Sanitarium and name calling

Quote






Rocknwolf said:
As was pointed out on another thread, certain posters oppose name calling. They should remind many of the conservatard posters to tone it down, but it won't matter, when candidates who have 0, zero, nada, zilch, chance of wining the conservatard teabag nomination, continue to run their mouth in the desperate attempt to gain press coverage.

http://www.rawstory.com/rawreplay/2011/08/santorum-maxine-waters-is-vile/
Click to expand...

He is just telling it like it is. The good news about the oncoming train is that Fleebaggers don't like guns:D
 






Rocknwolf said:
As was pointed out on another thread, certain posters oppose name calling. They should remind many of the conservatard posters to tone it down, but it won't matter, when candidates who have 0, zero, nada, zilch, chance of wining the conservatard teabag nomination, continue to run their mouth in the desperate attempt to gain press coverage.

http://www.rawstory.com/rawreplay/2011/08/santorum-maxine-waters-is-vile/
Click to expand...
What exactly is your point here?

Is it that you are one of the incurably habitual name-callers?

Or, is it that only people of whom you approve have freedom of speech?

Or, is it that Maxine is really a class act, despite her incitant language calling for the demise of a block of people who disagree with her?

Or, is it that Maxine revealed that despite her tirade to the contrary she is in fact intimidated by a strong group of people who have shifted the balance of power from the leftwing fringe toward a more responsible outcome.
 






Rocknwolf said:
As was pointed out on another thread, certain posters oppose name calling. They should remind many of the conservatard posters to tone it down, but it won't matter, when candidates who have 0, zero, nada, zilch, chance of wining the conservatard teabag nomination, continue to run their mouth in the desperate attempt to gain press coverage.

http://www.rawstory.com/rawreplay/2011/08/santorum-maxine-waters-is-vile/
Click to expand...

Fascinating. In your totally phony "plea" against name calling you managed to see fit to use the term "conservatard" twice, and referred to the Republican nomination as the "teabag nomination" even though you well know that they are a minority movement within the party. For the record, in the house vote for the deficit compromise, there were 95 votes "NO" votes from Democrats vs. only 66 "NO"votes from Republicans, a dirty little non-secret that I haven't even seen discussed by the left wing posters in here.

http://www.ajc.com/news/nation-world/house-roll-call-how-1066257.html

Way to go, kid.

Just for the sake of argument would you like me to go through all of your posts in the past and count up the number of times you have engaged in name calling? I don't think so.

Clean up your own act before you start worrying about what other people do. In my view, you are one of the worst offenders in here.
 
Last edited by a moderator:






I Love America said:
He is just telling it like it is. The good news about the oncoming train is that Fleebaggers don't like guns:D
Click to expand...

He is telling it like it is. She's not even vile though, she's just a moron.

But this points out a problem. When people like MFAS get vile enough to refer to people like me using the same terminology they use for people like her (liberal), they tend to make me want to 'caricature' conservatives as emotional wingnuts and not even listen to them much less vote for them.

We need more talking with less emotion and finger pointing.
 






Vagitarian said:
He is telling it like it is. She's not even vile though, she's just a moron.

But this points out a problem. When people like MFAS get vile enough to refer to people like me using the same terminology they use for people like her (liberal), they tend to make me want to 'caricature' conservatives as emotional wingnuts and not even listen to them much less vote for them.

We need more talking with less emotion and finger pointing.
Click to expand...

Valid point, However, MFAS is on MODMO. This..uh..person-under-discussion, is not. BTW, I edited this post a little bit with come significant additions. You might want to take a look at the amended version.
 


















Bubble Burster said:
Oops, you may retract your "touche". He's not on MODMO right now. Sorry. I thought he was fairly mild until he got on his current thing in Playground.
Click to expand...

What in the world do you mean by this? How am I not "fairly mild"? Because I stick up for Judeo-Christian values?

I think it's funny that Vag considers "liberal" a vile term. Vile or not, it's accurate when applied to him. He's far more liberal then he is anything else.

For the record, I've never been in modmo to my knowledge.
 






Man For All Seasons said:
What in the world do you mean by this? How am I not "fairly mild"? Because I stick up for Judeo-Christian values?

I think it's funny that Vag considers "liberal" a vile term. Vile or not, it's accurate when applied to him. He's far more liberal then he is anything else.

For the record, I've never been in modmo to my knowledge.
Click to expand...

I corrected the post and retracted the remark. I apologize.

