What Liberals Hate More Than Bush

[Dr. Shane]

Quote:

I know, you are not a conservative, you are "a moderate with conservative views"

The correct term is "militant moderate". I am a moderate that leans conservative but that is not the same as saying I have conservative views. What it means is if I list all my political views on a piece of paper, number them and count how many are conservative and how many are liberal, that there would be a few more categorized as conservative than liberal.

Please note, not too long ago we were talking about socialism here and I noted that it is because of socialist policies that I was able to escape poverty. I also noted that minimum wage is a social policy and I support it. I also support universal health care which is socialist. One must also remember that while I think the government should adopt public policy to discourage it, like they do with smoking, I think abortion should remain legal. Those are really not "conservative" views.

Quote:

Rush was using hate speech many years ago, with "feminazi" and "pinkocommie"...

The fact that someone would use those terms as some type of "proof" of hate speech tells me they do not listen to Limbaugh but are simply reading what Limbaugh's critics are writng about him. Understood in context, those terms are not hate-connected at all. Rush's critics have twisted things around and accused him of that. Unfortunately for them, I am too well informed to fall for their tricks and hop on their band wagon.

Quote:

As for the Adventist church taking sides of moderate or conservative or liberal views, for most of the issues, the Adventist Church is to afraid of taking issues and doesn't want to appear to offend.

Our religious liberty departments take positions on issues all the time. We have lobbyists in Congress and state legislative chambers.

[Dr. Shane]

Quote:

What you might do is something like this...

With all due respect (and that is a lot of respect), a thread like that would have probably not gotten any replies even posted to it. A lot of members come here and click on "Active Topics". The name and first few lines of a thread are what will cause them to click on it or pass it by. "What Liberals Hate More Than Bush" gets a lot of clicks. "Different media universes" gets passed by.

[Bravus]

I'm not sure attacking and insulting your friends is worth it for simple page views. And I would have posted to such a thread. I'm sure you could think of a snappier title than I could in my example, but take the substantive point I was making: it's just not sensible to insult people deeply and then expect them to just suck it up and participate in friendly dialogue.

[Dr. Shane]

I didn't then, nor do I now, see it as an insult. I suppose Olger could say I insulted him when I insinuated that taking a position against all forms of socialism would mean eliminating the minimum wage. I was simply pointing out the logical conclusion of that thinking and not accusing Olger personally of opposing minimum wage or trying to run a sweat shop. I am a moderate. I think some socialist policies are good and others are not. When discussing socialism I agree with some things conservatives bring up and some other things liberals bring up. It is very easy for a guy like me to offend both sides but that is not my intention.

[Bravus]

As I said, the sting is in the tail. Do you *really* not see 'liberals hate freedom of the press' as insulting?

[Dr. Shane]

That is not what I said. Liberals do not see that the logical conclusion of their hatred for conservative media is to limit the freedom of the press. I give them the benefit of the doubt. In their frustration they don't look that far ahead. Yet that is what the Fairness Doctrine would accomplish. It would limit conservative forms of media (talk radio) while not limiting liberal forms of media (newsprint & network TV).

In the thread on socialism I didn't say that conservatives want sweat shops although if someone were to twist my word they could accuse me of that. I simply stated that I supported the socialist-based minimum wage.

[Bravus]

Fair enough. I think we can shake hands and walk away still friends. Let me just ask you to word things a little more carefully in future - the clear meaning of what you wrote in the post is what I said above, even if that's not quite what you meant - and I'll try to respond in a more calm, relaxed manner.

[Woody]

Let me just ask you to word things a little more carefully in future - the clear meaning of what you wrote in the post is what I said above, even if that's not quite what you meant - and I'll try to respond in a more calm, relaxed manner.

How is it that YOU know the meaning more than Shane knows the meaning? I think we can let Shane explain what Shane means.

[Bravus]

Do words mean things?

The title of the post is "What Liberals Hate More than Bush" and the last line of the post is "Should we just say, freedom of the press?"

How does that not say 'Liberals hate freedom of the press'?

[Woody]

I give up. I will let you be in your misery . I am going to bed.

[Bravus]

G'night man.

[Neil D]

Originally Posted By: Bravus

Let me just ask you to word things a little more carefully in future - the clear meaning of what you wrote in the post is what I said above, even if that's not quite what you meant - and I'll try to respond in a more calm, relaxed manner.

How is it that YOU know the meaning more than Shane knows the meaning? I think we can let Shane explain what Shane means.

Here is Shane's origional post-

1. FOXNews

2. Rush Limbaugh

Should we just say, freedom of the press?

I think he should have labled the thread as "freedom of the press", but his desire for discussion stepped on a more than a few toes.

[phkrause]

Thanks, I try to be balanced.

pk

[Dr. Shane]

The title of the post is "What Liberals Hate More than Bush" and the last line of the post is "Should we just say, freedom of the press?"

How does that not say 'Liberals hate freedom of the press'?

That is a question, not a statement. The intention is to stimulate discussion.

