Follow by Email

What is it about nice people that attract total idiots?Nice people are martyrs. Idiots are evangelists.

SOCK IT TO ME BABY!!!

Tuesday, February 28, 2017

Coming back into the sunshine

I think I did a pretty good job of trying to give those with liberal leanings on social media a fair turn.  I've invited questions and answered.  I have tried hard to wean myself from treating them all like trolls, tried to hear their sides.  And I might have agreed on a few things with them, if not for...

I wasted a weekend discussing with two of them about how telling CNN, "I don't want to talk to you", is the blade's opposite side in a free speech, free press world.  You can report what you want; I simply don't have to share anything with you if you're going to pervert it all.  But, my debaters were sure, that this constitutes censorship, and makes the person unwilling to speak a Nazi.  Yes, the high crime of insulting CNN is the same as the crime of nearly wiping a continent off the map.

Oh, but Hitler didn't start out killing people, I was told.  As if you can parse evil like that into more easily digestible bits to use at your convenience.  Never once stopping to think that, while they claim that their version of "never again" includes extreme diligence in this regard, that they are falling for the same fear mongering hate that caused Germany to sit back and let Hitler do what he did.

This is what bugs me.  It's not about policies.  For example, the convo came back to the refugee ban.  I tried to explain that it wasn't a religious ban, because it included 7 nations without responsible governments.  Which was turned around with the concept that it was STILL a Muslim ban because there were no non-Muslim nations on the list.  Oh, and it was only nations that DIDN'T have dealings with the President.  So which is it?

Or how about the one where the MSM is now CONSERVATIVE.  When I pointed out that Fox stands virtually alone on broadcast news against CNN, MSNBC, BBC, and the other three broadcast networks, the reply was, "But Fox out draws them all, so it's a conservative mainstream media."  Well, dude, there's a REASON Fox outdraws them all- and it's the same reason why ESPN and the NFL are losing viewers.  It's called liberal bias, and a lot of the nation is sick of it.

But the final straw for me wasn't that.  Nor the barrage that I got on twitter of "What would Jesus do" posts- and without trying to be anti-semitic, it was a man of the Jewish persuasion trying to lecture me on my Lord.  No, the final straw for me was a man that I so recently respected as a decent human being and thoughtful debater retweeted some idiot post about Melania Trump's past.  To which I replied that this just proves the point- that for a lot of liberals, this has nothing to do with policies, or what's good for this nation, but just destroying anything that disagrees with their position.

His answer?  "Oh, well."

Let that sink in.  An admitting that it has nothing to do with anything but hate for what disagrees with it.  This kind of liberalism, so prevalent in Hollywood, in the MSM, on social media, is nothing but a rancid, sucking cancer that knows nothing but class hate and how to destroy.

And I am cutting it out of my life.


I don't need your cancer. I can well decide myself on what is right or wrong, evil or good.  And I'm done trying to point out to you when you're making valid points and when you're making a jackass of yourself.

I'm coming into the world of sunshine, a world where I don't have to spend my waking hours spreading paranoia and hate and the destruction of lives.  I'm going to celebrate the great things happening in our nation, and when necessary I'll hold the government I voted for to the fire.  Prolly a lot more now that I'm not wasting my time on those who only sneer behind my back anyway.

So, enjoy your humorless humor, your pointless fears, your tired insults.  I'm gonna sing in the sunshine.  Who wants to come along?

30 comments:

  1. Thank you for your thoughts, Chris.
    Why not tell folks who you are writing about?
    I have absolutely no problem in acknowledging that one of the two persons you write about in your blog entry is me.
    You thave chosen to take personal potshots that are indeed leveled at me. I have never personally attacked you as an individual as you have me on my blog and on Twitter.
    I accept responsibility and consequences of my own words. Unfortunately, Chris, you have put your own spin on what I have written in my blog and twisted it into somethng I did not express as you have spun. Ditto with my tweets.
    I choose not to argue for the sake of argument nor to engage in an exchange that would be better discussed personally face to face. I also refuse to stoop to a low level of attacking you or demeaning you or lecturing you as you have done to me. We disagree on many fronts, both in opinion and the manner in which we address issues. Regardless, I still respect you and continu to think of you as a friend.
    I hope that some day you will not jump to erroneous conclusions about me or my intentions.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Where did I libel you? I said nothing personal about you, other than you have chosen to side with those who put garbage (because that's what it is) about Trumpo and Nazism. And frankly, the discussion wasn't about the post, but about the following discussion.

      The thing I had against you is the same thing that split me and Robyn Engel- personal attacks on the POTUS' wife, who has NOTHING to do with the government. And when I tried one last time to make you see why I objected, your answer was "Oh well."

