Political Flame Wars

[Seth]

Originally Posted by Ginkasa

And I also dislike people who shoot down other people's opinion without giving them a chance. That's part of what I was complaining about. In most of the political debates, the sides have already been chosen before anyone said a word, and the people on opposite sides have already decided the people's opinions on the other side are stupid and uninformed. I hate that.

I guess I just don't like it how the above was said as a result of one of my posts. It seems like you're relating my post with the 'shooting down of other people's opinions without giving them a chance.' I know it's directed at a number of people but was said with what seemed to be a connection with my post. I can't see how you can draw so many conclusions from what I had posted.

I never, however, shot down bouncer's opinion (this is related to him). I didn't say I disagreed with it or said it was stupid or misinformed.

While you didn't try to shoot down my opinion, you accused me of, in essence, being a know it all.

I only used him as an example since he's the most recent and what spurred me to write the rant.

This comment leads me to believe that my post reflects every negative thing you said in this thread.

What I didn't like was that he brought up the war and what American's doing wrong for no apparent reason then to....spout off what America's doing wrong. It's great he feels so; I don't really care how he feels. I didn't see any reason, however, why he had to bring it up in a discussion that was evolving into something unrelated to the war in Iraq.

In my first reply in this thread I explained why I brought up the war in Iraq. Do you see this as invalid?

I don't want this to go anywhere bad but I just have to say that I feel you've mistakenly correlated me with a bunch of negative things that were somehow linked to my post in the car crash thread. Respond to this so you can give your views and then we'll call it at that.

[Typhoid]

I dont mean to direct this at anyone, cuz im not.

But from now on, when someone argues, i think they should get this picture.












And thus concludes this session

[Professor S]

I know a good amount of that was aimed at me, as I refuse to shut up on political threads, but then again I make a point not to.

The reason why I do so is because I feel there is a lot of misinformation that goes around on the media about many things, including drug abuse, conservative values, the Iraqi war and the war on terror to name a few.

I can't help what the media portrays, but I sure as hell can help it when I feel misinformation is being spread to the masses here. I know a lot of what I say is very one sided, but that is basically to give the other side of the coin and try and inspire people to see and research the other side of the coin and not just believe whatever the TV tells you.

I will admit to getting heated at times, but that generally only happens when I am forced to repeat different facts, and I repeat facts, over and over again. The recent Michael Moore thread being the most recent example of this. An validity of an article written by the Wall Street Journal... I repeat... the Wall Street Journal... was thrown out by those who did not want to beleive the facts that it stated, and that is the ONLY REASON it was thrown out. That makes absolutely no sense.

Now while my political tirades may annoy you, I will not be stopping any time soon. If someone posts a political thread I feel is rediculous, I will not hesitate to make my feelings on it known as the alternative, in my view, would be to allow misinformation to reach more people than it already is.

I do think I've done a much better job very recently at avoiding long drawn out flame wars. I've decided just to make my point thoroughly and then let people make up their own minds. I did go on for a couple posts in the Green Party thread, but each post had different information and there were no insults whatsoever.

[Ginkasa]

Originally Posted by bouncer

I guess I just don't like it how the above was said as a result of one of my posts. It seems like you're relating my post with the 'shooting down of other people's opinions without giving them a chance.' I know it's directed at a number of people but was said with what seemed to be a connection with my post. I can't see how you can draw so many conclusions from what I had posted.

I didn't draw all those conclusions from what you posted. That was just what motivated me to actually typing what I was thinking.

While you didn't try to shoot down my opinion, you accused me of, in essence, being a know it all.

You were presuming to know how exactly America should be run.

This comment leads me to believe that my post reflects every negative thing you said in this thread.

I apologize. It was supposed to lead you to believe that most of it didn't apply to you. You were...just what motivated me to type out all my thoughts of all (well...most) political debates I've seen.

In my first reply in this thread I explained why I brought up the war in Iraq. Do you see this as invalid?

I'll give you that.

I don't want this to go anywhere bad but I just have to say that I feel you've mistakenly correlated me with a bunch of negative things that were somehow linked to my post in the car crash thread. Respond to this so you can give your views and then we'll call it at that.

*thumbs up*


*shrugs and walks away*

[Typhoid]

You say he was presuming to know what America should do, and you seem pretty confident in presuming you know what he was talking about. He never directly said, " This is what they should do" or anything like that, to my "vast" knowledge. Both of you are presuming things.

[Dylflon]

I feel the same way you do Ginkasa. That's why I gave up on political debates. I tried my vest just to state my opinions or feelings but others have fun trying to make me look like an idiot for thinking something. I'll admit I got carried away sometimes too...but...yeah.