One the first posts I read since I noticed you were back, contained

a slur against T simply for having an opinion.

That sucks, so do you when you just want to smart off and avoid any negative information you don't like, from ANY SOURCE,

then you sit back and demonize whatever the rest of us do, or don't do, or say...

That's sad.

You are taking heat because on a lot of days, you just aren't a good poster. How you can accuse others of being partisan,

then you spew your crap, is pitiful. Maybe it was funny for a short time, but that was a long time ago.

The rest of us let other's have their opinions, and we talk about stuff. You are welcome to change your mo, and join in.

Or, not. It would be cool, imho, if you'd just make up your mind.

@westside-steve said:

You ran out of substance many posts ago.

Now I'll visit the healthcare debate; already in progress.

WSS

Hysterical.

@heckofajobbrownie said:

Fair enough.

You ran out of substance many posts ago.

Now I'll visit the healthcare debate; already in progress.

WSS

@heckofajobbrownie said:

Beating a dead horse? .........next topic

@heckofajobbrownie said:

Let's hear it. Back that up, rather than changing the subject. Come on, most gay-friendly man on the board. Walk me through your thought process, genius.

And thanks for pre-accusing me of something that hasn't happened, then finding me guilty of the scenario you just made up. Sounds fair.

Heh.

Tell me ya wouldn't.

And sure Heck, you're right.

I mean when railing at me about Matt Drudge it's perfectly reasonable to point out [he's a damn queer.]

(That'll show them gawd damn 'Publicans)

And "changing the subject????"

That's rich. It really is.

WSS

@heckofajobbrownie said:

Your still the funny man. And as far as paranoia, I dont have the slightest ideal of what your talking about. I only read articles post and comment my opinion on them. I always try to give the link. But you refuse to read because of your partisan beliefs are so strong you have left the blinders on. Your take on politics is almost as bad as an amish persons belief on having running water in their house.

Maybe if you would read and not just heckle you may learn a little bit about the world that is going on around you. Stop being a part of the machine and read, research it and dont put it down because someone got you excited over your liberal views.

And No focker, paranoia usally comes from puffing the majic dragon in which IMO is stupid.

Let's hear it. Back that up, rather than changing the subject. Come on, most gay-friendly man on the board. Walk me through your thought process, genius.

And thanks for pre-accusing me of something that hasn't happened, then finding me guilty of the scenario you just made up. Sounds fair.

@heckofajobbrownie said:

And by the guy who has posted at least 100 times on the validity of homosexual marriage, and the rights of homosexuals, including a multi-page, multi-day exchange with Tupa years ago. Huge gay basher, I am.

Anything to try and score a point in this pathetic little exchange.

Exchange???

Hell you chickened out on everything else.

I guess I could remind you which of Obama's voting blocks hates gays more than any other but then you'd call me racist.....

WSS

And by the guy who has posted at least 100 times on the validity of homosexual marriage, and the rights of homosexuals, including a multi-page, multi-day exchange with Tupa years ago. Huge gay basher, I am.

Anything to try and score a point in this pathetic little exchange.

What was the point of bringing it up, only for a conservative who links to conservative articles all over the net?

You used it for political expediency. Otherwise, you'd think it was worthy of trying to get

one of us who might have brought it up about a lib in the media... banned.

IOW's, you progressive leftists get to do anything you want. Say anything, link to anything, not link at all..

and it's fine.

but let any of us say the same things, link to anything, not link at all... and it's very, very, very bad.

Gosh, funny how that works, Heck.

You ever figure out what sources ARE okay to link to to document negative articles about what you say? Maybe even just one?

@heckofajobbrownie said:

Wow. You are a fountain of rage. Why not just write "You guys do it too!" and be done with it? That's all this is.

Rage?

Serioulsy Heck I haven't even been irked recently and I'd truly feel bad if I hurt your feelings.

I even did the "thank you" for the post I responded to.

It was pretty mild for you.

I suspect that's just the old trick of accusing the other side of being angry so as to condescend but....

Anyway it really is a case of "you guys do it too."

As a matter of fact I think you're worse than anyone you accuse.

And no, not everyone who disagrees with me is wrong. (I can't believe I had to write that.)

I'd be interested in the list of issues where people of substance disagree with you.

It sure looks to me like you have contempt for any source politician or

pundit who is not on the bus.

Now if you'll excuse me, I'll go back to my favorite hobbies - racist epithet-hurling and gay-bashing. Which I do all the time, along with Alo, Shep, and all the rest of rest of my lefty buddies.

Heh. Another Heck cheap trick.

