You ever wander if people that support the second amendment don't really care if they alienate members of a group that support taking away our rights to self defense and making us slaves to the ruling class? I don't mean the people on the fence - when need them to vote for freedom and not against it. I mean the people who see us as completely wrong and can't be corrected.

For example, I don't care if a member of PETA gets mad at me for deer hunting. They are already alienated from ME, so why do I care if they are alienating me in return?

I can't believe I am the only person who felt that that "good ol fashioned lynching" remark just went a bit far. There were so many other less harsh ways of saying that the current POTUS should be removed from administration. It;s one thing to have opinions in politics but when you phrase them carelessly you might lose your audience and end up with just the usual 3 or 4 yes men who always agree with you anyway.

Posting your political opinion on a cornsnake forum isn't really going to change the world and doesn't make everyone who does so a patriot and a freedom fighter. All it does is alienate others.

Not necessarily true! Your opinions will likely come from the aggregate of everything you see, hear, read, etc., over a long period of time, especially when you are young. If you are exposed to A LOT of a particular viewpoint, your own views will likely reflect that. That is exactly why the big corporations aim their commercials at children - win them over early, and they are more likely to be loyal, lifelong customers. It is not that different for proponents of a political ideology wanting to win over their customers, especially youngsters.

I bet there are a lot of CS members who never heard of a libertarian, but might have read about it in one or more discussions here. That does not mean that they will automatically BECOME one, but at least now they know there is such a thing, and it gives them options they didnt know they had. Conversely, if you see and hear the Right or Left arguments presented well, and often, you might be inclined to lean towards one of them.

So I have to disagree that people will not ever be influenced politically on a corn snake forum, or that it will always alienate them. Just depends on how it is presented, and received, at a particular time.

Well when even a mod of the forum feels the need to post a thread titled "stop the political BS" you know things were getting a little too heated. That thread by Dean a couple of days ago remember. Not that it was taken too seriously.

I can't comment on that. I didn't see that particular post. However, I can think of some people that DO deserve to be "set to dance," so I can't say I disagree with the unseen post, either. For example, I know of some politicians in Athens, TN, in 1946 that SHOULD have seen a rope.

I agree! It's really not a service to post your strict political views on a Corn Snakes site, and so far hasn't seemed to enlighten anyone to the cause. It's good to have a political debate occasionally for the feedback, or just to test the waters. But as someone who feels so strongly about their beliefs, it would be more effective to bring hope, and not divide those who disagree, as you will need the majority if you really believe in the American way.
Obama is our president for this very reason. People are all angry at his policy decisions, and sometimes just because he is who he is. But he has spent a lifetime of doing actual work in the communities, running for office, and offering hope and change, rather than expecting some armchair quarterbacking to get things done. People then get over their heads with talking him down, and even insinuating threats towards him. Sometimes the best way of fighting is with your mind, not your bold language and criticism of the opposition.
Brandishing guns in a public venue isn't bravely defending your rights, it is boldly defying the will of the majority with intimidation rather than intelligence. People would love to believe there will be this glorious day in which the citizens will revolt and take back the country, but fail to see that this will never happen, and they might as well use a more intangible approach to succeed. Paper soldiers are a dime a dozen, as well as e-soldiers. It's not about power and control, it's about winning over the majority with ideas, hope, and offers of change. Obama has done this, and done this brilliantly. I may not agree with every policy, but I sure know he was still the best pick, and I trust that he will leave this country better off than it was. If not, than it is only 3+years until the next election, and the people can reassess whether they would like him to be our leader once again.

Because a moderator only moderates. He doesn't CONTROL what we can or can not say as long as it is within the guidelines of Rich's rules. (Notice the rules Dean broke in his own posts to show the humorous irony of the whole situation.) The post had no more authority than if you or I said it.

BUT, I'm sure Rich has never said anything about politicians needing to be handled roughly, so maybe that did cross the line......lol. :-poke:

So in your opinion, should the will of the majority always rule?

I can't believe I am the only person who felt that that "good ol fashioned lynching" remark just went a bit far.

