Why do some people prefer a good fight to a good discussion?

[HogTrash]

How can a place created for the purpose of discussion and the exchange of ideas turn people into angry mudslinging enemies?

I realize that some people just don't click, but are simple words really enough to transform a moment of anger into rage and hatred?

After all, we don't commit adultery or rape here...We don't murder each others friends and loved ones...All we do here is discuss things.

Are we so offended by other people's beliefs, ideas, ideologies, intricacies and eccentricities that we loose our tolerance, civility and self control?

Are my beliefs serious enough to be hated for?...The group of people I'm least tolerant of is liberals but I manage to not curse and insult them relentlessly.

Don't get me wrong, I am not overly sensitive and am not bothered by insults and name calling but there are many times I'd rather discuss the issue of the thread.

I am very interested in hearing other member's opinion on this subject?

[chloe]

I'm sure someone has specifically hurt your feelings, so who was it?

[Noir]

Cus the internetz is srs bsns!

Not really, i find it funny to watch people getting all butthurt over the internet. Life moves on, wasting it insulting people anonymously or being hurt by anonymous insults is silly indeed.

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,


1. I have noticed this as well.
2. Usually its a couple people who decide to start shit, then a thrid gets into the mix.
3. They act like sharks circling the victim.
4. They laugh and make fun of how the victim is different, and doesn't fit in.
5. You should of been here a couple years ago, then you would know what I mean.
6. But there's no reason to go into details about it, the main bully was OCA, which you can search his nick and read all about him.
7. He is full of pointless hate.
8. He finally got his ass banned.
9. Two of the major three bullies got their asses perma banned from here.
10. Anyone care to guess who the third is?


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[crin63]

Its pretty simple actually HT. It seems like you and Sir James are 1 trick ponies. I'm not saying that you guys are, I'm just saying that's the persona you guys present.

You come off as a racist with no other actual view. If someone disagrees with you, you usually just come back with the person is Liberally programmed with PC propaganda in lieu of actual debate. Sir James blames everything on Muslims.

I'm also not saying that you guys are necessarily wrong in many of your views however no one likes racists and it hurts the actual debate to come from that position. You can have very valid points but all anyone hears is racism and Liberal PC programming because that's your tag lines.

[Kathianne]

Its pretty simple actually HT. It seems like you and Sir James are 1 trick ponies. I'm not saying that you guys are, I'm just saying that's the persona you guys present.

You come off as a racist with no other actual view. If someone disagrees with you, you usually just come back with the person is Liberally programmed with PC propaganda in lieu of actual debate. Sir James blames everything on Muslims.

I'm also not saying that you guys are necessarily wrong in many of your views however no one likes racists and it hurts the actual debate to come from that position. You can have very valid points but all anyone hears is racism and Liberal PC programming because that's your tag lines.

Well said, Crin. Time and again posters have given points or said there was a valid point made, just the conclusions made by the op on why or the 'facts' were generalized beyond all credibility. Most recently his belief, or 'fact' that 95% of blacks are 'librual Democrats' because of the election of the president.

Actually the % of blacks that voted for Obama I believe was higher than 95%, but to generalize from that one election is ridiculous; much was pride in the opportunity to vote for 'a black president.' Indeed a better case could be built on stats that would show that more than a few 'conservative blacks' voted for Obama, simply because he is black. Just like many 'Republican Catholics' voted for JFK in 1959.

A discussion on why blacks vote overwhelmingly for Democrats would be interesting, as would why so few blacks exercise the right to vote, a very hard won right, so seldom.

Instead we get the faux outrage of discounting his 'facts.' Bah, not worth discussing, as he's so blinded by his marriage to 'his facts', make that beliefs, that discussion is impossible.

[Cap'n Chew]

Well said, Crin. Time and again posters have given points or said there was a valid point made, just the conclusions made by the op on why or the 'facts' were generalized beyond all credibility. Most recently his belief, or 'fact' that 95% of blacks are 'librual Democrats' because of the election of the president.

