loadingreadyrun.com

Having a brother who's vastly more right-wing than......pretty much everybody short of invoking Godwins Law, this thread confuses the hell out of me. Skewed points of reference can do that I guess, because Yukikaze doesn't seem that extreme to me. Ah well.



...Yeah, I really have nothing to add to this thread.

Regarding my apparent paranoia about suddenly finding myself disbarred from reading the forums here... Allow me to explain.

The last(and really, only) forum I was banned from had a stated policy of giving troublemakers a very clear warning and holding a convene of the administration before issuing a ban.

This does not explain why I logged in to check replies to a post I had made to find myself disbarred, without warning of any kind, for a joking comment I had made, in admittedly poor taste, not four minutes earlier about the current president of the United States of America.

I know who did it, I know why he did it. I must admit myself it was not something I should have said, but I don't consider it ban-worthy, especially considering some of the things that had been allowed, and even encouraged, in the same forum. I could have appealed, but I decided that if the administration would be that blatant about disregarding their own rules, then I did not want to be associated with them.

So perhaps you'll understand that when I post here, I do so with the assumption that any given post, private message, or thread read-through may be my last, without any warning whatsoever. The fact that the Crew have gone so far as to state this is not so says much about them in comparison to "the other place." The fact that I am still around says exponentially more.

However, as I have stated before, I am not a trusting person. I still consider that when I hit the "Submit" button, I may never get to see my own reply.

Nah, you will see your reply.

My problem with the man is not that I do not agree with his politics, my problem is that he's a duplicitous hypocrite. He says that opposing the Government does not make one un-American now that the candidate he wanted is not in Government. He says that he wants to restore the country to a state where they do not care about political affiliation, by attempting to impose his political agenda on people.

He says that America is good and then that God is good. It can be one or the other not both, and certainly not God second. The fall of man must be accepted in order for Christian theology to stand in any manner. America cannot be good, because America consists of it's citizens, and if the fall of man is accepted, then Americans, like all other humans, are not good. Because he said both, and more importantly put God second; it shows that these are either not his true beliefs, or he does not take them seriously. He is merely using the religion card to gain more popularity for his political manoeuvrings.

Zivlok wrote:

Evisr wrote:That guy really creeps me out.. and sadly he will get away with it.

Sorry if I kinda hijack this thread a bit but I was also looking around Youtube and I found probably one of the worse "journalist" videos I've seen from Fox.

Apparently its a cool thing now a days to mock the Canadian military. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcJn5XlbSFk

I got 23 seconds in and then they made fun of his name, "Leslie". HIS LAST NAME. I couldn't go any farther.

I like the self righteous chuckle as if they were thinking "HAH THE WIT"

"I believe in God and He is the Center of my Life."
My problem with this is that it immediately excludes not only those who aren't religious, but everyone who believes in more than one god or in a different kind of spirituality. Certainly this is an important principle to those who believe in God, but trying to make it a universal principle when it is not universally held (and does not NEED to be universally held) strikes me as being close-minded and wrong. You can't tell an entire country that they must have the same religious beliefs you do.

There are a few other points I take issue with, but that's the main one that bothers me. And I agree with many of the points made by Unclever Title on the first page.
...actually, reading over it again, I agree with most of those points.

Can't we all just get along and let Black Jesus go back to leading America across the bridge of Hope and Love to Candy Mountain?


CHARLIEEEEEEE?

blah blah magical liopleurodon blah blah.

I'm really curious now as to what gives rise to Yukikaze's reputation. I wouldn't mind a discussion on alternate viewpoints, so long as it's bereft of cheap-shot argument tactics and the sweeping generalizations get dialed back a bit. I might, when questioned, classify myself as a gigantic freakin' hippie, if that helps you get it up discussion-wise.

ROUND ONE

FIGHT

CyberTractor wrote:This has changed from a "talk about Glenn Beck" thread to a "bash Yukikaze for having an opinion that coincides with Glenn Beck's" thread.

The issue I saw with it isn't that Yukikaze agrees with a more conservative viewpoint, it's that - in his first post, entirely unprovoked - he called the entire board a bunch of Hypocrites. No one likes being called a hypocrite.

Yuki: You've been here for 2 years. We're nice people. We don't get mad at people for having differing opinions. You won't be banned.


I for one am entirely up for an intelligent political or religious thread. We've had touches of them in the past, but nothing concrete, as obviously it doesn't stay together for so long. I consider myself a hippie-dippie, evolution-supporting, Obama-lover, but at the same time I love to hear what what the conservative or religious crowd might say.

