Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 23, 2024 19:21:09 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 9, 2018 19:47:30 GMT
I don’t know how I missed knowing who Ben Shapiro is. Now I must do research. Thank you for bringing his name to me.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 23, 2024 19:21:09 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 9, 2018 19:49:30 GMT
One? I thought there have been multiple speakers that were put in that position. Am I mistaken? The only one who didn’t get to speak was Milo. Everybody else went on as scheduled. No violence. Ben went on despite threat of violent protest and when that didn't deter him, the college tried to make them pay $15,000 for the security in order to deter him. Something that wasn't applied to speakers on the Left who were being protested. Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Condoleezza Rice were also run off by threats of violent protests. |
|
|
|
Post by leftturnonly on Jun 9, 2018 20:08:50 GMT
Condoleezza Rice were also run off by threats of violent protests. Condoleeza Rice? Talk about intolerance! She'd have had my vote for president in a New York minute. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 23, 2024 19:21:09 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 9, 2018 20:17:39 GMT
Condoleezza Rice were also run off by threats of violent protests. Condoleeza Rice? Talk about intolerance! She'd have had my vote for president in a New York minute. Mine too! |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 23, 2024 19:21:09 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 9, 2018 20:40:59 GMT
I think it's kind of silly to expect to discuss political topics without the President being discussed at all-- since he's the head of the executive branch of government, and all-- but that's just me, I guess... (and NO, I didn't say anything about Trump-bashing; just that if political / governmental / policy topics are discussed, he IS a part of that.) That's exactly how I felt during the campaign when discussing candidates and comparing them, I and a few others who didn't follow the "rules" we're demonized for bringing up Hillary. It was silly asinine not to be "allowed" to compare the candidates when that was our job as voters. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 23, 2024 19:21:09 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 9, 2018 20:42:28 GMT
Condoleeza Rice? Talk about intolerance! She'd have had my vote for president in a New York minute. Mine too! Mine, too! I think she is outstanding. And so very smart. |
|
|
|
Post by cadoodlebug on Jun 9, 2018 20:44:19 GMT
I thought Ann Coulter also got cancelled because of threats of violence.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 23, 2024 19:21:09 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 9, 2018 20:49:48 GMT
I thought Ann Coulter also got cancelled because of threats of violence. You're right. They kept changing the venue and demands hoping to dissuade her and she kept agreeing to all of the changes, so in the end they just cancelled her. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 23, 2024 19:21:09 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2018 1:42:35 GMT
First snowsilver thanks for taking the time to let me know what you believe are beneficial actions taken by or under trump. I do appreciated it. I believe your list is pretty much shared by a lot of like minded conservatives. My comments are directed to all conservatives who “second the list”. I read the list last night and put it aside, read it again later and read it a third time this morning and it click at what had me scratching my head. The liberals are told by many on this board that we let how we feel about trump colors our judgement on what good trump is doing for the country and as such it’s impossible to have any sort of discussion with us. I don’t necessarily agree with this but fair point. On the list of good thing were these comments “best economy in a long time” and what was it “3M jobs since he became president”. When President Obama took office the unemployment rate was 7.8%, It peaked at 10%. During the first part of his presidency the country lost over 4M jobs. By the time he left office the unemployment rate had gone down to 4.7% and 15M jobs had been created. The conservatives, including many on this board, never gave President Obama any credit for the turn around in the economy from a 10% unemployment rate and the loss of 4M+ jobs to a 4.7% unemployment rate and the creation of 15M jobs. But yet liberals are suppose to put aside their feelings for trump and acknowledge the good he has done. The downward trend of the unemployment rate continued under President Obama until he left office. Did trump specifically do something that