|
|
Post by JustMyOpinion on Nov 8, 2008 11:35:58 GMT -5
It bothers me that some of you are forming a “pack” and attacking people (not just Mink) that think differently than yourselves. Some of us have been posting together for a long time, and even though differences of opinion had created a lot of spark in past threads we’d never resorted to making entertainment out of another’s opinions, well, at least not so extensively. Mink has contributed to the forum based on her perceptions, research, and yes, feelings (we are human) just like the rest of you, and to hit the smite link every time she posts an opposing opinion just for the fun of it is not fair game. She has done an excellent job of sticking to her guns (not trying to thread drift  ) and I respect her for that, just as I respect most of you for defending your stances when done in a reasoned manner. I hope we can continue to respectfully debate each other. I know I have learned a lot posting with all of you, and often I will stop myself from shutting down your opinions and take an objective look at what you have to say and have found a lot of value in them. Can we please move forward... |
|
|
|
Post by surefire on Nov 8, 2008 11:41:11 GMT -5
I agree.
I wish posters would attack each others arguments, and stop the personal attacks.
It is okay to disagree, but the personal attacks against members is getting out of hand.
Nice post JMO, I've had the same exact concerns lately.
|
|
|
|
Post by ferrous on Nov 8, 2008 12:05:08 GMT -5
Oh please...
JMO writes; " Mink has contributed to the forum based on her perceptions, research, and yes, feelings"
I nearly choked on that one. Mink has contributed to the forum based on her perceptions and feelings. The bit about "research" is highly debatable.
Mink is perfectly capable of defending herself. If some time has elapsed since her last posting, I am sure that it is because she is occupied with something else.
I find it somewhat offensive that JMO seems to feel that she must come to the defense of something that might only be a figment of her imagination.
Is JMO justified with the theme of this thread or is she only venting a preconceived notion that the majority-rightists are picking on an easy target of the minority-leftists?
|
|
|
|
Post by subdjoe on Nov 8, 2008 12:20:02 GMT -5
JMO, there was no 'pack,' there was no trying to drive people away. If you look at the pattern, any personal attacks come after a series of exchanges where facts and views are presented, supporting links provided and ignored, the subject subverted to gratuitous attacks on Bush (it was his fault the apple you bought was bruised when you got it home). After a bit that wears thin and people tend to lash out. All the more so when the people being called to task are usually the first to say things like "let's stay on the topic." Also, when people who claim to be tolerant, diverse and inclusive automatically reject or ingnore anything that comes from sources they don't like (e.g. there was a recent thread that linked through Fox to some government site giving labor stats that was rejected out of hand because it linked through Fox - I think I had that right, if not, I'm sure you take my meaning). Certain people on this forum have a habit of telling people to calm down, no need for insults, etc. while they themselves use insults, hate speech, and bigoted stereotypes at those who express opposing ideas. Somehow those who think left of center feel free to insult and belittle, but make themselves be offended when those with differing ideas do the same.
Yeah, some on the right here tend toward explosive confrontation, right Bolverk? OK, that is his style, we know it, shake our heads and mutter "Jerk" and move on. Saunterelle, on the other side of the equasion, sneers and fleers at anyone who expresses any kind of Christian faith (claims to do it at all religions, but I have yet to see him come unglued here or in the SRPD forums at anyone expressing other faiths, other than when called on it his proforma Hey, I'm against all religion), he also has a tendency to question the intellegence of those who dare to disagree with his ex cathedra pontifications, that is his style, he gets spanked for it regularly. I fall back on my sarcastic "O, so tolerant, diverse, and inclusive" phrase when brow-beating about the intolerance and monolithic exclusiveness of a lot of progressives. I will say, JMO, that you are one of the most moderate voices here, even though I find your predictable support of anything that comes from the left and almost as predictable rejection of anything that comes from the right a bit disturbing.
One huge difference that I see, not just in this forum, is that those who support conservative views have a better sense of and grounding in our history and what the Constitution allows the government to do than those who support progressivism. And if you look at what most of us post, we are trying to limit the State to what powers and actions We the People have ceded to it. We compare what is being said now with what the framers in and about the Constitution. There are many things that I think would be good for the government to do, at least in the short term. But we can't think about the short term. And we can't allow the government to go one inch over the Constitutional line.
|
|
|
|
Post by JustMyOpinion on Nov 8, 2008 12:26:16 GMT -5
Ferrous, I guess this is a good example of emoticon use since you don't seem to understand my intent. Here it is: What Have You Done With Mink? I am not just defending Mink's right to have an opposing opinion, I am also saying I am tiring of the gotcha game, it is counter-productive. I am asking that we continue to debate each other with some sense of decorum despite our differences. |
|
|
|
Post by subdjoe on Nov 8, 2008 12:33:58 GMT -5
JMO wrote: "Can we please move forward..."