That being said, I am a devout Jew. Draw your own conclusions.

I'm sorry it upsets you to hear, but I believe CP is a totally inappropriate forum in which to discuss religion, especially so dogmatically. How would you like it if the positions were reversed? There are tons of blogs for that.

Although you have been supportive of me in the past, I continue to have a lot of trouble with this topic. I have never, EVER tried to impose my religious beliefs on others. It is why we are fighting the Global War On Terror.

And it is just plain impolite.
 
Last edited by a moderator:






Bubble Burster said:
Fascinating. In your totally phony "plea" against name calling you managed to see fit to use the term "conservatard" twice, and referred to the Republican nomination as the "teabag nomination" even though you well know that they are a minority movement within the party. For the record, in the house vote for the deficit compromise, there were 95 votes "NO" votes from Democrats vs. only 66 "NO"votes from Republicans, a dirty little non-secret that I haven't even seen discussed by the left wing posters in here.

http://www.ajc.com/news/nation-world/house-roll-call-how-1066257.html

Way to go, kid.

Just for the sake of argument would you like me to go through all of your posts in the past and count up the number of times you have engaged in name calling? I don't think so.

Clean up your own act before you start worrying about what other people do. In my view, you are one of the worst offenders in here.
Click to expand...

Maybe we are 'tards. We keep working to pay for people who won't.
 






Bubble Burster said:
I corrected the post and retracted the remark. I apologize.Thanks, I appreciate it greatly.

That being said, I am a devout Jew. Draw your own conclusions. Don't follow you here. I plainly said "Judeo-Christian. How are the moral codes different? They aren't to any significant degree. Theological differences, yes. Ethical differences, no.

I'm sorry it upsets you to hear, but I believe CP is a totally inappropriate forum in which to discuss religion, especially so dogmatically. It's the perfect place to. Sorry, but I won't be confined to a religious ghetto. Religion = worldview and it influences every other phase of life. I also won't apologize for being dogmatic.How would you like it if the positions were reversed? I don't have a problem with that. I 've said that repeatedly. This is the public square. Bring your best arguments. Besides, there is a huge difference between the demonstrable proven benefits of certain moral and behavioral codes and the metaphysical claims of a religion. I don't try to silence others in the manner in which you are suggesting I should be silent.There are tons of blogs for that. And this is one of them.

Although you have been supportive of me in the past, I continue to have a lot of trouble with this topic. I have never, EVER tried to impose my religious beliefs on others. BB, our whole system is about somebody "imposing their religious beliefs on others". Beliefs, values have consequences and somebody's are going to prevail in the public square. As far as I'm concerned, I'm going to see that mine prevail. This is far from infringing on someone's rights of belief or conscience, but as a practical matter, someone's moral code is going to prevail and mine just because it is religiously based does not mean that it is any less valid or inappropriate. There is no such thing as "value neutral". It is why we are fighting the Global War On Terror. Respectfully, no.

And it is just plain impolite.
Click to expand...

Not impolite in the least. Never impolite to discuss the things that really matter. Again, respectfully, I will not be silenced and sent to the religious ghetto. The key is that I allow everyone else the same opportunity that I take advantage of myself. There is nothing more fair than that.

Many of our friends on here are huge hypocrites when it comes to this. They believe in free speech and in pushing their values, but they don't want to extend the same right and courtesy to me. I politely won't tolerate it.

Thanks again for the apology.
 






Bubble Burster said:
I corrected the post and retracted the remark. I apologize.

That being said, I am a devout Jew. Draw your own conclusions.

I'm sorry it upsets you to hear, but I believe CP is a totally inappropriate forum in which to discuss religion, especially so dogmatically. How would you like it if the positions were reversed? There are tons of blogs for that.

Although you have been supportive of me in the past, I continue to have a lot of trouble with this topic. I have never, EVER tried to impose my religious beliefs on others. It is why we are fighting the Global War On Terror.

And it is just plain impolite.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry it upsets you to hear, but I believe CP is a totally inappropriate forum in which to discuss religion, especially so dogmatically. How would you like it if the positions were reversed? There are tons of blogs for that.

Although you have been supportive of me in the past, I continue to have a lot of trouble with this topic. I have never, EVER tried to impose my religious beliefs on others. It is why we are fighting the Global War On Terror.

And it is just plain impolite.

God damn Sam, I agree 100%.
 






Bubble Burster said:
I corrected the post and retracted the remark. I apologize.

That being said, I am a devout Jew. Draw your own conclusions.