all of a sudden we get a “best economy in a long time”? Or was it just a continuation of what President Obama started and what he is not getting credit for from the right? Same thing with the near elimination of ISIS in that conservatives want to give all the credit to trump even though he was pretty much falling what President Obama put in place . Yup read an article where trump’s “generals” couldn’t find a better plan then what was already in play. As far as Neil Gorsuch and confirmation of more judges than any other president. That is nice except the ability of the previous president to exercise his constitutional duty of picking judges was denied by the current Majority Leader of the Senate who happens to be of the opposition party. Stolen if you will. Even when the opposition party was in the minority stop the appointment of judges. I know some conservatives may think this fine and take a “good for us “ attitude. But I see it as a very dangerous precedent being set. What if the Democrats take the majority of the Senate back and Schumer becomes the Majority leader. A Supreme Court Justice or two decide to retire. Schumer pulls a McConnell and say “ I think we should wait for the next president to make the choice, so hearings/conformations until then”. If Schumer did that the right would go nuts. And I wouldn’t blame them. But yet McConnell did it to President Obama and the right was quite. The same can be said about the trump judges that have been confirmed. It’s the back story and how they came about being appointed will always cloud their appointment. It shouldn't have happened the way it did. It should not be celebrated by the right that this was the way they got a Justice on the Supreme Court and “their guy” got the most judges confirmed then previous presidents. There is something dishonest about it. And it should be acknowledged by both sides so it doesn’t continue to happen. I wonder why liberals should have to acknowledge the good trump has done while the conservatives continue to ignore the good President Obama did on the same issues . I wonder why the conservatives celebrate the appointment of conservative judges while ignoring how it came to be that these conservative judges could be appointed. I wonder , if at this point in time, if it’s even worth attempting any meaningful discussion if we need to play by rules you set but don’t follow yourselves. At this point I’m inclined to think it’s best to have two separate threads as you all want if for no other reason than I will wonder less. Again snowsilver thanks for taking the time to make the list. It gave me a lot to think about. And that’s a good thing. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 23, 2024 19:21:09 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2018 4:58:47 GMT
First snowsilver thanks for taking the time to let me know what you believe are beneficial actions taken by or under trump. I do appreciated it. I believe your list is pretty much shared by a lot of like minded conservatives. My comments are directed to all conservatives who “second the list”. I read the list last night and put it aside, read it again later and read it a third time this morning and it click at what had me scratching my head. The liberals are told by many on this board that we let how we feel about trump colors our judgement on what good trump is doing for the country and as such it’s impossible to have any sort of discussion with us. I don’t necessarily agree with this but fair point. On the list of good thing were these comments “best economy in a long time” and what was it “3M jobs since he became president”. When President Obama took office the unemployment rate was 7.8%, It peaked at 10%. During the first part of his presidency the country lost over 4M jobs. By the time he left office the unemployment rate had gone down to 4.7% and 15M jobs had been created. The conservatives, including many on this board, never gave President Obama any credit for the turn around in the economy from a 10% unemployment rate and the loss of 4M+ jobs to a 4.7% unemployment rate and the creation of 15M jobs. But yet liberals are suppose to put aside their feelings for trump and acknowledge the good he has done. The downward trend of the unemployment rate continued under President Obama until he left office. Did trump specifically do something that all of a sudden we get a “best economy in a long time”? Or was it just a continuation of what President Obama started and what he is not getting credit for from the right? Same thing with the near elimination of ISIS in that conservatives want to give all the credit to trump even though he was pretty much falling what President Obama put in place . Yup read an article where trump’s “generals” couldn’t find a better plan then what was already in play.
