Prevailing Left blowing wind on ATS (Op/Ed)

Originally posted by TheBorg
And maybe this little argument you two seem to be transferring from thread to thread could be taken to the U2U realm, where such arguments should be kept. Please move back onto topic, and stop bickering.

TheBorg

Well Borg the thing is that this thread is exactly about what people like grover and ceci have been doing in the forums lately. It must stop, at least in these forums.

I am tired of the bickering, insults, demeaning rhetoric and patronizing comments, and I am guilty of responding to them, but being quiet everytime someone from the left wants to resort to such tactics is not going to make them go away. In fact staying quiet will only encourage more people like grover and ceci to make more "op/eds" using the same tactics.




[edit on 8-6-2006 by Muaddib]

Originally posted by Muaddib

Well Borg the thing is that this thread is exactly about what people like grover and ceci have been doing in the forums lately. It must stop, at least in these forums.

I am tired of the bickering, insults, demeaning rhetoric and patronizing comments, but being quiet everytime someone from the left wants to resort to such tactics is not going to make it go away.

Which is fine, but take it where it needs taken to, the U2U's. We really don't need to hear all of this arguing. It doesn't contribute at all to the debate, nor does it help to put a good light on any of us ATSers. If I have a problem with someone personally, I deal with them ALONE, not in front of everyone. Just common courtesy.

As for this thread being about what they're doing; I don't know if that's a very accurate assessment of the situation. This thread is about the prevailing Left Wind, not about plagiarising someone else's work, which is what this argument has all really been about. Sure, people copy and paste things, and then source them correctly, but the plagiarism I speak of is the taking the ideas out of context and ruining the intended meaning of the otherwise genuine idea.

Anyway, my main point is that it's getting kind of tiring to see you two constantly arguing in every political thread about other threads. The arguing takes away from the constructive debate trying to go on, and that's not something we need to be doing. The U2U is there for a reason. I use it for things just like this.

TheBorg

P.S.

Please don't misunderstand me Maud. I'm not focusing just on you. Ceci and grover are both just as responsible for their actions as you are for your's. I'm just advocating a bit more restraint when it comes to posting in the open forums, that's all. And that goes for everyone, me included.

God, I should be a mod...

[edit on 8-6-2006 by TheBorg]

Except, my part in grover's thread was not based on an argument. It featured a question and a request that for all accounts Muaddib refuses to honor and will not.

On grover's thread, I was not arguing with Muaddib until he confronted me with his views about my posts. And if you read my second post in Semper's thread, I explained the reason why I posted my links regarding the views of extremists in the Republican party. Pretty simple reasons, until Muaddib started with his harsh criticism of them without any applicable proof.

Muaddib had a choice not to answer my posts on grover's thread. But he did. So the burden of proof occurs on him. Before I had even made my second post, he began to deride my posts in this thread similarly in negative fashion.

For my part, I am sorry that I did participate in arguing with Muaddib on grover's thread. But here, on Semper's thread, what I am doing is simply refuting what Muaddib said.

Again though, it's the finger-pointing that's the problem here. Publicly, that looks bad. When people come here and look at these threads, what do you think they think when they see this kind of behavior? I bet they think that the kinds of people here are too busy arguing back and forth about insignificant things, completely unrelated to the topic, when they could be focused on the issue that the thread is about.

I find myself partaking in said arguing right now, but I refuse to insult any member here, or tell anyone that their opinions are anything but that. I understand being angry if someone says something about you that's untrue, but that's no reason to derail a debate, like we've done here, to get even. It's unproductive, and it hurts the course of the rest of the thread. Again, I reiterate that that's the reason for the U2U. Maybe a mod could enlighten us as to the true uses of the U2U. That would be very helpful.

TheBorg

But I am not arguing, Borg. I am simply stating my case. Believe me, I would like the thread to return back to the subject matter that Semperfortis had proposed. And for my part, I will not mention any more about this situation with Muaddib.

But let's wait and see if Muaddib will even honor this request to keep things civil and stay on course with the subject matter.

