Thread: Intolerance From The Left

Originally Posted by crooks

Whistle, I responded to you in post no.35, that one was for another poster, I'd be happy to discuss all this stuff with you but I'd rather talk in one unbroken sequence.

So I cannot ask you questions about your posts to others?

Aren't we free to ask each other questions without someone telling us what we can or cannot ask?

You don't sound very freedom oriented to me.

Sounds like you're trying to dodge my questions.

This is a free country, so you can choose to answer if you want, but if you're going to insist on making declarative statements you have to expect to be called on them.

You have a PM function on this board. If you want to discuss topics with someone in private try using it to illiminate any further confusion.

I wonder, who is going to vote for a bowl of oatmeal for President?

Oatmeal has no 'disturbing' political ideas that are anathema to either Party. I'd say that most normal human beings, (unless they are really intolerant) could get by with a bowl of oatmeal as President. Perhaps, if you put a nice bland pudding on as the VP candidate you could get all the oatmeal haters on board...

I guess my point is that no-one votes for a 'bland' candidate, therefore no party can afford to put a 'bland' candidate on their ticket. It's like Coke vs. Pepsi... SO what if you like Royal Crown cola? When was the last time you walked into a restaurant that had RC on tap?

Originally Posted by pate

I wonder, who is going to vote for a bowl of oatmeal for President?

Oatmeal has no 'disturbing' political ideas that are anathema to either Party. I'd say that most normal human beings, (unless they are really intolerant) could get by with a bowl of oatmeal as President. Perhaps, if you put a nice bland pudding on as the VP candidate you could get all the oatmeal haters on board...

I guess my point is that no-one votes for a 'bland' candidate, therefore no party can afford to put a 'bland' candidate on their ticket. It's like Coke vs. Pepsi... SO what if you like Royal Crown cola? When was the last time you walked into a restaurant that had RC on tap?

I hate Oatmeal when it's over cooked.

Originally Posted by mudwhistle

So I cannot ask you questions about your posts to others?

Aren't we free to ask each other questions without someone telling us what we can or cannot ask?

You don't sound very freedom oriented to me.

Sounds like you're trying to dodge my questions.

This is a free country, so you can choose to answer if you want, but if you're going to insist on making declarative statements you have to expect to be called on them.

You have a PM function on this board. If you want to discuss topics with someone in private try using it to illiminate any further confusion.

Oh for heavens sake, talk about a dog and a bone - listen, I was telling you this not to 'dodge' (to quote myself:'I'd be happy to discuss this stuff with you') but because the post I wrote was part of a sequence I was typing with another poster - it's to do with basic courtesy and etiquette, not some tinhat silencing of your freedom.

Feel free to look over my other posts on the thread to get a grasp of my thinking, but I won't answer as I took the time to write a seperate answer to you, which you didn't even have the manners to continue with, prefering to cut up and respond to my answer to someone else, in a different context.

If you would like to bring up the stuff I was talking to dale about, absolutely, but please do it within the scope of our conversation.

My posts are not declarative, they are mearly opinions - I'm not asking you to believe them, nor am I running around treating them as fact, I come on here to exchange perspectives, but will not do so with someone just trying to make some sort of 'he's a totalitarian pretending to be a libertarian' point.

Good day.

Originally Posted by dalem

Maybe you should try to. They understand your reasoning, after all.

-dale

Aye, fair point.

Originally Posted by dalem

Oh, a sidestep into "Republicans are liars who work against my interests" and then a retreat into "I don't like the jerk-Dems but they're not me."

Neither of which is an answer to my question, of course.

-dale

I'd chalk it down to happiness with the way things are - most American liberals seem to be unhappy with the way things are, whereas most American conservatives would be happy.

I've always thought this is reflected in activism and media - conservatives tend to be more 'attack plus slander' orientated, while leftists are 'moan about life' orientated.

Is it true surveys tend to show conservatives more happy with their lot in life? - that sorta stuff has always interested me.