As far as Neil Gorsuch and confirmation of more judges than any other president. That is nice except the ability of the previous president to exercise his constitutional duty of picking judges was denied by the current Majority Leader of the Senate who happens to be of the opposition party. Stolen if you will. Even when the opposition party was in the minority stop the appointment of judges. I know some conservatives may think this fine and take a “good for us “ attitude. But I see it as a very dangerous precedent being set. What if the Democrats take the majority of the Senate back and Schumer becomes the Majority leader. A Supreme Court Justice or two decide to retire. Schumer pulls a McConnell and say “ I think we should wait for the next president to make the choice, so hearings/conformations until then”. If Schumer did that the right would go nuts. And I wouldn’t blame them. But yet McConnell did it to President Obama and the right was quite. The same can be said about the trump judges that have been confirmed. It’s the back story and how they came about being appointed will always cloud their appointment. It shouldn't have happened the way it did. It should not be celebrated by the right that this was the way they got a Justice on the Supreme Court and “their guy” got the most judges confirmed then previous presidents. There is something dishonest about it. And it should be acknowledged by both sides so it doesn’t continue to happen. I wonder why liberals should have to acknowledge the good trump has done while the conservatives continue to ignore the good President Obama did on the same issues . I wonder why the conservatives celebrate the appointment of conservative judges while ignoring how it came to be that these conservative judges could be appointed. I wonder , if at this point in time, if it’s even worth attempting any meaningful discussion if we need to play by rules you set but don’t follow yourselves. At this point I’m inclined to think it’s best to have two separate threads as you all want if for no other reason than I will wonder less. Again snowsilver thanks for taking the time to make the list. It gave me a lot to think about. And that’s a good thing. The tweaks Trump made to Obama's plans made them that much more effective. "Secretary of Defense James Mattis outlined that President Trump “delegated authority to the right level to aggressively and in a timely manner move against enemy vulnerabilities.” This meant that when those on the ground requested airstrikes, fewer layers of sign-off were required; the approval process was decentralized and, subsequently, faster. Mattis has also said that another change was a “shift from shoving ISIS out of safe locations in an attrition fight to surrounding the enemy in their strongholds so we can annihilate ISIS.” The purpose behind this, Mattis outlined, was to dry up the flow of foreign fighters leaving the region." from the Heritage Foundation Obama deserves his credit for what he put in place (as well as the flaws of it) as does Trump and just as those who will come after Obama and Trump who will no doubt still be dealing with Isis. But to say that Trump is only doing what Obama laid out is dishonest. The Left set that precedent long ago. |
|
|
|
Post by cade387 on Jun 10, 2018 9:38:09 GMT
First snowsilver thanks for taking the time to let me know what you believe are beneficial actions taken by or under trump. I do appreciated it. I believe your list is pretty much shared by a lot of like minded conservatives. My comments are directed to all conservatives who “second the list”. I read the list last night and put it aside, read it again later and read it a third time this morning and it click at what had me scratching my head. The liberals are told by many on this board that we let how we feel about trump colors our judgement on what good trump is doing for the country and as such it’s impossible to have any sort of discussion with us. I don’t necessarily agree with this but fair point. On the list of good thing were these comments “best economy in a long time” and what was it “3M jobs since he became president”. When President Obama took office the unemployment rate was 7.8%, It peaked at 10%. During the first part of his presidency the country lost over 4M jobs. By the time he left office the unemployment rate had gone down to 4.7% and 15M jobs had been created. The conservatives, including many on this board, never gave President Obama any credit for the turn around in the economy from a 10% unemployment rate and the loss of 4M+ jobs to a 4.7% unemployment rate and the creation of 15M jobs. But yet liberals are suppose to put aside their feelings for trump and acknowledge the good he has done. The downward trend of the unemployment rate continued under President Obama until he left office. Did trump specifically do something that all of a sudden we get a “best economy in a long time”? Or was it just a continuation of what President Obama started and what he is not getting credit for from the right? Same thing with the near elimination of ISIS in that conservatives want to give all the credit to trump even though he was pretty much falling what President Obama put in place . Yup read an article where trump’s “generals” couldn’t find a better plan then what was already in play.