      I opened the blog with you last time- you posted two links, I responded to each one. And there it lay.

      If you wish to acknowledge that you are one of the two people, that is your right. I don't consider it mine.


      You seem to run in cycles. One day you are willing to fairly discuss any point. The next you whip out the Nazi card to see what tumbles out of the tree. Or you post that thing "from 15 years ago" about Melania. That demens the discussion, not anything I did or didn't say about you.

      That part of my post after "This kind of liberalism" doesn't have to apply to you, and 905 of the time it doesn't. But in the cases sited, it did, and I am done with it.

      I put the posts up in chronological order. I'll now put up your second part and deal with it hopefully seperately.

      Delete
    2. Ops, never mind. E-mail just sent me the first comment twice.

      Delete
  2. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. For some reason I got yet another iteration of the original post. SOMEone up there wants me to post it several times, lol!

      Delete
  3. CW -- I am so glad that you have a forum to run to whenever things get too tough in an open forum! "Don't worry; be happy!" “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” ― Edmund Burke.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And this, friends would be the other antagonist, who claims I got off the thread because I was "losing" rather than because I was tired of going in circles with someone who believes that playing the Nazi card is appropriate in nearly any circumstance if you leave out all the deaths.

      I would point out that the "open forum" he refers to is Roland's blog, which is no more or less open than my own, else his comment wouldn't have appeared. See, that's freedom of speech, Dale.

      I would also point out that, in this particular comment, he seems to find happiness something to be resisted, and thinks that NOT wanting to has the same crap over and over is dishonorable. THAT is why I got out of the whole thing.

      Then, he passive aggressive accuses me of doing nothing, or brags about his doing something. But what are you doing when you alienate the people you want to reach by pinning a swastika to all your talking points?

      And, in claiming he is "doing something", he brings up another good point. Though I opposed the last administration, the only things I spoke out against were the things I thought were his most harmful failures. One: Obamacare which is a typical pyramid scheme, which is only successful when people gaining from it can continually find people who can be screwed by it. Two: Benghazi, where his inattention allowed his State Department to hang four people out to dry unneccessarily. And three: the Ferguson/Baltimore mess, where he had a real chance to unite the races, but further divided the nation instead in the name of spin points. However, Dale, Roland, and others think the best way to oppose is apparently to nitpick every little thing, blow the simple far out of proportion, and attack the opposition on a personal level. While I disliked Michelle Obama, the ONLY thing I have ever said against her was that her PUBLIC statements make her seem more a racist than any of the politicians involved, including her husband. I'm sorry, but the opposite of racism is NOT "Poor black people, you mean white guys." But, that's another topic.

      Finally, since he decided to come over and play whak-a-mole, I will give Dale this- I was wrong to castigate him on his tired insult tag line on the thread. Trump used the insult card way too much during the campaign, and is merely reaping the whirlwind.

      Delete
    2. Am I the only one to find the one great irony in Lyin' Don's first formal speech to a full session of Congress? Did he really say that: "The time for small thinking is over," Trump said. "The time for trivial fights is behind us?"
      Is this the start of a new era of cooperation? Did some in his entourage FINALLY get to him with the message that civility starts at the top? TY, CW, for admitting that Lyin' Don's personal attacks on so many others opens himself up for similar belittling by those who oppose him.

      Open vs. close forum -- When I first posted something on one of Roland's blogs, the only thing I had to do was to confirm that I was not a robot. When I first posted something on THIS blog, I received a message that my post had to be "approved." THAT'S the difference between an open forum and a close one. Thank you, CW for allowing my post.

      Delete
    3. Open vs closed: No, that's the difference between "I am so sick and tired of deleting spam comments" and "wow, all I have to do is delete the spam folder". Simply different means of saying the same thing.

      I will take on the challenge of your latest comment, since it is valid- to a point. I listened to NPR say much the same thing ( sans insult which you and Trump could both take a lesson on), and I thought to myself, "No- it's not so much that it's something he hasn't said before, it's just something that hasn't been LISTENED to"- which again wouldn't be a problem IF he hadn't had to be so crass in the debates.

      When one has to constantly defend their ideals against BS charges (which, unlike you, I dump the whole "censorship" thing and the "Nazi" slander), it is hard to see that the person your arguing with just MIGHT have some of the same concerns YOU have. I'm not against what you and Roland had to say, just the WAY you said it. Similarly, Trump doesn't have a problem with CNN reporting, but with HOW they spin things to the negative. By constantly being on the attack, they make it easy for Trump to call them out- a lesson CBS apparently learned, and maybe NPR.

      They want Trump to talk to them? Cease the endless, pointless, stupid attacks on him, his people and his family, and concentrate on issues. THEN, if he tries to shoot them down, it's bad on him- and the American people will see it.