Mention Alo when you know nobody's talking about him.

I'm sure (unless you pretend otherwise) you remember Shep's barrage of posts calling Charlie Frye "whigger."

(along with regular bashing of old white people and regularly referring to Senator McCain as "douche")

You've also personally berated me for saying I think the "Negro dialect" sounds stupid (or something to that evvect).

But if I'd used any reference that containg the "igger" part you'd have come unglued.

(The point was, of course, that I doubt many of the Republicans who frequent his site every morning - and also don't like gay people - know that he's a gay man. How you decided this was me "gay-bashing" is comically pathetic. Drudge's secret isn't very secret, after all. Just to some who wouldn't react so well to the news. Which is why he keeps it a secret.)

Well goodie for you Heck. You only fag bash if it's for the greater good.

Anyway I'm the least homophobic guy here and I don't remember the last time I've been on the Drudge site or posted an opinion story from one of the sources you so despise.

Hence your attack on me is a little off target.

I'm sure there are high crimes I've committed on my own more deserving of your ire.

Pick one of them.

WSS

You have a problem with Drudge, Heck? Why?

I thought those polls were all the rage with libs, when he was running for pres

and very popular in the polls.

Shep bragged about the Obamao high numbers in the polls.

But now, the polls are just right wing attack machines?

Why is that, if not corrupt political expediency?

And, I never knew Drudge was gay, nothing of the sort. Not that it matters, unless he becomes

a gay marriage advocate.

But deriding his conservative links to valid sites seems beneath your standards, somehow.

It seems to be more like, if it runs contrary to what my liberal side says, then it is bad, bad, bad.

So, Heck, seriously, where would you like posts to be from? Any source out there a Heck approved source?

Or is it just the flip side of your politics coming out that grates your nerves?

Don't judge by demonizing sources. Judge the content by it's validity, or lack thereof.

I can adapt and change how I bring about interesting subjects, but not to the extent

that I only find and post Bush basing articles, which we have seen plenty of in the past... and

you never complained once.

As for where T gets his paranoid crankery, Lord only knows.

Like I said, if you want to know what the 30% of the country is angry about today, all you have to do is go to one of those three outlets. It's where they live. And I'm not saying anything unique or controversial when I point it out. It's sort of common knowledge.

@heckofajobbrownie said:

What sucks Heck is that you think everyone who doesn't agree with you reads these publications. Ironically, until 2 days ago and after reading YOUR post, I didn't even know what the Drudge was. Rush is a lying drug addict. Fox blows. But I don't agree with you, I must read these publications. Everything I have posted on here was from CNN, Ruters, PBS, Charlie Rose (who is the best journalist in my generation). Yes Heck other people know how to sift through the shit.

But it is nice of you to admit the truth for once, as you wrote here.

And no, not everyone who disagrees with me is wrong. (I can't believe I had to write that.)

And no, not everyone who disagrees with me is wrong. (I can't believe I had to write that.) But there are basic facts that are either right or wrong, and basic arguments that are valid or are not valid. For instance, saying "It's been cold this week in Ohio" or "temperatures have always fluctuated in the past" or "politicians are power-hungry" are not valid arguments against global warming, or policies that address global warming. But I only have to contend with that level of argument in here, and I keep doing it, which - trust me - makes me the dumbest mf'er in the world. But yes, most of the time arguments like that are just wrong, or not valid. It's not my fault for pointing it out.

I mean, it doesn't even stop them from making the points when you show them that 2009 was a really warm year. Which isn't an argument in and of itself, either, but clearly disputes the argument they're making, which wasn't any good to begin with. So like I said before, these aren't real serious arguments. They're political arguments, and lousy ones at that.

I mean, really. You think that the next time it's cold outside their home they're going to realize that's not a good measurement for worldwide temperatures over time? Or do you think we'll get another round of posts similar to "an inconvenient absence"? Take a guess.

And when I say "I don't know what that means" it's because I read your post and ...I can't tell what it means, or what it's getting at. Sometimes you don't write very clearly, or you're assuming I feel or know something I don't and ...I don't know what you're talking about. I also don't know what "ALL WET IN EGYPT" means. It's as simple as that. (Or according to you, some game I'm playing. Because I don't waste enough of my time in here. Why not make it more excruciating be prolonging it?) How about this? Next time I'll say, "I'm not sure what you're getting at here. Can you please clarify it?" Will that do?

As for cutting and pasting, and Drudge, you clearly don't see the distinction between good information and political information, or good journalism and partisan journalism, or sloppy journalism. (What else is new?) If I posted Olberman's "special comment" in here every day I'd expect to hear about it, but I don't post Olberman. Yet all we get in here are links to partisan opinion pieces found through Fox News, Rush, and Drudge.

