P2P-Zone  

Go Back   P2P-Zone > Political Asylum
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Political Asylum Publicly Debate Politics, War, Media.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 11-03-04, 07:25 PM   #21
scooobiedooobie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 381
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Mazer
I may disagree with you a lot of the time, but since opposing you in this forum would force me to 'choose sides' I usually just read the discussions and keep my thoughts to myself.
mazer, that statement you made to ramona should show you what the tone of this forum is..and where it comes from. if you have an opposing view, you're choosing sides, then mocked. do you honestly feel that ramona's tone is not mocking? do think that calling someone a lobotomized carp, or anencephalic because they have a different view is acceptable? in your post, you appear to be in defense of ramona...that i don't understand, but it is your right to have an opinion.

let's be real here...have you taken note of all the names conservatives have been called? have you read any of multi's posts? before you make a judgement call, check through the all the posts, you'll see that the tone is obviously set..and it was not, and is not, set by the conservatives on this board.

Quote:
If I thought my opinions mattered to anyone here I would share them more often.
your opinions do matter, don't ever think they don't. i wish you would share them more often mazer. i'm not sure if you are a liberal or a conservative, and it doesn't matter. the point is you matter, and your opinions matter.

if you're wary of being accused of choosing sides...don't be. geez...i don't make a post without expecting spratts, knife or multi..etc. to twist, deflect and spin it into oblivion..in their unbridled condescending way of course. but, that's their way of debating.
__________________
Proud member of the Republican Attack Squad!
scooobiedooobie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-04, 08:30 PM   #22
Mazer
Earthbound misfit
 
Mazer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Moses Lake, Washington
Posts: 2,563
Default

Well, I appreciate everything, I'll try to be more vocal if you guys really want to read what I have to say. I'm not afraid of conflict, but I see little profit in it. I was defending Ramona, for his honesty and not necessarily his name calling. He's never called me names before in any of our discussions, I suppose he does it to you guys 'cause you guys do it to him. I don't know where it started, but it's really easy to stop if you try. So I'm not going to make accusations of childish behavior, you all know what needs to change.

The tone of these discussions is wildly organic and lacking in direction. Perhaps that is the cause of my vagaries, and it works to my advantage because I don't want to be associated with a party line, for that leads people to make assumptions about me. My goal, if I have one, is to provoke thought like Sinner, and hopefully change some minds once in a while. That's understandably very hard to do in this group. Yes, multi is a knee-jerk kind of guy, and he knows it too. But sometimes he's very open to new ideas, once you get past his inital reaction. I have observed that he's only stubborn when his intelligence is challenged. None of us here are easy to offend, we've got pretty thick hides, but to insult one's intelligence all you have to do is lump a person into a monolithic group like the political Left or Right and suddenly that person becomes very defensive. It's a failing of the political spectrum, it tries to be all encompassing but it's painfully inadequate when it comes to identifying individuals' beliefs. Basically, the words Liberal and Conservative are four letter words and I try not to see people that way.

Choosing sides? I try to align myself with people who have good ideas, and everyone has good ones and bad ones. I won't agree with everyone all the time, but when I do I hope I'm not attacked by my allies because of past disagreements. It happens all too often, and it makes it impossible to move forward on any new subject. If I disagree with you once I'm not your enemy for life, am I? I tend toward conservativism, but I won't always choose that side because it's not always right. But for some reason I find the so called liberals on this board easier to identify with, but maybe that's just 'cause they're as nerdy as I am. On the other forums I think more like Jack, multi, and Ramona, but on this one I think more like Sinner, span, and scoobie. This has a lot more to do with personality than politics.

I'm not gonna spout a lot of BS like 'All you need is love' and 'Can't we all just get along?' because it doesn't work like that. But I think open mindedness is much more fulfilling and entertaining. Hey, that's just me. You guys do what you want.
Mazer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-04, 09:39 PM   #23
theknife
my name is Ranking Fullstop
 
theknife's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Promontorium Tremendum
Posts: 4,391
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by scooobiedooobie
if you're wary of being accused of choosing sides...don't be. geez...i don't make a post without expecting spratts, knife or multi..etc. to twist, deflect and spin it into oblivion..in their unbridled condescending way of course. but, that's their way of debating.
well, i can't speak for anyone else but my condescending way is actually quite bridled - i only unbridle it for people who feel they need to attack me personally to make their point

and i suspect that if you went back through political threads over the last year or two, you'd find the lion's share of the vitriol comes from the right. scoob's actually a bit of a lightweight in this area - go read some posts by our old friend Albed for some really choice venom.
theknife is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-04, 10:02 PM   #24
scooobiedooobie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 381
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Mazer
On the other forums I think more like Jack, multi, and Ramona, but on this one I think more like Sinner, span, and scoobie. This has a lot more to do with personality than politics.
you’re right, it has a lot more to do with personality than politics. it’s only normal to feel agreement with others when you have an established bond of friendship and/or interests, most especially regarding generalities. but when you step into the realm of politics or religion, it’s an entirely different story.

these are subjects that people feel much more strongly about. that’s why it was a good idea to create a separate political forum.
Quote:
But I think open mindedness is much more fulfilling and entertaining.
you’re right about that as well.

lol, i think kerry’s website needs a ‘lil help in that area…..