Interesting. After 8 years of being treated to chants of 'stolen election" and "bush lied" and lynch mob mentality by the left, we are now urged, as the middle and right have been urging for 8 years, to MoveOn.
JMO, care to tell us why we couldn't move forward in 2000 or 2004? Why only now are we supposed to "move forward?"
|
|
|
|
Post by JustMyOpinion on Nov 8, 2008 13:02:26 GMT -5
subdjoe, I do not want to target individuals here. You mentioned Bolverk, well so far he has not mistreated me (in a while) and I appreciate that, just to be clear.
I am asking that we continue to share differing opinions without stereotyping, and assuming because one has a strong opinion and thinks that it is the ONLY opinion that is correct and justified and that all need to conform or they are -------- (you fill in the blanks). We all have our preconceived ideas and belief systems, and thankfully we are entitled to them here in the US.
Geez, what would happen to think tanks if everyone were to think alike?
|
|
|
|
Post by JustMyOpinion on Nov 8, 2008 13:03:52 GMT -5
I agree. I wish posters would attack each others arguments, and stop the personal attacks. It is okay to disagree, but the personal attacks against members is getting out of hand. Nice post JMO, I've had the same exact concerns lately. Thank you surefire! |
|
|
|
Post by JustMyOpinion on Nov 8, 2008 13:16:47 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by subdjoe on Nov 8, 2008 13:31:45 GMT -5
What box would that be, JMO? The box of the Constitution that strictly limits our Federal government? If so, WHY should we want or need to climb out of it? Those who like Barry in his zeal to "change" our Republic want to overthrow our Constitution, and in a different way Bush who wanted to ignore parts and grant to the State powers beyond what we have ceded to the State, should read this from "A Man For All Seasons" and take it to heart: William Roper: So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law! Sir Thomas More: Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil? William Roper: Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that! Sir Thomas More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!" Or are you talking about the box of divisivness and intolerance of the likes of Nancy and Harry and their minions. I note that you fall back on the tactic of throwing out an insult and then planting an elbow in our ribs and saying "It's a JOKE, boy, yer supposed to laugh!" |
|
|
|
Post by ferrous on Nov 8, 2008 14:30:28 GMT -5
Ferrous, I guess this is a good example of emoticon use since you don't seem to understand my intent. Here it is: What Have You Done With Mink? I am not just defending Mink's right to have an opposing opinion, I am also saying I am tiring of the gotcha game, it is counter-productive. I am asking that we continue to debate each other with some sense of decorum despite our differences. Bullshit. Your, now play on words and inserted emotioncon are sadly lacking. Your original post stands as an attack on those you perceive as against Mink and Saunterelle and thus in your perception as driving Mink away. Just exactly in your original thread is the so stated emotioncon as it pertains to your intent, and don't bother to include; "She has done an excellent job of sticking to her guns (not trying to thread drift ). Mink's latest outbursts with Bolverk tends to reaffirm my tagline..."Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference. --- Mark Twain" In this case, one might have difficulty telling the two apart or just surmising that they're both fools for pounding their heads against a brick wall. JMO finishes with this zinger: " I am asking that we continue to debate each other with some sense of decorum despite our differences." |
|
|
|
Post by JustMyOpinion on Nov 8, 2008 15:10:58 GMT -5
surefire understood the intent and I'm not sure why you all don't. My intentions were well intended and sincere, and I was addressing the members here as people that I would like to continue debating with, not Republicans, Democrats, Bush Haters etc. Funny how quickly that intent is spun into something else which is really my initial point after all. We can't just listen to each other and find value in opposing posts, instead we have to rip the content apart and assume the worst of the other guy.
I thought the cat joke was funny, but maybe that's because I am not so consumed with making me right, you wrong... Whatever...
Assume my intent, take a one-sided stance and continue on. I tried...
|
|
) and I respect her for that, just as I respect most of you for defending your stances when done in a reasoned manner. 