Actually the % of blacks that voted for Obama I believe was higher than 95%, but to generalize from that one election is ridiculous; much was pride in the opportunity to vote for 'a black president.' Indeed a better case could be built on stats that would show that more than a few 'conservative blacks' voted for Obama, simply because he is black. Just like many 'Republican Catholics' voted for JFK in 1959.

A discussion on why blacks vote overwhelmingly for Democrats would be interesting, as would why so few blacks exercise the right to vote, a very hard won right, so seldom.

Instead we get the faux outrage of discounting his 'facts.' Bah, not worth discussing, as he's so blinded by his marriage to 'his facts', make that beliefs, that discussion is impossible.

Ninty-five percent was dead on, but black Americans tend to vote really heavily Democratic so the percentage of their votes Barack Obama received while high, wasn't out of the realm of today's electoral and political reality.

John Kerry got 88% of the black vote while Al Gore received 90%. Clinton in '96 had 84% and 83% in '92.

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/polls/#USP00p1
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/US/P/00/epolls.0.html
http://arts.bev.net/roperldavid/politics/exitpolls.htm
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1996/elections/natl.exit.poll/index1.html
http://www.ropercenter.uconn.edu/elections/how_groups_voted/voted_92.html

[Kathianne]

Ninty-five percent was dead on, but black Americans tend to vote really heavily Democratic so the percentage of their votes Barack Obama received while high, wasn't out of the realm of today's electoral and political reality.

John Kerry got 88% of the black vote while Al Gore received 90%. Clinton in '96 had 84% and 83% in '92.

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/polls/#USP00p1
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/US/P/00/epolls.0.html
http://arts.bev.net/roperldavid/politics/exitpolls.htm
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1996/elections/natl.exit.poll/index1.html
http://www.ropercenter.uconn.edu/elections/how_groups_voted/voted_92.html

And that's how it's done. ;) Again, why so significant percentage married to Democrat Party, when significant gains in socioeconomic status have been made over the years?

Why do so few bother to vote at all?

[Cap'n Chew]

And that's how it's done. ;) Again, why so significant percentage married to Democrat Party, when significant gains in socioeconomic status have been made over the years?

Why do so few bother to vote at all?

Few people bother to vote period, the Iraqi voter turnout puts ours to shame lol.

When the voter age was lowered to 18, not that many young people really took advantage of it. Even in the 2008 election, voters 18-29 only made up 18% of the electorate. It was just 17% in 2004.

[Cap'n Chew]

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781453.html

A link to voter turnout for the last few decades, sad.

[Kathianne]

Few people bother to vote period, the Iraqi voter turnout puts ours to shame lol.

When the voter age was lowered to 18, not that many young people really took advantage of it. Even in the 2008 election, voters 18-29 only made up 18% of the electorate. It was just 17% in 2004.

There are significant differences in registration and voting by those registered:

http://www.census.gov/prod/2002pubs/p20-542.pdf

I searched out 1992 election, wanting to get before the 2000 debacle.

[Cap'n Chew]

36.1% of those who were 18-24 who were registered voted in 2000 and every other age group was above 50%.

-facepalm-

[Kathianne]

36.1% of those who were 18-24 who were registered voted in 2000 and every other age group was above 50%.

-facepalm-

That you ignore the differences between is interesting, why?

[Cap'n Chew]

What am I ignoring exactly? (That's not a question that can be widely open to interpretation lol.)

[Kathianne]

What am I ignoring exactly? (That's not a question that can be widely open to interpretation lol.)

The differences between races, Hispanics being the lowest of all. BTW, I agree that all are undervoting to a shameful degree.

But why so few minorities registering? Blacks are second behind whites, but that group has been heavily targeted for registration in the past 20 years or more. So many gave so much, some their lives for the right to vote, why do you think so few exercise it?

[Nukeman]

The differences between races, Hispanics being the lowest of all. BTW, I agree that all are undervoting to a shameful degree.