      But coating things in OMG he's a Nazi- as Roland HAS done more than once, and you defended him in- or that pointless stupid tweet about Melania last night- that's your credibility in a garbage bag, and when I and many others stop listening.

      Delete
  4. Chris, I'm sorry that you're struggling here. I don't know the answer. I suspect that you won't win many hearts and minds on the internet. The blogging world is by and large kinder than other platforms on social media, but it still leaves plenty of room for miscommunication (and/or frustration).

    I think that until this POTUS has more time in office many discussions will not bear much fruit. If he's successful at bringing back jobs and making the economy thrive... well, those are unarguable facts. If he isn't, he's just on a par with the rest of the POTUS's since Reagan. I would argue that the economy is actually in much worse shape than when Reagan took office, so this POTUS has a much harder row to hoe. But, if he can untangle health care, bring back jobs, get a handle on immigration... these are all tangible good things that reasonable people can get behind.

    There is an excellent video by Ron Beck you can find on YouTube (actually two videos) about immigration. One is called Immigration and Gumballs. The other is Immigration by the Numbers. I think they're both worth watching.

    Hang in there!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Appreciated more than you know. I believe you could teach me a lot about hanging in there I've yet to learn...

      Delete
  5. Chris:
    The one thing you have got to realize is that the liberals DO make it all about "policy", and their policy IS to disagree with anything BUT their own beliefs, in spite of trying to show them facts that otherwise bear truth to reason.
    When people gripe out of only a sense of "convenience", rather than evidence that gives purpose behind a gripe, that is what bothers me.
    It's the old "Oppositional Defiance Disorder" we hear tell about.
    There are people who just live to be combative, argumentative, and downright ignorant about a great many things they SHOULD know about.
    But, it's not like I've got 6 decades of life and experiences to draw upon to make my conclusions, right...lol.

    Good call.
    Stay safe (and free to speak your mind) up there, brother.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Unfortunately, there are gripers on both sides of the fence. People that go after Obama's kids just like the Bush girls and just like Trump's little man. Again, I say I think such attacks are cowardly and have nothing to do with civil discourse.

      But it does seem like you see it more from the left- many of them think this blind opposition is their version of 60's "flying the freak flag". Just about as effective in getting their point across too.

      The fact that my two debaters have come over says something different about them. Not ideologically, but in the sense that there can be talk. But, as I have told them, I'm not listening to the BS end of the spectrum anymore, from them or any one else.

      Delete
  6. CW -- All I can say is to quote my personal favorite as POTUS, Harry Truman. When a supporter yelled out to him, "Give 'em hell, Harry." He answered, "I don't give 'em hell. I just tell the truth and they think it's hell."
    I do cite facts. And, on both Roland's site and on Swamp Bubbles, I expressed the genuine hope that I am wrong about Republican, and Trumpian policies. I hope that these changes are successful. I want America to do well. My experience tells me that we are back to what George H.W. Bush called "Voodoo economics." We cannot cut taxes drastically, increase spending greatly, and balance the budget.
    Facts -- the last 4 years of Clinton's budgets were in SURPLUS! 1998 -- $87.9 billion; 1999 -- $157 billion; 2000 -- $290 billion; 2001 -- $154 billion. This occurred because of policies -- real tax reforms -- which Democrats instituted in the 1993-94 Congress. And Republicans and conservatives predicted that those policies would lead to recession. WRONG!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A few things to this. One, this post isn't on the subject of policy, and this veers awfully close to being off topic. Secondly, we can argue numbers all we want- liars, damn liars, and statisticians. Third, I admit to having as much concern how grand government projects and massive tax cuts are going to work out as I would of under the third-grade mathematics of a Bernie Sanders Presidency.

      Now if I decide to do a post on economics, then by all means, bring your stats. I'll go find some ringer to set up a bunch of links, as I have better things to do with my time than number crunching, and you can get your vitriol out all you want. However, the topic here is how I got sick and tired of fear mongering and wolf crying.

      In that light, this comes real close to my classic definition of a troll- when you can't make progress on the original topic, obfuscate by bringing up subject material that one can sound good on but avoids touching the core issue.

      Or in other words, who the hell was talking about Bill Clinton?

      Delete
  7. Singing in the sunshine sounds better then stumbling in the dark, kicking your toe and swearing your head off. My point, I don't know I don't really have a point so instead I am just saying what pops into my head and that is usually dribble stuff that makes no sense much like the stuff politicians says.

    ReplyDelete
  8. This why I stay far away from political discussions. And facebook.