I guess what I'm trying to say is this: Everyone ends up being unintentionally inflammatory when stating their opinion. I do it myself a lot of the time without realizing it, and I'm sure other people do as well. The problem we have is that for the most part, these boards are younger and liberal, and we all get used to the things said young, liberal people might say; any accidental insult will go overlooked because we've already seen it and dealt with it. However, when someone comes in with a more conservative point of view and says something (maybe entirely unintentionally) offensive, people get up in arms because we're not used to seeing that kind of talk.

Does that make sense at all? It does to me, but I'm also kind of tired and maybe slightly inebriated.


TL;DR: Play nice, take everything with a grain of salt, assume that your fellow board members have good intentions with their posts, and there will be World Peace!

JesterJ. wrote:

CyberTractor wrote:This has changed from a "talk about Glenn Beck" thread to a "bash Yukikaze for having an opinion that coincides with Glenn Beck's" thread.

The issue I saw with it isn't that Yukikaze agrees with a more conservative viewpoint, it's that - in his first post, entirely unprovoked - he called the entire board a bunch of Hypocrites. No one likes being called a hypocrite.

Yuki: You've been here for 2 years. We're nice people. We don't get mad at people for having differing opinions. You won't be banned.


I for one am entirely up for an intelligent political or religious thread. We've had touches of them in the past, but nothing concrete, as obviously it doesn't stay together for so long. I consider myself a hippie-dippie, evolution-supporting, Obama-lover, but at the same time I love to hear what what the conservative or religious crowd might say.

I guess what I'm trying to say is this: Everyone ends up being unintentionally inflammatory when stating their opinion. I do it myself a lot of the time without realizing it, and I'm sure other people do as well. The problem we have is that for the most part, these boards are younger and liberal, and we all get used to the things said young, liberal people might say; any accidental insult will go overlooked because we've already seen it and dealt with it. However, when someone comes in with a more conservative point of view and says something (maybe entirely unintentionally) offensive, people get up in arms because we're not used to seeing that kind of talk.

Does that make sense at all? It does to me, but I'm also kind of tired and maybe slightly inebriated.


TL;DR: Play nice, take everything with a grain of salt, assume that your fellow board members have good intentions with their posts, and there will be World Peace!

this.

James wrote:Glenn Beck is a fucking idiot. That is all.

WORD!

While we're on the topic of politics, here are some of the policies my the local provincial political parties, off the top of my head:

Liberals:
Supports a flat income tax
re-introducing ambulance fees
reducing spending on welfare, healthcare, and education
cutting government jobs
freezing wages of current government employees

Conservatives:
Removed ambulance fees in the first place, and is criticizing the liberals for putting them back in.
Complains about all the cutting in spending and laying off of government employees.
When they were in power, spent much more on welfare, healthcare, and the education than the liberals have.


Unsurprisingly, this has created a very confusing situation around here, with people not knowing which party to support (the uber-conservative brother I mentioned previously has even started to question his alliances, the rest of my family finds his predicament quite amusing).

JesterJ. wrote:

CyberTractor wrote:This has changed from a "talk about Glenn Beck" thread to a "bash Yukikaze for having an opinion that coincides with Glenn Beck's" thread.

The issue I saw with it isn't that Yukikaze agrees with a more conservative viewpoint, it's that - in his first post, entirely unprovoked - he called the entire board a bunch of Hypocrites. No one likes being called a hypocrite.

This was also a problem. I'm not saying he was a victim in this thread either.

Strange game. The only way to win is not to play.

JesterJ. wrote:

CyberTractor wrote:This has changed from a "talk about Glenn Beck" thread to a "bash Yukikaze for having an opinion that coincides with Glenn Beck's" thread.

The issue I saw with it isn't that Yukikaze agrees with a more conservative viewpoint, it's that - in his first post, entirely unprovoked - he called the entire board a bunch of Hypocrites. No one likes being called a hypocrite.

This is, however, an accurate description of the majority of his posts in any thread about politics or religion.

Instant and unprovoked venom about how much holier or right or what-the-fuck-ever you are and how nobody else gets it doesn't accomplish anything except making you look like a huge, whining tit. Going completely off the fucking deep end when people call you out on being a huge, whining tit doesn't help anything either.

It's the kind of scream-until-the-other-guy-leaves-the-room flaming row that's you see from immature bullies and is completely unrelated to rational or reasoned discussion.

That is the problem. Opposing viewpoints can be rationally and reasonably discussed. They, in fact, should be. Declaring, from the start, that everyone who doesn't believe exactly what you say and think is by definition of not agreeing with you, wrong, is closed-minded, ignorant and useless.

I'm curious what yuki's views are. Going around and saying you guys all suck cause you'll persecute me if i say what i want, isn't helping anything at all.

