Chef Jim Posted August 28, 2004 Posted August 28, 2004 .....been transformed in to a forum for those from the right only. There have been very few topics posted or topics replied to by our friends from the left. What are the reasons? Is it: 1. They have nothing to add anymore. 2. They realize their guy is in deep stevestojan. 3. They can't compete. 4. They're all on their way to NY in their best hippy gear to create chaos. Either way it's been eerily quite from that side. If it's number four we need to send my favorite fighter of Chaos, Maxwell Smart, Agent 86. But with all his bumbling, I would imagine that he's a Democrate.
swede316 Posted August 28, 2004 Posted August 28, 2004 I thinks it's they can't argue with facts. They've been getting regular beatings here.
KD in CA Posted August 28, 2004 Posted August 28, 2004 Clearly it's the vast right wing moderator conspiracy at work....
billfan63 Posted August 28, 2004 Posted August 28, 2004 .....been transformed in to a forum for those from the right only. There have been very few topics posted or topics replied to by our friends from the left. What are the reasons? Is it: 1. They have nothing to add anymore. 2. They realize their guy is in deep stevestojan. 3. They can't compete. 4. They're all on their way to NY in their best hippy gear to create chaos. Either way it's been eerily quite from that side. If it's number four we need to send my favorite fighter of Chaos, Maxwell Smart, Agent 86. But with all his bumbling, I would imagine that he's a Democrate. 9866[/snapback] This forum has turned into a right wing/conservative radio talk show in words. Anyone who disagrees is insulted and shot down, there is no debate, I'd say most of your friends from the left, left because it's become a bore.
KD in CA Posted August 28, 2004 Posted August 28, 2004 This forum has turned into a right wing/conservative radio talk show in words.Anyone who disagrees is insulted and shot down, there is no debate, I'd say most of your friends from the left, left because it's become a bore. 9910[/snapback] Much like the candidate himself, I'm still waiting for the Kerry supporters to articulate what exactly they like about his Senate record and what plans he has (if he has any) for the Presidency. But I understand if it's easier to cry about what the opposition is saying (again, very much in line with Kerry himself) rather than defend your positions.
Chalkie Gerzowski Posted August 28, 2004 Posted August 28, 2004 CNN political unit has a 274-264 advantage for Bush......presidentialelect.org has the same number.....their last update was on July 29th. From the CNN thing....WV and AZ....dems conceding those states now. ORG and WAS could come into play for Bush, but not likely. OH, FLA, NV and MO lean towards Bush...... IA, WI, MN lean towards Kerry. FLA isn't getting much notoriety yet......2 years ago, Jeb Bush won re-election by 13 points. Democrats focusing on a higher turnout in Miami-Dade. Kerry campaign has made few inroads south of Maryland.....Kerry starting to pull ads from Virginia, Arkansas, Louisiana. Dem strategists concede they have little chance in those states. This was interesting: "Part of Kerry's problem, aides say, has been a failure to generate support among a large segment of the African-American vote, particularly in states like Louisiana."
SactoBillFan Posted August 28, 2004 Posted August 28, 2004 Could be getting close to football season. B)
ExiledInIllinois Posted August 28, 2004 Posted August 28, 2004 CNN political unit has a 274-264 advantage for Bush......presidentialelect.org has the same number.....their last update was on July 29th.From the CNN thing....WV and AZ....dems conceding those states now. ORG and WAS could come into play for Bush, but not likely. OH, FLA, NV and MO lean towards Bush...... IA, WI, MN lean towards Kerry. FLA isn't getting much notoriety yet......2 years ago, Jeb Bush won re-election by 13 points. Democrats focusing on a higher turnout in Miami-Dade. Kerry campaign has made few inroads south of Maryland.....Kerry starting to pull ads from Virginia, Arkansas, Louisiana. Dem strategists concede they have little chance in those states. This was interesting: "Part of Kerry's problem, aides say, has been a failure to generate support among a large segment of the African-American vote, particularly in states like Louisiana." 9930[/snapback] I guess it is for more years of dieing soldiers? Ah, but who cares, it's been only a 1000 or so?
