• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

If Only....

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Originally posted by: DonVito
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

It may be cute to you but it's the truth.

CsG
Click to expand...

It's also the kind of marginalization of your "adversary" that makes this board a worse place. I wish you and everyone else would cut that crap out.
Click to expand...

DonVito, I'd be much more supportive of your argument, but I see it happening from your side of the aisle in virtually every post, hell, it's in virtually every thread title.

"Repug"
"Neo-conservatives" used in every reference to conservatives, when the poster clearly doesn't even know what or who a neo-conservative is.

On & on & on...
 
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Originally posted by: DonVito
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

It may be cute to you but it's the truth.

CsG
Click to expand...

It's also the kind of marginalization of your "adversary" that makes this board a worse place. I wish you and everyone else would cut that crap out.
Click to expand...

Meh.

I suppose throwing RBH around is almost as bad as those throwing around neocon. However in this case it is quite true. conjur is a rabid bush hater(extreme disliker, or whatever makes you "feel" better about it).

CsG
Click to expand...
I don't hate Bush, CsG. I hate the decisions he's made and I despise many in his administration. This election is more than Kerry vs. Bush. It's about right vs. wrong. It's about thought/debate/facts vs. ideology/faith.

I'll take the former any day of the week.
 
Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
DonVito, I'd be much more supportive of your argument, but I see it happening from your side of the aisle in virtually every post, hell, it's in virtually every thread title.

"Repug"
"Neo-conservatives" used in every reference to conservatives, when the poster clearly doesn't even know what or who a neo-conservative is.

On & on & on...
Click to expand...
On the contrary, "neo-conservative" now refers to a specific ideology embraced by the Bush administration. Indeed, that's the point. Bush and his minions are not representative of true conservatives nor of the traditional Republican party. Instead, they are their own little breed of extremists who have co-opted the Republican/conservative umbrella for their own insidious agenda. There is nothing "conservative" about Bush & Co.

"Neo-conservative" is a misnomer. While I'm sure many people are confused, knowledgable posters understand it as a narrow label, not a broad one. It sounds to me like you are either grossly exaggerating, or you may not understand what "neo-conservative" embodies.

Personally, I prefer the term "neo-fascist". While this also provokes knee-jerk howls of protest from the Bush supporters due to its historic stereotypes, I believe if you look at it objectively you will find it is largely accurate. I got tired of explaining this, however, so I mostly now just refer to "Bushies" as a shorthand term for Bush supporters. I can go back to "neo-fascists" if you prefer.

😉
 
Originally posted by: Bowfinger

On the contrary, "neo-conservative" now refers to a specific ideology embraced by the Bush administration. Indeed, that's the point. Bush and his minions are not representative of true conservatives nor of the traditional Republican party. Instead, they are their own little breed of extremists who have co-opted the Republican/conservative umbrella for their own insidious agenda. There is nothing "conservative" about Bush & Co.

"Neo-conservative" is a misnomer. While I'm sure many people are confused, knowledgable posters understand it as a narrow label, not a broad one. It sounds to me like you are either grossly exaggerating, or you may not understand what "neo-conservative" embodies.

Personally, I prefer the term "neo-fascist". While this also provokes knee-jerk howls of protest from the Bush supporters due to its historic stereotypes, I believe if you look at it objectively you will find it is largely accurate. I got tired of explaining this, however, so I mostly now just refer to "Bushies" as a shorthand term for Bush supporters. I can go back to "neo-fascists" if you prefer.

😉
Click to expand...

Originally posted by: DonVito


It's also the kind of marginalization of your "adversary" that makes this board a worse place. I wish you and everyone else would cut that crap out.
Click to expand...


 
Originally posted by: Pliablemoose

DonVito, I'd be much more supportive of your argument, but I see it happening from your side of the aisle in virtually every post, hell, it's in virtually every thread title.

"Repug"
"Neo-conservatives" used in every reference to conservatives, when the poster clearly doesn't even know what or who a neo-conservative is.

On & on & on...
Click to expand...

I don't use those terms, except where they're accurate - "neoconservative" is a term with a fairly precise definition, and many of the posters here are proud to wear that title. I don't believe "neoconservative" is an insulting term per se, whereas "RBH" clearly is a term meant to marginalize.


