a question for the atheists

[Lagboltz]

C'mon JPRD, settle down. Sure Dawkins is a pain in your butt. You accuse him of "hate-filled agenda" and then say

I don't just claim that left-leaning politics are bad, but that left-wing politicians are despicable scum who ...

If that isn't a hate-filled diatribe, I don't know what is. Remember that 51% voted for your "despicable scum".

 

[TheJPRD]

C'mon JPRD, settle down. Sure Dawkins is a pain in your butt. You accuse him of "hate-filled agenda" and then say
If that isn't a hate-filled diatribe, I don't know what is. Remember that 51% voted for your "despicable scum".

I'm usually settled down, but I don't play "pattycake" with someone who's accusing me and other Conservatives of being dim-witted and having a hate-filled agenda. Please re-read our posts, and you'll see that it was not me who first accused Dawkins of having a hate-filled agenda, it was he who made that accusation against all Conservatives! What's good for the goose ISN'T good for the gander anymore?

As for the 51% of voters who voted for Obama, I'd never claim that Alinsky's tactics don't work. They do work. Those tactics are despicable, but they work. Those whose minds can be changed by demogogues espousing bigotry and hate, are especially susceptable to Alinsky's tactics. As you know very well, the majority isn't always right, especially when that majority is misinformed and misled by those for whom they voted and their willing accomplices in the mainstream media. Majority-rule is not the primary law of our nation. The Constitution is!

 

[Lagboltz]

When you get ticked off to that extent and start counter-hate, you only accelerate things. I just ignore those who I know won't listen.

As far as Alinsky's tactics. I think Romney ("We're not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact-checkers") was just as guilty of despicable tactics. That's what politics is. Sure both parties gloat when the other side is caught at something bad, but that is the way politics has always been, and there is no point in huffing about that. We all have dirty closets.

 

[Openmind]

I'm usually settled down, but I don't play "pattycake" with someone who's accusing me and other Conservatives of being dim-witted and having a hate-filled agenda. Please re-read our posts, and you'll see that it was not me who first accused Dawkins of having a hate-filled agenda, it was he who made that accusation against all Conservatives! What's good for the goose ISN'T good for the gander anymore?

As for the 51% of voters who voted for Obama, I'd never claim that Alinsky's tactics don't work. They do work. Those tactics are despicable, but they work. Those whose minds can be changed by demogogues espousing bigotry and hate, are especially susceptable to Alinsky's tactics. As you know very well, the majority isn't always right, especially when that majority is misinformed and misled by those for whom they voted and their willing accomplices in the mainstream media. Majority-rule is not the primary law of our nation. The Constitution is!

Your rant sounds a lot like projection to me!
Talk about "hatred," and being "misguided!"

 

[TheJPRD]

When you get ticked off to that extent and start counter-hate, you only accelerate things. I just ignore those who I know won't listen.

It's not a matter of being "ticked off", Lagboltz. Attacking your opponent personally in an attempt to have him/her become angry and respond without thinking is an Alinsky tactic. I seldom become angry, regardless of how many exclamation points I may use in my posts. However, I've learned from experience that it's not wise to allow leftists to use Alinsky tactics on me without responding in kind. I don't admire Alinsky, but his tactics are the only thing that works on the left as well as on the right anymore. I've long ago quit trying to be respectful and civil toward extreme leftists, for they'll never respond in kind. Alinsky stated that "ridicule" is one of the most powerful tools to use against an opponent. Ridicule makes an opponent appear foolish and incompetent in the eyes of others, arouses anger, and can easily cause a reaction from your opponent that's poorly considered. I very seldom get angry enough to reply without thinking! Any leftist who uses Alinsky's tactics on Conservatives when I'm in the neighborhood, will receive a counter-attack that involves an equal or greater amount of ridicule. No leftist gets a free ride with me anymore.

As far as Alinsky's tactics. I think Romney ("We're not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact-checkers") was just as guilty of despicable tactics. That's what politics is. Sure both parties gloat when the other side is caught at something bad, but that is the way politics has always been, and there is no point in huffing about that. We all have dirty closets.