I'm sorry it upsets you to hear, but I believe CP is a totally inappropriate forum in which to discuss religion, especially so dogmatically. How would you like it if the positions were reversed? There are tons of blogs for that.

Although you have been supportive of me in the past, I continue to have a lot of trouble with this topic. I have never, EVER tried to impose my religious beliefs on others. It is why we are fighting the Global War On Terror.

And it is just plain impolite.
Click to expand...

" I have never, EVER tried to impose my religious beliefs on others. It is why we are fighting the Global War On Terror"

We are at war with the Evangelical movement in America? Who knew?
 






Rocknwolf said:
As was pointed out on another thread, certain posters oppose name calling. They should remind many of the conservatard posters to tone it down, but it won't matter, when candidates who have 0, zero, nada, zilch, chance of wining the conservatard teabag nomination, continue to run their mouth in the desperate attempt to gain press coverage.

http://www.rawstory.com/rawreplay/2011/08/santorum-maxine-waters-is-vile/
Click to expand...

Lest you forget that old Pruneface lit the match that started the L.A riots. Greg Gutfeld has the best take on this yesterday. "When she told the tea party to go to he'll, she was merely inviting them to her district.
 






Doc Who said:
" I have never, EVER tried to impose my religious beliefs on others. It is why we are fighting the Global War On Terror"

We are at war with the Evangelical movement in America? Who knew?
Click to expand...

Don't try to be cute. You can't pull it off.

And when you say "we", don't think it includes me.
 
Last edited by a moderator:






Man For All Seasons said:
Not impolite in the least. Never impolite to discuss the things that really matter. Again, respectfully, I will not be silenced and sent to the religious ghetto. The key is that I allow everyone else the same opportunity that I take advantage of myself. There is nothing more fair than that.

Many of our friends on here are huge hypocrites when it comes to this. They believe in free speech and in pushing their values, but they don't want to extend the same right and courtesy to me. I politely won't tolerate it.

Thanks again for the apology.
Click to expand...

They believe in free speech and in pushing their values, but they don't want to extend the same right and courtesy to me. I politely won't tolerate it.

With all due respect, your 'freedom of speech rant has become cliche. Do we honor freedom of speech in this country? Yes. Can one walk into a crowded auditorium and yell. "Fire!" Certainly not.

We all respect each others right to religion but your rants have become obnoxious, like a speaker on top of a car in Tijuana exorting those trying to have a peaceful day to 'repent'. This has been commented on so many times it's ridiculous. While you profess to view this behavior as evangelical, the truth is, you turn more people off to your religion than you turn on to it.
 






Major Wood said:
They believe in free speech and in pushing their values, but they don't want to extend the same right and courtesy to me. I politely won't tolerate it.

With all due respect, your 'freedom of speech rant has become cliche. Do we honor freedom of speech in this country? Yes. Can one walk into a crowded auditorium and yell. "Fire!" Certainly not.

We all respect each others right to religion but your rants have become obnoxious, like a speaker on top of a car in Tijuana exorting those trying to have a peaceful day to 'repent'. This has been commented on so many times it's ridiculous. While you profess to view this behavior as evangelical, the truth is, you turn more people off to your religion than you turn on to it.
Click to expand...

'AMEN' Very well stated.

I doubt the RP for whom it was intended is smart enough to heed your advice.
 












Major Wood said:
They believe in free speech and in pushing their values, but they don't want to extend the same right and courtesy to me. I politely won't tolerate it.

With all due respect, your 'freedom of speech rant has become cliche. Do we honor freedom of speech in this country? Yes. Can one walk into a crowded auditorium and yell. "Fire!" Certainly not.

We all respect each others right to religion but your rants have become obnoxious, like a speaker on top of a car in Tijuana exorting those trying to have a peaceful day to 'repent'. This has been commented on so many times it's ridiculous. While you profess to view this behavior as evangelical, the truth is, you turn more people off to your religion than you turn on to it.
Click to expand...

Really? LOL!

My aren't we thin-skinned and insecure in our beliefs? Otherwise you wouldn't be whining about reasonable free speech which is all I have been engaging in.

I only turn off people who aren't going to approach things with an open mind anyway. Funny how it's types like you who perpetually try to convince me that I'm turning more people off than on to my religion. A hint for you buddy, the Bible kinda indicates that it's going to be that way, so I don't lose any sleep over it.

My first responsibility is to speak the truth. It's your responsibility to accept it.
 






Top Bottom
Back
Quote