Guest RabidBillsFanVT Posted August 28, 2004 Posted August 28, 2004 HEY, I think that you have loonies from BOTH sides... but you could never tell on this board, because conservatives totally outnumber moderates and liberals, and of course the majority is NEVER silent here. I think I do a great job of bringing something good here, and I know I'm totally outnumbered, but it won't stop me from defending what I believe in. That is what being an American is all about... having a voice and being able to use it, NOT being scripted or restricted or gagged like in a censored society. And when people die for no reason, I'm going to say something. If I risk being labeled something that I am not, then I will take that chance willingly. Outnumbered, but NEVER out. Freedom and Unity
ExiledInIllinois Posted August 28, 2004 Posted August 28, 2004 HEY, I think that you have loonies from BOTH sides... but you could never tell on this board, because conservatives totally outnumber moderates and liberals, and of course the majority is NEVER silent here. I think I do a great job of bringing something good here, and I know I'm totally outnumbered, but it won't stop me from defending what I believe in. That is what being an American is all about... having a voice and being able to use it, NOT being scripted or restricted or gagged like in a censored society. And when people die for no reason, I'm going to say something. If I risk being labeled something that I am not, then I will take that chance willingly. Outnumbered, but NEVER out. Freedom and Unity 9943[/snapback] I am with you Bro! Not always on the same page but, with you!
Guest RabidBillsFanVT Posted August 28, 2004 Posted August 28, 2004 I am with you Bro! Not always on the same page but, with you! 9946[/snapback] I know... we can't all agree on the same subjects (read the janitor post and you'll see why I say that! hehe), but someone's gotta represent!
ExiledInIllinois Posted August 28, 2004 Posted August 28, 2004 I know... we can't all agree on the same subjects (read the janitor post and you'll see why I say that! hehe), but someone's gotta represent! 9952[/snapback] I know, I know... You are hard to "pin" down on this board with all its polarizing people. I don't see why they paint you as a "liberal". I guess that is the in vogue thing to do here. I'd feel less sympathy for "Joe" if he were making twice as much... As it was, he seemed to be barely keeping his head above water, yet enjoying the modern pleasures in life (yet, not to extravagently I might add). Why the bitterness toward "Joe" and his family over a lousy 20k?
Griswold Posted August 28, 2004 Posted August 28, 2004 I think the board is cyclical. A few months ago I visited and the board was in a very strong left-wing mode. The last few days have been heavy with right posts. I think we'lll see heavy, but nearly even posting until a few weeks after the election. Then the cyclical nature will start again. Psuedo-code for an analyst, plot this: select date, political leaning of poster from ppp where poster not in (insert the names of sociopaths) /* eliminate noise from the study */ group by date
Chalkie Gerzowski Posted August 28, 2004 Posted August 28, 2004 I guess it is for more years of dieing soldiers? Ah, but who cares, it's been only a 1000 or so? 9937[/snapback] 1,000 is small.....how many in Gettysburg? Didn't that approach or surpass 50k? In one weekend??? Can't imagine people today living in the 1860s.....and people living in the 1860s, in today's world.....would be a walk in the park for them.
ExiledInIllinois Posted August 28, 2004 Posted August 28, 2004 1,000 is small.....how many in Gettysburg? Didn't that approach or surpass 50k? In one weekend??? Can't imagine people today living in the 1860s.....and people living in the 1860s, in today's world.....would be a walk in the park for them. 9993[/snapback] Exactly, that was my point... I was being sarcastic. People today couldn't handle it back then. What was that... 58,000 (dead or wounded) in one day at the Somme (WWI)? 400,000 by evening's end lay dead on the battlefield at Passcendaele [sP] (WWI)? 1,000 is nothing!
