Thank you for being tolerant and accepting posts that you don't agree with and not whining like a two year old about them. Who is really the open tolerant posters on this board?

You are welcome.

And I thank you for not making multiple rant style posts in sequence like a scatterbrained fool.

(05-22-2015 06:07 PM)usmbacker Wrote:  Thank you for being tolerant and accepting posts that you don't agree with and not whining like a two year old about them. Who is really the open tolerant posters on this board?

Only LIBERALS believe in a utopian world where everyone agrees on everything and anyone who doesn't is a terrible person. Conservatives respect differences but reserve the right to respectfully disagree.

Most Conservatives see most Liberal/Socialists as naive, inexperienced at life and silly.

A large part of the Liberal/Socialists view Conservatives as evil; and they tend to be the most vocal element on that side these days.

Most Conservatives will thus get to a point where they just start ignoring Liberal/Socialists because they think "one day they'll learn".

But if you think your political opponent is evil, anything to stop them becomes justified.

The extreme ends of the political spectrum can both justify violence, but only the radicals will be viewed as martyrs by a significant portion of their side of the aisle. After all, they're fighting evil. All you have to do is see how much the Left glorified in the Baltimore riots to see the truth of this.

It's always been the right and only the right that are tolerant. It's why leftist are able to gain so much ground. We tolerate the leeches and parasites.

(05-22-2015 07:56 PM)49RFootballNow Wrote:  Most Conservatives see most Liberal/Socialists as naive, inexperienced at life and silly.

A large part of the Liberal/Socialists view Conservatives as evil; and they tend to be the most vocal element on that side these days.

Most Conservatives will thus get to a point where they just start ignoring Liberal/Socialists because they think "one day they'll learn".

But if you think your political opponent is evil, anything to stop them becomes justified.

The extreme ends of the political spectrum can both justify violence, but only the radicals will be viewed as martyrs by a significant portion of their side of the aisle. After all, they're fighting evil. All you have to do is see how much the Left glorified in the Baltimore riots to see the truth of this.

That pretty much sums it up.

Conservatives see liberals as stupid.

Liberals see conservatives as evil (which is ironic, given liberals' frequent use of moral relativism).

I'm not sure what I was expecting.

(05-22-2015 07:56 PM)49RFootballNow Wrote:  Most Conservatives see most Liberal/Socialists as naive, inexperienced at life and silly.

This sums up my view perfectly. All you really need to do is look at who makes up significant numbers of their base - young idealistic voters, public "educators" and union members.

(05-22-2015 10:34 PM)Paul M Wrote:  It's always been the right and only the right that are tolerant. It's why leftist are able to gain so much ground. We tolerate the leeches and parasites.

(05-23-2015 10:35 AM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(05-22-2015 07:56 PM)49RFootballNow Wrote:  Most Conservatives see most Liberal/Socialists as naive, inexperienced at life and silly.

This sums up my view perfectly. All you really need to do is look at who makes up significant numbers of their base - young idealistic voters, public "educators" and union members.

Or, maybe, tens of millions of people aren't so easily summarized? I know it requires more work than you'd like, but it's actually better for our political process and your own edification if you don't just lump everyone into simplistic and wholly inadequate descriptors like those above. I certainly don't think most conservatives are evil, what a silly notion.

Sure it's a sill notion.

Far more evil people are attracted to socialist views.

(05-24-2015 08:46 AM)Paul M Wrote:  Sure it's a sill notion.

Far more evil people are attracted to socialist views.

See, perfect example, I am not so lazy as to characterize all conservatives in any manner. But Paul M, I've seen enough of his posts to realize he's nothing more than a simpleton agitator, who can't defend his own views unless he's attacking someone elses, which is a pretty telling sign in the grand scheme of things.

That doesn't mean it's fair to characterize all conservatives in that manner though, which is why I don't.

So you still choose to not read actual words posted and just ascribe whatever you like to a person. Cool.

(05-24-2015 09:23 AM)Paul M Wrote:  So you still choose to not read actual words posted and just ascribe whatever you like to a person. Cool.

What makes you think I didn't read your words? I think most rational people would look at what you wrote and realize that, given the post you were responding to, it's clear that you are just acting like a simpleton who wishes only to stir up controversy.

I made a post stating how marginalizing either party members by lazily characterizing them with negative stereotypes is stupid, and unproductive, you responded with a nonsensical comment lazily stereotyping.

If you want to be taken seriously, make comments that are worth taking seriously. These lazy pot-shots aren't that, and they make you look pedantic.

(05-24-2015 09:41 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(05-24-2015 09:23 AM)Paul M Wrote:  So you still choose to not read actual words posted and just ascribe whatever you like to a person. Cool.

What makes you think I didn't read your words? I think most rational people would look at what you wrote and realize that, given the post you were responding to, it's clear that you are just acting like a simpleton who wishes only to stir up controversy.

I made a post stating how marginalizing either party members by lazily characterizing them with negative stereotypes is stupid, and unproductive, you responded with a nonsensical comment lazily stereotyping.

If you want to be taken seriously, make comments that are worth taking seriously. These lazy pot-shots aren't that, and they make you look pedantic.

You want some cheese with that whine? You are one of the worst posters when it comes to painting with broad strokes towards those you disagree with.

(05-24-2015 09:56 AM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  

(05-24-2015 09:41 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(05-24-2015 09:23 AM)Paul M Wrote:  So you still choose to not read actual words posted and just ascribe whatever you like to a person. Cool.

What makes you think I didn't read your words? I think most rational people would look at what you wrote and realize that, given the post you were responding to, it's clear that you are just acting like a simpleton who wishes only to stir up controversy.

I made a post stating how marginalizing either party members by lazily characterizing them with negative stereotypes is stupid, and unproductive, you responded with a nonsensical comment lazily stereotyping.

If you want to be taken seriously, make comments that are worth taking seriously. These lazy pot-shots aren't that, and they make you look pedantic.

You want some cheese with that whine? You are one of the worst posters when it comes to painting with broad strokes towards those you disagree with.

Those specific posters? Maybe, but I base it on statements they specifically have made. But not conservatives, or any other group of tens of millions of people as a whole. Which is sort of the point of my post, unsurprising that you missed it.

Also, you might want to reread my post if you think it's me whining, it isn't. Not in any usage of the term am I whining in that post.

There was once a point where NC State talked about how great of a fanbase they were. They were the biggest, they supported their program better than anyone else, etc. They also went on about how classy they were compared to the criers of UNC and the bumpkins of ECU. At the same time their fans were urinating in their own stands.

This is what this thread reminds me of. People shaking hands about how classy they are, while in other threads they are pissing all over everything.

You didn't reply to Blunderbuss's actual words either. Like I said, you have a habit of replying to phantom posts.

You deny "look at who makes up significant numbers of their base - young idealistic voters, public "educators" and union members." is an accurate statement? Did he say anything about the 10 of millions of others? Is "significant numbers " the same as "lump everyone into simplistic and wholly inadequate descriptors"?

(05-24-2015 11:46 AM)Paul M Wrote:  You didn't reply to Blunderbuss's actual words either. Like I said, you have a habit of replying to phantom posts.

You deny "look at who makes up significant numbers of their base - young idealistic voters, public "educators" and union members." is an accurate statement?

Those are demographic statements that could arguably be accurate, sure, but I'm not addressing those. Go back and look at what you didn't quote, and then try this again.