It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

A Call To Action: Ending The Political Game on ATS

page: 17
92
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 10:31 AM
link   
reply to post by dgtempe
 





Has the government got ATS by the horns now?


Although you and I don't see eye to eye on many things,

I spent time yesterday pondering this situation, both sides of the government are keeping a close eye on on blogs and forums, why, they are even being talked about On the MSM,

Could be they wanted to tone things down here?

Be on the safe side?

Much to do about nothing, me thinks.

Or just plain political bias.





[edit on 103030p://bFriday2008 by Stormdancer777]




posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 10:50 AM
link   
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 


There is no bias. ATS has always stood for intelligent discussion and limited personal attacks. This site as a whole has always stood by it's members, and that's what they are doing here.

Even if some of you can't see it, this change is for us. This is not a limit on free speech or anything similar. All that we have here is a way to promote real discussion cut out the ignorant bickering over nothing.

As has been said here many times. If you don't like it...

Leave.



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 10:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by dgtempe


I think the closing of the Keith Olbermann thread was a bit over the top.

Has the government got ATS by the horns now?



The government issue is definately in play. But what about MSNBC? They have a prominent ad here on ATS now, and we all know about MSNBC's pro-Obama stance. Could there have been a "I'll scratch your back and you scratch mine" type of deal here?

When controversy strikes......always follow the money.



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 10:56 AM
link   
reply to post by RRconservative
 


I hate this. I really do.

You and I have agreed with each other and more things than we disagreed around here RR. I've always considered you a friend.

However, you're dead wrong here.

There was no deal. There is no conspiracy. There is no agenda.

We can still make our case against Obama the same as always. The only difference is that now it has to be done on his issues. Nothing else.

Nothing has changed really. As far as I'm concerned, the best way to defend or attack a candidate is on issues only. These new rules will only serve to keep us on track.



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 11:10 AM
link   
reply to post by nyk537
 


We're still good!

The thing I don't like is Obama's gaffes have become a major issue in his campaign. Now we no longer can point them out. We can't even have good fun with it. It really seems someone is out to protect Obama from himself. John Kerry did not get the kit glove treatment, and George Bush certainly didn't get it.

Some will turn it around and say..."We are protecting McCain and Palin also" Well that is bunk because they don't need protection much like Bush didn't need it. I and most ATS'ers and certainly most voters in the USA know what is relevant in a campaign and don't need a nanny to protect us from it.

If ATS did get a complaint from someone high in government or high in the MSM, it most certainly came from the pro-Obama side of the spectrum. Obama himself has stated he will not put up with being "Swiftboated", is this one of his tactics to ensure this won't happen?

I am not stupid, some attacks stick, especially when they are based in truth, some attacks help the one being attacked because most know they are phony. Let us decide! Don't do it for us.



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 11:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by nyk537
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 


There is no bias. ATS has always stood for intelligent discussion and limited personal attacks. This site as a whole has always stood by it's members, and that's what they are doing here.

Even if some of you can't see it, this change is for us. This is not a limit on free speech or anything similar. All that we have here is a way to promote real discussion cut out the ignorant bickering over nothing.

As has been said here many times. If you don't like it...

Leave.


I'm just curious, does whomever is "in charge" agree with telling members if they don't like it, to leave? That doesn't seem like the best way to smooth ruffled feathers and get everyone to unite on this. You did say ATS stands by its members. Are you a moderator?



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 11:15 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 11:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Bombeni
 


No I'm not, but I've been around long enough to know how things work.

Also, I believe SO himself has made reference to members taking their business elsewhere if they can't abide by the rules.



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 11:18 AM
link   
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 


It's hard to believe that when you keep posting trying to defend your position on this.

It is what it is, and we can't change that. Either adapt or move on.

It's simple.

I'm not trying to get into an argument with you personally here. This is about the broader issue. Nothing more.

Edit to add: When did I personally attack anyone?

[edit on 12-9-2008 by nyk537]



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 11:19 AM
link   
Is there some reason we cannot question some rules?



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 11:20 AM
link   
Politics without politics as usual?

I like it, now if you could get the mainstream media to fire ALL biased journalists and anchors, and adapt a similar set of restrictions, maybe you would then have the two major political camps start discussing the real, urgent and most important issues that ALL Americans should be concerned with.

As I see it, it will be hard for most people to focus on these issues when they are bombarded daily by both left-wing and right-wing biased media which will report anything from rumors to outright lies etc, leaving the issues that matter most with little or no coverage, unless it fits within their biased agendas.

I look forward to seeing how this works out on ATS, but I expect that a lot of people will simply go elsewhere to discuss "mainstream politics as usual"





[edit on 12-9-2008 by The_Alarmist2012]



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 11:23 AM
link   
reply to post by nyk537
 


I don't attack people on this forum,

All of a sudden I wonder why you are so defensive.

I try not to spam or smear, and I don't abide that either, it just seems to me this forum is one-sided, in many ways, and those who don't abide/lock step ,are anathema.


[edit on 113030p://bFriday2008 by Stormdancer777]

[edit on 113030p://bFriday2008 by Stormdancer777]



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 11:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by The_Alarmist2012
but I expect that a lot of people will simply go elsewhere to discuss "mainstream politics as usual"


And that is what sets ATS apart my friend.

This kind of real discussion will work here when it would fail anywhere else.

That's why I'm proud to be a part of this.



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 11:25 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 


See what I mean



[edit on 113030p://bFriday2008 by Stormdancer777]



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 11:27 AM
link   
reply to post by nyk537
 





And that is what sets ATS apart my friend.


Right, lol, as long as you go with the flow.



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 11:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 


No I don't. What do you mean?

What was quoted there?




posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 11:30 AM
link   
I do have one question...

Can you absolutely guarantee that those who will enforce these restrictions and rules will do so without ANY political bias?



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 11:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by nyk537
reply to post by Bombeni
 


No I'm not, but I've been around long enough to know how things work.

Also, I believe SO himself has made reference to members taking their business elsewhere if they can't abide by the rules.


Ok ok, I was just asking. So basically you are telling members they can hit the road when SO is unavailable to do so himself.



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 11:32 AM
link   
reply to post by nyk537
 


My argument is not with you, nyk,

Enjoy your forum.
Remember me.




posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 11:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by The_Alarmist2012
I do have one question...

Can you absolutely guarantee that those who will enforce these restrictions and rules will do so without ANY political bias?


That is all I am saying.

They are taking away my points, OH woes is me, whatever shall I do?

I hope everyone can see the humor in all this.





[edit on 113030p://bFriday2008 by Stormdancer777]



new topics

top topics



 
92
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join