State Sen Steve Russell: Police Chief Bill Citty views " Are not welcome here!"

[Shadowrider]

MB,

I hear what you are saying about being polite. But I would add that in a political context that the Honorable Senator just took Citty to the woodshed. He blatantly "called him out" with that well reasoned and articulated letter. IOW, in a political context there was nothing polite about it.

 

[NikatKimber]

Politeness does not mean not saying what needs to be said, but not being mean or rude about it.

It is entirely possible to politely disagree very strongly with someone.

 

[ExSniper]

Excellent response by Sen. Russell.

 

[Harley1953]

I have had the good fortune to meet and discuss issues particularly the 2nd amendment with Senator Russell. I was very impressed with his outlook and attitudes, particularly towards the rights and responsibilities of the 2nd Amdendment. This does not surprise me in the least of his very articulate and well stated letter to the Chief....

Along the same line please read the letter sent to Chief Citty by Pastor Vineyard. He also takes the Chief to task. It can be reached at

http://www.okcteaparty.org/gun-free-zone-not/open-letter-to-okc-chief-bill-citty/

I apologize if Pastor Vineyard's letter has posted in another thread..

 

[Michael Brown]

Being polite isn't for our sake or the OKC chief's sake.

It's for the 80% of folks who can be swayed either way.

10% will be extreme on either side and won't be swayed by any type of argument either way no matter how well-reasoned.

I'm concerned with everyone else who IS affected by the tone of our message.

Regardless of whether people here want to be polite or not, everyone shall act/post politely in this sub-forum.

Senator Russell did it right.

Michael Brown

 

[permafrost]

If you have to ask, it's probably pointless.

Most learn manners pretty early in life so if you don't know, it's probably best to simply keep your mouth shut or stay away from the keyboard.

Michael Brown

That's rich! Man , that's good. You preach to others about being polite and you tell me to keep my mouth shut! Is this some kind of selective politeness you would care to explain?
Or possibly this is your interpretation of politeness:
Quote: 1-06-09 MICHAEL BROWN:
"There was a time when reading wasn't just for fags"
Apparently, in your world anything you say is ok, but if someones disagrees with you, they are impolite. You can denigrate an entire class of people and that's OK. As a police officer you are supposed to hold yourself to higher standards than this!
Apparently you aren't capable of having a reasonable discussion without feeling like you are being challenged and going into cop mode.
I know you haven't the courage to let this post stand so go ahead and ban me and delete all of this post so there won't be anyone else to challenge your authority.

 

[JB Books]

That's rich! Man , that's good. You preach to others about being polite and you tell me to keep my mouth shut! Is this some kind of selective politeness you would care to explain?
Or possibly this is your interpretation of politeness:
Quote: 1-06-09 MICHAEL BROWN:
"There was a time when reading wasn't just for fags"
Apparently, in your world anything you say is ok, but if someones disagrees with you, they are impolite. You can denigrate an entire class of people and that's OK. As a police officer you are supposed to hold yourself to higher standards than this!
Apparently you aren't capable of having a reasonable discussion without feeling like you are being challenged and going into cop mode.
I know you haven't the courage to let this post stand so go ahead and ban me and delete all of this post so there won't be anyone else to challenge your authority.

He was being sarcastic. Pointing out the anti intellectual sentiment that equates "book learning" with being unmanly. He was not making an anti-gay remark, and it's pretty low of you to try to twist it that way.

MB pointed out that the tone of our conversation here regarding these issues can often be used against us.

Can't you just advocate and/or defend your position without all the histrionics? You lose credibility when you get over emotional.

 

[permafrost]

He was being sarcastic. Pointing out the anti intellectual sentiment that equates "book learning" with being unmanly. He was not making an anti-gay remark, and it's pretty low of you to try to twist it that way.

MB pointed out that the tone of our conversation here regarding these issues can often be used against us.

Can't you just advocate and/or defend your position without all the histrionics? You lose credibility when you get over emotional.

I posted a reasoned, passionate opinion to a post and used the term "steaming pantload"
All I see from him are one-liners, quotes from others and commandments for the masses . I don't see him making a stand on anything.
A lawyer calling me low and accusing me of twisting words!... Oh, this gets better and better!

 

[jarhead983]

OK guys, I could use some help on this. Maybe it's laid out in a sticky somewhere, but I admit, I haven't read them all, or even most. What is the formula or guideline used that tells us when to take a sharp downward turn into the crap chute that almost every thread turns into? I've only been a member for about 2yrs and I see this on every thread. We discuss something of interest or even on mundane every day topics, but somehow it turns into preaching and ranting from one sect to another. Even between people who agree on a topic, the posts can degrade into something that doesn't look like anything but written attacks.

I know that when we don’t have all of the normal inputs during communicating such as visual and audio cues, we sometimes misunderstand or just miss the intent of the other. We don’t have the sarcasm chuckle or the tone of the voice that we have all learned throughout our years that tells us the full meaning of what someone is saying. People also act with more bravado with the anonymity of the web. Add to that a general inability to accurately write down what we are thinking or feeling and you get miscommunication not communication. This will always be the case, we are not one-dimensional communicators. Yes, there are the occasional out an out idiots on here, but I believe that most on here I would be friends with in real life, not just in cyber life. I’m not saying we all have to be friends, I’m just suggesting that we make this a whine free site. Write off the perceived affronts as just that, perceived. And I will stop my whining, starting… Now!

 

[Seadog]

I have had the good fortune to meet and discuss issues particularly the 2nd amendment with Senator Russell. I was very impressed with his outlook and attitudes, particularly towards the rights and responsibilities of the 2nd Amdendment. This does not surprise me in the least of his very articulate and well stated letter to the Chief....

Along the same line please read the letter sent to Chief Citty by Pastor Vineyard. He also takes the Chief to task. It can be reached at

http://www.okcteaparty.org/gun-free-zone-not/open-letter-to-okc-chief-bill-citty/

I apologize if Pastor Vineyard's letter has posted in another thread..

I like the letter the preacher sent to Mr Citty. It was well thought out and logical. I wish we had more poloticians that thought like that...