posted January 24, 2012 07:26 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Randall:
For the record, Joan, my comments were not directed toward you in particular. You do pride yourself on fairness. But it seems that you overlook the comments on here when coming from people who you agree with idealogically. I've seen Jwhop attacked from all sides. He holds his own. AG is as insulting as Jwhop, but because he's of like mind, you praise him. Be the fairness you wish to see exhibited in others, and maybe you will be able to effect some change in society as a whole.

---

posted January 24, 2012 07:42 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Randall:
I allow strong opinions on both sides. No one is breaking the rules. The extra latitude in this Forum is granted for the reasons Juni stated. And I don't see you speaking against Node, Kat, or AG when they do the same to Jwhop. Why not? Because they ascribe to your philosophies? Isn't that the very definition of favoritism? When you attack America with the strong language you used, you shouldn't be surprised at the backlash you incite as a result of it.

---

Well the truth is I won't be taking offense to Kat, Node, Pixie, Shura or AG because they've never personally insulted me. The day they do I might. If someone decides to attack Jwhop that's not my issue, that's between the people involved. At times I might jump in if it seems as though he's completely out of line. But I take offense to when on occasion Jwhop decides to throw insults at me. It then becomes my issue and I won't stand for it.

posted January 24, 2012 07:58 PM            

I included myself in my generalizations and cited a source and my own personal experience. Let's not get into a debate about ethics surrounding how to discuss controversial topics because Jwhop throws that right out the window within his topics and threads. Many people on this forum do that and that's fine, because we are all entitled to state whatever we think freely thank's to the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

posted January 24, 2012 08:51 PM            

I do believe you are being naive if you think your inflammatory thread title wouldn`t light up the forum. You already know jwhop yet you choose to poke him in his American eye with it Yes, AG and jwhop got toe to toe. AG insults jwhop when angered . Who is the judge of which insult is allowed and not another?

I can`t recall a single person mentioned in above posts ever starting a thread calling out Americans as you did. Not Node, kat, shura, AG or any other American poster that I can recall.

Node was kind in her post and an idea may be to go back and read and ponder her post to help see how not to be all inclusive and lend a neutral eye to your writings.

Idealism is a glorious attribute when used wisely and maturely.

posted January 24, 2012 09:23 PM            

I'm not criticizing Jwhops opinions, viewpoints, beliefs, values, ideologies, I'm only stating that I will not accept insults from him or anyone else on this forum. It's not OK. I'm not naive, of course I knew this topic was controversial. However I'm an American and I can make comments about being an American, Monday to Sunday, it's my constitutional right! That's why I brought it up. To further discuss and get insights which I was receiving initially from Node and PixieJane who so honestly and respectfully responded with information and sources to support their positions. You made note of how kind Node was in responding, but what about how abrasive Jwhop was? Of course he's the exception right Juniperb? Yes we all should mirror Node's eloquence but there's an exemption for Jwhop right?

Please don't misdirect irritation or anger at other commenters towards my direction. I stand by this thread and other thread topics I've posted. Anyone can respond however they please, that's not my concern, it's directing unwarranted insults in my direction. Say you disagree, say my arguments are ungrounded but do not insult me as an individual. I have never done that to anyone here and I would never do that.

It's becoming clear to me, Juniperb and Randall, that you're both trying to distract my criticisms of Jwhop's behavior by attacking the way I formatted and organized this thread. Correct me if I'm wrong. I've already made Jwhop aware that it would be best that we avoided each other in these threads. Which I've done, I don't post on his threads out of respect because I don't support his views and don't wish to insult him.

Randall and Juniperb, we are not in agreement on this topic nor the behavior of Jwhop and I see this is a no win situation because I don't call the shots, you both do and my criticisms are ineffectual. I've seen the truth and it's harsh and surprising but that's the way it goes, I guess. From here on out I'm requesting we all stick strictly to this thread topic.

posted January 24, 2012 11:26 PM            

Maybe NativelyJoan had a specific political agenda in posting what she did, but if so I don't see it. What I see her saying applies to Democrats in general just as it does to Republicans in general--though exceptions exist among Democrats and Republicans both.

Btw, John Stossel has commented on the failure of our schools--and the successes of European schools:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bx4pN-aiofw

Seems to me that he--a libertarian who is featured on FOX news--is saying something similar to NativelyJoan.

Oh, and here's Penn & Teller showing how dumb Americans can be, and this time it's Leftists getting exposed for their lack of critical thinking skills:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yi3erdgVVTw

posted January 25, 2012 10:40 AM            

They believe they can make outrageous, libelous statements against others and not be subject to the very same treatment.

Make no mistake.

The title and substance of this thread NativelyJoan started was intended to be an insulting attack on Americans and America.

The source NativelyJoan used comes from Loony-Tunes leftists with their heads up their butts.

For instance, NativelyJoan and her source says Americans want smaller government BUT then talk out of the other sides of their mouths and want their Social Security and Medicare left intact. A clear case of ignorance and stupidity to hear NativelyJoan and her Loony-Tunes source tell the story.

What foolish twaddle.

Of course Americans want Social Security and Medicare maintained. Americans have made forced contributions to Social Security since 1936 and to Medicare since the 1960s. Why in the hell wouldn't Americans want to receive what they've paid for?

What's happened on this thread is typical of the leftist thought process.

Leftists believe they can say anything and be immune little "touch me nots" from any return fire. When leftists get exactly what they deserve, they screech, howl, shriek and run to Randall to show him their oowies.

Nevertheless, I am an absolute believer in personal property rights. We all exist here under the benevolent sufferance Randall has established for this forum..and others.

Now, where's Mirandee?

It's about time for her to show up here with an election only 10 months away and push her little Marxist Messiah O'Bomber over the finish line...or, better yet, over the "finished line".

posted January 25, 2012 01:34 PM            

if jwhop doesn't like what she says he can always LEAVE, as he is always inviting those he considers INFERIOR AMERICANS to do.

i note however, that whenever this subject comes up, jwhop allows his backers to stand in for him until he feels the coast is clear.

i also notice that he has been taking a different tone on other threads lately which, i must say, is deeply appreciated by me. when you drop the abusive, pigeonholing stance, jwhop, you are much more eloquent and your point gets across much better.

posted January 25, 2012 01:56 PM            

"if jwhop doesn't like what she says he can always LEAVE, as he is always inviting those he considers INFERIOR AMERICANS to do"

Focus hard!

posted January 25, 2012 02:14 PM            

quote:

---

Yes we all should mirror Node's eloquence but there's an exemption for Jwhop right?

---

Node is always eloquent but that was not the point of my post.

It was her suggestion I refer to:

quote:

---

Although this statement is broad I would agree that it it is more true than not. I would amend the statement to say something like.... most, or the majority.

---

If worded as such or an equivalent, one would not come across as flammatory or looking for a row. And that`s what I ment by using Idealism and posting wisely. No more, no less. Be an all inclusive poster and one has an all inclusive boat to row.

Interesting to me you don`t seem to care what was thought of your content but rather making some poster am exception.

jwhop is NO exception and as kat said, all have lost their tempers and spoke ungraciously at one time or another. Rather I or you like it or not, GU gets rowdy and heated.

These rules are obeyed here:

quote:

---

You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use this bulletin board to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, racist, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually explicit, pornographic, threatening, personally insulting of any member, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise violative of any law

---

Good luck and I do hope you continue to post and share .

posted January 25, 2012 02:19 PM            

i do not NEED to get anything just because you say so. the INFERIOR is definitely IMPLIED in your "accidental" category.

posted January 25, 2012 02:34 PM            

Sorry, but the vast majority of Americans would agree with me...not you.