For instance, I just posted the results of NASA's yearly study of global temperatures. I found it because it was carried by all the major news services. (Though not on Fox News or Drudge - imagine that!)

It's posted in a thread that starts with a story about ...what the weather in the Midwest was going to be like a few weeks ago. I suppose I could post that in northern New England it's going to be 50 degrees and rain this week, and we could carry on like this, back and forth, until our IQs started dropping to Sling Blade territory. But it wouldn't really be relevant, would it?

Now if you'll excuse me, I'll go back to my favorite hobbies - racist epithet-hurling and gay-bashing. Which I do all the time, along with Alo, Shep, and all the rest of rest of my lefty buddies.

(The point was, of course, that I doubt many of the Republicans who frequent his site every morning - and also don't like gay people - know that he's a gay man. How you decided this was me "gay-bashing" is comically pathetic. Drudge's secret isn't very secret, after all. Just to some who wouldn't react so well to the news. Which is why he keeps it a secret.)

Nobody fits that bill more than you on the left. It’s a cheap weak accusation and one of the stupidest you guys offer up on a regular basis.

I don't know why you always think I'm lying when I say things like this, then dare me to "be a man" and admit something that I can't.

Probably because you spend so much time bragging about your great knowledge of every issue under the sun but feigning ignorance on occasion with an “I don’t even know what you’re talking about” bit. Maybe you missed it all.

It always amuses me how much you think I scheme when I deal with you, rather than what I do, which is to type out my thoughts really quickly and press send, then go back to my work.

So do I Heck, but the high school debate tactics are pretty familiar to me.

I left this board (for the most part) because everyone who was interesting to talk politics or policy with left this board, or were people I came to know and could just email with anyway.

And you’re certainly free to spend your time as you wish.

As for what we talk about, they're all on a level where I can assume they have a serious understanding of the issues we're talking about, so we can just talk. They're also not committed partisans. They're just people with knowledgeable opinions, and I respect their take.

But they’re still wrong if they don’t agree with you, right?

Back to football. Romeo Crennell knows more about football than anybody here right? Yet he was blasted every day.

Plus, you've got some guys who actually do this stuff for a living, and are working on things like the cap and trade bill right now. It's a lot more interesting to hear from the people working on the actual drafts of the bill, know the players, etc., than someone posting a Drudge link with the headline "Goobers wanking" or likening environmentalists to Stalin and Hitler. I can't imagine that's all that hard to understand.

Shrug. Are you asking me to defend topics of discussion I’ve not been a part of?

Didn’t you just bitch about that?

As for Drudge, it's not whether he is full of shit. He doesn't write anything. He links to right-wing opinion, and writes headlines to make them more friendly to right-wing interests, or to make left-wing interests look bad. He also uses single quotes to make people think he's quoting someone, when he's really summarizing a story or quote in his own words. That's all he does.

Heck everybody takes pieces of information to prop up whatever convictions they already have and whatever conclusions they wish to make. Everybody. I’d bet you respect many who support your beliefs..

In other words, the only reason to go to his site is to have your news pre-filtered by a right-wing activist who is, oddly enough, a closeted homosexual.

Since I don’t check the Drudge site I wouldn’t know. But I do love the gay bashing. What’s next Heck? Out Michelle Malkin for being an octoroon?

There's no reason to get your news from him - unless you're only interested in partisan news. Same thing with Fox, unless you're reading what they use from the wire services, since they don't have many actual reporters. They're an opinion organization with partisan journalism thrown in.

So what? I watch CNN and some network news too. I don’t see a lot of difference except the left wing slant is disguised as news.

At least you know right up front where the opinion show are coming from.

Please don’t pretend that a perfectly true story can’t be told in different ways as to reach a desired conclusion. Please?

As for you, it's sort of interesting for me because you do read up on this stuff, probably more than the average citizen, and like to consider yourself somewhat independent, even while copping to your anti-liberal views, and even though you reserve most or all of your distaste for people on the left.

I do indeed. Those on the left are more annoying to me for their faux superior pompous attitudes and hypocrisy. Then again you won’t hear me slobbering over any Republican candidate. Independent doesn’t mean I think compromise equals love and peace. I’m to the hard right or left on many issues. I just don’t have a party that represents my exact view.

But you're proof of the new reality - there are very few true independent voters left.

Again independence from political party devotion doesn’t mean one must be an ideological blank slate.