But why so few minorities registering? Blacks are second behind whites, but that group has been heavily targeted for registration in the past 20 years or more. So many gave so much, some their lives for the right to vote, why do you think so few exercise it?

Personally I think it has to do with having to give your address!!! If they know your address than they cross check with the social services and find out you are living with a man or another adult they can cut off your assistance.

Of course this is not all the cases but minorities seem to have a unreasonable fear of government even though a disproportionate amount of them are dependent upon it.

Geez I almost sound like HT............ Scary!!!!!!!!!!!

I do believe it is a fear of government knowing too much about them though!!!!

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,


1. Errr,......whats the topic?



Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[Cap'n Chew]

The differences between races, Hispanics being the lowest of all. BTW, I agree that all are undervoting to a shameful degree.

But why so few minorities registering? Blacks are second behind whites, but that group has been heavily targeted for registration in the past 20 years or more. So many gave so much, some their lives for the right to vote, why do you think so few exercise it?

Oh that, hahaha sorry bout that lol.

I'm going with an element of apathy that is more pronounced than in other voting blocs. The still-recent history of oppression may have something to do with it. I mean when you lack any power, then suddenly get it, it's hard to utilize at first.

That and laziness, but that's part of every voting demographic, especially the youth.

Damn youth lol.

[Cap'n Chew]

Sorry bout that,


1. Errr,......whats the topic?



Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

The topic is whatever tangent it shall become. Today voter apathy, tomorrow Pringles!

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,





Its pretty simple actually HT. It seems like you and Sir James are 1 trick ponies. I'm not saying that you guys are, I'm just saying that's the persona you guys present.

You come off as a racist with no other actual view. If someone disagrees with you, you usually just come back with the person is Liberally programmed with PC propaganda in lieu of actual debate. Sir James blames everything on Muslims.

I'm also not saying that you guys are necessarily wrong in many of your views however no one likes racists and it hurts the actual debate to come from that position. You can have very valid points but all anyone hears is racism and Liberal PC programming because that's your tag lines.




1. Well I'm going to have to disagree on that.
2. I have far more ponies than just *Muslims*.
3. Thou muzzies are one on my main ones.
4. Anyone who reads my stuff knows better than that, so you've been called to the mat.
5. My depth of topics are uncountable.
6. Its just my passion is those evil muzzies.


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[crin63]

Sorry bout that,

1. Well I'm going to have to disagree on that.
2. I have far more ponies than just *Muslims*.
3. Thou muzzies are one on my main ones.
4. Anyone who reads my stuff knows better than that, so you've been called to the mat.
5. My depth of topics are uncountable.
6. Its just my passion is those evil muzzies.


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

I said you have other valid points, but almost no one hears them over what seems to be your blaming Muslims for most of the worlds wrongs. I mostly agree with you about Muslims but you have driven the nail so deep and so often that it looks obsessive.

If Michael Jackson doctor turned out to be a Muslim you would proclaim it as a terrorist attack through trying to break the hearts of America or something like that. I know how bad Islam is and Muslims are but hammering it every single day if there is any possible way doesn't help get your point across, it marginalizes you.

I mean my responses in the thread to be helpful.

[HogTrash]

I'm sure someone has specifically hurt your feelings, so who was it?No one has even come close to hurting my feelings or offending me Chloe...This is about, what it's about...Nothing more, nothing less.

My sole motivation for this thread is too make people aware of how rediculous it is to take things so personally that hate overides their good judgement.

Some people's personal feelings make sensible and rational discussion all but impossible and leaves them with nothing but name-calling, mudslingging and insults.

There are people here that I dissagree with on most issues but at times they will say things that I agree with and I have no problem showing my support for their position.

At the same time there are people here who I am pretty sure agree with many of my political views, but because of their personal feelings will challenge me, but usually only with an insult.

It is true that many[but not all] of my posts deal with a subject that most people avoid like the plague...Once again I will assure you, it has absolutely nothing to do with hate or racism.