Others, and I, have bemoaned the lack of civility on P&N for a long, long time now, and I think CsG's brand of casual nastiness just makes matters worse. I find this particularly troubling because he is, in general, a reasonable guy.

Sometimes I really lose hope that this country can regain its way; I have never seen our nation more divided. It would be nice if this board could at least offer a relatively civilized environment for dialogue, but it just isn't, since the mean-spirited loudmouths so often seem to overwhelm the discussion.
 
Originally posted by: conjur
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Originally posted by: DonVito
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

It may be cute to you but it's the truth.

CsG
Click to expand...

It's also the kind of marginalization of your "adversary" that makes this board a worse place. I wish you and everyone else would cut that crap out.
Click to expand...

Meh.

I suppose throwing RBH around is almost as bad as those throwing around neocon. However in this case it is quite true. conjur is a rabid bush hater(extreme disliker, or whatever makes you "feel" better about it).

CsG
Click to expand...
I don't hate Bush, CsG. I hate the decisions he's made and I despise many in his administration. This election is more than Kerry vs. Bush. It's about right vs. wrong. It's about thought/debate/facts vs. ideology/faith.

I'll take the former any day of the week.
Click to expand...

You're right - this is about right vs wrong. Too bad you've chosen the wrong side😉
Leadership is not about thought/debate - it's about being able to lead. Leaders that think too much aren't good leaders because they aren't decisive. Debate is good, but just like "thought" it can lead to indecision and delay.
You can spin "facts" to whatever you wish but kerry doesn't hold a monopoly on "facts". Don't forget that kerry is playing the "faith" card as of late. kerry also doesn't seem to be able to admit his own liberal ideology - just like so many liberals. They are the ones who have made it a "dirty word" - not anyone else. It's their ideas, views, and votes that have made it "dirty".

There is a "right" way to lead and a "wrong" way to lead. I'll take the "right" way over the "wrong" way every time. Bush is leading the "right" way.

Anyway - back to the inside joke between Bush and Rove.

CsG
 
Originally posted by: DonVito

Others, and I, have bemoaned the lack of civility on P&N for a long, long time now, and I think CsG's brand of casual nastiness just makes matters worse. I find this particularly troubling because he is, in general, a reasonable guy.
Click to expand...

Agreed, the first step is to kill Moonbeam

Looks around for a torch & pitchfork:evil:
 
Originally posted by: DonVito

Others, and I, have bemoaned the lack of civility on P&N for a long, long time now, and I think CsG's brand of casual nastiness just makes matters worse. I find this particularly troubling because he is, in general, a reasonable guy.
Click to expand...

But you named only one name - CsG. Why does he merit a personal mention, and others do not?

Sometimes I really lose hope that this country can regain its way; I have never seen our nation more divided. It would be nice if this board could at least offer a relatively civilized environment for dialogue, but it just isn't, since the mean-spirited loudmouths so often seem to overwhelm the discussion.
Click to expand...

Well, you (and everyone else alive now) are too young to have 'seen' it, but there once was a time we were shooting at each other (1861-65). I certainly agree we as a nation are pretty polarized politically, but all this "I fear for the survival of the Republic" talk seems a bit overblown to me. The one issue that threatens us most, though, is the one neither candidate is addressing honestly - spending, and fiscal irresponsibility. The funny math both Bush and Kerry are using makes Enron look small-time.
 
Originally posted by: DonVito
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

It may be cute to you but it's the truth.

CsG
Click to expand...

It's also the kind of marginalization of your "adversary" that makes this board a worse place. I wish you and everyone else would cut that crap out.
Click to expand...

Your track record would suggest that you are okay with this "kind of marginalization of your adversary".

Are you turning over a new leaf Don Vito? Or are you simply using tact in your role as the "adversary"? 😕

Any-who, Cad, you have a PM. It has a link to what I think is really bothering Don Vito. 🙂




 
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Originally posted by: conjur
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Originally posted by: DonVito
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

It may be cute to you but it's the truth.

CsG
Click to expand...

It's also the kind of marginalization of your "adversary" that makes this board a worse place. I wish you and everyone else would cut that crap out.
Click to expand...

Meh.

I suppose throwing RBH around is almost as bad as those throwing around neocon. However in this case it is quite true. conjur is a rabid bush hater(extreme disliker, or whatever makes you "feel" better about it).

