Any besides me noticed the changed tone here?

[Vietvet]

Hopefully he picks Romney. I like Mitt!

If he picks the huckabump Im going Nader!

The "huckabump?!" I LIKE that!

What do you like about Romney? His plastered down hairdo,his flip-flopping pandering, or his pasted on smile? reminds me of a Donny Osmond wannabe..

 

[SW85]

Everyone needs to cool the hell off.

Mods, do the responsible thing and lock this thread.

 

[Libsmasher]

Libsmasher, you've been here what - four, five months now? I've been on this forum for over a year now. I've seen it get invaded by groups of conspiracy theorists and anti-semites, not to mention our resident wacko Roker (who holds the record for coming back and making new accounts to pester us somewhere in the range of 40-50 times). Between 9sublime and USMC (I really wish he'd come back) it was a struggle to keep this board focused on civil political discourse.

And now here we are, the anti-semites are gone, the conspiracy theorists have dwindled to a few (and they're mostly tolerable), so what problems are we faced with? Keeping the board civil. Everything you do and say suggests that you're here to attack, not debate. I've given you the opportunity to be civil and to debate with respect and so far I'm not seeing you take it.

So I'm asking - are you here to be serious about political debate, or are you just here to be a jerk?

I AM here to attack - in the civil sense of the word. I support what I say. I DON'T read political attack blogs, and then dump the garbage here. I in fact have posted completely original ideas here, such as my concept of a United Democratic Nations. Liberalism is so pervasive, accepted by so many people as unquestionably "correct", that when they hear someone attacking it, they become very upset, and think they've been "attacked". And your claim that I don't debate is just false - I've gotten in long debates with the resident libs. As I indicated before, I operate at the same level as people who want to take me on. If that is debate, fine. If it is a p_ssing contest, fine. I admit to an intolerance for a dimwitted level of historical ignorance, particularly about the U.S.

 

[all_arm]

That cretin comes in and dumps without any contraception crap he's picked elsewhere from attack sites.

proof? citations?

if you disagree, fine, prove me wrong. but i actually DON'T "dump" anything, anywhere. some "attack" sites share my views, just as some "attack" sites share yours. it's absolutely immaterial to these discussions and shows your unwillingness to discuss actual ideas.

 

[vyo476]

I AM here to attack - in the civil sense of the word. I support what I say. I DON'T read political attack blogs, and then dump the garbage here. I in fact have posted completely original ideas here, such as my concept of a United Democratic Nations.

You march to the beat of your own drummer, yes. That's one of the only reasons I've yet to give up on you.

Liberalism is so pervasive, accepted by so many people as unquestionably "correct",

Accepted by liberals. Here's the inherent flaw in your personal philosophy - you think that you're changing peoples' minds by attacking their beliefs. That almost never works. If you want to change someone's mind, pissing them off first just isn't a good idea.

that when they hear someone attacking it, they become very upset, and think they've been "attacked".

Are you trying to imply that when you attack them they're not being attacked?

And your claim that I don't debate is just false - I've gotten in long debates with the resident libs. As I indicated before, I operate at the same level as people who want to take me on. If that is debate, fine. If it is a p_ssing contest, fine.

I'll admit, we got off to a rocky start. But I've offered you a chance to be more civil, and I've attempted to be more civil towards you, and so far I haven't seen any change.

I admit to an intolerance for a dimwitted level of historical ignorance, particularly about the U.S.

It is entirely possible to inform people that they are mistaken about something without insulting them.

 

[Libsmasher]

Quote:
Liberalism is so pervasive, accepted by so many people as unquestionably "correct",

Accepted by liberals. Here's the inherent flaw in your personal philosophy - you think that you're changing peoples' minds by attacking their beliefs. That almost never works. If you want to change someone's mind, pissing them off first just isn't a good idea.

I am not really here to change liberals' minds. As you know, most of the people who look at sites like this are probably lurkers. My effort is to not let bad liberal ideas gain currency as they have so many times in the past simply by default, by no opposition.

Quote:
that when they hear someone attacking it, they become very upset, and think they've been "attacked".

Are you trying to imply that when you attack them they're not being attacked?

Yes - their ideas are being attacked. Since their ideas are simply the unopposed "reality" they always ingrained in themselves, they think I am attacking them.

Quote:
And your claim that I don't debate is just false - I've gotten in long debates with the resident libs. As I indicated before, I operate at the same level as people who want to take me on. If that is debate, fine. If it is a p_ssing contest, fine.

I'll admit, we got off to a rocky start. But I've offered you a chance to be more civil, and I've attempted to be more civil towards you, and so far I haven't seen any change.

Oh doggone, and here I thought I was holding back.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

Why is it incoherent or peculiar? He asked you a simple, straightforward question. Do you have a problem with reading comprehension??

Thank you , I thought I was quite clear in meaning and intent...and made my point quickly. Notice I did not use every letter 10 times to make it 6 lines long?