Originally posted by ceci2006
But I am not arguing, Borg. I am simply stating my case. Believe me, I would like the thread to return back to the subject matter that Semperfortis had proposed. And for my part, I will not mention any more about this situation with Muaddib.

But let's wait and see if Muaddib will even honor this request to keep things civil and stay on course with the subject matter.

Agreed.

TheBorg

It is by discussion and debate, the airing of our own personal views and the weighing them in the balance that we form a consensus on both this site and in this country. There is nothing wrong with either my or semperfortis' postings...whom I respect even though I generally disagree with him. Like I told him though in a U2U that if we sat down over a couple beers and had a nice long civil talk, he would find that our opinions are not so different as he might think. Muaddib does however have a track record of attacking and twisting peoples words around, especially if there is any criticism of either his beloved war or worshiped bush is present. I went back and re-read ceci and muaddib's postings on "Cracks in the Facade" and it is pretty clear who the aggressor is, and it was not cesi. Both she and I requested repeatedly instead of these childish personal attacks like the one tommy indulged in against me, that a bush supporter and conservative pen a proper defense of their position so that we could compare notes and have a proper discourse. Something Semperfortis graciously did, not once, in my post but twice, more extensively here. Unfortuately he was the only conservative to rise to the occission, Muaddib (who was also personally asked to pen an essay) however, for whatever reason (and it certianly was not inarticulateness) chose to continue his attacks. I am sure, and in fact would put money down on it, that he will consider this an attack and will retiliate. i really do not care. I am just calling it how I see it and if anyone goes back through both this thread and mine, you will see that I am correct.

You can throw all sorts of "facts" around as proof of your position, both pro and con anything, but calling them facts doesn't mean that they are true...I don't have to go around digging up "facts" to prove my arguement, while the interpertations are mine, the sources all came from local and national newspapers and news magazines and as such are accessable to everyone.

I for one consider the quality of an arguement to determine its validity... I can respect a well reasoned arguement even if iI disagree with it but when you start resorting to personal attacks and belittlement well then as far as i am concerned, you are not worth listening to. Kinda like the difference between David Brooks and Ann Coulter.

Originally posted by grover
......................

I for one consider the quality of an arguement to determine its validity... I can respect a well reasoned arguement even if iI disagree with it but when you start resorting to personal attacks and belittlement well then as far as i am concerned, you are not worth listening to. Kinda like the difference between David Brooks and Ann Coulter.

Then I guess your arguments have no validity at all.

If you and ceci would have actually done what you are now claiming you did, I would have had more respect for both of you and others, but you didn't, you two tried to bunch together any and every person, including Republicans, who disagrees with you and you two continuously label those people.

The facts are simple, if you, Ceci and others can actually make a "reasonable argument" without any name calling, nor excerpting quotes from sites which do nothing but label, insult and degrade, we would be having a different discussion right now.

The point of the matter is, i have seen people like you two, and it has become the habit of others too to try to label those you disagree with.

Grover,
Oh this hurts, HAHAHAHA, but I have to agree with you as far as the presentation of facts is concerned.

There is a lot of call on here for people to "post threads, links etc" to support their statements. Well it is easy enough to go out there (Internet) and see that those links, threads etc are all self canceling. For every Conservative one, another Liberal one can be found.

That is the reason I reached out for all of your personal thoughts and opinions. Because when all has been said and done, that is really what we have left here. Our difference of opinion.

Perhaps no one of us will ever be able to convince another to change their mind, yet maybe we will be able to give them cause for concern. Just maybe I will read and take a moment to consider Grover's and Ceci's thoughts in a greater depth then I would have if not for our posting on threads like this one.
The Intelligent mind should find it difficult if not impossible to have only one view point, be it conservative or liberal. I for one, freely admit my conversations with Borg, Grover and Ceci as well as Muddib and Jsobecky, have all given me new outlooks on all of these issues. Does that make me "wishy-washy" or weak in my convictions? I don't think so, it simply means I can think and decide issues. That the issues we are discussing are multifaceted and complex and to limit myself to one viewpoint is doing a disservice to both myself and my fellow posters.


