It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by gimme_some_truth
With all due respect are you under the impression that this is the first " crack down" we have ever had to do? It is not. There were crackdowns when Bush was in office as well.
I am not sure where you are seeing bias. The new rules stop BOTH sides from doing and saying things that both sides should not have been doing and saying in the first place.
Now if the new rule said, "no republicans can speak their mind" I would agree. If it said "No democrats can speak their mind" I would agree.
It does not say that though, these are rules for all political affiliations and they are and will be enforced equally. Anybody who breaks any of these rules will have action against them. Not just republicans and not just democrats.
Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
However, the subject is a valid conspiracy theory on many levels, worthy of discussion on ATS.
And with that in mind, I'm 100% certain it's possible to discuss the subject within the guidelines laid out in the opening post.
It is a very heated issue for many.
Lets face it if your argument/thesis has to rely on bombastic personal attacks, sniping, or the repeated use of clearly false material (aka the "IF I shout it loud and long enough it must be true" syndrome, then perhaps its time you rethink how to better defend your position in an articulate and civil manner.
Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
(2a) Avatars designed exclusively to denigrate a politician or political figure, using derogatory wording or photo-manipulation, is not allowed.
Originally posted by pavil
While I welcome this new round of enforcement, the proof is in the pudding. The guidelines that have been laid out are pretty easy to enforce. I hope they are enforced on all evenly. That was one of the problems last time around, which has caused this problem to rear it's ugly head yet again.
Got my fingers crossed..........
As for people like myself.... That's a pretty narrow subset, a seriously narrow subset. Consisting of Males Over Forty with a College Education, Combat Infantrymen and Calvary Soldiers (Specifically those who served in Honduras, Panama, Kuwait and Iraq,) Disabled Veterans, Life Members of the DAV and Members of the NAAV, Law Abiding Citizens, Native Americans (Specifically: Mixed Crow, Lakota, Algonquin, European, Gemanic and Irish (Yes I am a Mutt!),) Democrats, Texans, Boarder Residents, People With No Criminal Records, People born in Charleston, South Carolina and raised in Iowa. People who have PTSD and Depression, People Contaminated with Depleted Uranium, Computer Geeks and so on and such forth.
Clearly if you can create or define a group 'like' myself, you are a miracle worker. (Which is also to read: What are you doing here when the world needs you?????)
So seriously, which group am I supposed to be here, that you think I am defending from or that has a position to be associated with???
Originally posted by whatukno
Politics are a very emotional realm.
People get heated fast. (I know I have) and sometimes they say things that are rather inappropriate. It's not directly charged at the poster it's more about the idea.
If one is on one side of the issue and others are on another, the differences are going to cause strife and people will backlash.
I do like this idea, but I think it is going to be difficult for many to adhere to. Especially when rhetoric is involved.
If you see someone stirring up crap on a reasonable thread, and they are pro-gov't health care, AND they are from a foreign country, it might be a reasonable assessment that they are a paid shill.