Has debating made you forget you are human?

First topic message reminder :

Has it become about being right?

Has it become about Winning for your political side - Right wing/Left wing Republican/Democrat?

Has it made you narrow minded so that you must agree with something because it is your “label”?

Has it taken away your ability to see fellow posters as human beings?



How important is it to you, to be so rigid in your beliefs that you are petrified of actually listening to an opposite view in case it makes you question everything you thought you knew?

Just how open are you?

I mean maybe you can come to terms with the fact that Lincoln constantly advocated to have freed slaves returned to Africa or moved to Mexico? That he viewed that it would be impossible for blacks and whites to live alongside each other? I mean I could really go into more detail on this, being as I am reading a book on Lincoln at the moment. Written by Doris Kearns Goodwin, winner of the Pulitzer Prise?

This thread isn’t about war though, is it?

Start a new one guys.

eddie wrote:This thread isn’t about war though, is it?

Start a new one guys.

Why, because you misdirected and went personal talking about posters and you wish to maintain that instead?

At least we are talking about history and not posters here. Well I am talking about history, Quill certainly is not

Quill is the biggest liar when it comes to history and on so many occasions I have caught him being so disingenuous

Original Quill wrote:

Didge wrote:


The biggest load of revisionist load of bullshit I have ever heard

Civil rights became later a part of the war. The union and keeping this together was the main cause of this conflict and the right of slave states to govern

Kennedy starting sending in forces into Vietnam, that were directing forces and attacks on the Vietconq

Your blind hate of the Republicans, is so bad now, it has gotten you to the point, where you are just making up history and not based on any facts.

Its also rubbish to claim the Republicans of the past are what would be classed as democracts today. As in now way even in the time of Lincoln, did they support equal rights for Blacks. You had a minor view advocating such a view, which went against what most Americans, wanted which was Abolition. This poor attempt to redefine politics and history to make something seem like it was Democrats, when it was the democrats against abolishing slavery. Its a complete perversion of the true events of history

There was never ever a concept of Republicans, until the 1850's, before this it was Federalists, whigs, Democrats. So yoiu are just making up stuff as you go along

So I am really am sorry, no amount of revisionism, is going to change the fact that Licoln, was very much a conservative in political beliefs. To claim otherwise is complete and utter nonsense. His cabinet was made up of Conservatives and Abolitionists and even a former Democrat in Stanton and only one Radical in Chase

So please spare me your revisionist history, that seems to think Democrats are never at fault. They constantly have been as have Republicans

How would you know, you've never finished primary school.  Notice your short answer only starts with Kennedy, Igor?  You're not equipped for this conversation, I can tell.  

As seen I am very well equipped to expose once again that you constantly lie about history and do so politically

It proves you have no integrity

I am not a Democrat or Republican supporter and thus have no political motivation

Again twice before I posted up the amount of wars that involved Democrat and Republican Presidents

The democrats were involved in far more and happy to post this up against for you

You know so little, you can only argue what you've heard in gossip...and you've only heard clichés  and pablum.

As for the Vietnam war:

Wiki wrote:The Vietnam War (Vietnamese: Chiến tranh Việt Nam), also known as the Second Indochina War, and in Vietnam as the Resistance War Against America (Vietnamese: Kháng chiến chống Mỹ) or simply the American War, was a conflict that occurred in Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia from 1 November 1955...

Hmmm...who was president in 1955?  Tough question, eh?  Kennedy was only elected in 1960.

You are such a fraud.

Original Quill wrote:You know so little, you can only argue what you've heard in gossip...and you've only heard clichés  and pablum.

As for the Vietnam war:

Wiki wrote:The Vietnam War (Vietnamese: Chiến tranh Việt Nam), also known as the Second Indochina War, and in Vietnam as the Resistance War Against America (Vietnamese: Kháng chiến chống Mỹ) or simply the American War, was a conflict that occurred in Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia from 1 November 1955...

Hmmm...who was president in 1955?  Tough question, eh?  Kennedy was only elected in 1960.