Perhaps in Muddibs defense, I too have a great amount of respect for President Bush and there really is a lot of nasty stuff floating out there about him. When you respect a public figure, it is difficult to hear things like "war criminal", "Traitor" etc and not become inflamed and indignant. A lot is being made about the Presidents approval ratings when it is remarkably easy to see his rating go down in direct corelation to the rise in the price of gas. Lets face it, the majority of Americans are shallow in their day to day concerns and gas prices are a daily indicator of the job their president is doing.
We here on ATS tend to examine issues more in depth and evaluate the situation on a different level. yet we continue to use the public opinion polls to substantiate our positions when in reality they have little to do with them.

Just my opinion.

Thank you Semperfortis...you are obviously a person who can learn and grow and change your views as needed. Not a common trait these days. A little story:

Right after the 2000 election and before the surpeme court butted in I asked several conservative and right wing people I knew including my father (may he rest in peace) the following question.

"Considering the fact that you Republicans had a qualified candidate for president (John McCain) who could have beaten Al Gore hands down, no questions or hanging chads about it, why on earth did you guys run with an unqualified wennie (Bush) for the position?"

Now mind you Bush was an unknown quality at the time but my opposition to him had nothing to do with him personally, I disagree with most Republican platforms, but I did object that before there was even a primary to chose him, the media had already crowned him heir apparent (or so it seemed to this liberal who went so far as to vote for McCain in the primary as a protest vote, though I would not have voted for him in the general election). I honestly felt that Bush was not qualified for the job either by temperment or experince, indeed the only reason he is qualified now is that he has held the job, poorly in my opinion, but then obviously that is my opinion.

Any rate, I asked about a dozen people the above question, and to a person I couldn't get a straight answer from any of them, most, like my father sputtered and cursed about "damned liberals". I found this amazing. I know good and well why I vote for a candidate and I can articulate it. If the candidate, including liberals and democrats, do not stack up either via qualifications or their stances, I will not vote for them.

So periodically I have to ask why do you support this guy when his policies seem so determental to the good of the country, unless of course you have millions in the bank and want more, the public be damned.

"I know good and well why I vote for a candidate and I can articulate it. If the candidate, including liberals and democrats, do not stack up either via qualifications or their stances, I will not vote for them. "

As a matter of fact, I will not vote for Hillery Clinton if she is chosen as the democratic standard bearer. I have nothing against her as a person, but I honestly think that not only is she not qualified for the job, she represents all that has gone wrong with the Democratic party, instead of standing for something she is constantly trying to straddle the fence and the middle ground. As a life long liberal and democrat this does not cut it. The Democratic Leadership Council has castrated their party by trying to position themselves as the conservative lite party. To hell with that. If we want conservative we will vote conservative, get the American people a real choice...stop being so bloody afraid of being liberal...I would have had alot more respect for John Kerry if he had got up and said 'Yeah, I am a liberal, what of it?" Now Lets discuss the real issues". But he played it safe and got his just desserts. Give me a eal liberal aka Paul Wellstone (RIP) or Bernnie Saunders anyday, At least I know they stand for something.

As for you Muaddib once again you conviently ignore my repeated statements of respect for mainstream conservatives and Republicans (even though I disagree with them) and that it is the neo cons (what an appro word, con) and hard core right wing that I take objection to.

Grover,
My only answer can be that I do not see his policies as detrimental to the country at all. Now I am against the spending the Republicans have been doing lately, but I support the tax cuts, economic decisions, war on terror and mildly the border issues.(very complicated)

I just do not see the terrible things that many are saying as being in anyway founded on fact. They are opinions, and like mine can either be wrong or right. I look at jobs, housing and the overall state of the economy and see wonderful growth and low interest rates. I hate that we are in a war, and I think it is un-winnable, yet I appreciate the fact that we are fighting over there and not over here. I do not like the wiretapping, but understand the need for information in regards to possible terrorist activities.

