Sorry, but your unsubstantiated recollections with no proof do not get any sort of credibility simply because you remember an alleged anecdote from years ago
Online is not the same thing as being logged in, dumbass.
I’m basically a lurker on this board but holy shit. How the fuck can a selfish old piece of shit like SA be totally tolerated, even seemingly liked by anyone on this board. This asshole has completely hijacked a thread and made it 100% about him and just trolls along collecting insults. I have him on ignore for all the good it does. I understand this venerable old board’s proclivity to retain pet trolls to toy with but enough fucking already. Ban his diseased ass, end his embarrassing presence on this board. I really want to tell sa to go fuck himself with a tube but it’s probably a violation. But I really would want to tell him that if it was allowed.
He was grandfathered in
We ask ourselves the same thing, dude.
(And you can get away with saying, “go fuck a tube”. Just leave out the “yourself with” and you’re golden)
It’s, “You should never argue with a crazy mi-mi-mi-mi-mi-mind.” It’s still appropriate.
Objection: Assumes existence of organs not in evidence.
Thanks for the tip, but the golden part is strangely unsettling.
I would think a fun-loving almost-septagenarian like you would recognize the choices were made in a facetious spirit. I even said so in the thread, but evidently you didn’t read it.
For example, the first one was “Thanks to them, I’m an avowed Marxist and live in a commune.” I would think anybody would be able to tell I was being silly, but you didn’t comment on it. Apparently you thought it was a normal question to ask. It appears that like most conservatives, you were taken in by Poe’s Law, which states “without a clear indicator of the author’s intent, it is impossible to create a parody of extreme views so obviously exaggerated that it cannot be mistaken by some readers or viewers as a sincere expression of the parodied views.”
But that’s neither here nor there. You didn’t read the thread comments. Nobody felt their political outlooks were changed regardless of whether the educator was liberal or conservative. In the end, they were able to think for themselves and avoided any brainwashing. That’s the point I was trying to make, but you used your liberal conspiracy filter to completely warp it. How did I not see that.
I at least got you to read something out of your comfort zone, which you ought to spend more time doing so you can understand how research works. btw, you don’t need to notify us that you’re signing off. We don’t care, and you usually stay anyway.
I think that a lot of the dreaded liberalization seems to come from expanding one’s circles, and even greater, one’s mind. The girl in his anecdote wasn’t indoctrinated by evil liberal educators; she got out a bit more, thought a bit more, and was exposed to ideas that were new and intriguing. As I said, I know kids who didn’t go to college yet still became more liberal in their late teens/early twenties. There’s a quote attributed to Churchill, falsely I believe, that says if you aren’t liberal when you’re young, you have no heart and if you aren’t conservative when you’re old, you have no brain. I know a lot of exceptionally smart older people who are as liberal as they come. But young kids, going into the world in whatever way they can, tend to be firebrands when it comes to injustice.
Not always, of course. I know young Republicans, too. But I know more liberals who thought they were conservative while still in the nest than vice versa.
Yeah, that happened to me, and I credit the Internet more than getting out in the world.
Plus the massive implosion principled conservative thought underwent in the Dubya/FOX News era.
I’ll add some nuance to this, and I know I’m probably not disagreeing with you per se: Young Republicans can be firebrands when it comes to injustice, primarily because they fall for “decoy ideologies” the GOP sells but does not follow, such as Evangelical Christianity and Libertarianism.
When you’re a Libertarian, you’re a Socialist, only Smarter. You have the One True Scientific Plan To Solve Everything, and it isn’t Marxism, where you can point to the numerous times that’s failed in practice. (Note: Don’t fucking go there with me.) You can claim that your ideology has never been tried, and that it’s based on both logic and respect for others. It’s invigorating, to think it’s possible to fix everything just by tearing down a few rotten edifices like, you know, OSHA, the EPA, and everything else we learned about good government beginning in the Progressive Era and continuing on through the Liberal Consensus period.
Libertarians are Republicans in that the Republican Party has a so-called Libertarian wing, and if you’re at all politically active, you know the Libertarian Party is a joke which can barely swing local elections. Libertarians can fool themselves into thinking they can enter the GOP, execute a French Turn (only this time an Austrian Turn, I suppose), and use the Republicans to implement Libertarian policy.
Hell, the modern GOP might actually be idiotic enough to fall for that these days, were it still complement to implement any coherent policy. Back when I was a Young Libertarian, though, the GOP was solidly Neoconservative, which is the Trotskyist “Permanent Revolution” of conservative thought.
Evangelicals are firebrands for Jesus, and I won’t pretend to know much about that life. I lived in their world, but I was never of their world.
Finally… in my quieter moments, I fancy myself something of a big-C Conservative in a psychological sense. I don’t want massive, radical change, because I feel that provokes hysteria and hysteresis, or counter-revolution and Reaction and Lobsters Thermidor. I do want progress, but I don’t pretend to have a Grand Plan and I am openly disdainful of teleological ideologies which have a Grand Plan and honestly think that “it’s never been tried” is a good thing. Moreover, I hold to a rights-based framework for social justice and am extremely distrustful of policies which reduce rights or give preference to any specific group, which I think makes me a Literal Fascist among some crowds.
The royal “we,” or are you speaking on behalf of your fellow socks?
Mmmm…lobsters Thermidor! 
Well played. 
Old Time Hockey - I don’t see much evidence that people like SA, but we’ll argue honestly with just about anyone. It’s one of the strengths of this board, and I think it results in a higher quality of debate than just about anywhere else I’ve been on the Web.
Yeah, I don’t know about the royalty characterization. Including the long-running drive-by trolls such as yourself seems unfair. 
Also, a lot of behavioral changes in young adulthood derive not from any ideological changes but just from, you know, growing up.
For instance, if a teenager remains a virgin throughout high school but ceases to be a virgin in college, that doesn’t necessarily imply any kind of radicalization of their views on the morality of premarital sex. It could just mean that they personally didn’t feel ready to have sex as a high-schooler, but a couple years later they did. No “liberal indoctrination” required.
In truth, the real mechanism of such a change cannot be identified until the details of the sexual behavior are collected by a septuagenarian neighbor acquaintance. And it will in fact be liberal indoctrination. There’s no point denying it.
(One shudders at how Sharting knew she “wasn’t averse to make out sessions”.)
I love this board’s lively debates. I just think you need two honest debaters. I have never seen any growth or honesty in sa over the years, just unrelenting worship of all things Orange. A thread discussing school shootings has been hijacked to talk about an old shitstain who perves on his young neighbour. I’m sure most here despise sa and all his bullshit, but I just seem to detect an underlying affection among posters who engage with him, almost like they are protective of their pet troll.
Now Trump claims that if he had been there in Florida, he would’ve run in to help even without a weapon
There aren’t enough :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: in the world…
Yeah, well, with a phalanx of armed Secret Service agents leading the way, who wouldn’t?