derogatory statements about my opinions.

So much for free speech, right? You would rather shout down those who object and exile them from the site, rather than deal with the issues.

Mike is proud of you. You ate his shit whole.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:6 Re:

Actually, I have seen Mike’s version of debating, there isn’t much to it. Most of the time, it starts with “you don’t understand economics” or “you have no idea what you are talking about”.

Mike talks a good game, but rarely addresses key issues.

One of the good ones: You know that whole idea of infinite distribution, right? He says it takes the “supply demand” calculation down to the point where things have zero marginal costs. However, he rarely mentions that one of the things that comes with that supply / demand theory is a big asterix that says “this does not work properly with items that have no real marginal costs”. In other words, the very theory he uses to support his views doesn’t work. He knows it, he ignores it.

First amendment and copyright – Mike’s stand has always been that copyright should be knocked down by the 1st amendment. He learned that idea from Lessig, I think. Well, Lessig got his dick slammed in the dirt in the courts over this one, nearly a unanimous decision to send him packing. Yet, Mike has never come out and said “that is a dead issue, copyright is consitutional”. He just let’s it linger, because it doesn’t work for him.

Mike does have one very important skill. He knows how to baffle them with bullshit. He piles it so high, so wide, and spikes it with just enough verifiable fact as to make it look whole. It’s not, but he’s good at it, and good at presenting it.

I bow down to his shit shoveling skills. They are near the top.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:5 Re:

You know, I don’t really get involved in the debates between “trolls” and Techdirt fans and all I do is read them (most of the time I quickly skip to more insightful discussions).

But take it from me:
I see a few people who post here and who have ideas that disagree with Techdirt (and I assume you are one of them, at least in the context of thread).

What I rarely if ever see from the people is constructive criticism. What I mostly see is name-calling, personal attacks, ignoring the other party’s arguments instead of responding to them and in some cases complete lies and made up facts.
Your posts in this thread are no different and I’m going to support this with a few examples:

“Techdirt is an idealogue blog, plain and simple. Anyone who disagrees gets treated as you treat me: insults, name calling, and derogatory statements about my opinions.”
— You are trying to make a point, which I am fine with, but you offer no evidence, not a single quote from other comments. It just doesn’t persuade me so I see this discussion as nothing more than a verbal fight between you and the other posters. —

“So much for free speech, right? You would rather shout down those who object and exile them from the site, rather than deal with the issues.”
— Now here, as a neutral observer of the regular exchanges between Pro- and Anti- Techdirt folk (or whatever you want to call yourselves), I have to disagree with your assertion. I’ve seen a lot of stuff posted here by the anti-Techdirt folk that was not constructive and sometimes offensive (personal attacks) yet none of it was deleted, removed or otherwise censored. To hear you say that people here are trying to censor you is absolutely not convincing to me and makes it harder to take you seriously. —

“Mike is proud of you. You ate his shit whole.”
— Vulgarity really doesn’t help me take you seriously. —

I was recently visiting another website where I heard the arguments of people who have opinions that are opposed to Techdirt’s, and I found that some people were making really good points and this led me to rethink about copyright and related issues. However, nobody who has been posting on Techdirt has managed to do that yet, so maybe there’s actually a problem with the way the anti-Techdirt folk are arguing.

Now I’d like to clarify a few things:
– I’m not trying to prove you wrong or argue against you. I’m only trying to offer you some feedback, because I think it would be great if we could have constructive discussions on Techdirt and hear both sides’ ideas and arguments. And my feedback is: the people who disagree with Techdirt just aren’t convincing even to a neutral party like me. And it’s not your position that is the issue, it’s the way you argue. Hopefully you will take this into consideration and things will change for the better.

– There are pro-Techdirt folk who do the same mistakes I’ve said you’re doing, however the reason I’m not calling them out is because there are enough pro-Techdirt folk who debate constructively. The issue with the anti-Techdirt folk is that ALL those who post here are not constructive, at least from what I have seen. And before accusing me of bias, please remember what I mentioned above: I’ve seen very interesting arguments supporting your opinions on other websites. Arguments which gave me something to think about. My problem is, I don’t see those arguments or the same constructive debate here on Techdirt.

– Finally, I’m aware that you feel persecuted here and thus it’s normal for you to be quite defensive. However, you’ve reached a point where you no longer even convince neutral folk like me who want to hear both sides of the story and don’t want to be biased. It would be good if you could get over the attacks you are receiving and remain constructive in your discussions so that neutral people could learn from you; but if you cannot do this, then perhaps it’s time to give up and stop posting here – after all, if you’ve become so defensive that you can’t convince anyone anymore, then why keep it up? It won’t achieve anything.

Anonymous Coward says:

What Does Bipartisan Really Mean?


Adjective. Abbreviation for: “One can buy both major US parties off for insanely low prices”.

Definition(s): Firesale on democracy; Fucked beyond all repair (FUBAR).

Typical Usage: The US political system is completely bipartisan.

Synonyms: useless, dead.

MrWilson says:

Re: Bipartisan is an outdated term

It does a lot of good if you’re fully invested in the false dichotomy of Reps vs. Dems! Surely one of the two parties represent the entirety of your cut and dry and never changing or nuanced political views!

You can lead a member of the voting populace to the kool-aid but you can’t make them drink…until we get this legislation passed outlawing water in favor of Brawndo!

Wally (profile) says:


……..Is an excuse for poloititions trying to hide their own curruption.
……..Something only the public can maintain
……..Gives one side the power to endorse a weak candidate for the other to keep their pockets lined and thenselves in power (most republicans actually wanted Santorum, not Romney).
……..’s true meaning is both public and congressional approval.

Nina’s cartoon depicts exactly how I feel about my government right now.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...