# Liberal: Prove it or retract it **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [June 15, 2005, 2:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-prove-it-or-retract-it/308314 "2005-06-15T02:21:19Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![EddyTeddyFreddy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eddyteddyfreddy/32/18796_2.png) [@EddyTeddyFreddy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EddyTeddyFreddy)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2005, 4:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-prove-it-or-retract-it/308314/61 "2005-06-15T16:57:31Z")
> [@wring](#): > > Three headed cat from Venus. > > and female. > > 😉 Oh, yeh? Well, I say you’re actually an immigrant from Mercury, and one of those heads is vestigial. The six tails are legit, though, I’ll concede that. ---
**Author:** ![Metacom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ecae2f/32.png) [@Metacom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Metacom)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2005, 4:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-prove-it-or-retract-it/308314/62 "2005-06-15T16:57:32Z")
> [@EddyTeddyFreddy](#): > > No, it’s about the ontological proof of **Uvula Donor’s** Liberalism[sup]TM[/sup]. Oh, that’s easy. You see, we don’t actually have to show that **Uvula Donor** is a liberal; we merely have to show that’s it’s _possible_ for her to be liberal, and we can then use LOGIC to show that she is, necessarily, a liberal. ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2005, 5:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-prove-it-or-retract-it/308314/63 "2005-06-15T17:02:41Z")
> [@EddyTeddyFreddy](#): > > Oh, yeh? Well, I say you’re actually an immigrant from Mercury, born on Venus, raised on Pluto, schooled on Mercury. > [@ETF](#): > > and one of those heads is vestigial. never said otherwise. 😉 > [@ETF](#): > > The six tails are legit, though, I’ll concede that. as well you should. ---
**Author:** ![EddyTeddyFreddy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eddyteddyfreddy/32/18796_2.png) [@EddyTeddyFreddy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EddyTeddyFreddy)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2005, 5:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-prove-it-or-retract-it/308314/64 "2005-06-15T17:05:14Z")
> [@wring](#): > > But you asked (essentially) where he got the idea that you dogpiled on him, he answered it. You disagree that his perceptions of your posts were correct. That’s not lible. that’s a misunderstanding. Actually, you’re correct in that he perceived mostly innocuous posts of mine as part of a pattern of persecution. Unfortunately he does that a lot, a hell of a lot, often after posting inflammatory stuff that’s pretty much guaranteed to provoke a hostile reaction. His driveby in the Koran thread (his first post) about if this were about Bible desecration this would be a celebration thread – that’s a perfect example of how he throws out inflammatory bait, then wails at being persecuted when he draws the responses he’s seeking. My error in that thread, and one I freely admit, is in taking his bait and giving him the opening he wanted to turn it into another chapter of The **Liberal** Show. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2005, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-prove-it-or-retract-it/308314/65 "2005-06-15T17:06:09Z")
> [@EddyTeddyFreddy](#): > > Well, dammit, why’d you let it roll off? Just when I was… Gee, :o I actually meant roll off and then on and then off and then… Is it hot in here? 😉 ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2005, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-prove-it-or-retract-it/308314/66 "2005-06-15T17:10:17Z")
> [@EddyTeddyFreddy](#): > > My error in that thread, and one I freely admit, is in taking his bait and giving him the opening he wanted to turn it into another chapter of The **Liberal** Show. This is a point I’ve wondered about in a coulpe of threads. If you’ve had several discussions with somneone and you know you don’t agree then why continue to engage tehm. If you choose to do so then don’t place all the responsibility for what follows on them. ---
**Author:** ![EddyTeddyFreddy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eddyteddyfreddy/32/18796_2.png) [@EddyTeddyFreddy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EddyTeddyFreddy)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2005, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-prove-it-or-retract-it/308314/67 "2005-06-15T17:15:54Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > This is a point I’ve wondered about in a coulpe of threads. If you’ve had several discussions with somneone and you know you don’t agree then why continue to engage tehm. If you choose to do so then don’t place all the responsibility for what follows on them. Yes, you have a point. It in fact is why I have many times _not_ posted a reply to what **Lib** has said. As I noted above, I was wrong to jump to his bait in the Koran thread. I believe his subsequent naming me as one of his pet anklebiters was his way of striking back at me for it. The longer you read here, the clearer his patterns will become, and the more you’ll understand just why he evokes the reactions he does. It goes beyond simple disagreement with his point of view, and is based on how he conducts himself in thread after thread. ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2005, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-prove-it-or-retract-it/308314/68 "2005-06-15T17:18:46Z")
> [@EddyTeddyFreddy](#): > > **newcrasher** , you’re right, “libel” is too grand a word for it. I should have said “added me to your (paranoidly delusional) enemies list”. But then he’d whine about baseless accusations of mental illness. > > **lieu, Revtim** , your analyses are spot on. > > The only regret I have about opening this thread is that it gives our resident drama queen yet another stage on which to chew the scenery. Agreed with all three points. But being the smart lady that you are, don’t tell me you needed help from Mrs Cleo to see the third one coming? On the positive side, there’s the smell of yet another **Lib** meltdown in the air. What are they usually good for? Two to three weeks of fingerless dike? SDMB denizens need not worry if that’s the case, my finger’s willing and able and so is the dike. Right. Since that’s settled, let’s talk about Me, Myself and I. Can’t imagine a more fascinating topic. ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2005, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-prove-it-or-retract-it/308314/69 "2005-06-15T17:21:49Z")
