Art Posted March 31, 2003 Share Posted March 31, 2003 Henry, I'll see what I can do. In reading some posts and getting a feel for that board, I can't promise it will be a very worthwhile stay though. There are many amazing dolts on that site and I fear my style will dazzle them so, it might upset the balance . But, I'll see what I can do. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted March 31, 2003 Share Posted March 31, 2003 Kurp, Do a count mentally of those people who speak here and can generally be described as coming from the left and which generally come from the right. I'm talking regular posters in this. You, given your devil's advocate position and any conspiracy is more meaningful than any non-conspiracy position would qualify as left, whether you are or are not . Then let me know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted March 31, 2003 Share Posted March 31, 2003 right Jack...like left leaning reporters never attempted to corrupt government workers by quoting "off record"....or never injected personal bias by twisting reports with unattributable "sources say.....".... get real.........fox wasn't pretending to report....were chastising protestors for their hypocrisy....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheKurp Posted April 1, 2003 Share Posted April 1, 2003 Okay Art, I'll grant you a point scored. I'll continue to insist that the Right outnumbers the Left on this board. By how much will be determined by a mental score that I will shortly commence tracking. Perhaps my perception is somewhat skewed by the aggressive participation of the Right. Perhaps my accounting is clouded by the anti-American label affixed to the Left by members of the Right. Or maybe I'm just perturbed when members of the Right waste no opportunity to bash the entire Left population when responding to a single leftist view; something you rarely see reciprocated. I'm able to, but won't give you the names of two posters with left-leaning views who I've noticed, after taking a verbal beating, now post preemptively apologetically. Fearing the wrath of the Right should they take umbrage with a thought or idea expressed. But for digressing I apologize. I will take your suggestion and try to come up with the numbers. Maybe I'll even go you one further and occasionally point out when I see the Right overwhelmingly dominating a thread where the Left has had something to say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Mike Posted April 1, 2003 Share Posted April 1, 2003 Originally posted by JackC No actually Fox is now half full because Bush is in charge. They were half (or more) empty when Clinton was President. Don't blame me I'm just reporting to you the facts. You decide if you accept truth or not. Don't you mean *our country* was "half full" when Clinton was in charge? Half full of morals. Half full of backbone... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted April 1, 2003 Author Share Posted April 1, 2003 Kurp- Obviously, I'm one of those who's right of center and who's active. I'd hope you'd note, however, that I have never labeled anyone of our posters here as being "anti-American". If I've used that term, it's been reserved either for a viewpoint as opposed to a poster, or else to extremists like that Columbia professor. I too would be interested in a breakdown of our political lines here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted April 1, 2003 Share Posted April 1, 2003 Kurp, I'll take it one step further. There were very well-spoken, meaningful left contributors to this board who after conversations with me have left the board. To me, this demonstrates more of an essential weakness not only in message but character, so, perhaps it is not fair to label them truely left, because these people had such a weakness in supporting their position they decided to go to bed without supper rather than continuing a dialog. In both cases the members were people that had frequently found their words accepted and agreed with by myself and others on the right. When there was acceptance, there seemed a calm. As soon as the rejection of a message was witnessed though, these two very intelligent people took the easy route and left the board because, in the end, they lacked any basis for supporting their positions, and found it easier to run from them, feigning insult, than to actually address the issues presented in opposition. Where I respect you for your devil's advocate position, and Jack for his intransigence (often ignorant ), and Gbear for his socialism, and a while back for TEG before he kind of became a wimp, is that when a person believes in themselves and their positions they will fight and discuss them -- or in your case and often in mine, where the thrill is merely the discussion itself -- without being run off because there are words, often good ones, that limit the impact of their view. But, that's really beside the point. The fact is there have always been very strong liberal positions offered in the Tailgate. The casualties of some in the discussion probably just serve to increase the strength of those who remain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BG Posted April 1, 2003 Share Posted April 1, 2003 Why do you all have to play the "partisan" card?:laugh: I make it quite clear where in the middle I can be found on any given day............ :bow: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted April 1, 2003 Share Posted April 1, 2003 Originally posted by redman I too would be interested in a breakdown of our political lines here. Since I sorta started us off on this tangent I'll volunteer some names of the right-wigers who's posts I look forward to reading to go along with my list of lefties: You redman, fansince62, Glenn X and Tarhog are generally very rational and thoughtful in your approach. I haven't quite gotten a bead on this Consigliere fellow yet, but so far I really like his stuff too. Kilmer at times as well, although he denies being a true rightist. Art has his moments as well, but as Kurp pointed out in another thread, watching him tear into some poor soul, while fascinating along the same vein as watching a train wreck, isn't always particularly informative. But he's definately the most fun to read on an adversarial level. And then there are NavyDave and Air Sarge, who are sort of the yin to Jack's Yang (uh, philosphically speaking ) ... I admit I'm not the biggest fan of their approach, but there are times when someone from the left says something real stupid that I know one of those two will just go to town, and I gotta admit I look forward to it. In the middle I like, uh, myself , Om, PCS and Bufford. OPM writes good stuff, but I'm not sure he's all that moderate. And then there are the conspiracy theorists: ASF, Tex and Jags. I'm not sure where they fall on the spetrum exactly. Obviously there are a lot more posters on both sides out there (Riggo-toni and Riggo-Drill for example, although I can't remember which is the righty and which is the leftist ) but these names are the ones I find myself paying the most attention to. Maybe some others could add to the list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted April 1, 2003 Share Posted April 1, 2003 Oh, Henry. Kurp didn't say that watching the eradication of a poor soul was fascinating along the lines of watching a train wreck only without any true informational capacity. In fact, he said, "You Art, and a few others on ExtremeSkins, provide an intellectual stimulation that I've found only occasionally elsewhere on the Internet. I like your writing style and witnessing you take some poor soul to task is akin to watching a train wreck." So, not only do I provide an occasional wreck, but I even get to provide intellectual stimulation for the contrarian on occasion. What more could one ask . Granted, during the wreck the information usually stops flowing, and it is more of a repetitive expression of a reality ignored, so, I catch your meaning . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackC Posted April 1, 2003 Share Posted April 1, 2003 Originally posted by stratoman it appears that way because Bush is a good man Clinton is not. Bush puts politics aside Clinton doesn't. Bush has more moral integrity in his little finger then Clinton ever has. Bush cares about the future of national security and the people of America Clinton doesn't. PS: Bush isn't married to a woman who has a bigger d!ck then his(LOL) Thanks for making my point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted April 1, 2003 Share Posted April 1, 2003 No offense intended I assure you Art. The last thing I want to do is get you fired up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackC Posted April 1, 2003 Share Posted April 1, 2003 Originally posted by Art Henry, I'll see what I can do. In reading some posts and getting a feel for that board, I can't promise it will be a very worthwhile stay though. There are many amazing dolts on that site and I fear my style will dazzle them so, it might upset the balance . But, I'll see what I can do. . You will be banned in an hour! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackC Posted April 1, 2003 Share Posted April 1, 2003 Originally posted by Mad Mike Don't you mean *our country* was "half full" when Clinton was in charge? Half full of morals. Half full of backbone... Do the morals in our country reflect whoever is the current President? "one man's backbone is another's foolish arrogance" JackC 2003 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackC Posted April 1, 2003 Share Posted April 1, 2003 Originally posted by redman Kurp- Obviously, I'm one of those who's right of center and who's active. I'd hope you'd note, however, that I have never labeled anyone of our posters here as being "anti-American". If I've used that term, it's been reserved either for a viewpoint as opposed to a poster, or else to extremists like that Columbia professor. I too would be interested in a breakdown of our political lines here. I would agree with you Redman. I don't remember you treating any opposition idea with anything but respect. Some on the left appreciate your style. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheKurp Posted April 1, 2003 Share Posted April 1, 2003 Originally posted by redman Kurp- I'd hope you'd note, however, that I have never labeled anyone of our posters here as being "anti-American". No worries Redman, it's been noted and filed. The fact that you describe yourself as "right of center" reveals some level of moderatism. The guilty whom brushstroke the Left as anti-American are so far Right that Center has dropped off the horizon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stratoman Posted April 1, 2003 Share Posted April 1, 2003 Originally posted by JackC Thanks for making my point. and what point would that be?? That Clinton represents what is wrong with this country? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golgo-13 Posted April 1, 2003 Share Posted April 1, 2003 I would also label myself as a right of center contributor to the tailgate. But I'm not getting any love. :cry: You also forgot to mention my buddy Tommy the Greek who can get pretty worked up about certain causes that some may label as right of center as well. I'm just making sure that you keep score fairly here.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackC Posted April 1, 2003 Share Posted April 1, 2003 Originally posted by stratoman and what point would that be?? That Clinton represents what is wrong with this country? Thanks for making it again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stratoman Posted April 1, 2003 Share Posted April 1, 2003 Originally posted by JackC Thanks for making it again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted April 1, 2003 Share Posted April 1, 2003 I do not deny being right. Im always right. More to the point though. I have too many views that do not mesh with Conservative thought to be labled as such. I do think that the Dems are responsible for most of the problems our country faces now and have not offered any real solutions to solve them. So if disliking the Dem party and most Liberals (note, not Liberal ideas or Dem ideas, but the actual people) in public makes me right, then by all means, label me correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted April 1, 2003 Share Posted April 1, 2003 It's hard to argue with the statement that Dems and liberals in general are what's wrong with the country. The reason it is hard to argue with that is because the facts are, that in order for them to benefit politically, they have positioned themselves as the party that can only improve its standing if the world goes to hell. If we have trouble in Iraq, the Democrats benefit. If our economy doesn't improve, the Democrats benefit. If jobs aren't created, the Democrats benefit. Etc. Etc. Etc. If the worst thing happens to the U.S., the Democrats ARE the party that will benefit. This is probably not a position they want to be in, but it is the position they have taken and it's very odd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenn X Posted April 1, 2003 Share Posted April 1, 2003 Originally posted by Henry I'll volunteer some names of the right-wigers who's posts I look forward to reading to go along with my list of lefties: You [Art], redman, fansince62, Glenn X and Tarhog are generally very rational and thoughtful in your approach... [Cue that Sally Field-winning-an-Oscar soundbite:] You like me! You really like me!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted April 1, 2003 Share Posted April 1, 2003 Art, that's the case with any party not in power at any given time. That doesn't mean that the opposition is what's wrong with a country, only that it's the opposition ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted April 1, 2003 Share Posted April 1, 2003 Henry, I know the difference between simple opposition standing and willful positioning. What we see among the Dems is more along the line that they've carefully crafted positions where their greatest political gain is merited by the absolute failure in any particular area. That, by political reality, means they have to work toward making the worst happen so they can benefit. That's the difference between a traditional opposition party and where the Dems are now. It's not a good place for them to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.