As far as Neil Gorsuch and confirmation of more judges than any other president. That is nice except the ability of the previous president to exercise his constitutional duty of picking judges was denied by the current Majority Leader of the Senate who happens to be of the opposition party. Stolen if you will. Even when the opposition party was in the minority stop the appointment of judges. I know some conservatives may think this fine and take a “good for us “ attitude. But I see it as a very dangerous precedent being set. What if the Democrats take the majority of the Senate back and Schumer becomes the Majority leader. A Supreme Court Justice or two decide to retire. Schumer pulls a McConnell and say “ I think we should wait for the next president to make the choice, so hearings/conformations until then”. If Schumer did that the right would go nuts. And I wouldn’t blame them. But yet McConnell did it to President Obama and the right was quite. The same can be said about the trump judges that have been confirmed. It’s the back story and how they came about being appointed will always cloud their appointment. It shouldn't have happened the way it did. It should not be celebrated by the right that this was the way they got a Justice on the Supreme Court and “their guy” got the most judges confirmed then previous presidents. There is something dishonest about it. And it should be acknowledged by both sides so it doesn’t continue to happen. I wonder why liberals should have to acknowledge the good trump has done while the conservatives continue to ignore the good President Obama did on the same issues . I wonder why the conservatives celebrate the appointment of conservative judges while ignoring how it came to be that these conservative judges could be appointed. I wonder , if at this point in time, if it’s even worth attempting any meaningful discussion if we need to play by rules you set but don’t follow yourselves. At this point I’m inclined to think it’s best to have two separate threads as you all want if for no other reason than I will wonder less. Again snowsilver thanks for taking the time to make the list. It gave me a lot to think about. And that’s a good thing. The tweaks Trump made to Obama's plans made them that much more effective. "Secretary of Defense James Mattis outlined that President Trump “delegated authority to the right level to aggressively and in a timely manner move against enemy vulnerabilities.” This meant that when those on the ground requested airstrikes, fewer layers of sign-off were required; the approval process was decentralized and, subsequently, faster. Mattis has also said that another change was a “shift from shoving ISIS out of safe locations in an attrition fight to surrounding the enemy in their strongholds so we can annihilate ISIS.” The purpose behind this, Mattis outlined, was to dry up the flow of foreign fighters leaving the region." from the Heritage Foundation Obama deserves his credit for what he put in place (as well as the flaws of it) as does Trump and just as those who will come after Obama and Trump who will no doubt still be dealing with Isis. But to say that Trump is only doing what Obama laid out is dishonest. The Left set that precedent long ago. But why is that ok? The Left did so we are going to do it too?  Really? Are they 5? Because that is the arguments I have with my kids. And that isn’t one sided because the Left shouldn’t say the same about the Right either. If I won’t let my kids get away with that behavior then I darn sure don’t want the people who run this country (of either party) playing the whiny “well they did so I can too” or the cranky “well he did it so I’m going to outsmart him at his own game” kind of crap. I’m so done with all of this. There isn’t some moral high ground for the Right because the Left did it before and now we are giving it back to them twice over. This is not what Jesus would do, and anyone maintaining they have faith in any deity and acting this way is not a true follower of their religion. Which brings me once again back to they may be a Republican but they are not Consitiutionists nor are they Conservative Christians. The constitution doesn’t need to be twisted to be followed. I have no tolerance for parties right now. If you (general you) are spending millions of dollars trying to convince folks that the constitution really means X because that is what they want it to say, it should make you take a step back and think. That is like saying that the Ten Commandments only said you shall not covet your neighbor’s possessions, but that didn’t include the guy across the street - that’s ok because neighbor in that time only meant the guy literally next door. ::facepalm:: |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 23, 2024 19:21:09 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2018 12:05:36 GMT
If the Constitution only had one way to be interpreted or understood, we would need no Supreme Court, and even they almost never all agree on its interpretation.
|
|
|
|
Post by leftturnonly on Jun 10, 2018 17:33:14 GMT
Fred has begun how many bashing threads? How many posts on those threads has she made?
She laid the trap here and Snow took the bait. Now, she feels adequately justified to respond and turn this into a bashing thread as well.
Once again, all political conversations on this board must be dominated by anti-Trump.
|
|
|
|
Post by thundergal on Jun 10, 2018 19:25:59 GMT
trump is the leader of the conservative party. The rest of the conservative party leadership doesn't seem to have anything to say these days. Dehumanizing and dangerous policies are being written and enforced by the leader of the conservative party. That's trump. You want the shit without the stink. It. Does. Not. Work. That. Way. But I can't help but be a tad bit entertained by the effort to make it so.