Instead of discussing my views, many if not most will only respond with accuastions of racism and make remarks about stormfront, kkk, nazis and compring me to Adolf Hitler.

The result is, problems that have never been solved and never will be because it is impossible to fix what you can't even talk about...Yes, like it or not this is the result of political correctness.

There are very few people in America who are willing to suffer the hatred, accusations and abuse they would endure by honestly and bluntly bringing this problem to light...As those who do will attest to.

I'm not making this thread about racism, as some of you have already done, I'm using racism as an example of a subject that angers people so badly that instead of rational discussion, they attack with hatred.

[Abbey Marie]

Crin, I am not sure that a poster's continual focus on one topic is the main reason for personal attacks. It would certainly explain people not responding to that poster at all, but attacking takes more animus. I do not know what makes some people turn stalker on a debate forum. Perhaps male ego, perhaps there are nasty PM's flying behind the scenes. Perhaps some people are just mean-at-heart.

Whatever it is, I just don't think repetitive posting on a particular topic, however distasteful, can fully explain it.

[Nukeman]

Crin, I am not sure that a poster's continual focus on one topic is the main reason for personal attacks. It would certainly explain people not responding to that poster at all, but attacking takes more animus. I do not know what makes some people turn stalker on a debate forum. Perhaps male ego, perhaps there are nasty PM's flying behind the scenes. Perhaps some people are just mean-at-heart.

Whatever it is, I just don't think repetitive posting on a particular topic, however distasteful, can fully explain it.

Than how about "repetitive labeling" when you disagree with the poster?????

Some on here like to LABEL if you have a differing opinion than cry to admin when others get sick of it and call them on it or use their same tactics and label or call a name!!!!

[Abbey Marie]

Than how about "repetitive labeling" when you disagree with the poster?????

Some on here like to LABEL if you have a differing opinion than cry to admin when others get sick of it and call them on it or use their same tactics and label or call a name!!!!

We had a poster (now banned) who liked to call anyone he disagreed with a disparaging name; one that he obviously thought was clever. It wasn't. It was annoying and childish. But it never made me want to stalk him and try to outdo him in the childish department. I believe that 99.9% of the time, if I think someone isn't worth my time debating, for whatever reason, I simply don't debate him or her.

[Kathianne]

Than how about "repetitive labeling" when you disagree with the poster?????

Some on here like to LABEL if you have a differing opinion than cry to admin when others get sick of it and call them on it or use their same tactics and label or call a name!!!!

Yep, that is the response that nails it. No matter how one tries to discuss, only get the unsubstantial, "brainwashed", "PC"... so he gets nonsense in return. I've no desire to go nasty, but my responses are about as nasty as I get for non-nasty post responses.

[HogTrash]

Than how about "repetitive labeling" when you disagree with the poster?????

Some on here like to LABEL if you have a differing opinion than cry to admin when others get sick of it and call them on it or use their same tactics and label or call a name!!!!I believe if you go back and check the "Drive By Posters" thread, you will find that my "crying to admin" had absolutely nothing to do with the reason you stated above.

You certainly don't want to get the reputation of being a dishonest man now do you?...Think of your honor my friend.

We can look on this as simply being a case of forgetting what actually went down instead of an outright lie, if you like?

[Kathianne]

I believe if you go back and check the "Drive By Posters" thread, you will find that my "crying to admin" had absolutely nothing to do with the reason you stated above.

You certainly don't want to get the reputation of being a dishonest man now do you?...Think of your honor my friend.

We can look on this as simply being a case of forgetting what actually went down instead of an outright lie, if you like?

Sir, it is YOU that is guilty of repetitively labeling others, not too mention incorrectly labeling.

[HogTrash]

Sir, it is YOU that is guilty of repetitively labeling others, not too mention incorrectly labeling.True...That is because Americans have been subjected to political correctness indoctrination and programming since 1970...Most of the lives of some and all for many.

It is impossible for it not to have enfluenced the opinions of almost every American with few exceptions..I acknowledge those exceptions when I see them, which is rare.