> [@RedFury](#): > > Since that’s settled, let’s talk about Me, Myself and I. OK. But eventually, let’s talk about me. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2005, 5:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-prove-it-or-retract-it/308314/70 "2005-06-15T17:30:20Z")
> [@EddyTeddyFreddy](#): > > The longer you read here, the clearer his patterns will become, and the more you’ll understand just why he evokes the reactions he does. It goes beyond simple disagreement with his point of view, and is based on how he conducts himself in thread after thread. So I’ve been told. It is subtle. Some folks have been patient enough to explain rather than just vent. I appreciate it. This may be off subject but it seems a contributing factor that folks bring baggage from a previous thread into a new one. They draw there conclusions about the posters intent based not on what was said in the post they respond to but what was said in a different thread. I suppose it’s to be expected. Just a to note that there are some newer postes that might like to discuss the thread at hand without previous disagreements being dragged into it and discussed at length. Is that an unreasonable expectation? ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2005, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-prove-it-or-retract-it/308314/71 "2005-06-15T17:31:28Z")
> [@This Year's Model](#): > > OK. But eventually, let’s talk about me. Or Toby Keith, for some reason he just came to mind 😕 ---
**Author:** ![Uncommon\_Sense](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Uncommon\_Sense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uncommon_Sense)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2005, 5:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-prove-it-or-retract-it/308314/72 "2005-06-15T17:32:34Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > Stalking is deliberately following someone around from thread to thread. What Guin, This Year’s Model, et al, engage in is mere opportunism. I think this is it. For instance, I may purposely open and post to threads that I notice certain posters have either started or replied to. I do this because I know that they usually have interesting things to say. Whether those are things I agree with or not doesn’t matter, they’re still interesting. What WILL get me to submit a passioned reply is when I disagree with the poster. This is human nature. So, in your case you may have certain people that open threads that you’re in because they’re interested in what you have to say (pro or con), or in the topic of the thread that you are involved in. Since it sounds like many of these posters also happen to disagree with you you will see a higher percentage of posts that disagree with you and that you may disagree with. Or that happen to offend you. I really don’t think that they _look_ for you. You’re just out there. You post alot, they read alot and you clash. Much of that clashing is going to be similar to the kind of posts you were referring to in your first post in this thread. I don’t think the posters in question hate you or aim for you, you just happen to post some thoughtful, intelligent, and often controversial things. I think every poster, if given a few minutes to collect some data, could come up with a handful of posters that they consider to be their own personal attackers. ---
**Author:** ![Greathouse](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/greathouse/32/2992_2.png) [@Greathouse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Greathouse)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2005, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-prove-it-or-retract-it/308314/73 "2005-06-15T17:33:27Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > Just a to note that there are some newer postes that might like to discuss the thread at hand without previous disagreements being dragged into it and discussed at length. Is that an unreasonable expectation? Ok, who’s the new guy? 😉 ---
**Author:** ![EddyTeddyFreddy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eddyteddyfreddy/32/18796_2.png) [@EddyTeddyFreddy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EddyTeddyFreddy)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2005, 5:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-prove-it-or-retract-it/308314/74 "2005-06-15T17:40:59Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > This may be off subject but it seems a contributing factor that folks bring baggage from a previous thread into a new one. They draw there conclusions about the posters intent based not on what was said in the post they respond to but what was said in a different thread. I suppose it’s to be expected. Just a to note that there are some newer postes that might like to discuss the thread at hand without previous disagreements being dragged into it and discussed at length. Is that an unreasonable expectation? No, actually, this is on target, very much so. You’re right that one shouldn’t let interactions with another Doper in one