Z
zzigzzag
Guest
I have decided to drop out of PJ.
My greatest fun was exposing dishonest tactics and patently false assertions. I was never the scholar on policy, economic issues, law or anything else. I also had no illusions about that and was never reticent or the least bit embarrassed to admit it. I also never intentionally offered false information from fringe sources or hitched my wagon to the pundits whose daily goal is to be most outrageously contemptuous of the other side for ratings.
That seems to be where we are now. More every day, it has become a sounding board for dupes of the man I see as the most despicable American who has ever lived. The man who changed the goal of debate from an honest and righteous exchange of opposing views to a goal of getting us to genuinely hate and despise each other.
No one since Hitler has ever been more successful at getting one group of fellow countrymen to hate another. He has no other goal than to amass personal wealth by doing this. He has no conscience about employing intentional lies and outrageously dishonest characterizations to do so. He has changed the word "liberal" from a description of a political view to an invective spat out with contempt with precisely the same tone and intent as the Klan using nig_er or a Nazi bleating "Juden".
I'm aware that I was always as strident as anyone and, perhaps, as guilty as anyone for the tone of the rhetoric. It's impossible for me to point out that someone is being intentionally dishonest and somehow disguise my genuine contempt for it. So it becomes personal. Sorry 'bout that....but not a lot.
99% of us here are gentlemen and gentleladies of good humor venting our frustrations on one another rather than fantasizing about planting bombs on the left or right side of the aisle in the chambers of Congress. The other 1% are nuts. I am leaving here because of that 1%.
I made the decision last night after :censored: resorted to "coward" for about the third time on one thread that he started in his quest to deify Rush's bullcrap. When I start wanting to smack someone, I'm keeping the wrong company.
The only other poster who made me feel that way was :censored: when he insulted my wife by implying that she was a child molester. Then he goaded me with, "Oh, have I hit a nerve?" as if he had made some primal point by attacking a poster's family member who he will never know, much to his deprivation.
She is one of the most universally beloved members of the community in which I live. She can't go out in public without someone wanting a hug from her. She genuinely loves everyone she meets and has never met a stranger. Until last night, it was the only post I had ever reported. Next time I looked up, the [Unwelcome language removed] was a moderator. I'm sure everyone can understand my chagrin. I'm not waiting around for a mental case like :censored: to become one.
My suggestion to PJ would be that they flag provable falsehoods rather than censor adult language and good humored insults. That would elevate the dialogue more than the tattletale system.
If you look at my friend list, you will see a few of my opponents with whom I have had the most heated and, to any observer, disrespectful exchanges. I think you would be quite surprised to see our private conversations. The same was true on Slate. I exchanged personal e-mail addresses with one of the most talented provocateurs on the board. He could make a lefty boil with a two word post. He was hilarious and a fine gentleman in the tactile world.
So be it known that I have had genuine contempt for only two members. To the rest, I say, "Thanks for putting up with me." I would leave any social circle that had regulars like these two. I don't hang out with vermin in the tactile world and I won't do it here.
I will leave with one final left-handed apology. I know you're a pilot, Stan. I was just pickin' on you. It's what I do. Hahahahahahahaha!
My greatest fun was exposing dishonest tactics and patently false assertions. I was never the scholar on policy, economic issues, law or anything else. I also had no illusions about that and was never reticent or the least bit embarrassed to admit it. I also never intentionally offered false information from fringe sources or hitched my wagon to the pundits whose daily goal is to be most outrageously contemptuous of the other side for ratings.
That seems to be where we are now. More every day, it has become a sounding board for dupes of the man I see as the most despicable American who has ever lived. The man who changed the goal of debate from an honest and righteous exchange of opposing views to a goal of getting us to genuinely hate and despise each other.
No one since Hitler has ever been more successful at getting one group of fellow countrymen to hate another. He has no other goal than to amass personal wealth by doing this. He has no conscience about employing intentional lies and outrageously dishonest characterizations to do so. He has changed the word "liberal" from a description of a political view to an invective spat out with contempt with precisely the same tone and intent as the Klan using nig_er or a Nazi bleating "Juden".
I'm aware that I was always as strident as anyone and, perhaps, as guilty as anyone for the tone of the rhetoric. It's impossible for me to point out that someone is being intentionally dishonest and somehow disguise my genuine contempt for it. So it becomes personal. Sorry 'bout that....but not a lot.
99% of us here are gentlemen and gentleladies of good humor venting our frustrations on one another rather than fantasizing about planting bombs on the left or right side of the aisle in the chambers of Congress. The other 1% are nuts. I am leaving here because of that 1%.
I made the decision last night after :censored: resorted to "coward" for about the third time on one thread that he started in his quest to deify Rush's bullcrap. When I start wanting to smack someone, I'm keeping the wrong company.
The only other poster who made me feel that way was :censored: when he insulted my wife by implying that she was a child molester. Then he goaded me with, "Oh, have I hit a nerve?" as if he had made some primal point by attacking a poster's family member who he will never know, much to his deprivation.
She is one of the most universally beloved members of the community in which I live. She can't go out in public without someone wanting a hug from her. She genuinely loves everyone she meets and has never met a stranger. Until last night, it was the only post I had ever reported. Next time I looked up, the [Unwelcome language removed] was a moderator. I'm sure everyone can understand my chagrin. I'm not waiting around for a mental case like :censored: to become one.
My suggestion to PJ would be that they flag provable falsehoods rather than censor adult language and good humored insults. That would elevate the dialogue more than the tattletale system.
If you look at my friend list, you will see a few of my opponents with whom I have had the most heated and, to any observer, disrespectful exchanges. I think you would be quite surprised to see our private conversations. The same was true on Slate. I exchanged personal e-mail addresses with one of the most talented provocateurs on the board. He could make a lefty boil with a two word post. He was hilarious and a fine gentleman in the tactile world.
So be it known that I have had genuine contempt for only two members. To the rest, I say, "Thanks for putting up with me." I would leave any social circle that had regulars like these two. I don't hang out with vermin in the tactile world and I won't do it here.
I will leave with one final left-handed apology. I know you're a pilot, Stan. I was just pickin' on you. It's what I do. Hahahahahahahaha!