I don't remember that particular post. I am guessing they were saying it in jest, as a sort of exaggeration? I would never post anything like that, and would not really consider it funny, either. Although I would not consider it in good taste, neither would I censor it, as long as it is not a real call to action. I don't always agree with every post I see here, but I also haven't seen very many posts that truly upset me, either. They are just opinions, some more logical, some distasteful, some I agree with, some I don't.

Not sure which politicians, but that was a different era. Back then there was prejudice and no clear fairness to the American way. Now it is fair, and elections are chosen at the people's discretion. Violence and threats is primitive in this day and age, because we all have the freedoms to choose our leader. No leader nowadays won due to prejudice, lack of a fair vote, etc... So if you don't like it either run for public office, or campaign harder in 2012'.

Oh, that conman did LOTS of work. I'm just not sure how much of it was legal.

Although not overtly illegal, ever looked at what his wife made at her job following an increase in funds he pushed through? Well, her 20-hour a week job went from $100k to over $300k per year, coincidentally, as soon as he got the U the extra funds...and her job was SO IMPORTANT that they didn't even hire a replacement. Seems that $300+k job doesn't even NEED to be done. Was it a "bribe" to keep him funding them. You know, give us $1 million, and we'll line your wife's pocket with a third of it. Hmmmm, I don't know but it does sound suspicious!

Have you even LOOKED at a recent poll of how Americans feel about what he has done so far???

Of course! How else should a country be lead, if not chosen by the will of the majority?

It is statements like this and beliefs like this that doom me, Tara, Robbie, Tony, and every other gay, lesbian, bisexual and transexual on the boards to a life of being 2nd class citizens. Rights that are habitually, even casually, granted to heterosexuals are denied to us based on the gender of the person we love and make a home with.

Think about it.

http://www.cornsnakes.com/forums/sho...&postcount=202 Just linking to the "lynching" post I found objectionable. Apparently I am just thin skinned and everyone else is OK with it.

He was elected to a four year term. That means that in four years you can recast your vote for someone else if you are unhappy with the job he's doing. Polls don't mean a thing. If we went by that standard, most presidents would be impeached at some point during their tenure. The fact is that the majority voted to have him be our president, knowing darn well it was for four years. Sure they may be unhappy, disappointed, etc... But they did elect him, so that's all that matters.

Someone once said I'm made JUST because I was out-voted. I'm sure we can name MANY cases of genocide where the losers were just the ones that got "out-voted." That doesn't make their deaths any more real or any more tragic. In fact, it makes it MORE tragic. Majority does not always equal right.

Do you think the MAJORITY of legal voters would have voted for black and female suffrage? Of course not! This is why we have a representative system instead of a true democracy. Freedom supersedes majority votes.

Take the BOR. That is a REMINDER to the .gov that we have those rights. It doesn't GIVE us those rights, it justs states what they are. No law can take them away. No law that tries - even an amendment - is valid because those are remindes to the .gov that we HAVE them no matter WHAT they try to do at any time. THAT is the legal basis behind the treaty that bound our unique states together. Furthermore, any violation of those laws by the federal .gov is a violation of that treaty and negates all legal authority of said treaty.

The wannabe slavemasters are the ones that try to convince you otherwise.

Pay attention to what you actually said and try to remember it for 5 minutes. You said, "it's about winning over the majority with ideas, hope, and offers of change. Obama has done this, and done this brilliantly." Polls have nothing to do with past elections, but they definitely DO SHOW that your state4ment is false. He may HAVE done that, but he is NOT doing it now.

Trust me - I don't need to "recast" my vote. It'll be the same vote next time (if we are allowed a free election): I'll vote against that red communist with a smile!

That's not fair to pin my point to that. I was simply stating that in an election, the only deciding factor should be the majority, and the only way to fight back is by having more success in the next election.
I would never intend majority rules on subjects like that, these are human rights, and I would never suggest majority voting on this. My cousin happens to be gay, and him and his partner are two of the greatest people I know. I consider their relationship as normal, if not more normal, than most others I see.

