cosmodan
I am not about to wade thru 5 pages of posts to find it. But I do know that I was the one who mentioned pro-choice, universal health care etc. You were correct in that they are policies stemming from principles I hold dear.
I make no statement as to Hentor’s stance (although I think I have a good idea of it).
Did I misconstrue your post where you “correct” Hentor on the difference between principle and policy? I believe that remark should have been addressed to me, not him. That’s all.
It is getting to be too much work to track all the posts ain’t it.
I understand your confusion. I was responding to Hentor’s statement about defending his principles forcefully {with profanity and name calling} and wanted to clarify what principles are IMO. The simialrity to your post was coincidental.
Actually, as you see, you did make an explicit offer to explain. I’ve asked several times that you do so, but your efforts have consisted solely of chastizing others for disagreeing and mischaraterizing their posts here, then crying foul and making pronouncements about what is proper.
You keep claiming that these nefarious posts have kept you from debating the key issues raised by Liberal, and have now denied even making the offer to explain further.
So, what did Liberal mean, how was it appropriate to link the elements of the Freedom Fries guy’s change of mind to whether Democrats have called for “Wars on This or That,” and how is it in any way appropriate to characterize the Freedom Fries guy as quiet.
Feel free to keep sniping, bitching, whining and denying if you like, or provide the explanation that you promised.
My apologies. In venting my frustration I incorrectly responded directly to "you "concerning some posts by others. I will try to avoid that mistake in the future.
Am I mistaken or did you start your participation in this thread by referenceing a different thread Liberal had been in?
I agree with you that argueing that Dems improve themselves by not being democrats is a joke not an arguement. What I got out of the OP was Democrats being urged to reconsider thier postion or at least examine the details, which does seem to be a viable discussion, and a point I happen to agree with.Perhaps you’re right and I was reading my own thinking into it. Your conclusion and about the point of the OP and what seems to be the conclusion of others still seems based in part on arguements Lib made in other threads.
Again my apologies for lumping you in with the profanity and sarcasm that was in the first two pages of this thread.
The post I quoted also seems to be drawing a conclusion based in part on other threads. I see the libertarian references but not the conclusion you draw. I see a request to look at your beliefs but not one to abandon them.
If you find no merit in his arguemnt thats okay with me. My objection was primarily to those who had nothing to contribute but profanity and sarcasm. {you were not one of them}This is the pit however so I concede they are well within the rules. I also don’t blame them for the fact that Lib chose to respond to them more often than any rational discussion.
I’ve recognozed and explained my error. The hijack wasn’t you sepcificly.
Don’t be ridiculous. Of course I support disagreement. My frustration was in posters coming in here with baggage from other threads and similar discussions and offering little except profanity and ridicule. I’ve recoginzed you weren’t one of them and apologized. You were making references to other threads and drawing conclusions that seemed based on previous political discussions.
Then let me say for the record I see that it is not the same as trolling. It is just as annoying. I enjoy some good sarcasm and well placed profanity. It just got out of hand in this thread and did smack of hijack to me. For those who have little to offer other than that, I maintain my position.
I believe I’ve already said how ridiculous this is.
When one, or many use the same tone and technique that they find reprehensible in thier opponents, thats hypocrisy.
I see now that you misunderstood the sentance you quoted. I understand and apologize for not being clear.
My offer was not to explain Liberals position. I was saying that the fact that you didn’t get the irony I spoke of might be part of Libs position. I said “I’m not sure” sincerely because I didn’t want to assume something incorrectly. I still decline to explain for him but I will for myself.
I do understand that the link beween Jones and Democratic principles is tenuous and it’s been explained to me by mhendo in particular in a way that makes sense.
What I didn’t see in the OP was liberals being blamed for the war or any of the rest of the sarcastic and irrational crap that followed soon after. I happen to agree that the Dems need to examine and reassess their methods and position. I don’t see how recommending that insults anyone.I don’t think that requires them to abandon their principles or being Democrats. I didn’t see where** Lib** recommended that in this OP. That accusation seemed to come from other threads. I was frustrated because I was interested in the subject and it was being abandoned in favor of Lib bashing.
I have conceded in a previous post that since this thread was started in the Pit then you and others were well within the rules. That doesn’t prevent my frustration but it is a pretty legitamate “tough shit”
Perhaps we’ll have the chance to discuss this in another thread and seperate the two issues. I think we’ve exhausted this one.