Originally Posted by crooks

I'd chalk it down to happiness with the way things are - most American liberals seem to be unhappy with the way things are, whereas most American conservatives would be happy.

I've always thought this is reflected in activism and media - conservatives tend to be more 'attack plus slander' orientated, while leftists are 'moan about life' orientated.

Is it true surveys tend to show conservatives more happy with their lot in life? - that sorta stuff has always interested me.

So what are some examples of conservative "attack plus slander" we could discuss and compare to demonstrated liberal intolerances?

And yes, the numbers all show that cnservatives are happier overall than liberals. Makes sense because liberalism is a more feminine mode of thought and females do not accept reality as easily as males.

-dale

Originally Posted by crooks

Oh for heavens sake, talk about a dog and a bone - listen, I was telling you this not to 'dodge' (to quote myself:'I'd be happy to discuss this stuff with you') but because the post I wrote was part of a sequence I was typing with another poster - it's to do with basic courtesy and etiquette, not some tinhat silencing of your freedom.

Feel free to look over my other posts on the thread to get a grasp of my thinking, but I won't answer as I took the time to write a seperate answer to you, which you didn't even have the manners to continue with, prefering to cut up and respond to my answer to someone else, in a different context.

If you would like to bring up the stuff I was talking to dale about, absolutely, but please do it within the scope of our conversation.

My posts are not declarative, they are mearly opinions - I'm not asking you to believe them, nor am I running around treating them as fact, I come on here to exchange perspectives, but will not do so with someone just trying to make some sort of 'he's a totalitarian pretending to be a libertarian' point.

Good day.

If it's not a dodge then I don't know what it is. You're the one trying to avoid answering a question.

What gives you the right to tell me what I can say or not say on this site? Excuse me for being put off....but didn't I start this thread?

I started it and I have to right to comment on anything that you or anyone posts on it.....and that means you can't just take it over and take it any direction you choose and exclude others from the conversation. If you've got a problem with that ether take it up with the moderator or move your discussion to PM.

When I read what you said....in such a dismissive tone......I just said to myself....."Who does this person think he or she is?"

You're the one acting rude, not me.

dale,

females do not accept reality as easily as males.

oh man, when i saw that remark i looked left and right- there's a LOT of female O-6s here whom if they saw that would make you their wailin' b****!

Originally Posted by astralis

dale,



oh man, when i saw that remark i looked left and right- there's a LOT of female O-6s here whom if they saw that would make you their wailin' b****!

Dam Dale, officer material wants a piece of you azz and pronto!)

Originally Posted by mudwhistle

If it's not a dodge then I don't know what it is. You're the one trying to avoid answering a question.

No, I'm not - ask it right now if you like, and I'll answer you, I have no objections to answering questions, but it's my right to object to the way they're framed.

Originally Posted by mudwhistle

What gives you the right to tell me what I can say or not say on this site? Excuse me for being put off....but didn't I start this thread?

You certainly did, and I'm not trying to tell you what to comment on or not to comment on, are you deliberately trying to destort what I've said?

Originally Posted by mudwhistle

I started it and I have to right to comment on anything that you or anyone posts on it.....and that means you can't just take it over and take it any direction you choose and exclude others from the conversation. If you've got a problem with that ether take it up with the moderator or move your discussion to PM.

I'm not taking it in any direction, nor am I excluding you - I was having an enjoyable conversation with you, and the board needs more engaged, debating people, it's what made it good and people like you are desperately needed.

However, I've been here almost two years - quoting a rulebook I have rarely stepped out of line with is not going to prove fruitful, just looks incredibly stupid to me - I know the rules and this not an issue for the moderators, it's not an issue for anyone.

Given the choice, I'd just like to move on talking now.

Originally Posted by mudwhistle

When I read what you said....in such a dismissive tone......I just said to myself....."Who does this person think he or she is?"

Crooks, of Cork, Ireland.

Average joe poster who as a moderate social liberal/economic centrist within my country objects to this board's sometimes unhealthy political slant - that's all.