As for the rest of the people in here, when I'm in a meeting and everyone is wondering what the hell Fox/Beck/Hannity/Rush/WND types are on about today - "Who the hell is Saul Alinsky and why does anyone care?" "Why are they so obsessed with Anita Dunn?" "What moron puts a picture of Woodrow Wilson with Stalin and Hitler?" - guess who can explain it all to them?

Dunno Heck. Remember when I googled Bush Hitler comparisons from your side?

Dozens if not hundreds of hits.

I live in that world so they don't have to. It's my curse.

The most interesting part to me is that I talk to a lot of people on the right, not just you guys. But whether you're in Ohio or Maine or California or Mississippi, you're all talking about the same things, same controversies, real or imagined, or the same articles, by the same people, at exactly the same time. Whatever that Fox/Drudge/Rush triumvirate says you should be angry about today, you're angry about today. (This is less applicable to you than the rest in here.)

Well Heck we are living in a time of lightning fast communication. Is it any different when the words of Axlerod via Obama are repeated within seconds in every chat room or barber shop and around every water cooler?

Van Jones, the "War on Christmas", illegal immigrants, gay marriage, Copenhagen, death panels, socialism - whatever it is they want to steer you towards they can easily steer you towards. The diehard base of the Republican Party, the type of people who frequent message boards like this, or Free Republic, or Freedom Post, are, to put it plainly, a bunch of servile nutcases. Honestly, if they made up the name of a guy and paired it with some B-roll of him speaking at a college, and told Fox viewers that his name was Abu Shabazz, and he was an old Obama friend who preached gay sex and Islam to teens, they could create an entire controversy out of thin air. You've have legions of guys like Cal demanding that Obama's ties to socialist pederast Abu Shabazz be exposed, and wondering why the mainstream media won't cover it.

Again I guess there’s some merit but not enough for me to get worked up over.

Then again Larry Craig was a big story…….

(Oh and when the ACLU goes to war with somebody’s Christmas tree it’s my fault? Seems like your guys could just STFU once in a while couldn’t ya?)

Hell, wouldn't even take Fox. An email chain, or a post in a couple right-wing forums like this one would be all it would take.

Ironically one of the most prolific is Truthout. I get those e mails every day.

There may not be a more consequential development in American politics in the last 20 years than the rise in partisan media outlets, particularly right-wing ones. (Left-wing outlets like MSNBC pale in reach and really don't compare.) And it's not a good development.

Really?

You prefer the days of Cronkite where one wise looking old man was regarded as the bringer of truth?

When there was nowhere else to reasonably get differing opinion?

Come on Heck, MSNBC is a turd because the left doesn’t even have the attention span to devote. (and Air America is too frigging bitter.)

And think about this. Hannity Beck et al rail at Obama. Fine he’s the president.

Olbermann and Madcow rail at Limbaugh and O Reilly. Great.

But that aside, I read some survey recently that stated the biggest influence for lefties is from The Daily Show Colbert SNL and Letterman.

(not you so much)

Geez.

WSS

2009: Second Warmest Year on Record; End of Warmest Decade

Jan. 21, 2010

2009 was tied for the second warmest year in the modern record, a new NASA analysis of global surface temperature shows. The analysis, conducted by the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) in New York City, also shows that in the Southern Hemisphere, 2009 was the warmest year since modern records began in 1880.

Although 2008 was the coolest year of the decade, due to strong cooling of the tropical Pacific Ocean, 2009 saw a return to near-record global temperatures. The past year was only a fraction of a degree cooler than 2005, the warmest year on record, and tied with a cluster of other years — 1998, 2002, 2003, 2006 and 2007 1998 and 2007 — as the second warmest year since recordkeeping began.

**************************

typical. Lib makes stuff up so he can posture from

his imagined superior viewpoint. I never said anything about abu shabazz whoever.

IOW, you are wrong again. Completely wrong again.

Or, lib twists words so he can have some seblence of a leg to stand on.

Or, lib tries to demonize anyone who talks about subjects and disagrees with them.

Heck, you clearly made a statement that nobody is talking about carbon tax.

Then, I kicked your arrogance to the curb by simply posted a very legit article, legit source,

that 100% contradicted your arrogant putdown.

IOW, you complain about everybody who disagrees with you, Heck.

You can't stand it, you pout about articles you don't like, and you and your ilk

desperately try to to control content.

And you can't stop. Too bad, you seem like you might be able to take part in discussions,

if you weren't such a tool of the lib side.

I left this board (for the most part) because everyone who was interesting to talk politics or policy with left this board, or were people I came to know and could just email with anyway.