thread affect the dialog in another. The problem in **Liberal’s** case is that his pattern is to hijack thread after thread to his preferred topic. Whether he provokes attacks by bait-tossing, or grabs whatever subject is being discussed and insists that the debate be recast in his terms, you’ll find that thread after thread gets hijacked to discussing him. Now, if this happened only occasionally, and only because one or two Dopers consistently responded to him in such a way, then your observation would apply. But go back and consider what **lieu** said: > [@](#): > > ``` > I see Liberal attempting to brand most criticism of his aforementioned annoying habits as part of a conspiracy, thereby attempting to discredit their legitimacy. Most are as legitimate as B. Graham's kids and, like others, it's part of what's caused me to quickly abandon any thread he's entered that appears in danger of yet another hijacking. It just ain't worth the frustration anymore. > > ``` ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2005, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-prove-it-or-retract-it/308314/75 "2005-06-15T17:59:34Z")
> [@This Year's Model](#): > > OK. But eventually, let’s talk about me. Sorry, no. Simply not enough time left. Freedom! Fries! Liberals! **This Year’s Model**! No matter! It’s all about ME. Why can’t you see that? Perfectly obvious to ME. Discuss. ---
**Author:** ![EddyTeddyFreddy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eddyteddyfreddy/32/18796_2.png) [@EddyTeddyFreddy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EddyTeddyFreddy)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2005, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-prove-it-or-retract-it/308314/76 "2005-06-15T18:02:34Z")
> [@RedFury](#): > > Freedom! Fries! Liberals! **This Year’s Model**! No matter! It’s all about ME. > > Why can’t you see that? Perfectly obvious to ME. > > Discuss. How dare you accuse **This Year’s Model** of frying liberals in the name of freedom? Are you blind? Just cuss. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2005, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-prove-it-or-retract-it/308314/77 "2005-06-15T18:13:14Z")
> [@Greathouse](#): > > Ok, who’s the new guy? 😉 Hey here’s a nifty idea. Perhaps there can be a special icon for newbies. Something resembling a the buttocks. It would be akin to those “in training” labels some stores give new employees. It’s a request for patience and and a premptive explaination and apology for the next inevitable screw up. Oh, buttocks avatar, whereforart thou? ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2005, 6:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-prove-it-or-retract-it/308314/78 "2005-06-15T18:15:12Z")
> [@EddyTeddyFreddy](#): > > No, actually, this is on target, very much so. You’re right that one shouldn’t let interactions with another Doper in one thread affect the dialog in another. The problem in **Liberal’s** case is that his pattern is to hijack thread after thread to his preferred topic. Whether he provokes attacks by bait-tossing, or grabs whatever subject is being discussed and insists that the debate be recast in his terms, you’ll find that thread after thread gets hijacked to discussing him. > > Now, if this happened only occasionally, and only because one or two Dopers consistently responded to him in such a way, then your observation would apply. But go back and consider what **lieu** said: I understand the explaination and will keep it in mind for future threads. Danke ---
**Author:** ![Giraffe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giraffe/32/129_2.png) [@Giraffe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giraffe)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2005, 6:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-prove-it-or-retract-it/308314/79 "2005-06-15T18:18:06Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > This may be off subject but it seems a contributing factor that folks bring baggage from a previous thread into a new one. They draw there conclusions about the posters intent based not on what was said in the post they respond to but what was said in a different thread. I suppose it’s to be expected. Just a to note that there are some newer postes that might like to discuss the thread at hand without previous disagreements being dragged into it and discussed at length. Is that an unreasonable expectation? It’s not an unreasonable ideal but it is a bit unrealistic. Once you’ve had many discussions with someone, their past statements and behavior are going to quite reasonably alter your view of their current statements and behavior. Your posting history affects your credibility in future debates, as it should. This is pretty much why we have the Pit, so members have a place to discuss and/or criticize each other’s behavior without hijacking the discussion in the more, um, useful forums. Personally, I think this is an underutilized tool. Instead it seems that there has been a shift lately toward the idea that dishonesty and obnoxiousness should be handled by staff action rather than by the membership. As a strong proponent of actual free speech (i.e. don’t whine to me about pile-ons), I much prefer the latter to the former. ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2005, 6:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-prove-it-or-retract-it/308314/80 "2005-06-15T18:21:31Z")
> [@EddyTeddyFreddy](#): > > How dare you accuse **This Year’s Model** of frying liberals in the name of freedom? Are you blind? Quit stalking me and get back on topic! No doubt you’ll say I’m climbing on my cross, but it is a burden I must endure for others. Freedom! Fries! Happy? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-prove-it-or-retract-it/308314.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-prove-it-or-retract-it/308314.md?page=5)