Originally Posted by mudwhistle

You're the one acting rude, not me.

Not deliberately, and sincere apologies if you think so, or if I genuinely am - I am trying to show you as much curtesy as possible, I honestly didn't think that asking you to talk to me in an unbroken sequence was over the line or a breach of your personal freedom.

I am not ordering or obliging you to, do whatever you like.

Originally Posted by dalem

So what are some examples of conservative "attack plus slander" we could discuss and compare to demonstrated liberal intolerances?

Ah you must know what I mean - take McCain's recent ad (America's nasty presidential election | America not quite at its best | The Economist) stating Obama once backed a bill that would give kindergarten children comprehensive sex education. this seemed to bw a distortion: the bill Mr Obama backed provided for age-appropriate sex education, and was intended to protect children from sex offenders.

Lipstick on a pig etc..

Conservatives are aggressive, and will slander the enemy as much as possible - it's not a bad thing, nor a particularly good thing, it's just tactics.

American Liberal tactics generally do seem to be to mooooaaan until someone listens - again, politically I'd imagine it's just a tactic, regardless of what people's personal views on it must be.

Originally Posted by dalem

And yes, the numbers all show that cnservatives are happier overall than liberals. Makes sense because liberalism is a more feminine mode of thought and females do not accept reality as easily as males.

-dale

Contentious stuff there, but I have indeed heard that conservatives tend to be happier - they also seem to give more to charity.

Odd but certainly shows politics, values and political culture is a lot deeper in America than many would claim.

Originally Posted by crooks

No, I'm not - ask it right now if you like, and I'll answer you, I have no objections to answering questions, but it's my right to object to the way they're framed.



.

My Dad was mostly Irish and my mom is mostly Scottish. I really don't care where you're from. I just wanted to know who in the heck did you think you were, as in you must think you're better then me.


Besides.....I forgot the question. (Not really)

It doesn't matter anymore anyway because I wanted to know what you meant then, not now.

I was asking for clarification of your statements. Maybe instead of telling me to shove off you might want to take that into consideration.


I don't think you have a right to tell me how to frame my questions ether.

We all have a choice to respond to questions to from other posters if we wish. Far as I know this is a free forum.

Just because you've been here longer it doesn't mean I'm some piss-ant not worth your time. My suggestion is stop treating people as such and you'll have no trouble with me in the future.

Well done, mudwhistle, on showing us all how to stay on-topic.

Originally Posted by dalem

So what are some examples of conservative "attack plus slander" we could discuss and compare to demonstrated liberal intolerances?

• "Barack Hussein Obama is a Madrassa-educated radical Muslim bent on destroying America" chain e-mails. Fox ran a version of that - and Fox hardly has the same level of influence as Lindsay Lohan, Jeremiah Wright.
  
• GOP congressman calls Obama 'uppity'. Again, a little more serious than Hollywood celebrities speaking out against McCain.
  
• Obama is an elitist. Completely unlike every other presidential candidate in history, who all had very modest bank accounts before, during and after their attempts or presidencies. Maybe it had something to do with the bitterness comment, though of course few stopped to see whether or not that was true. Again, a little more serious than Hollywood celebrities speaking out against McCain.
  
• Confusing Obama with Osama, and saying that ideally both would be killed. I dunno whether it's grounds for a Secret Service investigation... but definitely a sacking at Fox. Again, a little more serious than Hollywood celebrities slandering McCain.
  
• Baby mama comment. Another sack-worthy comment. Again, a little more serious than Hollywood celebrities slandering McCain

All those are off the top of my head, i.e. someone who has nowhere the daily exposure to US politics that you guys do, and directed at Obama.

Ooh, another one from my YouTube travails. This time they apologise for it. YouTube - Fox News' E.D. Hill Apologizes for "Terrorist Fist Jab"

Oh and concerning your (unsourced, gosh!) "99.9% of intolerance comes from the left!" comment; Bill O'Reilly alone probably accounts for more than 0.1% considering his viewership figures.