ELECTION 2004
Kerry's website riddled with obscenities
Official online page for Democrat loaded with F-word, S-word


Posted: March 8, 2004
1:00 a.m. Eastern

© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com

As public obscenity becomes a heated issue in the wake of this year's Super Bowl breast exposure, the leading Democrat in the race for the White House has obscenities laced throughout his official website.

According to the Drudge Report, Kerry's homepage of JohnKerry.com is filled with expletives, "setting the standard for a new wave of 21st Century campaigning."

Drudge typed in the F-word and the S-word into the search box on Kerry's site to yield some of the following results:

"Bush f----- up Afghanistan ...
Did I expect George Bush to f--- it up as badly as he did ...
cutting all your f---ing legs off at the knees...
Where the f--- is he?...
scare the living s--- out of me...
He has a pig-in-s--- grin on his face, he wanted to get into the s--- ...
doesn't play s--- in my book ..."

Other words some might find objectionable include "G--damn," "Christ," and "piss."

A campaign source told Drudge the Kerry campaign site contains published material, and that the Massachusetts senator was not aware the expletives were posted on his own server.

I think you'll see the offensive words removed," the source told Drudge.

Similar foul language was not found on the official site to re-elect President Bush.
__________________
Proud member of the Republican Attack Squad!
scooobiedooobie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-04, 01:33 AM   #25
Ramona_A_Stone
Formal Ball Proof
 
Ramona_A_Stone's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 2,948
Default

Quote:
whether a teacher is intellectual or caring is not what the issue is about. it’s about the fact that liberal bias runs rampant on the majority of college campuses, and a good portion of students are getting a biased education.
I agree that 'intellect and compassion' are not cogent to the crux of this particular issue because that crux is your perception, definition and qualifications of the concept of bias, still it seems remarkably true that teachers can so often be characterized by this pair of factors made a trinity by the statistical observation that they are also so often liberal.

It cannot be said that college professors are never 'plucked out of the air' because many are; the average university is an oligarchical and fairly self governing body and can certainly preferentially matriculate its staff, so the presence of this trinity of characteristics is certainly not absolute. Nonetheless this Democratic label fairly glares from these stats, which you yourself provided.

I would never argue that the majority of campuses in this country--and in fact, the world at large--are liberal environments. I would not argue that the placement of intent lies anywhere but squarely upon the faculties. I will also grant you that the form this liberalism takes is most often of a demeanor that could be called antiestablishment, and can even verge on pure personal spite for power and authority.

The spoor of this species is also quite obvious, I'd wager it's a good bet that a high percentage were themselves in fraternities during or very near the disillusioned zeitgeist of Kent State and Vietnam.

These, it would seem, are more subtle factors; eccentricities and generalities we can also add to the syllogism of "most teachers": most are intellectual, compassionate and liberal most often, and may have tendencies or agendas toward engendering social revolutions and political restructure much of the time. lol. Given.

...at least that certainly stands as a highly acceptable description of all the 'good teachers' I've known and been influenced by.

"Influence. I'll have to examine my own word before I go on to examine your words of bias and indoctrination, which may be names for the same effect.

I'd define the best infuential qualities to belong to the teachers I've known who have not only tolerated, but embraced, invigorated, nurtured, celebrated and even sanctified the individual idiosyncrasies of their student bodies--and have considered it all the more fortunate for this body when it is the more diverse.

Any good teacher knows that higher learning is not spoonfed to the uninvested, and that the best investment is to engage the student as much as possible in participatory dialogue as pitted against as many views as possible--it's only then that a student takes responsibility for his own critical thinking while maintaining his individuality, a formula too integral to the very fabric of sanity to be undervalued.

Now, frankly, to call this method of teaching bias is fine... perfectly acceptable...

...Until we're offered Patrick Henry College as some supposed example, in contrast, of an unbiased institution! PHC has every conceivable right to be exactly what it is in my opinion, but one cannot possible argue that it's unbiased while maintaining a straight face.