    ReplyDelete
  9. CW -- You claimed that you write about facts, and I write without facts. And, I thought that the topic was about poor Lyin' Don and how unfairly his proposals are being skewed by the media. I was merely proving, with actual facts, that we had a Democratic POTUS who did something that no one predicted he could do. Not only did he balance the budget, he oversaw 4 consecutive Federal budget SURPLUSES. Now, if you have evidence that ANY Republican in the last CENTURY has done this, present it. Maybe I'm far off base, but do readers here really buy into the idea that looking up and writing facts is a waste of your time?
    CW -- You have all the power here. You can refuse to give ANY of my posts your "approval" any time you want. As I stated, I HOPE I'M WRONG! about the economic effects of Republican and Trumpian proposals. I fear that I am not.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "You claimed that you write about facts, and I write without facts." Well, yes, but that doesn't mean I write about bumblebee physiology on a post about flowers.

      " And, I thought that the topic was about poor Lyin' Don and how unfairly his proposals are being skewed by the media." Somewhat- at least that's closer than your piece on the Clinton economic plan.

      " Maybe I'm far off base"- congratulations! We agree on something! Whether someone looks up facts and writes about them, or whether your "facts" are correct or not, is STILL off the topic- even the version of the topic you listed above.

      "CW -- You have all the power here"- ooh, I feel all Superman-y.

      Look Dale, I am trying to be patient here. You know as well as I do what the topic is, and it isn't "how many facts I can dig up to bash republicans." It is "Why should Chris put up with people who have lost the point of the term 'Nazi' and want to spread fear while claiming they hope everything works out." To that point, I will tell you, Dale, again and directly- if you have ANYTHING else that actually matches the topic AS WRITTEN IN THE POST, feel free to comment. I am fairly confident that people can now see just why I bailed from Roland's comment line in the first place- ongoing BS which only seeks to self-prove how intelligent you are. I believe you have accomplished this. However, if you wish to continue using this thread as a means to disseminate your slobbering love of Bill Clinton (which apparently is one thing you have in common with Monica Lewinski), then I will, regrettably, pull the plug on you. Surely even you can see that your current trajectory here has changed into a waste of everyone's time.

      Delete
    2. Oh, was that an insult? Why yes, because that is what I do to trolls. For whatever reason, after being warned to stay on topic, you wandered off again, and have thus reverted to troll status in my humble opinion. Even Roland says "trolling not allowed" on his blog. I just don't allow it under anonymous OR named. Unless it is entertaining. And if everyone else is as bored of your pseudo-intellectualism as I am, then I'd say that boat has sailed.

      Delete
  10. CW -- Just keep in mind this part of your closing comments in your original post on this thread (Is it OK to quote you, CW?): "when necessary I'll hold the government I voted for to the fire."
    Oh, and remember, Jesus was a Jew. So were Joseph and Mary.
    BTW -- I am NOT trying to prove to anyone how intelligent I am. Intelligence has little to do with looking up facts and stating them. America today has a very strong anti-intellectual bias. Facts are scary to ALL ideologues, both on the right and the left! Intelligence is not sinful, CW. Neither are facts.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 1- I don't have to be reminded of my comments. My blog doesn't have to be all politics all the time.

      2- Jesus is also the Son of God, both part of and above ethnic divisions, as I'm sure you'd agree. Thanks for pulling those two out of nowhere.

      3- AND I told you, stick to topic. Since you refuse to grant me that courtesy on MY OWN Blog, this thread is done for you, after one further stupid comment.

      Delete
  11. CW -- Your blog would not allow me to post that post under my name. I do not know why. I could only post it as "anonymous." I ALWAYS stand behind EVERYTHING I write. If someone proves me to be wrong, I admit it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I wasn't even referring to your earlier anon post- I just assumed it was a Blogger glitch. Which, if you would have looked to see that all your other posts came under your name, you would have figured as well.

      But if you couldn't figure that out, then I guess you're right- you aren't out to prove how smart you are.

      Delete
    2. Oh, and, if I may quote you:

      "Intelligence has little to do with looking up facts and stating them."

      Thanks for making one final point for me. Write back when you get work.

      Delete
  12. That's why I had to stop going on social media. I even had to stop watching some of my favorite shows. It's gotten so out of control. And I love politics, but I don't like when it's completely biased and now it is. It wasn't even this bad when Bush was president.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, now people think their life's duty is to self-promote on the internet. Which brings me to...

      Delete
  13. Dale, I told you twice to stay on topic. You chose to bloviate on about whatever you wanted. So, for the first time in my history, I am NOT posting up someone's comments. Got the notices, deleted without looking. Maybe if we correspond again, you'll be more respectful in the area of the ground rules.

    There used to be one thing I didn't allow on this blog, and that was commenters who insult my people that come here. Now, there's another- people that exhaust my patience with bs, get told to cease and desist, and ignore me. Congrats Dale, you're victim Zero!

    ReplyDelete