As for what we talk about, they're all on a level where I can assume they have a serious understanding of the issues we're talking about, so we can just talk. They're also not committed partisans. They're just people with knowledgeable opinions, and I respect their take. Plus, you've got some guys who actually do this stuff for a living, and are working on things like the cap and trade bill right now. It's a lot more interesting to hear from the people working on the actual drafts of the bill, know the players, etc., than someone posting a Drudge link with the headline "Goobers wanking" or likening environmentalists to Stalin and Hitler. I can't imagine that's all that hard to understand.

As for Drudge, it's not whether he is full of shit. He doesn't write anything. He links to right-wing opinion, and writes headlines to make them more friendly to right-wing interests, or to make left-wing interests look bad. He also uses single quotes to make people think he's quoting someone, when he's really summarizing a story or quote in his own words. That's all he does.

In other words, the only reason to go to his site is to have your news pre-filtered by a right-wing activist who is, oddly enough, a closeted homosexual. There's no reason to get your news from him - unless you're only interested in partisan news. Same thing with Fox, unless you're reading what they use from the wire services, since they don't have many actual reporters. They're an opinion organization with partisan journalism thrown in.

As for you, it's sort of interesting for me because you do read up on this stuff, probably more than the average citizen, and like to consider yourself somewhat independent, even while copping to your anti-liberal views, and even though you reserve most or all of your distaste for people on the left. But you're proof of the new reality - there are very few true independent voters left.

As for the rest of the people in here, when I'm in a meeting and everyone is wondering what the hell Fox/Beck/Hannity/Rush/WND types are on about today - "Who the hell is Saul Alinsky and why does anyone care?" "Why are they so obsessed with Anita Dunn?" "What moron puts a picture of Woodrow Wilson with Stalin and Hitler?" - guess who can explain it all to them?

I live in that world so they don't have to. It's my curse.

The most interesting part to me is that I talk to a lot of people on the right, not just you guys. But whether you're in Ohio or Maine or California or Mississippi, you're all talking about the same things, same controversies, real or imagined, or the same articles, by the same people, at exactly the same time. Whatever that Fox/Drudge/Rush triumvirate says you should be angry about today, you're angry about today. (This is less applicable to you than the rest in here.)

Van Jones, the "War on Christmas", illegal immigrants, gay marriage, Copenhagen, death panels, socialism - whatever it is they want to steer you towards they can easily steer you towards. The diehard base of the Republican Party, the type of people who frequent message boards like this, or Free Republic, or Freedom Post, are, to put it plainly, a bunch of servile nutcases. Honestly, if they made up the name of a guy and paired it with some B-roll of him speaking at a college, and told Fox viewers that his name was Abu Shabazz, and he was an old Obama friend who preached gay sex and Islam to teens, they could create an entire controversy out of thin air. You've have legions of guys like Cal demanding that Obama's ties to socialist pederast Abu Shabazz be exposed, and wondering why the mainstream media won't cover it.

Hell, wouldn't even take Fox. An email chain, or a post in a couple right-wing forums like this one would be all it would take.

There may not be a more consequential development in American politics in the last 20 years than the rise in partisan media outlets, particularly right-wing ones. (Left-wing outlets like MSNBC pale in reach and really don't compare.) And it's not a good development.

***********************************************

Okay, now I'm mad at Steve. He, like me, is admitting some of my stuff is nonsense.

well, tell everybody somethin we DON'T know. lol

And, I SAID that Heck was riding on the Obamao goofy train.

I know I post some nonsense. But really, I think it's fun to find different ways

of saying someone is really wrong.

If nothing else, I'm creative, and if that is what rankles the likes of mzbeetlejuice and Heck and Al,

I humbly apologize.

But it's just me. I have fun, and truth is, Steve and I are similar and very different. Say, so is everybody else.

To most of us, that isn't a crime.

But to certain libs, they rail against it, are angry about it, can't control it, and it makes them upset.

Certain libs need some "sense of humor - don't worry, be happy" counseling.

I have to go watch Glenn Beck now. GGG

@heckofajobbrownie said:

Actually I well remember the crying about Lumbergh very clearly and the threats to leave were he not banned.

You can pretend you don't I guess.

C'mon Heck. Spare me the snowjob.

BTW I just listened to Obamas bullshit in Elyria.

And you whine about me??????????

LOL

But seriously on your secret little board, when one of your colleagues disagrees with you on some issue of the day why do you suppose they're so stupid, evil, racist and/or anti American?

Just ignorant of how policy works?

Brainwashed by Drudge?

Just assholes?

ANd if they aren't why then are you wrong?

WSS