OK, I did see that one. I didn't take it the way you did because she didn't say "Let's lynch him now." She said (the way I read it), "Let's lynch him later if he keeps getting worse and worse." There MAY be a point when we DO need to start hanging politicians enmass, but I don't think her post was advocating it NOW. Big difference.

...or are you saying that no matter WHAT a politician does, they never deserved to be hung. If so, what about the German War Criminals? Stalin? etc. Not Obama today but possible FUTURE-Obama? Do you think Hitler shouldn't have been held accountable with death (if captured alive) because he was voted in? I'm not saying Obama is Hitler of even like him. I'm saying WHAT IF he does become him in the future?

Are you advocating the overthrow of the American constitution? You must be since that is NOT how the presidential election is decided. Oh, wait.

Never mind. I know the answer to that since we all know how you cast your ballot. :-puke01:

Owwww...I have only read a few posts, but already my head hurts!

...Sometimes the best way of fighting is with your mind, not your bold language and criticism of the opposition...

Sorry - I do not understand this. How would you fight with your mind, unless it is through your use of verbal or written speech (bold language)? I don't have the power of telekinesis, lol! So not sure what else you had in mind.

Please explain further - thanks!

...But as someone who feels so strongly about their beliefs, it would be more effective to bring hope, and not divide those who disagree...
...So if you don't like it either run for public office, or campaign harder in 2012.

That is why I am ALWAYS putting in a word for Libertarian ideals. The Republicrats have things sewn up between them to keep others out (kind of like Coke and Pepsi - battle each other, but band together to keep outsiders out!). The only real, long lasting hope I believe in will come with the practice of the philosophy of personal responsibility AND freedom actually practiced (not just mouthed) by Libertarians. But unfortunately, few know anything about it due to the money and power wielded by those at the top.

For me it was more the connotation that the word lynching has being the preferred method of the KKK and traditional method of murdering black people in the south, word used being "lynched" not "hanged". I didn't see whether lynching now or later made a difference the sentiment was already there

I suppose you could say that about anyone though
...politician or not.

Making the statement rather redundant.

I know the feeling....lol.

:headbang::headbang::headbang::headbang::headbang: :headbang::headbang:

This is what I mean with the political nonsense. To compare Obama to Hitler or Stalin, and suggest that maybe a hanging would be in order in the future is simply out of line. I can't find any historical knowledge in that comparison, and find it so far beyond logic that it's no wonder why Obama won by that margin. And let's not get into sugar coating the "lynching" statement either. People know damn well what lynching is, and have no sense of mind using it here.

Which has worked VERY well for the GLBT community. Case in point, I and MANY other GLBT folks I know were swayed to vote for Obama by his promises of things like overturning Don't Ask, Don't Tell in the US Military (hasn't happened) and pushing for federal "marriage" rights/ equality for us, while blocking attempts to constitutionally ban gay marriage. He seemed more friendly to us than Sarah Palin (yes, I said Sarah Palin... McCain was an afterthought, ready to keel over) was and a lot of us thought "Finally, someone who will listen."

Nope. The rights of the minority are trampled and ignored again by yet another Washington Politician. Woot.

What you INTEND and what actually HAPPENS are often two seperate and far disparate things. The fact is that whenever we are "ruled" by a majority, the rights of the minority will always be disregarded. Sometimes it takes insurrection in order to change that... or a sheer reduction in political and governmental reach and power.

I don't believe any politician or government organization or individual citizen of this great country has ANY right to tell me who I may take as my life partner. It is, quite frankly, none of their damn business, and the collective "they" need to butt the hell out. At this point I want the freedom to live my life as I see fit, free of intervention from government officials of any party.

(Incidentally I find it amusing that a thread started to protest political threads has now turned into one! :grin01:)

Well, connotations in the receiver may have no validity to the sender. Realize I was talking about lynching in reference to a WHITE sheriff for his actions (rigged voting booths, shooting a balc guy via his deputies, etc.). So? Lynch means any group of mad people hanging on they feel deserves it to me. Nothing more.

Like I've alweays said, I am responsible for my meaning - not how you TAKE that meaning. I am firmly convinced that Susan would have used those terms to describe McCain if he was doing the same thing now. Projection of bad thoughts on words is something we all need to avoid in a text-only mode of communication.