|
|
|
|
Post by leftturnonly on Jun 10, 2018 19:27:48 GMT
The rest of the conservative party... There is no conservative party. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 23, 2024 19:21:09 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2018 19:58:01 GMT
The tweaks Trump made to Obama's plans made them that much more effective. "Secretary of Defense James Mattis outlined that President Trump “delegated authority to the right level to aggressively and in a timely manner move against enemy vulnerabilities.” This meant that when those on the ground requested airstrikes, fewer layers of sign-off were required; the approval process was decentralized and, subsequently, faster. Mattis has also said that another change was a “shift from shoving ISIS out of safe locations in an attrition fight to surrounding the enemy in their strongholds so we can annihilate ISIS.” The purpose behind this, Mattis outlined, was to dry up the flow of foreign fighters leaving the region." from the Heritage Foundation Obama deserves his credit for what he put in place (as well as the flaws of it) as does Trump and just as those who will come after Obama and Trump who will no doubt still be dealing with Isis. But to say that Trump is only doing what Obama laid out is dishonest. The Left set that precedent long ago. But why is that ok? The Left did so we are going to do it too? Really? Are they 5? Because that is the arguments I have with my kids. And that isn’t one sided because the Left shouldn’t say the same about the Right either. If I won’t let my kids get away with that behavior then I darn sure don’t want the people who run this country (of either party) playing the whiny “well they did so I can too” or the cranky “well he did it so I’m going to outsmart him at his own game” kind of crap. I’m so done with all of this. There isn’t some moral high ground for the Right because the Left did it before and now we are giving it back to them twice over. This is not what Jesus would do, and anyone maintaining they have faith in any deity and acting this way is not a true follower of their religion. Which brings me once again back to they may be a Republican but they are not Consitiutionists nor are they Conservative Christians. The constitution doesn’t need to be twisted to be followed. I have no tolerance for parties right now. If you (general you) are spending millions of dollars trying to convince folks that the constitution really means X because that is what they want it to say, it should make you take a step back and think. That is like saying that the Ten Commandments only said you shall not covet your neighbor’s possessions, but that didn’t include the guy across the street - that’s ok because neighbor in that time only meant the guy literally next door. ::facepalm:: Do not come here and put words in my mouth. I never said it was okay or that they did so we can do it. I didn't say that because that's not what we're doing, so you're having that 5 year old mentality argument all by yourself, Cade. What I said is that Fred is doing the very thing she's complaining about. According to the "rules" shoved down our throats in order to shut us up every time we call out YOUR double standard, WE can't bring up the past president or Hillary while we're talking about this president. We're called out as crazy or everyone is told not to respond to us when WE do. We are dismissed and demonized for doing it, but your side does it ALL the time when it suits their position. You demand that we need to play by rules you set but don’t follow yourselves. THAT'S what I'm saying. I wonder why liberals should have to acknowledge the good trump has done while the conservatives continue to ignore the good President Obama did on the same issues . I wonder why the conservatives celebrate the appointment of conservative judges while ignoring how it came to be that these conservative judges could be appointed. I wonder , if at this point in time, if it’s even worth attempting any meaningful discussion if we need to play by rules you set but don’t follow yourselves. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 23, 2024 19:21:09 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2018 20:36:18 GMT
That is really sad news, I'm so sorry to hear that and he will really be missed. |
|
|
|
Post by leftturnonly on Jun 10, 2018 20:49:54 GMT
@mytnice - Save yourself the angst.
Take a page out of the playbook and just go around saying "We get it. You hate Trump."
