Rules for this forum

[ibex]

Originally Posted by winthrop

The chances of this becoming a "pro McCain" forum are remote at best,
based on the majority views expressed here. The owner of the site,
like the owner of anything else, will run his property as he sees fit,
but the very best way to discredit ideas and opinions deserving of such
treatment, such as McCain and Bush support, is to examine them in
the light of day, not to segregate them in their own ghetto.

Actually, we've had fairly open discussions in the past about conservative vs. "liberal" ideas and it usually ends with quarrels and hurt feelings on one side or the other, along with accusations of mendacity. My advice to any McLame supporter is simply this, nobody's holding a gun to your head. In addition to the Conservative section of this forum, there are dozens if not thousands of rightie blogs and web sites where you can discuss the reality of WMDs in Iraq, the direct connection between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda and various other fractured fairy tales from the Neocon Comic book series and the planned McLame sequel. This forum can be interesting and fun, but it's not an organized news source and it's no place to win hearts and minds. If you want to examine ideas in the cold light of day, try finding news sources that aren't exclusively agenda driven and work from there, as impossible as that might sound.

[Cookie]

Originally Posted by ibex

Actually, we've had fairly open discussions in the past about conservative vs. "liberal" ideas and it usually ends with quarrels and hurt feelings on one side or the other, along with accusations of mendacity. My advice to any McLame supporter is simply this, nobody's holding a gun to your head. In addition to the Conservative section of this forum, there are dozens if not thousands of rightie blogs and web sites where you can discuss the reality of WMDs in Iraq, the direct connection between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda and various other fractured fairy tales from the Neocon Comic book series and the planned McLame sequel. This forum can be interesting and fun, but it's not an organized news source and it's no place to win hearts and minds. If you want to examine ideas in the cold light of day, try finding news sources that aren't exclusively agenda driven and work from there, as impossible as that might sound.

It's a dangerous thing when people think they know it all; that they cannot be bothered by alternative points of view. Reminds me of the fundie mentality, and we all know how reprehensible those people are....

[ibex]

Originally Posted by Cookie

It's a dangerous thing when people think they know it all; that they cannot be bothered by alternative points of view. Reminds me of the fundie mentality, and we all know how reprehensible those people are....

I agree but that's a concept that applies to the real world, not a virtual setting like this. I would have no right to feel that my right to freedom of speech was violated just because I would be denied that right in somebody else's domain.

[winthrop]

Originally Posted by ibex

Actually, we've had fairly open discussions in the past about conservative vs. "liberal" ideas and it usually ends with quarrels and hurt feelings on one side or the other, along with accusations of mendacity. My advice to any McLame supporter is simply this, nobody's holding a gun to your head. In addition to the Conservative section of this forum, there are dozens if not thousands of rightie blogs and web sites where you can discuss the reality of WMDs in Iraq, the direct connection between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda and various other fractured fairy tales from the Neocon Comic book series and the planned McLame sequel. This forum can be interesting and fun, but it's not an organized news source and it's no place to win hearts and minds. If you want to examine ideas in the cold light of day, try finding news sources that aren't exclusively agenda driven and work from there, as impossible as that might sound.

Hmm...I am not sure how you are differing from my point, or even
if you are. The use of phrases such as "If you ..." Who? Me? ...
"want to examine ideas in the cold light of day ..." suggests you are
addressing me personally. I will repeat, the owner of the site may do
as he pleases with his property, and if he wishes to include or exclude
certain points of view I would make no effort to suggest he should do
otherwise. If a site is to be a "supporters ..." (a group which, in the
case of Mr. Obama, I would be included) "... only" forum, then of
course alternative points of view can be ghettoized or even deleted
together. For some this may result in a forum which quickly becomes
a less exciting place to visit, but certainly if such excitement results in
"quarrels and hurt feelings" and the majority of participants find such
an outcome untenable, then a more sedate atmosphere is the one
which should be pursued. Those who come to such a venue for the
rattle-clatter of such debates, or arguments, or "knock-down drag-outs",
as my dear Grandmama used to refer to such encounters,
may indeed wish to take their contributions elsewhere, regardless of
their own political leanings.
Or they may wish to remain and see what happens. I am certain I
would remain welcomed in such an atmosphere, understanding that
"welcome" will never be universal.

