Not everyone here is bashing Palin. And to be fair, if this were a thread about Obama / Pelosi / Biden, etc then there wouldn't be any positive comments, would be at 25 pages by now, and would never get shut down.
Not everyone here is bashing Palin. And to be fair, if this were a thread about Obama / Pelosi / Biden, etc then there wouldn't be any positive comments, would be at 25 pages by now, and would never get shut down.
^
|
|
These are wise words.
You may very well have a legitimate griping point about favoritism in general being played, and/or this not supposing to be a political forum - I don't know, because I don't know which ones were deleted and why (since they were deleted), and whether it was a non-partisan reason.
But in any event, it *seems like* to me, for the most part, political discussions ARE allowed as long as they're kept civil for the most part - they usually only get shut down (I think) when people start personal attacking and getting out of hand. Are you sure that's not the reason why your threads were closed? Not a political bent, but just that someone (not you necessarily mind one) got out of hand in the thread?
[The sole and glaring exception to this is threads about LEOs and LEOAs, where everyone knows that most critical posts get removed (and the person likely banned for a time with a very vague reason stated by an anonymous moderator), even if presented in the most calm, civil, tactful, and factual way possible, whereas non-critical posts are allowed to stay. In fact, there's certainly a decent chance that I'll be banned for a day, week, or permanently, simply for typing out this truth in this paragraph you see here. Never know with the arbitrary and capricious way in which the banhammer is weilded. Chance I'm willing to take. You won't know though, because it will be deleted, I will be gone, and the message you receive when you try to PM me will be misleading because it will say "this user is not accepting PMs at this time", rather than telling you that the person has been banned, and that's why they cannot accept PMs. I have to say, this state of affairs is is truly a huge insult to our wonderful and esteemed LEO members, because it's essentially saying to them and others "Hey, we the moderators think and believe that you the LEOs, have no leg whatsoever to stand on in your arguments, so we're just gonna delete the person who is challenging or criticizing, and their arguments as well." - Very insulting to them and a huge disservice to them, because they do a fine fine job of arguing the counterpoints, when there are valid ones to be made; and they admit, for the most part, when there is a recognizable issue (particularly since everyone agrees that 99% of the time, those issues are the fault of the chiefs and the politicos who hire & fire the chief; NOT the rank & file represented here). But that's a topic for another day I guess.
]In any event, I'm very glad that for political discussions, we have all types represented here: (a) the blindly-following-the-D-party-line folks, and (b) the blindly-following-the-R-party-line folks, and (c) those of us who you might term 3rd-partiers, who dislike a LOT about both major parties and the unassailable corrupt false 2-wing Replicrat Uniparty system we have in this state and this country; several of these free thinkers are represented here in this thread; and (d) perhaps a few other types who don't really fit into my a/b/c trichotomy here.
In my view, having this mix of all is a good thing, as we can hopefully eventually convince those here from camps (a) and (b) of the error of their ways!
If you're not supporting third parties, you've not paying attention, and are part of the problem! IMO, YMMV, and all that. Love or hate Nader, he's doing a great service in promoting better ballot access for third party candidates. When there's just two choices, you generally get crap (Walmart & Target). When you go from 2 to 3 or more in the oligarchy, the choices get much more palatable. But the laws of ballot access have been intentionally tightened very tight by both wings of the Uniparty (that's one thing they agree wholeheartedly on), such that we cannot even GET a CANDIDATE to vote for in the general election that is not an R or D, in most states, most of the time. This is just fundamentally improper, seems to me. There ought to be just a minimal level of petition signatures and interest to throw someone on the ballot, in my view.
You mean like calling people "the left" just because they dont like Palin? lol
Funny how what was once left and now calls themselve right is calling the real right left, thats just not right, or is it left?
Whitey, I'll agree with you. It probably goes without saying that the majority of recent deleted threads dealt specifically with Quran burning and the Park51 mosque. I should know, because there were many, many times that I doubted the continued existence of my wonderful OSA account.
But what RugersGR8 is missing is that the source of argument and debate in that thread came from the "left," not the "right." I use quotations because I think that Constitutional rights as simple as the freedom of speech and freedom of religion are apolitical, but your logic that "left" topics are less likely to be shut down falls through on this one. Those threads were all shut down because of personal attacks, or maybe just lack of sensitivity.
But what RugersGR8 is missing is that the source of argument and debate in that thread came from the "left," not the "right." I use quotations because I think that Constitutional rights as simple as the freedom of speech and freedom of religion are apolitical, but your logic that "left" topics are less likely to be shut down falls through on this one. Those threads were all shut down because of personal attacks, or maybe just lack of sensitivity.
How do you really feel?
The media doesn't love her, they hate her! They think she is stupid and so are all the teaparty members. They hope to paint all of us as stupid,ignorant peasants. They are the ones who know what's good for us because we obviously can't think for ourselves since we don't agree with their worldview.
I've got news for you Mr. Hannity; I started this thread, and I'm no where near left wing. If you knew me, you'd know that for a solid fact. I referred to you as "Mr. Hannity" because that's his M.O.: if you disagree, you must certainly be a liberal.
And for the record, I don't hate Palin; I hate that the media has somehow crowned her queen of the Tea Party - when she is really just a leech, getting full off of the popularity of the movement. I can't claim to disagree with many of her talking points, but, like most Republicans, all it is is cheap talk. I broke with the "R"s several years ago, when they basically left me. I now consider myself a "conservative independent". Screw both parties - there isn't a nickel's worth of difference between them.
I feel like I'll crack open another Newcastle......
Similar threads