I don't recall Romney implying that his opponent was a racist, a sexist, that he hated the poor, that he wanted to throw grandmothers from cliffs, or that he hated Hispanics????? Obama and his surrogates did make such implied accusations against Romney. I don't recall Romney criticizing his opponent for any reason other than that his policies were wrong. Romney said thousands of times that nobody 55 or older would be subject to SS changes, but Obama and his surrogates accused Romney of lying about that intention. There are indeed some pretty pathetic Republicans. However, when compared to the Democrat-Party leaders, there is no moral equivalence whatever. Add up the times that a Republican leader has acxused Obama of anything other than adhering to policies that aren't in the best interest of our nation. Compare that total to the personal attacks, lies, and accusations made against Republicans. Republicans are wooses when it comes to personal attacks, bigotry, and the utilization of demogogues. The Democrats have turned such practices into a highly-effective art form! I simply return their fire with fire of my own.

Leftist expect us Conservatives to sit by quietly and be civil to them as they're attack us personally. They accuse us of incivility when we react to their behavior in kind. That's like telling folks that when someone shoots at you with an illegally-obtained firearm, we should be unarmed because it's the civil thing to do. I won't sit by quietly and pretend that the lies of leftwing demogogues are just honest and well-intended differences of opinions!

 

[TheJPRD]

Your rant sounds a lot like projection to me!
Talk about "hatred," and being "misguided!"

Rest assured that you were among the furthest things from my mind when I posted. Why would you think otherwise?

If you'd like to talk about "hatred" and being "misguided", I suggest you begin with the poster who never contributes anything here except bigoted and hateful attacks on Christians and Jews. It was that poster who began and continued the hateful attacks, kid, not me. I simply fed him some of his own medicine. If he's going to dish it out, he should be willing take it, don't you think?

 

[Lagboltz]

It's not a matter of being "ticked off", Lagboltz. Attacking your opponent personally in an attempt to have him/her become angry and respond without thinking is an Alinsky tactic. I seldom become angry, regardless of how many exclamation points I may use in my posts. However, I've learned from experience that it's not wise to allow leftists to use Alinsky tactics on me without responding in kind. I don't admire Alinsky, but his tactics are the only thing that works on the left as well as on the right anymore. I've long ago quit trying to be respectful and civil toward extreme leftists, for they'll never respond in kind. Alinsky stated that "ridicule" is one of the most powerful tools to use against an opponent. Ridicule makes an opponent appear foolish and incompetent in the eyes of others, arouses anger, and can easily cause a reaction from your opponent that's poorly considered. I very seldom get angry enough to reply without thinking! Any leftist who uses Alinsky's tactics on Conservatives when I'm in the neighborhood, will receive a counter-attack that involves an equal or greater amount of ridicule. No leftist gets a free ride with me anymore.

Well, you sure have the appearances of being ticked-off. So you admit both sides use Alinsky tactics. That sounds like standard dirty campaigning that everyone does, no matter who they learned it from. Fight dirty, and tell lies. If one side does it the other side shouts to the world that they are fighting dirty and telling lies. Too bad it's that way, but the people on both sides fall for it.

I don't recall Romney implying that his opponent was a racist, a sexist, that he hated the poor, that he wanted to throw grandmothers from cliffs, or that he hated Hispanics????? Obama and his surrogates did make such implied accusations against Romney. I don't recall Romney criticizing his opponent for any reason other than that his policies were wrong. Romney said thousands of times that nobody 55 or older would be subject to SS changes, but Obama and his surrogates accused Romney of lying about that intention. There are indeed some pretty pathetic Republicans. However, when compared to the Democrat-Party leaders, there is no moral equivalence whatever. Add up the times that a Republican leader has acxused Obama of anything other than adhering to policies that aren't in the best interest of our nation. Compare that total to the personal attacks, lies, and accusations made against Republicans. Republicans are wooses when it comes to personal attacks, bigotry, and the utilization of demogogues. The Democrats have turned such practices into a highly-effective art form! I simply return their fire with fire of my own.