And then just walk away.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 23, 2024 19:21:09 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2018 20:51:25 GMT
I am going to say it - no one agrees 100% of the time with the leadership of this country, no matter who the leader is. So for those concerned we do not lay enough blame at Trump's feet - we do. We don't necessarily like his tweets, his take no prisoner approach to things. No one approved of the pussy grabbing comment. OK? But I think some of us feel there are things getting done that we like. snowsilver was gracious enough to provide a list. Most of us - I think - do not want the tit-for-tat discussion here that has been the norm on a lot of political threads. Hence the sandbox. Off to enjoy the sunshine before Cuomo decides to tax that too in NYS.  |
|
|
|
Post by dewryce on Jun 10, 2018 22:46:24 GMT
Fred's post to address Snowsilver's list did not come across as bashing to me, at all. She disagreed with a few points and asked valid questions. That's a conversation. Maybe that's part of the problem. We can't even agree on what is considered bashing. I'll be honest, occasionally on this these conservative threads I do see something that I would consider bashing Trump et al by a liberal pea. But mostly it just looks like a difference of opinion to me. To me, it seems that when someone disagrees or doesn't like something that Trump, his administration, or the GOP has done it is construed by the conservatives (general) as bashing him. Whereas, if we posted that we disagreed with something a liberal had done, it would not be interpreted the same way.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 23, 2024 19:21:09 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2018 22:55:01 GMT
Fred's post to address Snowsilver's list did not come across as bashing to me, at all. She disagreed with a few points and asked valid questions. That's a conversation. Maybe that's part of the problem. We can't even agree on what is considered bashing. I'll be honest, occasionally on this these conservative threads I do see something that I would consider bashing Trump et al by a liberal pea. But mostly it just looks like a difference of opinion to me. To me, it seems that when someone disagrees or doesn't like something that Trump, his administration, or the GOP has done it is construed by the conservatives (general) as bashing him. Whereas, if we posted that we disagreed with something a liberal had done, it would not be interpreted the same way. When you dismiss what Trump actually did that was extremely effective in order to say that all he did was follow what Obama put in place, I can see why that is taken as the same old Trump bashing. |
|
|
|
Post by leftturnonly on Jun 10, 2018 22:57:24 GMT
Fred's post to address Snowsilver's list did not come across as bashing to me, at all. She disagreed with a few points and asked valid questions. That's a conversation. Maybe that's part of the problem. We can't even agree on what is considered bashing. I'll be honest, occasionally on this these conservative threads I do see something that I would consider bashing Trump et al by a liberal pea. But mostly it just looks like a difference of opinion to me. To me, it seems that when someone disagrees or doesn't like something that Trump, his administration, or the GOP has done it is construed by the conservatives (general) as bashing him. Whereas, if we posted that we disagreed with something a liberal had done, it would not be interpreted the same way. You know, I really don't care what people post about Trump. I don't care what conversations are had here in general on this board. I do care that all political conversations are required to follow the same subjects with the same conversations repeated here that are elsewhere. It is mandatory - as we've been told repeatedly - to "call out" this president. So, this whole "But I don't see this post as doing that" is misleading. It was an outright attempt to steer the conversation on this thread exactly as it is steered on other threads and that ALWAYS leads to anti-Trump. I can read any other thread any time I want if that's what I want to read. When I want to read something else, I come to this thread. Y'all can go on and on and on and on about what you think is hypocritical and never once address how selfish it is to have to dominate the conversation of the minority group. |
|
|
|
Post by vpohlman on Jun 10, 2018 23:02:34 GMT
Fred's post to address Snowsilver's list did not come across as bashing to me, at all. She disagreed with a few points and asked valid questions. That's a conversation. Maybe that's part of the problem. We can't even agree on what is considered bashing. I'll be honest, occasionally on this these conservative threads I do see something that I would consider bashing Trump et al by a liberal pea. But mostly it just looks like a difference of opinion to me. To me, it seems that when someone disagrees or doesn't like something that Trump, his administration, or the GOP has done it is construed by the conservatives (general) as bashing him. Whereas, if we posted that we disagreed with something a liberal had done, it would not be interpreted the same way. I agree with you with the exception of the second to last (I wonder...) paragraph. That felt very passive aggressive, little digs seemingly innocent yet meant to hurt. Then back to nice with the last paragraph. And maybe I'm placing my own feelings on it because I've been hardened. Hard to say. And I sit here afraid to hit create post for fear of the predictable onslaught. Oh well, doing it! |
|
|
|
Post by #notLauren on Jun 10, 2018 23:03:19 GMT
Exactly. The need to dominate every conversation is the perfect way to describe what the liberals who insist on coming on to this thread are exhibiting.