[Neil D]

That is a question, not a statement. The intention is to stimulate discussion.

If I were a betting man, I would wager that you got a bit off the intended discussion....

Being a journalist, you need to phrase your question to get the answers you seek. If you are seeking to prove that liberals are hate filled individuals, I think you got what you were seeking in that most of the liberals charged you with 'poisoning the well'. If you are looking for honest discussion, you need to phrase your question honestly, as Bravus has suggested.

What was your intention for this 'stimulated discussion'? To seek answers or to inflame liberal?

[Dr. Shane]

The thread has stimulated discussion. That is a good thing. I am not a journalist although I do write a published commentary in a local newspaper. That makes me a commentator, not a journalist. A journalist investigates and reports in what is suppose to be without bias. That is not me.

Every time someone on this forum attacks Rush Limbaugh or FOXNews, conservatives could accuse them of trying to poison the well (I am not making such an accusation). Some on this forum go to the extreme of misspelling FOXNews as FAUXNews. That could really be considered poisoning the well. Liberals that let threads questioning their ideology upset them may need to ask themselves why they can dish it out but not take it. I think we need to be able to roll with the punches and that makes for a much more enjoyable exchange of ideas.

[Dr. Shane]

I'm not sure attacking and insulting your friends is worth it for simple page views.

On a personal note, I do want to apologize for upsetting you as much as it seems this thread has. Much is lost in this internet medium. In real life this discussion would have had a lot of chuckles, smiles, back slaps and I have many good friends that are both liberals and conservatives and we enjoy giving each other friendly "jabs" and challenging each others ideology. I try to challenge my conservative friends as much as my liberal friends. I think I have earned the title "militant moderate".

[Neil D]

The thread has stimulated discussion. That is a good thing.

[Woody]

The thread has stimulated discussion. That is a good thing. I am not a journalist although I do write a published commentary in a local newspaper. That makes me a commentator, not a journalist. A journalist investigates and reports in what is suppose to be without bias. That is not me.

Every time someone on this forum attacks Rush Limbaugh or FOXNews, conservatives could accuse them of trying to poison the well (I am not making such an accusation). Some on this forum go to the extreme of misspelling FOXNews as FAUXNews. That could really be considered poisoning the well. Liberals that let threads questioning their ideology upset them may need to ask themselves why they can dish it out but not take it. I think we need to be able to roll with the punches and that makes for a much more enjoyable exchange of ideas.

Shane ... you bring up such a good point. The Left leaning folks here ... love to call Bush a LIAR and a MURDERER ... and they just call those 'facts'. They love to call Rush Limbaugh names and make fun of his former addiction problems. But if anyone questions a liberal's policies ... BOY ... the sensibilities come out. The best they can complain about is that there are too many conservative posts. Well ... hey liberals ... get busy and post. But please stop the personal attacks.

Oh on second hand ... continue. This helps us see you as you are ...

[olger]

olger, what's your response to this post:

http://adventistforum.com/forum/ubbthrea...html#Post221382

Lo Dave.

My response is that we don't have TV, can't afford it. As to radio, I do listen to talk radio several times a week, and I have the Bible or Ravi Zacharius on tape in my personal truck. We don't get a newspaper, either. The downside is that we miss out on a lot of bad news.

I also take a self-imposed fast of talk radio occasionally, to make sure that I am not being negatively affected by it.

I appreciate the humor of Glenn Beck. Zany..

I also like to blow something up once in a while, ie tannerite. Ahh, it's a good life.

`oG

[jasd]

>>Now many liberals will jump back aghast at the suggestion that they are not in favor of freedom of the press. But when we walk through it we see that is where their ideologies take us.<<

Not that many “liberals” would be aghast at the suggestion.

It is ‘liberals’ who are framing the issue of the Fairness Doctrine to that of the semantical argument; that is, they do not support a ‘Fairness Doctrine’ per se – but rather, support localization of program ‘content’. Same thing; that is,

the control of program content.

[jasd]

Quote:

Quote:Shane

What Liberals Hate More Than Bush

1. FOXNews

2. Rush Limbaugh

Should we just say, freedom of the press?

Oh, I thought the thread focused on something that both “Liberals” and “Bush” hated – with the understanding, of course, that liberals do so more viscerally. Silly me, as I couldn’t figure how

Dubya might dislike either FOX or The MajaRushie... Now, given

the moral depravity of the so-called ‘Mainstream Media’ – well, he’s just a good ol’ boy, yes?

Did any of y’all see the photo of Barry looking for the doorknob of a White House window – which he might enter, as through a door? Contrast that with the Hee-Haw, yahoo glee the MSM treated the infinity-looped photos of Dubya frustrated by a locked door in China? at least that one had a doorknob...

Yeah, I’d say Dubya had reason to dislike the Lefty-media more than liberals – never mind the mainstream driven, Goebbels-like propagation of total bulldust metastasizing in the oh-so-susceptible psyche – left of the national ‘aisle’..., present company excepted, of course.