Guest RabidBillsFanVT Posted August 28, 2004 Posted August 28, 2004 I know, I know... You are hard to "pin" down on this board with all its polarizing people. I don't see why they paint you as a "liberal". I guess that is the in vogue thing to do here. I'd feel less sympathy for "Joe" if he were making twice as much... As it was, he seemed to be barely keeping his head above water, yet enjoying the modern pleasures in life (yet, not to extravagently I might add). Why the bitterness toward "Joe" and his family over a lousy 20k? 9959[/snapback] Well, my opinions are very strong, and sometimes I can let the juices flow too much. All I ever expect from a person running for President is telling things the way they actually are, not being a cash cow to big business, standing up for what is right and not what is right for the lobby, be responsible when dealing with other countries, taking decisive action when things need to be done, and all the while having a heart while doing it. That man WAS Theodore Roosevelt. We have no men like him, and haven't for almost 75 years. He was a Republican, but a good one... I think Republicans went wrong during the 1920's, when Harding, Coolidge, and Hoover forever linked their party to Big Business. Since then, the lobby has only gotten stronger and stronger, much like the Democrats went wrong when Kennedy took office. Since then, Democrats have been far too liberal, and a lot more apt to defend every little handout. Sad, really.
Chalkie Gerzowski Posted August 28, 2004 Posted August 28, 2004 Exactly, that was my point... I was being sarcastic. People today couldn't handle it back then. What was that... 58,000 (dead or wounded) in one day at the Somme (WWI)? 400,000 by evening's end lay dead on the battlefield at Passcendaele [sP] (WWI)? 1,000 is nothing! 10001[/snapback] Media back then was fascinating to read.....Gettysburg......the Baltimore paper reporter basically was saying......"There could be a big scrap on the horizon here in a town called Gettysburg....." It took a few days to know what was going on.....imagine an "embedded" reporter on Little Round Top or in the field of Picketts Charge.....
RuntheDamnBall Posted August 28, 2004 Posted August 28, 2004 Exactly, that was my point... I was being sarcastic. People today couldn't handle it back then. What was that... 58,000 (dead or wounded) in one day at the Somme (WWI)? 400,000 by evening's end lay dead on the battlefield at Passcendaele [sP] (WWI)? 1,000 is nothing! 10001[/snapback] 1,000 people is nothing? Can you honestly say you would feel this way if one of those 'nothings' was in your family? And Gettysburg was one of the bloodiest battles fought in a war fought over completely different circumstances, and it wasn't a war of choice (unless you're among the sick few that think there WAS a real choice to disband the union). And 3,000 WTC dead is three times as many as in Iraq. Where is the vindication for these people? What happened to getting bin Laden 'dead or alive,' 'smoke 'em out'? Now it's just, "to tell you the truth I don't spend that much time on him." I want to see that war won and the man who started it brought to justice, as promised. Oh, and us liberals are too busy having wine and cheese parties and discussing foreign films to debate here all the time. I wish I could help fight an outnumbered battle in an echo chamber more often, but my lobster is ready and I have to go do some yoga [/sarcasm]
DC Tom Posted August 28, 2004 Posted August 28, 2004 1,000 people is nothing? Can you honestly say you would feel this way if one of those 'nothings' was in your family?[/sarcasm] 10054[/snapback] If it's family, one's a tragedy. If it's a military commitment of 125,000 men, 1000 is nothing. Ultimately, conquering and occupying a country for the loss of 1000 soldiers is astoundingly cheap in military terms. The key being: "in military terms". Don't mix your contexts. In fact, get used to not mixing your contexts. A LOT more Americans are going to become casualties before the war on terrorism is over.
DC Tom Posted August 28, 2004 Posted August 28, 2004 Exactly, that was my point... I was being sarcastic. People today couldn't handle it back then. What was that... 58,000 (dead or wounded) in one day at the Somme (WWI)? 400,000 by evening's end lay dead on the battlefield at Passcendaele [sP] (WWI)? 1,000 is nothing! 10001[/snapback] British casualties on the first day of The Somme were something like 45k. At Passchendale, total British casualties - killed and wounded - were 250k over about two weeks (and 400k Germans). And Passchendale is also known as the Third Battle of Ypres (there were four). I don't even want to think how many men were killed and left to rot on that battlefield in all four battles. Ypres and Verdun, even by the standards of the rest of the line, must have been absoulte hell on earth. Bloodiest single day of the Civil War, by the way, was at Antietam. 25k dead in a surprisingly small patch of land. I've walked it; a lot of it hasn't changed much from the battle, and you can get a real sense of what soldiers were facing at the sunken road or the corn fields. Unlike Gettysburg, which is startlingly different from when the battle was fought, and is far too big to hike in a single day.
Recommended Posts