Also glen beck does seem to be a tool, but he'll always have an audience till somebody more entertaining comes along for that audience to cling too.

and finally at least those idiots talking about the army weren't and as bad as that one insane blonde woman from a couple years back, i think she was on hannity and combs a lot.

So I have an aunt and uncle who live in the Midwest and all throughout the campaign season, I'd see email forwards (*shudder*) from her on the family ML which have been debunked on Snopes.com about then-Presidential candidate Obama. I gave the rest of the family the Snopes URLs and asked them to do more research on non-partisan sites before voting or forwarding those kinds of messages to the family.

Recently I saw another one that was a take on the Chicken Little story that while it could not be proven or disproven because it was based in a fictional/satirical context, it still made me feel uncomfortable because it was unfairly critical of a president I like. I took my complaints directly to them because I'm trying my best to make sense of the economic situation and how I can feel good about whatever solutions are taking place.

My uncle's response was to imply that Obama was going to turn the country into a socialist/commie hell hole and my first reaction was, "Wait, did you seriously diss Canadians for being able to make some socioeconomic strides we haven't been able to make yet due to our adherence to capitalism?"

The "teal deer" point I'm trying to make is that I can understand where/why Yukikaze feels marginalized because every time he sees a post like this one, he feels as if he is being marginalized by people he's come to like and trust. It is a form of rejection, but I think that it's one he's going to have to learn to accept for the next four years.


Trisha Lynn
...sad, but true...

Cybren wrote:Strange game. The only way to win is not to play.

This.

Yoda had it right when he told us that anger is bad. It really, really doesn't help.

Going back to the Canadian military clip for a second. The thing I'm not sure people are realizing is that the show "Red Eye" isn't an actual news show. It's more in the vein of "DL Hughley Breaks the News" or "the Daily Show", where popular news stories are made fun of. They're a late night talk show based loosely around the news.

This isn't to say that their cracks at the Canadian military were in poor taste (they were) and a little too vehement for the show's supposed lackadaisical stance toward news, but I think that was maybe missed by some people who just saw the "FoxNews" logo and assumed that it was being presented as regular news.

To the conservative, even the liberal members of the forum:

The thing about politics is that most people have strongly held opinions, but do not think about the source of those opinions. It is much easier to yell about subjugation and intolerance to one's beliefs than it is in fact to consider those beliefs or those of one's perceived opponent.

Most of the beliefs that I hold that would stand to controversy I have gained through higher education: investigating the source of ideological or political conflicts and attempting to view all the sides as objectively as can be done through research. I realize that at times that research may be guided by or influenced by certain ways of thinking, but referenced, citable documentary histories are available in most of these areas for those who care to look. Sometimes they are in other languages, but I would regard that as a challenge rather than a roadblock.

My point is that in political debate it is easier to butt heads than make head way, easier to talk than it is to listen, especially to ourselves. Now, I highlighted this to the conservative forum goers because their opinions are in many areas different from my own, but I would look forward to reading an explanation of why they believe the things they do (in politics specifically - frankly I don't care about your religion), where those beliefs come from, and how they question their own stances to ensure they are still 'on the side' that they wave the flag for. I highly doubt that it would change my own opinions (because, frankly, after I've shaved in the morning I've usually already seen the smartest person I'll meet all day), but the chance to be challenged or even shown the error of one's ways is one of life's great pleasures.

I would like to debate with you some day Brad. It'd probably be fun.

Extremists on either end of the spectrum scare me. I don't have a problem with religious people, or conservatives, or anyone who thinks differently than I do. I just don't like being bashed over the head with those differing opinions, or have it infered that I am stupid because I have a differing opinion.

As far as Glen Beck goes. I really just find him kind of obnoxious. I do agree with a few of his points tho.
I must always try to be a more honest person than I was yesterday.
Any attempts to be more honest, or generally improve ourselves is always a good plan. I don't think there is enough honesty in this world.

It is not un-American for me to disagree with authority or to share my personal opinion.
This is always a good point to remember. General disagreement with authority is how change happens. Whether you disagree with Barack Obama, Stephen Harper or *insert leader of your alternate country here*.
Change does not happen when everyone accepts the status quo.

The government works for me. I do not answer to them, they answer to me.
This needs to be more true than it is. But the government is NOT afraid of the people in the US.

America Is Good.
I thought about this one alot, and at first I didn't like the sounds of it, nor did I like that it got first billing. But then I looked a bit closer. In order for positive change to occur, people need to believe in their country, and they need to believe in themselves. Children who believe they are 'bad children' are much more likely to misbehave, and then same goes with Adults. If people assume their Country is evil, then they won't work to make it better.