So when I come to your conclusion that all these listed colleges have a liberal bias--and we'd have to agree that PHC has it's own kind of bias --it seems we can only proceed by asking what are the things each is biased against?

I doubt if it's as clear cut as we might like to make it. Liberal colleges have courses on Evolution and Christianity and I doubt that PHC can entirely avoid the subject of Evolution in its curriculum just because it can be construed as contrary to Christianity. But we don't have to be screenwriters to visualize a significant difference in debating Christianity or Evolution among a group composed exclusively of young Republican WASPS with political aspirations (yes, I am picturing a room full of multiples of Micheal J. Fox as Alex, from Family Ties) and those same debates occuring in a group of mixed races, gays and straights, Christians and atheists, Democrats and Republicans... even if it is under the auspices of a liberal professor.

These are exactly the kind of environments one finds in "liberal colleges," and again it's clear that they can be defined as more inclusive.

This is all well and good. I'm not being critical of the existence PHC at all. I am critical of it from a personal standpoint, this is not I college in which I would like to matricualte personally. But there it is. Some people who want to go there can, and in the long run, so they have good ol' buddy ties--or at least have created a small demand for their students to get foot-in-the-door quasi-political government appointments or what-not--so what? Not terribly significant in the scheme of things. And certainly not the biggest fish in the pond, there are supergiant "conservative" universities in the sky of education that dwarf PHC. My own medium-sized hometown is host to a number of fairly prestigious Christian academies, not the least of which is Oral Roberts University. If you want to get crazy conservative, you can go all out and pick a military school, you'll even get to wear a uniform.

It would be hysterical to find an embodiment of some great evil conspiritorial trend of the right in PHC, but I don't think anyone does. It's just noted that some of its intent is a bias toward exclusivity, just as some of the intent of the more common liberal college is bias toward inclusion.

You are arguing for the right of an exclusive college to exist, and no one is arguing against them because there are and always have been exclusive schools.

At bottom, it's all a question of supply and demand, as long as you can afford the education you desire I don't feel the need to stop anyone.

Do you?

The "favoritism" shown the students of PHC by those in certain circles of power, as insinuated by the original article, is another matter--yet still a question of supply and demand.

What troubles some of us, I think, lol, is that the demand in those circles of official power should be what it is: the internal demand for a certain kind of predetermined religious morality in the halls of our government, the infrastructure of which is supposed to be philosophically as void as possible of the possibility of exerting that kind of influence outward.

I'm not sure I would go so far as to even call it a "part of a disturbing trend" because no doubt mechanisms like it have probably been in place all along. But it's certainly not crazy to merely raise an eyebrow to it under this present administration which so clearly has its own religious agenda.

The greater question is why anyone would be disturbed by religious influences since they are supposed to be inherently "good"--but many people have cast a wary eye on the historical record of this supposition--not the least of which were our founding fathers, themselves religious men, who came to this continent to escape the religious oppression and corruption that was inherent in a government that had no mechanisms for the separation of Church and State. I see no need to start rethinking the value of that observation. There's plenty of evidence where it leads.
Ramona_A_Stone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-03-04, 10:40 PM   #26
albed
flippin 'em off
 
albed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: the real world
Posts: 3,231
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by theknife
well, i can't speak for anyone else but my condescending way is actually quite bridled - i only unbridle it for people who feel they need to attack me personally to make their point

and i suspect that if you went back through political threads over the last year or two, you'd find the lion's share of the vitriol comes from the right. scoob's actually a bit of a lightweight in this area - go read some posts by our old friend Albed for some really choice venom.

The truth must be very painful for you to view it as venom.

Perhaps it's an allergic reaction.

Smoke some more pot and escape the pain knife.
albed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-03-04, 06:56 AM   #27
theknife
my name is Ranking Fullstop
 
theknife's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Promontorium Tremendum
Posts: 4,391
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by albed
The truth must be very painful for you to view it as venom.

Perhaps it's an allergic reaction.

Smoke some more pot and escape the pain knife.
i missed you, sweetie - where ya been?

you don't call, you don't write
theknife is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-03-04, 12:32 PM   #28
multi
Thanks for being with arse
 
multi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: The other side of the world
Posts: 10,343
Default

as a rule i have never come out with an expletive laced discription of any conservative here...until they try and turn the subject of the thread into a slagging match..witch is often more than 95% of the political threads here
if you can find a thread i have posted that is designed to bait the consevatives here into responding..and then throw insults at them for sharing their opinion
i would be very suprised..

scoobie complains that left thinking people are condacending..LOL
now that is a joke..

left thinking people want equality for others that is obvious

and are always put in the light of whinging complainers..when ever they make a point to do with a question of unequality

the right always justifies the unequality in those repetitive degrading and condacending arguments we hear so often around here..

