• Hello!

    Either you have not registered on this site yet, or you are registered but have not logged in. In either case, you will not be able to use the full functionality of this site until you have registered, and then logged in after your registration has been approved.

    Registration is FREE, so please register so you can participate instead of remaining a lurker....

    Please be certain that the location field is correctly filled out when you register. All registrations that appear to be bogus will be rejected. Which means that if your location field does NOT match the actual location of your registration IP address, then your registration will be rejected.

    Sorry about the strictness of this requirement, but it is necessary to block spammers and scammers at the door as much as possible.

Whats the deal!

...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
 
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.
 
Michael823 said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.

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.
Click to expand...

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:)
 
ghosthousecorns said:
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 th south, word used being "lynched" not "hanged". I didn't see whether lynching now or later made a difference the sentiment was already there
Click to expand...

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.
 
Michael823 said:
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.
Click to expand...

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:
 
kathylove said:
...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!
Click to expand...
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.


kathylove said:
...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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
Michael823 said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
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
Click to expand...
.

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)
 
Hypancistrus said:
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:)
Click to expand...
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.
 
Michael823 said:
I can't find any historical knowledge in that comparison,
Click to expand...

...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.
 
KJUN said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
ghosthousecorns said:
.

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

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.
 
ZoologyGirl said:
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)
Click to expand...

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....
 
snakemaster24 said:
So does anyone here watch The Closer. Just tryin to lightne the mood
Click to expand...

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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top