I regard that as hate speech as well, Bricker. I missed it, and apologize to you for that. Even with several sets of eyes on task, it’s easy to miss things when reading fast, and especially in long, involved exchanges. Please, you and everyone else, if you spot something wrong, report it.
BTW, this isn’t to say it’s the readership’s responsiblity to catch offenses. It’s ours, and being human, sometimes we slip up. But we won’t knowingly ignore offenses.
Veb
Let me point something out to you Americans…
Being pro or anti abortion is not Liberal or Conservative.
Being pro or anti gay rights is not Liberal or Conservative.
Being pro or anti racial discrimination is not Liberal or Conservative.
Being pro or anti religion is not Liberal or Conservative.
Being pro or anti gun law is not Liberal or Conservative.
Being pro or anti death penalty is not Liberal or Conservative.
The Republican and Democratic parties of USA have taken stands on these issues, but the issues are not themselves particularly left wing or right wing.
This board is strongly pro gay rights, anti racial discrimination.
This board is middling to strongly pro abortion rights, anti gun law, and anti death penalty.
This board is moderately anti religion.
The board seems to have very little biass for real Liberal issues.
Very few advocate higher taxes, very few advocate socialised medicine, lots advocate small government, lots advocate being tough on crime, lots advocate being tough on foreign injustices, few advocate free handouts to the poor, almost noone advocates anything socialist at all. This is all good from my point of view as a Conservative leaning person. This board is Conservative but with many issues against current Republican party ideals, not against Conservative ideals. Nearly all of which come from the Republican parties connections and alliance with extremist fundamental Christian groups and ideals.
I can’t speak for everyone, but I know that I get enough of the attitudes in posts 4,7,13, and 25 IRL and don’t really want to see more on the boards. For this reason, I usually skip GD, sometimes ignore the Dope altogether, and often ignore thread elsewhere that got the random 'Sorry your dog died, but that’s what you get for voting for the Bush Puppet into office because you know he is letting the Saudi royal family line up and take turns pounding him in the ass and you know he started the war in Iraq ‘cause he has an Oedipan thing for his mom’
Really, you guys sound about that crazy to around 51 percent of the country.
Somewhat ironically, it is exactly that type of attitude that turns me away from the Democratic party in general, but that is for another thread another time.
Bippy, I agree with you 100 percent.
RE the classical definitions of Liberal & Conservative, you are absolutely correct.
RE the political realities of US-style Liberals & Conservatives, you are just as absolutely incorrect
RE the OP- the only outright hostility I’ve encountered in political discussions has been in response to my enthusiastic support for Ceremonial Theism in the public square and my moderate opposition to gay marriage & adoption, and none of that opposition has been from the Mods.
What is it I said? That one shouldn’t be flamed for being a conservative, but that, on factual grounds, Bush’s presidency and the war can be taken to task? You’ll have a very hard time jamming your fingers in your ears and pretending those claims aren’t true, because there’s proof. Hell, the OSP was set up specifically to cherry pick intel. This is a matter of public record. If you’re tired of factual refutation, the Dope is not the place for you.
I propose a new SDMB drinking game:
Every time someone invokes the Magic Mandate, take a shot.
If they use the Magic Mandate in a blatant bandwagon fallacy, take two shots.
Every time someone hops up on the cross because their ideas are being debated forcefully and factually, take a shot.
Every time someone points to the ‘tone’ of the Democratic party/left wing and ignores that the Republican party/the right wing via Bush, Coulter, Limbaugh, etc has said that if you’re not with them you’re againt them, that dissent is treason, that Liberals are communists… take a shot.
Every time someone says that the issues matter to them, but they vote on our elected officials based on the tone of talking heads and people on message boards, take a shot.
I’m sure more rules will be invented as time goes on, but this should at least allow for maximum inebriation in the meantime.
Let’s see, we have Demo calling someone an Uncle Tom. Do liberals here (not including Daniel) feel that should be tolerated? In another thread rjung claims conservative posters regularly claim that liberals are traitors, Muslims are terrorists and feminists are lesbians. He provides no cites whatsoever to back up that bit of specious bullshit.