CsG
Click to expand...
I don't hate Bush, CsG. I hate the decisions he's made and I despise many in his administration. This election is more than Kerry vs. Bush. It's about right vs. wrong. It's about thought/debate/facts vs. ideology/faith.

I'll take the former any day of the week.
Click to expand...

You're right - this is about right vs wrong. Too bad you've chosen the wrong side😉
Leadership is not about thought/debate - it's about being able to lead. Leaders that think too much aren't good leaders because they aren't decisive. Debate is good, but just like "thought" it can lead to indecision and delay.
You can spin "facts" to whatever you wish but kerry doesn't hold a monopoly on "facts". Don't forget that kerry is playing the "faith" card as of late. kerry also doesn't seem to be able to admit his own liberal ideology - just like so many liberals. They are the ones who have made it a "dirty word" - not anyone else. It's their ideas, views, and votes that have made it "dirty".

There is a "right" way to lead and a "wrong" way to lead. I'll take the "right" way over the "wrong" way every time. Bush is leading the "right" way.

Anyway - back to the inside joke between Bush and Rove.

CsG
Click to expand...
And Bush has chosen the vastly WRONG way to lead. One doesn't lead on faith/instinct and ignore the facts or distort or make up facts.
 
Originally posted by: Pliablemoose

Agreed, the first step is to kill Moonbeam

Looks around for a torch & pitchfork:evil:
Click to expand...

Actually I think Moonbeam is one of the most open-minded posters here - he is a true thinker, which sometimes makes him a bit cryptic, but it's almost always worth taking the time to parse what he has to say IMO.
 
Yeah, look at all those conservatives who are fleeing to Kerry... just tons. That might be why Bush is getting more votes than he did in 2000. Perfect Bush-hating logic.

This country must be teeming with those "ultra-conservatives" for Bush to have the support he does. It's one thing to lie for political gain, but it's pretty sad when the Bush-haters start BELIEVING their own myths.
 
Originally posted by: Mursilis
Originally posted by: DonVito

Others, and I, have bemoaned the lack of civility on P&N for a long, long time now, and I think CsG's brand of casual nastiness just makes matters worse. I find this particularly troubling because he is, in general, a reasonable guy.
Click to expand...

But you named only one name - CsG. Why does he merit a personal mention, and others do not?

Sometimes I really lose hope that this country can regain its way; I have never seen our nation more divided. It would be nice if this board could at least offer a relatively civilized environment for dialogue, but it just isn't, since the mean-spirited loudmouths so often seem to overwhelm the discussion.
Click to expand...

Well, you (and everyone else alive now) are too young to have 'seen' it, but there once was a time we were shooting at each other (1861-65). I certainly agree we as a nation are pretty polarized politically, but all this "I fear for the survival of the Republic" talk seems a bit overblown to me. The one issue that threatens us most, though, is the one neither candidate is addressing honestly - spending, and fiscal irresponsibility. The funny math both Bush and Kerry are using makes Enron look small-time.
Click to expand...

I named CsG because he was the one who used the "RBH" abbreviation that inspired my comments. I would have thought that was fairly obvious, but maybe I needed to show my work better.

I wasn't around in the 1860s, and I imagine you weren't either. It strikes me that if the Civil War is our only yardstick for how divided our nation is, everything will appear to be just ducky until it's too late. I'm not suggesting we are headed for civil war, but I think a nation so badly divided can't function nearly as well as one that is united.
 
Originally posted by: Ozoned

Your track record would suggest that you are okay with this "kind of marginalization of your adversary".

Are you turning over a new leaf Don Vito? Or are you simply using tact in your role as the "adversary"? 😕

Any-who, Cad, you have a PM. It has a link to what I think is really bothering Don Vito. 🙂
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you're implying, but then I've never found you easy to understand. If you have a point, maybe you should just make it, rather than resorting to cheap innuendo.

None of us is perfect, least of all me, and I can't say I've been a model of reasonableness in every debate here, but I have tried to be fair and respectful, which is more than I can say for any number of other posters.

I'd rather all of us, myself included, would refrain from personal attacks, categorical names like "libs," "neocons," and "RBH," in the interest of conducting civil discussion.
 