[ibex]

Originally Posted by winthrop

Hmm...I am not sure how you are differing from my point, or even
if you are. The use of phrases such as "If you ..." Who? Me? ...
"want to examine ideas in the cold light of day ..." suggests you are
addressing me personally. I will repeat, the owner of the site may do
as he pleases with his property, and if he wishes to include or exclude
certain points of view I would make no effort to suggest he should do
otherwise. If a site is to be a "supporters ..." (a group which, in the
case of Mr. Obama, I would be included) "... only" forum, then of
course alternative points of view can be ghettoized or even deleted
together. For some this may result in a forum which quickly becomes
a less exciting place to visit, but certainly if such excitement results in
"quarrels and hurt feelings" and the majority of participants find such
an outcome untenable, then a more sedate atmosphere is the one
which should be pursued. Those who come to such a venue for the
rattle-clatter of such debates, or arguments, or "knock-down drag-outs",
as my dear Grandmama used to refer to such encounters,
may indeed wish to take their contributions elsewhere, regardless of
their own political leanings.
Or they may wish to remain and see what happens. I am certain I
would remain welcomed in such an atmosphere, understanding that
"welcome" will never be universal.

I should have used the words "If one" since the "you" was addressed to anybody debating this topic. We are in agreement that freedom of speech does not guarantee anybody the right to say anything anywhere or at any time. I have the right to speak my mind on my own dime but I don't have the right to force my way into my neighbor's house and demand to be heard. That's the message I'm trying to convey in my last post to Cookie.

[Kanadesaga]

Originally Posted by Cookie

It's a dangerous thing when people think they know it all; that they cannot be bothered by alternative points of view. Reminds me of the fundie mentality, and we all know how reprehensible those people are....

From my experiences, it is conservative/republicans that believe they "know-it-all" and can't be bothered to even know, or better, accept the facts as they really are. Not filtered through some rovian, neocon colored glasses.

In fact, if I may, conservatives, not so much on this board, but on every board I post on, are mostly condescending assholes. Like little limbaugh clones. it's disgusting, because no matter how nice you try to be, no matter what realitiies you expose them to, they walk around in a constant state of ignorant smugness.

[Environment Man]

Oh the prejudice against conservatives.

Jesus was persecuted too.

[ibex]

Originally Posted by Kanadesaga

From my experiences, it is conservative/republicans that believe they "know-it-all" and can't be bothered to even know, or better, accept the facts as they really are. Not filtered through some rovian, neocon colored glasses.

In fact, if I may, conservatives, not so much on this board, but on every board I post on, are mostly condescending assholes. Like little limbaugh clones. it's disgusting, because no matter how nice you try to be, no matter what realitiies you expose them to, they walk around in a constant state of ignorant smugness.

They always pull out the old mythology that every liberal is some type of out of touch elitist, that only righties know what the Real America wants and needs. Phil Gramm's gaffe kinda boomeranged that canard right back in their fucking faces, but you won't hear it from them. The few, and I mean I can count them on one hand, smug uber lefties I have known on line and in person have been rigid idealogues wedded to the most extreme form of Marxism and outside of Berkeley, CA and a handful of academic enclaves are powerless. Rightwing assholes on the other hand have been running the show in this country for the better part of the twentieth and 21st centuries, and their toxic ideas have been normalized over time, that's the really scary part.

[Environment Man]

Originally Posted by ibex

Rightwing assholes on the other hand have been running the show in this country for the better part of the twentieth and 21st centuries,

Because they are right.

But this thread is about the rules of the board, NOT bias against conservatives.

[HarperLee]

Originally Posted by Kanadesaga

From my experiences, it is conservative/republicans that believe they "know-it-all" and can't be bothered to even know, or better, accept the facts as they really are. Not filtered through some rovian, neocon colored glasses.

In fact, if I may, conservatives, not so much on this board, but on every board I post on, are mostly condescending assholes. Like little limbaugh clones. it's disgusting, because no matter how nice you try to be, no matter what realitiies you expose them to, they walk around in a constant state of ignorant smugness.

A case in point would be the 2 days and counting insistence on another thread that the Lancet and ORB estimates of Iraqi civilian war deaths have been "discredited" because a Rupert Murdoch publication says so.