archer wrote: Your post sounds a lot like what liberals have been posting bill. The conservatives on this board ignore the hateful posts from their own side, yet jump all over anything posted by a liberal. So is there anyway we can bridge the gap and get each side to see the behavior of those they agree with as equally hateful as the other side? Will we ever agree that slinging angry words at each other will never accomplish anything? Yeah, probably not. So what is to be gained by accusing liberals of doing exactly what conservatives do? Why are liberals bad for supporting each other but not conservatives? Can you explain that?
I made several attempts to get some civil debate around here and I still would if more people were with me. I've been told over and over that it's just not possible and I should basically just grow a pair. And thanks to one person on your side who feels the need to make an insult or paint entire groups with a hateful brush with almost every post, I see no need to try anymore. You may not be a hateful person, but you consistently chime in after the troll and just accept the hate as long as the message is something you agree with.
You won't see me agreeing with someone who just posted something hateful, racist, or religiously bigotted. Maybe you'll be more aware of your blind eye in the future, but I doubt it.
And lastly, I'll challenge anyone on the left to only debate the issues without insults. Sadly, we know it's not possible...been there, tried that. The offer is always there if others are willing to play. Until that unlikely day, I'll just keep stepping on rats that infest my monitor.
It was always the women, and above all the young ones, who were the most bigoted adherents of the Party, the swallowers of slogans, the amateur spies and nosers−out of unorthodoxy
here's what I say, we are all individuals and not painted the same as anyone else. I know it has been tried before, but putting the ones that only seem to be here to argue on ignore, is a start to trying to have a civil discussion. I, for one, would welcome it. Hell, I have sat down face to face with Thor himself and we had a perfectly delightful conversation while not agreeing on a lot, we did find some common ground. It is possible. Of course, there were cocktails involved. that helps
I haven't gone back and looked up all your posts bill, but your claims that you are trying to keep above it all ring a little hollow. I don't recall you complaining about the conservative attacks on liberals here, maybe I just missed them?
Bill is doing more to mend the gap than most of us and my hat is off to him, give him some credit where credit is due. While Bill is trying to mend the fence most of us conservatives are aggravating our counterparts (I'm not putting words in anyone's mouth, just stating my own opinion) and I have to admit it would be refreshing to have an intelligent debate on any topic you care to name.
At the same time, I can't find any fault with the remarks Ted Nugent made, IMHO he is guilty of using some wild metafors and sensationalizing some political situations but nothing more.
At the end of the day it may be that we agree to disagree, it would be nice to skip over the name calling and badgering. Who will be the first to bear the olive branch? Or do we continue as we have in the past? I'm guessing the later is going to be the defacto solution.
I can explain it to you but I can't understand it for you.
"Any man who thinks he can be happy and prosperous by letting the Government take care of him; better take a closer look at the American Indian." - Henry Ford
Corruptissima re publica plurimae leges; When the Republic is at its most corrupt the laws are most numerous. - Publius Cornelius Tacitus
If you can't find any fault with Nugent's remarks then you are probably right, no olive branches will be exchanged here. If a certain liberal poster had made similar remarks about Romney or Boehner can you honestly say most of the conservatives here wouldn't be squealing about how hateful those remarks were?
The blinders are firmly in place here...we only see hate on the other side...our own side is just telling it like it is. This board is merely a reflection of our country, and it isn't a pretty image.
archer wrote: I haven't gone back and looked up all your posts bill, but your claims that you are trying to keep above it all ring a little hollow. I don't recall you complaining about the conservative attacks on liberals here, maybe I just missed them?
In my opinion you are putting words in his mouth and then attacking him for what he did not say. Keep up the good work.
archer wrote: I haven't gone back and looked up all your posts bill, but your claims that you are trying to keep above it all ring a little hollow. I don't recall you complaining about the conservative attacks on liberals here, maybe I just missed them?
In my opinion you are putting words in his mouth and then attacking him for what he did not say. Keep up the good work.
You are welcome to your opinion, that was not my intention.
Wily Fox aka Angela wrote: here's what I say, we are all individuals and not painted the same as anyone else. I know it has been tried before, but putting the ones that only seem to be here to argue on ignore, is a start to trying to have a civil discussion. I, for one, would welcome it. Hell, I have sat down face to face with Thor himself and we had a perfectly delightful conversation while not agreeing on a lot, we did find some common ground. It is possible. Of course, there were cocktails involved. that helps
Who is Thor?
I think I mostly stay above the back and forth :bash frey, but if someone sees it different I would like to know. I can change.
The only criticism I notice on a persistent basis is requests or demands that I post my opinion of the pieces I post. To those people I say you if do not like the content and want to build a straw man or
find something to nit pick
by attacking me, go f**k your self. Or you could address the points in the post. Or you could go to PineCam. I have had posts deleted for that reason.
Other wise go f**k your self.
It should be obvious that my beer to post ratio is above the legal limit, so good night.
PS> Wily, this is one of the difficulties of Internet discussions. While I hit reply on your post to make a comment, it is a statement to the thread and not aimed at you.
Maybe I am being too kind to Mama Nugent's little boy Ted
But I don't think he meant to imply he would try to take out the president next year
It was a stupid thing to say but the motor city madman does have a tradition of speaking before thinking.
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
Ted has a big mouth and a bigger ego. He constantly says things that are inflammatory because it gets him airtime/facetime in the media, and after all, that's what its all about: Ted.
He does do some good things with charity work and other causes, but I just cringe when he opens his mouth.