This isn’t a call for mods to do some kind of mass banning. I actually only support banning in the most extreme cases. The problem is that conservatives pitting liberals does nothing to get the message across to the handful of assholes who continue this nonsense. Dio or wring occasionally stepping in to tell rjung he is being an idiot would be a lot more effective.
As a postscript the request still stands for rjung to produce examples of any of the well known conservative posters saying what he claimed earlier. I think he is a liar and knows it, but I would be happy to be proven wrong.
There you conservatives go, marching in lockstep again. Five percent on a CD is barely better than stuffing it in your mattress, but Una and you–CONSERVATIVES–think we should invest in them to support your pals in the banking industry. Jalapeno sauce is better than plain hot sauce but I get mine at Trader Joe’s, a known hotbed of liberals, and you can’t be supporting that, can you? Being underdressed shows that you are one with The People and not pushed around by the fashion fascists. And air conditioning is for wimps and the people who push it are supporters of the Cheney-Enron energy policy.
(quick–okay, SLOW–mental math) You mean…that would mean…you’re a gentleman of color? Not that it would change what I think of you (your being a lawyer, on the other hand… 
), nor is it something I’m likely to remember a week from now, but I have reason to believe I never knew that particular irrelevancy about you. And yeah, I agree about the hate speech (or at least “tacky and excessively rude speech that should be dealt with severly”) assessment, though I can understand Veb when she explains how the mods sometimes miss stuff.
I’m of Hispanic descent. I suppose he could have said I’m a “Tio Tomás” but it would lacked a certain panache.
But his point was, I assume, that because I’m Latino, my “pubbie friends” laugh at me behind my back for supporting the GOP, and that by so doing, I am a traitor of sorts to my Hispanic brethern.
In fact, I don’t assume - I KNOW it, because he said as much:
Hey, nothing personal or ethnic, but I have laughed at some of your views, too, ESPECIALLY early last November, but I’m gracious enough to do it to your face. Yeah, that was pretty tacky of Desmo and Lefty properly took him to task for it, but isn’t there a statute of limitations on Pittings or, for that matter, remembering bad things people said to you? Six months is pretty long for me to hold a grudge; a blessing that comes from a lousy memory.
God, that is one butt-ugly thread. When I read that quote of mine, I was all like, “Dude, I was all calm and respectable before the election!” Then I read more of the thread and, well, nothing to see, folks, move along.
Daniel
In a discussion of ways in which the board needs to be improved, evidence of what really happens is a pretty good starting point. (There have been numerous unsupported–and probably unsupportable–charges lodged in the three related threads currently addressing that issue.) Here is one case where we have a documented event. (Had Bricker said that he had that post bookmarked, I would agree that it would seem odd, but there was probably no remarkable effort to find that exchange by dropping “uncle” into the search engine with Left Hand of Dorkness as the poster and a selection criterion of “posts” rather than “threads.”
Steve, FWIW - it’s statements like this that show the liberal bias of this board. The administration has NOT been caught in outright lies, and no matter how many liberals scream shrilly that it has, the truth is that it hasn’t. But as conservatives have seen way too many times already, liberals simply just don’t let the truth get in the way of a good rant.
I used to consider myself conservative, but in reality I’m more moderate (and some would say libertarian) than conservative. I agree with the Republicans on most things and with the Democrats on a few things. I totally disagree with the Republican Party’s having gotten in bed with the religious whackos because those whackos pollute everything else. I give Bush’s Presidency a B-minus so far; he’s done some things real well, most things fairly well, and he’s fallen squarely on his ass on a few things. I said all that to explain where my point of view is and why I said what I did in the first paragraph. I’m not even a full-blooded conservative and I’m sick of the liberal bs.
I know that liberals consider Ann Coulter to be the Antichrist Incarnate, but I’m in the process of reading Slander: Liberal Lies about the American Right, and it is an eye-opener. Say what you will about her, Coulter has done her homework and her book is solid. Even if only half of what she is reporting were accurate, it’s enough to make you toss your cookies.
Valid point, and it was a hurtful enough comment that even I might’ve remembered it and who had said it.