I personally do not like McCain's back and forth movement on issues. One minute he seems to be right wing then when the wind blows he moves left. I feel that Bush has held the ground even under the withering fire he has gotten lately. His convictions are true and he is standing strong. I admire that.

grover

Let me ask you a question, regarding this question you posed:

"Considering the fact that you Republicans had a qualified candidate for president (John McCain) who could have beaten Al Gore hands down, no questions or hanging chads about it, why on earth did you guys run with an unqualified wennie (Bush) for the position?"

What type of response did you expect when you start off by calling their choice "an unqualified wennie"?

Sometimes it's as simple as that.

Just sayin'.

well I have to admit you got me there josbecky. he was though.

Originally posted by semperfortis
Grover,
My only answer can be that I do not see his policies as detrimental to the country at all. Now I am against the spending the Republicans have been doing lately, but I support the tax cuts, economic decisions, war on terror and mildly the border issues.(very complicated)

THANK YOU SEMPER, finally something we can actually "debate" without anyone hopefully taking shots at eachother over liberal and conservative (not saying you are, but so far its all been about whos bashing who, not any issue).

I can't support the tax cuts, because spending is so high. If we raise spending (war materials and such so the government needs more money) we cant cut revenue, it just makes things worse. I find that people often want as much as possible for little to nothing. I say you have to pay the price. If the majority want to go to war, then they will pay for that war. You shouldn't be able to say "yes lets go to war...hey don't put my taxes up!" It doesn't work and creates a burden on the system. Often creating a deficit like the one we are experiencing. Im for tax cuts, only if our taxes can support the spending, which it cant right now.

Economics, something that I feel we are setting ourselves up for. We have been increasing the interest rate on and on in attempt to keep our economy up. Well guess what, we cant keep raising it. As soon as we stop raising that interest rate, we will see a big change in the economy. Thats all I can say about this for now.

"The market is...concerned that the (US) Federal Reserve will raise interest rates further. That would be positive for the dollar and negative for the gold price,"
www.businessday.co.za...

now the war on terror im fully against (at least in a pre emptive action sense). Im all for patroling the border, having security waiting for any suspicious actions that may be suspect for bomb planting and such, and Im all for boosting up the security on main targets like football stadiums and such. I am not for pre emptive action foreign or domestically. To me this is where we will fail and destroy ourselves. Im all for protection, but not pre emptive protection. The war on terror is a war against an ideology that anyone can suddenly follow. Anyone can become a terrorist or stop being one and never touch a gun again. Its not our decision to decide who is terrorists. It is their decision, and when they try to act on that decision we should be there to stop them. I feel that until they try to commit the crime they are still innocent. I mean the war on terror is actually nothing more then a war on thoughts. They don't have to be caught in the act, they just have to think it, and if that thought shows they get in trouble badly. That is dangerous and wrong to me.

I just do not see the terrible things that many are saying as being in anyway founded on fact. They are opinions, and like mine can either be wrong or right. I look at jobs, housing and the overall state of the economy and see wonderful growth and low interest rates. I hate that we are in a war, and I think it is un-winnable, yet I appreciate the fact that we are fighting over there and not over here. I do not like the wiretapping, but understand the need for information in regards to possible terrorist activities.

Ok first lets talk about these low interest rates. The federal reserve has been raising interest rates steadily to support the economy.

Stocks around the world have fallen sharply Thursday as fears build over U.S. interest rates.

The Australian market lost $25 billion of its value in its biggest fall since the September 11 2001 terrorist attacks, while Tokyo's Nikkei 225 plunged nearly 500 points. European bourses fell an average 3% in their worst day in more than a year.

Behind the falls is a concern the U.S. Federal Reserve will continue raising interest rates in response to heightened concerns over inflation.

Whilst slamming stocks those same fears have seen a steadying in the U.S. dollar which has been sliding for several months.
story.malaysiasun.com...