When anyone demonstraits an obvious sign or charactistic of PC or makes any one of the many typical PC statements or accusations, the enfluence becomes all too obvious.

The "tells" of PC are very distinct and easy to spot...The simple fear demonstrated by people to honestly discuss racial issues is a sign of PC...We all know it exists "but not me".

Different people are enfluenced by PC to different degrees...Liberals are so totally submerged in political correctness to such an extent, they have lost the ability to think for themselves.

I too am guilty simply because minorities have become so accustomed and conditioned to being dealt with by the standards of political correctness, they actually get offended if we don't ablidge.

[Kathianne]

Lots of words, don't say much. Tacit agreement of labeling, then how it's correct. Well it's not, that's a 'fact.'

[HogTrash]

Lots of words, don't say much. Tacit agreement of labeling, then how it's correct. Well it's not, that's a 'fact.'
Governments label people

Law enforcement label people

Businesses label people

Schools label students

Employers label employees

People label people

You label people

A "label" is simply a conclusion drawn from observation and detection of known determining factors.

As a rule, Labeling will only be flawed when someone makes a determination of a subject based on appearance alone.

I am the first to tell you that looks can be deceiving and I never make the mistake of labeling by appearance alone...I use the litmus of a lifetime of experience and observations to draw my conclusions.

How many people do you suppose look at my avatar and nick and determine that I'm a dirty, uncooth, beligerent, ignorant, uneducated, redneck, nigger-hatin, biker trash?...Alot I imagine and possibly even you?

I'm a Marine and combat veteran...I have traveled much of the world and most of the US...I may not be Ivy League, but I am very well educated...My intelligence quotient is in the top 5% of the population of the planet.

[Kathianne]

Governments label people

Law enforcement label people

Businesses label people

Schools label students

Employers label employees

People label people

You label people

A "label" is simply a conclusion drawn from observation and detection of known determining factors.

As a rule, Labeling will only be flawed when someone makes a determination of a subject based on appearance alone.

I am the first to tell you that looks can be deceiving and I never make the mistake of labeling by appearance alone...I use the litmus of a lifetime of experience and observations to draw my conclusions.

How many people do you suppose look at my avatar and nick and determine that I'm a dirty, uncooth, beligerent, ignorant, uneducated, redneck, nigger-hatin, biker trash?...Alot I imagine and possibly even you?

I'm a Marine and combat veteran...I have traveled much of the world and most of the US...I may not be Ivy League, but I am very well educated...My intelligence quotient is in the top 5% of the population of the planet.

Bully for you! I mean that. Still doesn't allow you to determine 'facts' that are your opinion. No matter how many words you use.

Facts are things that can be proven or disproven. They are not what you determine to be 'facts.' I figure if I repeat this, it may sink in, since you seem to like repetition.

[HogTrash]

Bully for you! I mean that. Still doesn't allow you to determine 'facts' that are your opinion. No matter how many words you use.

Facts are things that can be proven or disproven. They are not what you determine to be 'facts.' I figure if I repeat this, it may sink in, since you seem to like repetition.You don't get it because you don't want to get it.

[Kathianne]

You don't get it because you don't want to get it.

No, you don't get it, because you don't wish to understand 'facts.' You prefer to make them up and call others by labels. Labels that are used wrong and have no basis in fact.

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,



We had a poster (now banned) who liked to call anyone he disagreed with a disparaging name; one that he obviously thought was clever. It wasn't. It was annoying and childish. But it never made me want to stalk him and try to outdo him in the childish department. I believe that 99.9% of the time, if I think someone isn't worth my time debating, for whatever reason, I simply don't debate him or her.



1. Oh really who would that be?
2. Or are your afraid if you reveal his Nick he will return like some
evil spirit?


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,


No, you don't get it, because you don't wish to understand 'facts.' You prefer to make them up and call others by labels. Labels that are used wrong and have no basis in fact.

:popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn:


1. Who did the Hog label and what label was used that makes you so mad anyways?
2. Is it you?
3. If it is does it ring true, and that's why you're so pissed?
4. What's my label, I bet you have one go ahead let it out, what is it?
5. *Muzzy Nutter*.



Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[Binky]

And that's how it's done. ;) Again, why so significant percentage married to Democrat Party, when significant gains in socioeconomic status have been made over the years?

Why do so few bother to vote at all?

Do the dems give out more handouts than the repugs?

[Kathianne]

Do the dems give out more handouts than the repugs?

Yes, all the more reason to think they'd vote.

[Kathianne]

Sorry bout that,



:popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn:


1. Who did the Hog label and what label was used that makes you so mad anyways?
2. Is it you?
3. If it is does it ring true, and that's why you're so pissed?
4. What's my label, I bet you have one go ahead let it out, what is it?
5. *Muzzy Nutter*.



Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

James, sometimes you are just a tool. Not useful or unuseful, just there.

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,





James, sometimes you are just a tool. Not useful or unuseful, just there.



1. Well, it's hard to know which side to be on if I don't have enough information.
2. Just trying to get that so I can at least know what this dust up is about.
3. You are starting to sound like a hostile witness.
4. Just take a deeep breath and try to tell me what's up.


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[Kathianne]

Sorry bout that,






1. Well, it's hard to know which side to be on if I don't have enough information.
2. Just trying to get that so I can at least know what this dust up is about.
3. You are starting to sound like a hostile witness.
4. Just take a deeep breath and try to tell me what's up.


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

Why? It's not your fight, if it is one. I prefer to think of it as establishing parameters of what are facts, like how the dictionary defines them, not Mr. HT.

If curiosity really has the better of you, I suppose you could read the thread, like the rest of us.

[HogTrash]

Once again, another one of my threads got blindsided!

Does anybody remember the original intended subject?

If so, would anyone like to comment on it?...Anybody?

Holy Shit!...Now I remember!...Hey we managed to have a good fight and discussion, Kat!

All that Nukeman, Monkeyman and the Village Marine would have done was call me bad names.

We're making progress here Kathianne! :thumb:

[Kathianne]

Once again, another one of my threads got blindsided!

Does anybody remember the original intended subject?

If so, would anyone like to comment on it?...Anybody?

Holy Shit!...Now I remember!...Hey we managed to have a good fight and discussion, Kat!

All that Nukeman, Monkeyman and the Village Marine would have done was call me bad names.

We're making progress here Kathianne! :thumb:
Oh I need to get really pissed off personally to get to name calling, but heh, that's me. :laugh2: A swear? It happens.

You will find that I'm probably as stubborn as you, just coming from a different place is all.

Facts are facts. Right is not always necessarily what we think it is, though. Something to think about, for both of us.

[HogTrash]

Oh I need to get really pissed off personally to get to name calling, but heh, that's me. :laugh2: A swear? It happens.

You will find that I'm probably as stubborn as you, just coming from a different place is all.

Facts are facts. Right is not always necessarily what we think it is, though. Something to think about, for both of us.Yep, we do have alot in common.

The only difference is, I'm always right! :laugh2:

[Kathianne]

Yep, we do have alot in common.

The only difference is, I'm always right! :laugh2:

Only in your dreams, sweetpea. :laugh2:

[Jeff]

Only in your dreams, sweetpea. :laugh2:

Damn that is a low blow, sweatpea, :laugh2: Hog that has to be the worst name of all, LOL

[HogTrash]

Only in your dreams, sweetpea. :laugh2:Typical woman...You always gotta get the last word in. :bye1:

[HogTrash]

Damn that is a low blow, sweatpea, :laugh2: Hog that has to be the worst name of all, LOLWell I Never! :eek:

[Jeff]

Well I Never! :eek:

:laugh2::laugh2::laugh2:

[Kathianne]

:laugh2::laugh2::laugh2:

LOL! What Jeff wrote!