Of course Romney didn't didn't accuse Obama of using racism, sexism and grandmothers from cliffs, etc. That kind of dirt was specific to Romney. Romney had his specific dirt on Obama. Both sides flung poo.

Leftist expect us Conservatives to sit by quietly and be civil to them as they're attack us personally. They accuse us of incivility when we react to their behavior in kind. That's like telling folks that when someone shoots at you with an illegally-obtained firearm, we should be unarmed because it's the civil thing to do. I won't sit by quietly and pretend that the lies of leftwing demogogues are just honest and well-intended differences of opinions!

Do you really think leftists expect you to sit by quietly and be civil? That's oversimplifying it.
On the whole, I have to agree with Openmind,

Your rant sounds a lot like projection to me!
Talk about "hatred," and being "misguided!"

In science I learned that I should be my own strongest critic. Too bad more people aren't that way.

 

[TheJPRD]

Well, you sure have the appearances of being ticked-off. So you admit both sides use Alinsky tactics. That sounds like standard dirty campaigning that everyone does, no matter who they learned it from. Fight dirty, and tell lies. If one side does it the other side shouts to the world that they are fighting dirty and telling lies. Too bad it's that way, but the people on both sides fall for it.

No, I don't admit that both sides use Alinsky tactics. Re-read my post carefully. My position is that the Republican-Party does not use Alinsky's tactics. Most Republicans hold onto the mistaken impression that leftwing Democrats possess good character, and will return Republican civility in kind. Most Republicans make themselves into easy targets for corrupt, leftwing demogogues. I try to not be easy!

If you were only accusing me of using Alinsky tactics when they're being used on me, I fully admit that I do! Mea Culpa. However, I won't apologize for not rolling over and playing dead when I see bigotry, nor when I and/or my Conservative brothers and sisters are attacked unfairly and personally. Those who'd practice Alinsky's tactics on me should be prepared to have them returned in spades.

Of course Romney didn't didn't accuse Obama of using racism, sexism and grandmothers from cliffs, etc. That kind of dirt was specific to Romney. Romney had his specific dirt on Obama. Both sides flung poo.

So, you're telling us that Romney deserved the attacks leveled at him by leftwing demogogues?? Romney is a racist, a sexist, and he hates poor people???? I sure hope that's NOT what you're telling us.

Romney could have easily accused Obama of racism and bigotry. He had a lot of examples to use in support of such accusations. Witnesses from Obama's DOJ testified before Congress that it is official DOJ policy to enforce civil rights laws for those citizens with a dark skin color, but not enforce the same laws if a white citizen has been the victim of descrimination. That is the same thing done by some southern States during the civil-rights era of the 50's and 60's, a government-condoned racism! The DOJ policy is racist. This is but one more example of this President ignoring the laws he doesn't like, enforcing those that he does like, and selectively applying other laws in a way that's best for his voting base. Such an approach to law enforcement is not only bigoted, but criminal as well, and is an outright violation of his oath of office.

Do you really think leftists expect you to sit by quietly and be civil? That's oversimplifying it. On the whole, I have to agree with Openmind,/quote]

My statement wasn't the least bit oversimplified. Obviously I'm correct in what I said! As evidence; reference your response when I DID open my mouth and return incivility with incivility! Based upon your response to my post, one can deduce that you expected me to sit quietly and respond civily. I didn't sit quietly and absorb the abuse, and you're now criticizing me for doing that.

In science I learned that I should be my own strongest critic. Too bad more people aren't that way.

In science I learned that the most important characteristic of a scientist is impartiality/Objectivity. I'm having a hard time finding impartiality and objectivity in a scientist who would ignore or condone a tactic when used by one side, yet criticize the same tactic when used by someone with whom he disagrees. Such non-objective observation can often result in wrong conclusions. ........