I am not seeing the same trend that you are talking of, so kindly elaborte what you mean by low interest rates.
Next is housing:

NEW YORK, June 8 /PRNewswire/ -- The U.S. housing industry - developers, builders, realtors and others - may understandably view National Homeownership Month (June) with mixed feelings. Yes, the housing market has enjoyed a sustained period of high demand and high prices in many parts of the country, but now the tide is turning.

Indeed, new indicators, including the increasing inventory of unsold homes languishing on the market, point to a rapid cooling of the U.S. housing market in many once-hot areas.

In other words, the market for housing is starting to decrease, and at a bad time. Or maybe the reason for the decrease is the trouble we are seeing in the near future? jobs, actually a reason for rising interest rates:

TOKYO (Reuters) - The dollar was mired near a one-year low against the euro on Monday after surprisingly soft U.S. employment data last week helped squelch expectations for the Federal Reserve to raise overnight rates again this month.

The 75,000 jobs created in May was far short of forecasts for a 175,000 increase, providing more evidence of slowing economic growth that will likely help cool core inflation now running at the upper end of the comfort zone of some Fed officials.

But expectations of a coming Fed pause, along with worries that Washington wants a weaker currency to help curtail its massive trade deficit, have all helped to undermine the dollar this year.

To make things short, we are kicking our own feet out from under us. We are creating conditions for the Euro to overthrow the dollar in the global market. The only reason we have been able to keep up is because of the interest rates rising and the housing market. Everything is pointing toward a recession that will lead to the Euro being able to take the breakthrough its been dying for.

I personally do not like McCain's back and forth movement on issues. One minute he seems to be right wing then when the wind blows he moves left. I feel that Bush has held the ground even under the withering fire he has gotten lately. His convictions are true and he is standing strong. I admire that.

Bush showed to be more stubborn and pig headed, which I know from personal experience is a bad thing. Its one thing to feel strong about your stance, is another thing to ignore everyone elses and consider theirs obsolite, which is what hes doing. I find him very insulting the way he carries on. He never changes his views, and shows he has no intent on pleasing anyone other then people who go with what HE wants. unfortunately for him, its not about HIM, its about the people. He doesn't care about though, his views stay put regardless of what people want.

Well as I have always understood Liberalism to be is taking a stand for the common good, the public weal as it were, knowing that there is a point where individual rights must by necessity give way to the needs and rights of community. The accknowledgement that society is not just an agragate of business concerns but a community of people and that the acid test for us as a society, as Christians or the true and faithful believers of all religions, is not how we treat the most fortunate, but how we treat the least among us....if but for the grace of God, there goes I. In a society with so much wealth and graced with such bounties as ours, the notion that someone could resent the poor amazes me. Jesus injoined us to take care of the needy...he did not give a limitus test for us to qualify them with. To think that the environment is not worth taking care of (Interior Sec. James Watts infamously gave the excuse that once the last tree was cut down, Jesus would come for not being more interested in protecting the interior as opposed to exploiting it) is foolish beyond belief. That profits should always come first is so incredibly short sighted as to belay understanding. Global Warming, is real, but even if it isn't, it is more proitable to find ways of protecting and nurturing what we have than destroying it for a quick buck. The incredible richness of human society all but demands a tolerance for the differences among us as a matter of simple human decency but when people are demonized for whatever...be it illegal aliens or gays wanting to form lasting and permanant bonds...for political gain, I find it obscene...when you demonize an enemy or someone different you remove them from the realm of the human and as such can be treated however you want because they are not one of us. To think that there are those who want to write discrimination into the constituation deeply offends me. Every ammendment to it so far has been to enunciate rights, not deny them, to promote such an idea sets a terrible precedent. There are many reasons why I am a liberal and this is jsut a partial reading.

Grim, we then must agree to disagree, for I too see a natural progression of slight increases in the interest rates, which is in and of itself a good indicator of a healthy economy. Perhaps our sources differ in regards to the housing for everything I am seeing and reading indicates the greatest boon in new home sales in history. And just look at the unemployment rate! WOW, it has not been this low in our lifetimes.
Sorry I just see it differently.