Originally posted by: cwjerome
Yeah, look at all those conservatives who are fleeing to Kerry... just tons. That might be why Bush is getting more votes than he did in 2000. Perfect Bush-hating logic.

This country must be teeming with those "ultra-conservatives" for Bush to have the support he does. It's one thing to lie for political gain, but it's pretty sad when the Bush-haters start BELIEVING their own myths.
Click to expand...
Myths like "Bush has been a good president" and "Saddam has vast stockpiles of WMDs"?
 
Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
Originally posted by: Bowfinger

On the contrary, "neo-conservative" now refers to a specific ideology embraced by the Bush administration. Indeed, that's the point. Bush and his minions are not representative of true conservatives nor of the traditional Republican party. Instead, they are their own little breed of extremists who have co-opted the Republican/conservative umbrella for their own insidious agenda. There is nothing "conservative" about Bush & Co.

"Neo-conservative" is a misnomer. While I'm sure many people are confused, knowledgable posters understand it as a narrow label, not a broad one. It sounds to me like you are either grossly exaggerating, or you may not understand what "neo-conservative" embodies.

Personally, I prefer the term "neo-fascist". While this also provokes knee-jerk howls of protest from the Bush supporters due to its historic stereotypes, I believe if you look at it objectively you will find it is largely accurate. I got tired of explaining this, however, so I mostly now just refer to "Bushies" as a shorthand term for Bush supporters. I can go back to "neo-fascists" if you prefer.

😉
Click to expand...

Originally posted by: DonVito


It's also the kind of marginalization of your "adversary" that makes this board a worse place. I wish you and everyone else would cut that crap out.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Care to explain where I am marginalizing my opponent? At best, you are making false assumptions. I question whether you actually read and understood what I said.

 
Originally posted by: DonVito
Originally posted by: Ozoned

Your track record would suggest that you are okay with this "kind of marginalization of your adversary".

Are you turning over a new leaf Don Vito? Or are you simply using tact in your role as the "adversary"? 😕

Any-who, Cad, you have a PM. It has a link to what I think is really bothering Don Vito. 🙂
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you're implying, but then I've never found you easy to understand. If you have a point, maybe you should just make it, rather than resorting to cheap innuendo.

None of us is perfect, least of all me, and I can't say I've been a model of reasonableness in every debate here, but I have tried to be fair and respectful, which is more than I can say for any number of other posters.
Click to expand...

Obviously you do know what I am implying.

I have had to show you the error in your thinking on another occasion and though it pains me to do so, I will offer some advice, once again. :gift:

May I suggest that until you can lead by example, that you refrain from trying.

If that is not clear enough then try this: Until you can practice what you preach, why don't you just STFU. 😛
 
Originally posted by: DonVito
Originally posted by: Ozoned

Your track record would suggest that you are okay with this "kind of marginalization of your adversary".

Are you turning over a new leaf Don Vito? Or are you simply using tact in your role as the "adversary"? 😕

Any-who, Cad, you have a PM. It has a link to what I think is really bothering Don Vito. 🙂
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you're implying, but then I've never found you easy to understand. If you have a point, maybe you should just make it, rather than resorting to cheap innuendo.
Click to expand...

Maybe his point is that while you say you bemoan a lack of civility (presumably by all sides) here, you only seem to call it out when certain people (such as CsG, whom you cited) appear to be guilty. Maybe you missed this thread?
 
Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Care to explain where I am marginalizing my opponent? At best, you are making false assumptions. I question whether you actually read and understood what I said.
Click to expand...

It's like saying "I'm not going to use the N word to describe N's anymore."

Since your profile isn't enabled I can't tell if you're from/live in the South, but feel free to PM me if you don't understand the N word...

 
Originally posted by: Mursilis

Maybe his point is that while you say you bemoan a lack of civility (presumably by all sides) here, you only seem to call it out when certain people (such as CsG, whom you cited) appear to be guilty. Maybe you missed this thread?
Click to expand...

You know, I stayed out of that thread till today, what a steaming pile of racism, intolerance & class bias...

I don't agree with some of the far right, but they damn well have the right to their beliefs as well as they don't infringe on mine.

Some of the worst stories about racisim, religeous intolerance, & class bias I've ever heard involve children & their first experience with bias & intolerance.

I humbly submit no "social progressive" that posted in that thread should ever consider themselves a social progressive.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top