Nah, I wouldn’t. As me the interrelationships of the people on 24, though I’ve only seen one episode the past couple years? No trouble! What did a poster say to me a year ago that really hurt my feelings? Uh, give me a couple hours and I might come up with it.
I’m sorry, but Coulter is not a paragon of honesty herself. When she berated a disabled war veteran as being “the reason we lost the war”. she was showing her true colors as a demagogue and a user of the worst sort. Her own statements wreck any credibility she might try to claim, in my view.
As far as lies, here is a recent example. During the Schiavo “experience”, the word leaked out that there was a “talking points” memo, outlining how the extreme far right could use her to gain “political capital”. When the stuff hit the fan, the various party faithful and the pundits accused the “evil left” of planting it. As it turns out, that was a falsehood. The true author finally did own up to it. The memo was genuine. That is just the more recent example I can come up with. Does the other party do it too? Damn right they do. I still remember the reports of “glorious victory” every night on the evening news (Vietnam- 800 gazillion Commies killed, 2 GIs wounded). Same song they sing now - freedom, America, “domino principle”, etc.
You describe yourself as what I consider to be a Moderate (a good thing). However, be very aware that this alone also makes you “dangerous” to some people of the far right. As to your opinion of the “religious whackos”, you took the words right out of my mouth. On that, we agree completely.
And it’s statements like that which show the Bush apologist bias. Express certainty about WMD as the basis for launching a full scale war, especially after you’ve cherry picked the intel, and either you’re lying or unable to do the job of president. Neither is a particularly wonderful outcome. It’s binary.
And there are others. Like telling the world that he was open to negotiation when before 9/11 the decision to attack Iraq by hook or by crook had already been made.
Or how about the fact that we were taking Sadaam to task for frustrating the process of inspections when we were planting CIA operatives into the mix and spying on him? Is there a new rule that countries have to submit to espionage if the US says so?
But, no, it’s the screaming looney leftists. Yessir.
Yes, that’s it. Thank you for helping to keep the tone of the boards lower. Liberals don’t care about the truth, and conservatives are mightily put upon.
(take a shot.)
This is not a left/right issue, or a repub/dem issue, or a liberal/conservative issue. This is simply an issue over those who support and enable president Bush, and those with a freakin’ mountain of facts with which they oppose him.
(take a shot)
And what, pray tell, to do about people like Airman Doors who are conservatives, and yet have come to the rational conclusion based upon the data that Bush is bad for our country? Little hole in your theory there.
(take a shot)
“When contemplating college liberals, you really regret once again that John Walker is not getting the death penalty. We need to execute people like John Walker in order to physically intimidate liberals, by making them realize that they can be killed, too. Otherwise, they will turn out to be outright traitors.”-address to the Conservative Political Action Conference
I think I would remember a poster who really hurt my feelings even many years ago. Not because I am particularly vindictive or bare grudges, but simply because they really hurt my feelings. Of course if it were a mere missunderstanding that got sorted out, then the hurt would be quickly forgiven and forgotten, but any time someone truley hurts me I remember it even though I wish I didn’t.
I think the less modding the better, no matter what. I’m guessing the mods would agree, as I can’t imagine anyone needs the kind of workload required to “improve” things.
I’ve seen at least one ex-poster get dopesmacked for saying things to me that I really didn’t care that much about. I thought the guy was behaving like a nutcase in general, but I actually complained that the other poster got warned for the particular offense. No harm, no foul, in my book; and as I don’t go to bed worrying about what people say here or many other places, it’s hard to imagine harm of any kind*. There’s simply no need for it, as it makes no difference anyway. Besides, being pissed off isn’t the same thing as being oppressed, and as it is this place has got more rules than I can keep straight sometimes. My attitude is of the sort I would have thought any conservative would embrace: The less regulation, the better. Or is this one of those “free speech is code for ACLU-backed radicalism” kinds of arguments?
*Unless, of course, my privacy should be compromised without my consent. THAT would be something else entirely.
But that’s not lying, Finn! The woman is batshit pizza and she’s entirely upfront about it! That’s not lying, that is the utmost candor!