 

[Openmind]

No, I don't admit that both sides use Alinsky tactics. Re-read my post carefully. My position is that the Republican-Party does not use Alinsky's tactics. Most Republicans hold onto the mistaken impression that leftwing Democrats possess good character, and will return Republican civility in kind. Most Republicans make themselves into easy targets for corrupt, leftwing demogogues. I try to not be easy!

If you were only accusing me of using Alinsky tactics when they're being used on me, I fully admit that I do! Mea Culpa. However, I won't apologize for not rolling over and playing dead when I see bigotry, nor when I and/or my Conservative brothers and sisters are attacked unfairly and personally. Those who'd practice Alinsky's tactics on me should be prepared to have them returned in spades.



So, you're telling us that Romney deserved the attacks leveled at him by leftwing demogogues?? Romney is a racist, a sexist, and he hates poor people???? I sure hope that's NOT what you're telling us.

Romney could have easily accused Obama of racism and bigotry. He had a lot of examples to use in support of such accusations. Witnesses from Obama's DOJ testified before Congress that it is official DOJ policy to enforce civil rights laws for those citizens with a dark skin color, but not enforce the same laws if a white citizen has been the victim of descrimination. That is the same thing done by some southern States during the civil-rights era of the 50's and 60's, a government-condoned racism! The DOJ policy is racist. This is but one more example of this President ignoring the laws he doesn't like, enforcing those that he does like, and selectively applying other laws in a way that's best for his voting base. Such an approach to law enforcement is not only bigoted, but criminal as well, and is an outright violation of his oath of office.

Rest assured that you were among the furthest things from my mind when I posted. Why would you think otherwise?

If you'd like to talk about "hatred" and being "misguided", I suggest you begin with the poster who never contributes anything here except bigoted and hateful attacks on Christians and Jews. It was that poster who began and continued the hateful attacks, kid, not me. I simply fed him some of his own medicine. If he's going to dish it out, he should be willing take it, don't you think?

Where did I say you were addressing me?

I do read many posts. . .even those NOT addressed to me. And I do make observations and express my opinion on posts that are NOT addressed to me. This is an OPEN forum.

And I stand by my statement that I detect very clear projection in many statements made by you and by Gipper. Although neither one of you would ever call himself a "progressive," or a "liberal," or a "Democrat," it is obvious that you do not hesitate to assign feelings and emotions to a group which you have no personal knowledge off.

By the way, big boy. . .I suggest you stop calling me "kid" and that you remember that my pen name in this forum is "OPENMIND," NOT "openminded."

This would go a long way to demonstrating that you are not purposely being belittling and arrogant.

 

[cashmcall]

C'mon JPRD, settle down. Sure Dawkins is a pain in your butt. You accuse him of "hate-filled agenda" and then say
If that isn't a hate-filled diatribe, I don't know what is. Remember that 51% voted for your "despicable scum".

Yes they did...and about 25% of that is what you and I would call the dumb vote...that is if your going to be honest...take that away and Mitt won by a landslide..I'm not sure any conservative could win today, with all the gifts being handed out...

 

[Openmind]

Yes they did...and about 25% of that is what you and I would call the dumb vote...that is if your going to be honest...take that away and Mitt won by a landslide..I'm not sure any conservative could win today, with all the gifts being handed out...

So. . .you really think that there were no "dumb votes" in favor of Mitt Romney?

Come on, Cashmcall! Do you remember those tea party "patriots" and their signs?

In fact, I believe there are a LOT MORE dumb people in the extreme Right than anywhere in the Left! And they are getting dumber every day they listen to Fox News and to Limbaugh!

 

[Lagboltz]

This is what you said before:

I don't admire Alinsky, but his tactics are the only thing that works on the left as well as on the right anymore.

This is what you are now saying.

No, I don't admit that both sides use Alinsky tactics. .... My position is that the Republican-Party does not use Alinsky's tactics.

It sure sounds like you said the Alinsky tactics work on both the Republican right and Democratic left. That is a contradiction. I had hoped that you were coming to a more objective stance, but I guess now you think the blame goes one way.