Selfish. Indeed they are.
|
|
|
|
Post by dewryce on Jun 10, 2018 23:07:59 GMT
Fred's post to address Snowsilver's list did not come across as bashing to me, at all. She disagreed with a few points and asked valid questions. That's a conversation. Maybe that's part of the problem. We can't even agree on what is considered bashing. I'll be honest, occasionally on this these conservative threads I do see something that I would consider bashing Trump et al by a liberal pea. But mostly it just looks like a difference of opinion to me. To me, it seems that when someone disagrees or doesn't like something that Trump, his administration, or the GOP has done it is construed by the conservatives (general) as bashing him. Whereas, if we posted that we disagreed with something a liberal had done, it would not be interpreted the same way. You know, I really don't care what people post about Trump. I don't care what conversations are had here in general on this board. I do care that all political conversations are required to follow the same subjects with the same conversations repeated here that are elsewhere. It is mandatory - as we've been told repeatedly - to "call out" this president. So, this whole "But I don't see this post as doing that" is misleading. It was an outright attempt to steer the conversation on this thread exactly as it is steered on other threads and that ALWAYS leads to anti-Trump. I can read any other thread any time I want if that's what I want to read. When I want to read something else, I come to this thread. Y'all can go on and on and on and on about what you think is hypocritical and never once address how selfish it is to have to dominate the conversation of the minority group. No, it's not misleading. Or, I should say not purposeposfully misleading in any way. It was a very genuine attempt to discuss what is considered bashing, as that is one of your (general you) biggest complaints. And to recognize that we don't see eye to eye on that term, or even use it in the same way, and therefore it's no wonder we are having these issues. Then I shared my perspective about what is viewed as bashing so that one of you (general) could say this is what I (we) think bashing is. Starting a conversation towards understanding each other. Nothing more, nothing less was intended. Sincerely. eta: There is confusion about what you (general) want out of this thread, and disagreement even amongst yourselves. Some want civil conversation with liberals as long as it is not bashing, others don't. |
|
|
|
Post by #notLauren on Jun 10, 2018 23:11:22 GMT
Why can't you seem to get it? We don't want to discuss what you want us to discuss. Just go away if that's all you can do. Do you really think we're interested in discussing on our one measly thread the issue of "what is Trump bashing?" Just leave us to our own devises. You're not here for any positive interaction. And it's clear to everyone but you.
|
|
|
|
Post by dewryce on Jun 10, 2018 23:15:57 GMT
Fred's post to address Snowsilver's list did not come across as bashing to me, at all. She disagreed with a few points and asked valid questions. That's a conversation. Maybe that's part of the problem. We can't even agree on what is considered bashing. I'll be honest, occasionally on this these conservative threads I do see something that I would consider bashing Trump et al by a liberal pea. But mostly it just looks like a difference of opinion to me. To me, it seems that when someone disagrees or doesn't like something that Trump, his administration, or the GOP has done it is construed by the conservatives (general) as bashing him. Whereas, if we posted that we disagreed with something a liberal had done, it would not be interpreted the same way. I agree with you with the exception of the second to last (I wonder...) paragraph. That felt very passive aggressive, little digs seemingly innocent yet meant to hurt. Then back to nice with the last paragraph. And maybe I'm placing my own feelings on it because I've been hardened. Hard to say. And I sit here afraid to hit create post for fear of the predictable onslaught. Oh well, doing it! I can say I was very careful in my wordering and no digs, passive-aggressive or otherwise, were meant. I'd address it more specifically, but I'm not sure what part you're referring to. I only have one paragraph, and the second to last sentence doesn't seem to fit what you are describing. |
|
|
|
Post by vpohlman on Jun 11, 2018 0:28:47 GMT
I agree with you with the exception of the second to last (I wonder...) paragraph. That felt very passive aggressive, little digs seemingly innocent yet meant to hurt. Then back to nice with the last paragraph. And maybe I'm placing my own feelings on it because I've been hardened. Hard to say. And I sit here afraid to hit create post for fear of the predictable onslaught. Oh well, doing it! I can say I was very careful in my wordering and no digs, passive-aggressive or otherwise, were meant. I'd address it more specifically, but I'm not sure what part you're referring to. I only have one paragraph, and the second to last sentence doesn't seem to fit what you are describing. Oh, I was referring to Fred's post, not yours! Sorry! I should have been more clear! You had zero digs or "mean" anything! I really am sorry! |