Grover,
I am going to think a lot more on your post, there are mitigating circumstances in what you have brought up with me.
I obtained my first degree in Forestry from WVU, and the environment meant a lot to me at one time. I don't see the immediate emergency, yet I also do not wish to leave a barren planet for my grandchildren.
However, on the other subjects. The values of personal and corporate competition are what has brought this great nation to where it is today. Our ability to out-think, out-spend, out-buy, out-produce and simply overwhelm other nations is what gave us the win in WWI and WWII, the cold war and our current status as the lone superpower. We definitely need social programs, but not at the expense of economic growth. The very act of funneling more money into the big corporations (tax cuts) fuels the economy like coffee does me in the mornings. A robust economy is all that is going to see us through the eventual rise of China and the ever changing market.
I feel bad for the poor and the underprivileged, yet did they/do they not have the same opportunities as all of the rest of us? I left an abusive home in WV at the age of 17 on a 175 honda motorcycle, with all of my worldly possessions strapped on the back. I put myself through college, the military and now having retired once and started a new career, I never have to worry about money again. I did this without ever having once used a social program, foodstamps/welfare etc. That same opportunity is out there for anyone.
Some few are not capable and for those we need the programs, but alot of others just need to get up, get motivated and get to work. That may take some tough love, meaning the cutting of programs where they either work or do not eat. I know that sounds harsh, but it really is a harsh world out there and as long as we coddle them, they will never be self reliant.
That is what we are talking about, self reliance. The "right" is all about self reliance, diminished government and self reliance. We can not afford to continue to produce a nation of subjects dependent on the government for everything or we are going to lose and lose big in the global community. Production is not our "thing" now, hence the diminishing labor unions, now we are a technological society and we must concentrate on that aspect of our economy to succeed today.

Granted the politicians are so muddled anymore that they really are all the same, this is their job and they will do anything that they can to retain it. the power is far too intoxicating and addictive for them to ever willingly lose control. So they will move right/left and center to what ever way they figure will get them the votes to stay in power. I still stand by my earlier statement that Bush stands by his convictions even through diminished polls and personal attacks. He is doing the job that he feels we put him in there to do and he refuses to waver.
You have to admire that kind of fortitude.

Originally posted by grover
......................
As for you Muaddib once again you conviently ignore my repeated statements of respect for mainstream conservatives and Republicans (even though I disagree with them) and that it is the neo cons (what an appro word, con) and hard core right wing that I take objection to.

No grover, your op/ed said it all, if anyone approves on the basic issues that president Bush has done, you labeled them as what you did with your op/ed. Even i have been critical of some of the things done by the administration, but I don't exagerate and start calling for impeachments. Now you are trying to cover your tracks by claiming something different to what you clearly stated in your op/ed. Again, that's one of the rasons why i don't back, or vote for liberals/democrat candidates at all. Because they don't really stand up for issues, they just go along with whoever screams the most.

[edit on 9-6-2006 by Muaddib]

Originally posted by grover
..................
Muaddib does however have a track record of attacking and twisting peoples words around, especially if there is any criticism of either his beloved war or worshiped bush is present.
..................

It is kind of funny and it really shows who is "twisting people's word around", when I did not mention any criticism against the president....rather I have been talking about the criticism that you, and people like yourself, keep throwing at Republicans in generals and anyone who agrees with any issues that the present administration stands for....

Show me where i said anything about you attacking the president?.... i was mentioning your attacks on Republicans, not on the president....

semper I am not saying it hasnt been good. Housing has been huge past 5 years, and unemployment has been low. Thats changing now though. As you can see the interest rates have been rising, and not just recently. This has been to keep the economy up. They aren't choosing to raise interest rates I hope you know, they are being forced. Without raising it, the euro is going to go flying past us because the dollar will start going down. basically we are on the verge of losing our world wide grip with the dollar, to the euro.