So, you're telling us that Romney deserved the attacks leveled at him by leftwing demogogues?? Romney is a racist, a sexist, and he hates poor people????

No. I simply said both sides flung their own version of poo. I never said Romney deserved it. This is the sort of jumping to conclusions that makes communication on this board so laborious and futile

Romney could have easily accused Obama of racism and bigotry.... etc.

No. Jumping to conclusions again. I didn't mean that. We all know Romney couldn't do that without losing lots of votes. Romney choose different poo to fling.

I didn't sit quietly and absorb the abuse, and you're now criticizing me for doing that.

Of course not. You earlier said:

Leftist expect us Conservatives to sit by quietly and be civil to them as they're attack us personally.

And I my reply was a rhetorical question which was supposed to mean "Of course leftists don't expect that." Sorry for the misunderstanding.

In science I learned that the most important characteristic of a scientist is impartiality/Objectivity. I'm having a hard time finding impartiality and objectivity in a scientist who would ignore or condone a tactic when used by one side, yet criticize the same tactic when used by someone with whom he disagrees. Such non-objective observation can often result in wrong conclusions.

You have totally missed most of my points. Find my post that led you to believe I condone Obama's tactics. I think I was being impartial and objective when I said both sides were guilty of a dirty campaign. Both flung poo at each other. In post # 123 I said "We all have dirty closets. "

You on the other hand give me the impression that you think Democrats were the only ones in the wrong and Republicans in the right. I consider that quite partial and nonobjective.

I really think it is getting impossible to communicate anything on HOP.

 

[cashmcall]

So. . .you really think that there were no "dumb votes" in favor of Mitt Romney?...Not One..

So. . .you really think that there were no "dumb votes" in favor of Mitt Romney?..At least they clean up after..

I should not have used the word dumb...I should have said slow to understand....When we figure out how to do the right thing and still get the hispanic vote...Dems wont have a chance..

 

[cashmcall]

This is what you said before:

This is what you are now saying.

It sure sounds like you said the Alinsky tactics work on both the Republican right and Democratic left. That is a contradiction. I had hoped that you were coming to a more objective stance, but I guess now you think the blame goes one way.

No. I simply said both sides flung their own version of poo. I never said Romney deserved it. This is the sort of jumping to conclusions that makes communication on this board so laborious and futile

No. Jumping to conclusions again. I didn't mean that. We all know Romney couldn't do that without losing lots of votes. Romney choose different poo to fling.

Of course not. You earlier said:

And I my reply was a rhetorical question which was supposed to mean "Of course leftists don't expect that." Sorry for the misunderstanding.

You have totally missed most of my points. Find my post that led you to believe I condone Obama's tactics. I think I was being impartial and objective when I said both sides were guilty of a dirty campaign. Both flung poo at each other. In post # 123 I said "We all have dirty closets. "

You on the other hand give me the impression that you think Democrats were the only ones in the wrong and Republicans in the right. I consider that quite partial and nonobjective.

I really think it is getting impossible to communicate anything on HOP.

You know..you have said a lot about what both men did or didn't do...now jprd has made clear statements as to what Obama did that bothers him..what did Mitt do ?

 

[Openmind]

You know..you have said a lot about what both men did or didn't do...now jprd has made clear statements as to what Obama did that bothers him..what did Mitt do ?

What did Mitt do to bother. . .a majority of people?

Well, I can only answer for me, obviously.
But for one thing, he has non integrity, as he has changed his stand on just about EVERY issue, including immigration, health care, abortion, even gay rights.
Another thing is that he has absolutely NO understanding of what the middle class and the poor's life really consist off. He is totally insensitive to the special concerns and needs of the middle class, and he only knows the "world" through the glass stained windows of his ivory tower.
He was also selected by the "power that be" in the GOP to act as a puppet while they pulled the strings.
And. . .he is just too fake, a parrot really, with not an ounce of courage for his opinions. . .although this may be unfair, because it is very possible that he may not EVEN have a real opinion on anything!