[SassyLady]

We had a poster (now banned) who liked to call anyone he disagreed with a disparaging name; one that he obviously thought was clever. It wasn't. It was annoying and childish. But it never made me want to stalk him and try to outdo him in the childish department. I believe that 99.9% of the time, if I think someone isn't worth my time debating, for whatever reason, I simply don't debate him or her.

Must spread rep! :clap::clap:

[SassyLady]

True...That is because Americans have been subjected to political correctness indoctrination and programming since 1970...Most of the lives of some and all for many.

It is impossible for it not to have enfluenced the opinions of almost every American with few exceptions..I acknowledge those exceptions when I see them, which is rare.

When anyone demonstraits an obvious sign or charactistic of PC or makes any one of the many typical PC statements or accusations, the enfluence becomes all too obvious.

The "tells" of PC are very distinct and easy to spot...The simple fear demonstrated by people to honestly discuss racial issues is a sign of PC...We all know it exists "but not me".

Different people are enfluenced by PC to different degrees...Liberals are so totally submerged in political correctness to such an extent, they have lost the ability to think for themselves.

I too am guilty simply because minorities have become so accustomed and conditioned to being dealt with by the standards of political correctness, they actually get offended if we don't ablidge.

Not all PC programming is evil. HT, I have not really ever addressed any of the PC posts on this board, but I will admit that everyone is PC programmed to a certain extent and it doesn't have to be a negative. My parents raised me to be respectful of my elders - was that not, at some level, Politically Correct programming ... respecting older people. So, respecting people with disabilities, or people of different religions, or different skin colors, different cultures, etc. IS PC programming.

However, I also believe that the PC programming in this country has gone overboard in some areas to the point of being ridiculous (i.e., not admitting that the majority of gangs are non-white and it's not just due to economic inequality, but is due to racism - intolerance of one cultural for another....Hispanics hating blacks, etc.). Do I believe that just because someone does not agree with my assessment of something that they are just espousing PC propaganda... certainly not.

I will be honest ..... due to all the pressure put on by society and the community I choose to hang out in, there are certain words that I no longer use........why? Because I want this to be a better society than the one I grew up in and that means changing some behaviors.

Here's a good example: I have recently been PC programmed to think people riding Harleys are just normal, nice people (my husband and I have one). However, if I see a group of people on Harleys traveling in a group of more than 20 .... I get nervous and start thinking of the Hells Angels............why? Because the PC programming can't quite get rid of the reality of what I saw as a kid growing up......where the only people we knew that rode Harley's were members of the Hells Angels gang. So, if I had not been "programmed" to believe that not all Harley riders are Hells Angels, I would live in fear and not be open to seeing that there are some really good people riding Harleys. Yes, there are still some bad ones out there, but I don't shut myself down from believing that the majority are good people.

So.....apply this same scenario to any other situation where you believe that due to the label YOU have assigned to someone should be the same label used by EVERYONE else. Just isn't common sense.

Not all PC programming is negative.

[Nukeman]

Once again, another one of my threads got blindsided!

Does anybody remember the original intended subject?

If so, would anyone like to comment on it?...Anybody?

Holy Shit!...Now I remember!...Hey we managed to have a good fight and discussion, Kat!

All that Nukeman, Monkeyman and the Village Marine would have done was call me bad names.

We're making progress here Kathianne! :thumb:
And all HT would have done is tell everyone how "PC programmed" they are or how "liberal" they are. You are just stuck on stupid and that is all you ever come back with. Regardless of the argument it is ALWAYS one of those two.... Get better talking points and MAYBE you will actually have a debate...........:poke:

[Monkeybone]

Once again, another one of my threads got blindsided!

Does anybody remember the original intended subject?

If so, would anyone like to comment on it?...Anybody?

Holy Shit!...Now I remember!...Hey we managed to have a good fight and discussion, Kat!

All that Nukeman, Monkeyman and the Village Marine would have done was call me bad names.