|
|
|
Post by dewryce on Jun 11, 2018 0:31:37 GMT
I can say I was very careful in my wordering and no digs, passive-aggressive or otherwise, were meant. I'd address it more specifically, but I'm not sure what part you're referring to. I only have one paragraph, and the second to last sentence doesn't seem to fit what you are describing. Oh, I was referring to Fred's post, not yours! Sorry! I should have been more clear! You had zero digs or "mean" anything! I really am sorry! LOL! No worries and no need to apologize for my state of confusion. You'll find it's a state I visit often  |
|
|
|
Post by snowsilver on Jun 11, 2018 1:10:38 GMT
Dewryce, honestly, I hate to even post anymore, but I feel you deserve a response. You are truly one of the nice ones, and for my part (which believe me does not count for a lot), I'm glad you come over and attempt to interact. I'm going to sort of go against a couple of people I dearly love here (Lefty, I hope you understand  ), but I didn't get upset at Fred's response. I actually sort of like Fred. We were both in the Christmas card exchange and she sent me one of my absolute favorite cards out of the 100-plus that I got. I told her so and we agreed that away from politics we probably would get along just great. I do understand how she might annoy my conservative friends with her constant cut and pastes--all anti-Trump of course. We could do the exact same thing with pro-Trump commentary, and it IS out there and it isn't all that hard to find. I saw an interesting one just today where two economists state that it is Trump's policies--NOT what Obama did--that have led to the good economy we are enjoying. It's tempting to cut and paste these things, but they convince no one, so it's sort of self-defeating. But Fred generally is pretty nice and rarely gets mean. She's completely convinced that Trump is a terrible President and you know what--that is her absolute right! So, overall, I just wanted to tell you that I basically agree with what you said. I guess I sort of wish there were a way to develop an area here where only discussion was allowed. No personal insults. No screaming "YOU LIAR" to people who don't see things your way. But that just isn't going to happen. We used to have it on the old forum. I fondly remember many long, long threads where conservatives and liberals debated without ugliness such topics as abortion and gay rights for page after page. I even changed my stance on a couple things. But that seems to be impossible anymore. It is to the point now that we conservatives are plain out called names--not sure you saw in the Merkel thread today that I was flat out called "sanctimonious". It's silly to let something like that hurt, but it did. It stung. I try very hard to be civil, but I think a lot of us conservatives just feel that there's no point in discussion. If you disagree with the majority, you will be called names, most regularly the delightful "racist, misogynist, intolerant, etc. etc." mantra that we have gotten used to. So I understand that many of my cohorts just want a place where we can come in and discuss our conservative take on things without the immediate derailment that ALWAYS happens on every other thread. Not sure where I'm going with this, but I didn't want you to think that you came over and tried to be nice and no one noticed. I noticed. I thank you. If I were to begin my own forum where I regulated who could belong on EITHER side, you'd be one of the ones I'd choose. Have a good night. |
|
Really? Are they 5? Because that is the arguments I have with my kids. And that isn’t one sided because the Left shouldn’t say the same about the Right either. If I won’t let my kids get away with that behavior then I darn sure don’t want the people who run this country (of either party) playing the whiny “well they did so I can too” or the cranky “well he did it so I’m going to outsmart him at his own game” kind of crap. 
), but I didn't get upset at Fred's response. I actually sort of like Fred. We were both in the Christmas card exchange and she sent me one of my absolute favorite cards out of the 100-plus that I got. I told her so and we agreed that away from politics we probably would get along just great. I do understand how she might annoy my conservative friends with her constant cut and pastes--all anti-Trump of course. We could do the exact same thing with pro-Trump commentary, and it IS out there and it isn't all that hard to find. I saw an interesting one just today where two economists state that it is Trump's policies--NOT what Obama did--that have led to the good economy we are enjoying. It's tempting to cut and paste these things, but they convince no one, so it's sort of self-defeating. But Fred generally is pretty nice and rarely gets mean. She's completely convinced that Trump is a terrible President and you know what--that is her absolute right! So, overall, I just wanted to tell you that I basically agree with what you said.