whites over blacks
straights over gays
jews over arabs
rich over poor
coporations over small business

anyway the insults are water off a ducks back thesedays..i dont see reall much point for them..but insult away..then when i snap back with something you can make out i only ever insult you..
__________________

i beat the internet
- the end boss is hard
multi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-03-04, 02:46 PM   #29
span
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,260
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by multi


left thinking people want equality for others that is obvious
then please explain Affirmative Action.
span is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-03-04, 04:54 PM   #30
multi
Thanks for being with arse
 
multi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: The other side of the world
Posts: 10,343
Default

dont know much about them..here is what i could find
Quote:
Affirmative action, the set of public policies and initiatives designed to help eliminate past and present discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin, is under attack.

* Originally, civil rights programs were enacted to help African Americans become full citizens of the United States. The Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution made slavery illegal; the Fourteenth Amendment guarantees equal protection under the law; the Fifteenth Amendment forbids racial discrimination in access to voting. The 1866 Civil Rights Act guarantees every citizen "the same right to make and enforce contracts ... as is enjoyed by white citizens ... "
* In 1896, the Supreme Court's decision in Plessy v. Ferguson upheld a "separate, but equal" doctrine that proved to be anything but equal for African Americans. The decision marked the end of the post-Civil War reconstruction era as Jim Crow laws spread across the South.
* In 1941, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed Executive Order 8802 which outlawed segregationist hiring policies by defense-related industries which held federal contracts. Roosevelt's signing of this order was a direct result of efforts by Black trade union leader, A. Philip Randolph.
* During 1953 President Harry S. Truman's Committee on Government Contract Compliance urged the Bureau of Employment Security "to act positively and affirmatively to implement the policy of nondiscrimination . . . ."
* The 1954 Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board of Education overturned Plessy v. Ferguson.
* The actual phrase "affirmative action" was first used in President Lyndon Johnson's 1965 Executive Order 11246 which requires federal contractors to "take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, creed, color, or national origin."
* In 1967, Johnson expanded the Executive Order to include affirmative action requirements to benefit women.
* Other equal protection laws passed to make discrimination illegal were the 1964 Civil Rights Act, Title II and VII of which forbid racial discrimination in "public accommodations" and race and sex discrimination in employment, respectively; and the 1965 Voting Rights Act adopted after Congress found "that racial discrimination in voting was an insidious and pervasive evil which had been perpetuated in certain parts of the country through unremitting and ingenious defiance of the Constitution."

Much of the opposition to affirmative action is framed on the grounds of so-called "reverse discrimination and unwarranted preferences." In fact, less than 2 percent of the 91,000 employment discrimination cases pending before the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission are reverse discrimination cases. Under the law as written in Executive Orders and interpreted by the courts, anyone benefitting from affirmative action must have relevant and valid job or educational qualifications.
i guess its got to be something more sinister than this or you wouldnt of mentioned it..
__________________

i beat the internet
- the end boss is hard
multi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-03-04, 06:28 AM   #31
span
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,260
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by multi
dont know much about them..here is what i could find


i guess its got to be something more sinister than this or you wouldnt of mentioned it..
AA isn't a "them" it's a law, and it's a law that grants preferential treatment for one section of society at the expense of others....and the left defends it no matter how dated and discriminatory it is.
span is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-03-04, 11:58 AM   #32
JackSpratts
 
JackSpratts's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: New England
Posts: 10,013
Default

multi it's like when bush got to go to yale ahead of better students, and he got to cut to the head of the queue for the national guard, and all the other legacy stuff he was given - because he's a white guy. except this tries to give poor non-whites a little chance too.

- js.
JackSpratts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-03-04, 12:14 PM   #33
span
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,260
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by JackSpratts
multi it's like when bush got to go to yale ahead of better students and he got to cut to the head of the queue for the national guard, and all the other legacy stuff he was given - because he's a white guy. except this tries to give poor non-whites a little chance too.

- js.
yeah, thats why it was enacted

it's funny even many of those "poor non-whites" think it's a crap law that forces people to judge them not on their skills but on the color of their skin, last i heard that was discrimination.
span is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-08-04, 07:14 AM   #34
multi
Thanks for being with arse
 
multi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: The other side of the world
Posts: 10,343
Puke

http://shop.wnd.com/store/item.asp?ITEM_ID=1617
Attached Images
 
__________________

i beat the internet
- the end boss is hard
multi is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump






All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:52 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© www.p2p-zone.com - Napsterites - 2000 - 2024 (Contact grm1@iinet.net.au for all admin enquiries)