We're making progress here Kathianne! :thumb:hahahaha my word you are a whiner. I used to try and have debates with you but you couldn't get your head out of your ass and wouldn't talk. all you would say is "PC" or "Liberal Programmed" or "It's THEM doing this" like some damn parrot that wanted a cracker. Maybe if you actually could have a discussion and not be so condesending it would help.

Show of good faith, I will start over in other threads, actaully trying to talk to you and well you.... you actually try and talk about some points without throwing in any of the above mentioned things if you are able to.

[Kathianne]

hahahaha my word you are a whiner. I used to try and have debates with you but you couldn't get your head out of your ass and wouldn't talk. all you would say is "PC" or "Liberal Programmed" or "It's THEM doing this" like some damn parrot that wanted a cracker. Maybe if you actually could have a discussion and not be so condesending it would help.

Show of good faith, I will start over in other threads, actaully trying to talk to you and well you.... you actually try and talk about some points without throwing in any of the above mentioned things if you are able to.

That has also been my problem with discussing things with him. Then when I refused to allow those diversions to count, there was the claim of 'facts' that were not.

I enjoy debates, I try to keep from going ballistic when losing, but I do not discount the other person on false premises.

[HogTrash]

And all HT would have done is tell everyone how "PC programmed" they are or how "liberal" they are. You are just stuck on stupid and that is all you ever come back with. Regardless of the argument it is ALWAYS one of those two.... Get better talking points and MAYBE you will actually have a debate...........:poke:OK Nukeman, I'll Try...You post a list of your favorite "talking points" and I'll do my best to put a smile on your face and a song in your heart. :salute:

[HogTrash]

hahahaha my word you are a whiner. I used to try and have debates with you but you couldn't get your head out of your ass and wouldn't talk. all you would say is "PC" or "Liberal Programmed" or "It's THEM doing this" like some damn parrot that wanted a cracker. Maybe if you actually could have a discussion and not be so condesending it would help.

Show of good faith, I will start over in other threads, actaully trying to talk to you and well you.... you actually try and talk about some points without throwing in any of the above mentioned things if you are able to.Ok Monkeybone, I'll Try...You post a list of your favorite "responses" and I'll do my best to put a smile on your face and a song in your heart. :salute:

[hey, my posts are starting to look like those 'form letters' I get from my congressman?]

*

[Gaffer]

Not all PC programming is evil. HT, I have not really ever addressed any of the PC posts on this board, but I will admit that everyone is PC programmed to a certain extent and it doesn't have to be a negative. My parents raised me to be respectful of my elders - was that not, at some level, Politically Correct programming ... respecting older people. So, respecting people with disabilities, or people of different religions, or different skin colors, different cultures, etc. IS PC programming.

However, I also believe that the PC programming in this country has gone overboard in some areas to the point of being ridiculous (i.e., not admitting that the majority of gangs are non-white and it's not just due to economic inequality, but is due to racism - intolerance of one cultural for another....Hispanics hating blacks, etc.). Do I believe that just because someone does not agree with my assessment of something that they are just espousing PC propaganda... certainly not.

I will be honest ..... due to all the pressure put on by society and the community I choose to hang out in, there are certain words that I no longer use........why? Because I want this to be a better society than the one I grew up in and that means changing some behaviors.

Here's a good example: I have recently been PC programmed to think people riding Harleys are just normal, nice people (my husband and I have one). However, if I see a group of people on Harleys traveling in a group of more than 20 .... I get nervous and start thinking of the Hells Angels............why? Because the PC programming can't quite get rid of the reality of what I saw as a kid growing up......where the only people we knew that rode Harley's were members of the Hells Angels gang. So, if I had not been "programmed" to believe that not all Harley riders are Hells Angels, I would live in fear and not be open to seeing that there are some really good people riding Harleys. Yes, there are still some bad ones out there, but I don't shut myself down from believing that the majority are good people.

So.....apply this same scenario to any other situation where you believe that due to the label YOU have assigned to someone should be the same label used by EVERYONE else. Just isn't common sense.

Not all PC programming is negative.

Gotta spread the rep. So well said.