I am pretty sure that that was not a direct comparison on KJUN's part.

In any event, I, too, found the lynching comment to be over the top, however, I took it as a joke in bad taste, much the same way when I tell my department chair it's time to "get out the torches and pitch forks" and march on the Office of Science. It's not serious... it's an expression of frustration... not something one should typically say in public.

But freedom of speech works both ways. :shrugs:

Bold language comes out of emotion, and usually has no positive affect on changing someones opinion. Language like insinuating a "lynching", or comparing Obama to Stalin and Hitler.
Using your mind would be to realize that we have to see Obama's term through, and rather than trying to start some forum march, some would be better suited arming themselves with a plan to inspire people to elect differently in the next election.


I've heard your libertarian ideals, and you have been one of the few fighting with your mind and logic. I have read almost everyone of your posts, and have learned infinitely more about libertarians than I knew before, and find myself leaning that way more and more.

Because in your ignorance you have NO concept of history. Additionally, you have an extreme apparent inability to understand the written word.

We didn't compare him to Hitler. In fact, I said I wasn't doing that. What I asked was if HITLER deserved to be hung for his actions. Then I asked what IF Obama became like Hitler? WHAT IF? How more clear can one be and still have you insist on misunderstanding it and twisting it into a crazy fabrication not even loosely based on the truth? It's like English isn't your first language or something.

You are the one that keeps bring up prejudice because you have NO OTHER WAY to defend your stance. I believe it is more projection on your part (trying to pretend you didn't vote for him based on color) than anything else. I haven't voted for a democrat in a major election in my life. I don't think I refused to do so this time because he is HALF black.

.

Oh bull poopy. I am just as firmly convinced the word used was unnecessary and inflammatory and carries the wrong connotation.

I have a question for all you fine folks. (wait, did this start out as a political thread, I can't remember)

Anyway...

Do any of you think things would have been differend (read: for the better) if McCain/Palin would have won the election?

Personally, I think the majority of us would still be complaining, only about different things.

The system works! (fails)

I agree 100%! This would be one of my biggest problems with Obama. I know he has no bad feelings about gays and lesbians, but he needs to do way more than he is. I find these minority rights to be more important than any other right now, because we can't lead anyone if we haven't gotten past the most simple of things, which is equality for all.

...because you haven't looked. Read something and comprehend it before saying any such thing. Have you read Mein Kampf? If not, how can you even pretend to say there is no connection or historical similarities between what Obama has said and started doing with what Hitler started off saying and doing? Do you even realize Hitler was elected by a large majority (90% or something like that if memory serves). The majority should ALWAYS get what they want, right? Isn't that basically what you said? Sometimes, they get what they ask for - even if it isn't what they wanted.

You disguise your true feelings as "hypothetical" then blame me for not understanding. Really an easy out, but doesn't hide the comparisons you made.

"(trying to pretend you didn't vote for him based on color)"
Ooooohhhh! Reverse psychology. Try to say I voted based on color, as to deter someone from pointing that finger back at you.

Well, I can't say what Susan meant. I can only tell you what I mean when I say it, and I took it the way I would mean it. You can take it the way you would have meant it, but only Susan's meanings count. because you took it one way doesn't mean she is wrong for saying it. Sorry.

So does anyone here watch The Closer. Just tryin to lightne the mood

I agree. I have now voted in three Presidential elections, and in every single one of them I found myself choosing between the lesser of two evils. This last was the hardest of all... there was no clear choice and the fact that Sarah Palin, a religious right Class A whack job, was added to the McCain mix just solidified Mr. Obama that much more.

At the very least, Obama IS taking his ideas, thoughts, orders and bills from men and women here on EARTH... not from God in His heavens above, like Palin was inclined to do.... :-puke01:

Men and women can be influenced, their words and thoughts and decisions modified and changed. When it comes to a religious nut like Palin, there's no arguing with God's law....

I hate that show too. The lead actress really bugs the hell out of me... not sure why. Just makes my skin crawl listening to her.

I am all about some Law & Order... regular or SVU... preferably with some Angie Harmon hotness thrown in.