You said the Vietnam war, which started between North and South, or did you not read your own link?

Seriously stop embarressing yourself. American armed involvement happened later and vastly escalated with action under Kennedy. Which set the tempo for the decade with the war. His successor, escalated the war further, that Being LBJ, another Democrat.

Wiki wrote:It was the second of the Indochina Wars and was officially fought between North Vietnam and the government of South Vietnam. The North Vietnamese army was supported by the Soviet Union, China,^[37] and other communist allies; the South Vietnamese army was supported by the United States, South Korea, Australia, Thailand and other anti-communist allies.

Beginning in 1950, American military advisors arrived in what was then French Indochina.^{[87][A 3]} Most of the funding for the French war effort was provided by the U.S.^[88] The Việt Cộng, also known as Front national de libération du Sud-Viêt Nam or FNL (the National Liberation Front), a South Vietnamese communist common front aided by the North, fought a guerrilla war against anti-communist forces in the region, while the People's Army of Vietnam, also known as the North Vietnamese Army (NVA), engaged in more conventional warfare, and had launched armed struggles from 1959 onward. U.S. involvement escalated in 1960 under Kennedy, with troop levels gradually surging under the MAAG program, from just under a thousand in 1959 to 16,000 in 1963

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War

May 1961: President John F. Kennedy sends helicopters and 400 Green Berets to South Vietnam and authorizes secret operations against the Viet Cong.

https://www.history.com/topics/vietnam-war/vietnam-war-timeline

Get to the back of the class boy

Original Quill wrote:

eddie wrote:Well, you managed to talk about something else entirely by mentioning some wars that I don’t give a rat’s arse about - thought you disagreed with war anyway, surely you can’t brag about something you didn’t participate in and are against?

No, I'm just making the point that we in the US are divorced from any attitude you Brits may have toward colonists.  And now that you guys are so dependent upon us, get in line.

Eds, I've told you repeatedly that I am no pacifist.  It's just that I don't hasten willy-nilly into stupid and expensive wars.  It's called the Defense Department for a reason...WTF are our soldiers doing in foreign adventures thousands of miles away?  Our wars should be limited to when we are attacked at our borders.

Incidentally, that is money wasted on toys for Admirals and Generals, that if not spent could go to an elaborate health care system...which we lack.  What's the difference between saving lives from foreign external enemies, and saving lives from foreign internal enemies?  Only the ego thrills of fighting other humans, and killing their babies.

There is no 'attitude' from Brits to colonists, Quill. Stop makong everything tribal. There are Americans, Aussies and Brits with similar attitudes we share or disagree with. Why you a fabricating this colonist BS fuck knows.

Eilzel wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

No, I'm just making the point that we in the US are divorced from any attitude you Brits may have toward colonists.  And now that you guys are so dependent upon us, get in line.

Eds, I've told you repeatedly that I am no pacifist.  It's just that I don't hasten willy-nilly into stupid and expensive wars.  It's called the Defense Department for a reason...WTF are our soldiers doing in foreign adventures thousands of miles away?  Our wars should be limited to when we are attacked at our borders.

Incidentally, that is money wasted on toys for Admirals and Generals, that if not spent could go to an elaborate health care system...which we lack.  What's the difference between saving lives from foreign external enemies, and saving lives from foreign internal enemies?  Only the ego thrills of fighting other humans, and killing their babies.

There is no 'attitude' from Brits to colonists, Quill. Stop makong everything tribal. There are Americans, Aussies and Brits with similar attitudes we share or disagree with. Why you a fabricating this colonist BS fuck knows.

Les, stop being naive.  I am as close to Canadians as I am to Americans.  The Chief of Litigation in my firm is a Canadian attorney.  She has hired Canadians and French lawyers, which I love about her, in that it shows her open-mindedness.  I have clients in both Australia and New Zealand, as well as Canada and Britain.

They all, at one time or another, have mentioned the British supercilious attitude toward the colonies and colonists.  For god's sake, everyone talks about it.  Maybe, if you are that naive, you Brits ought to be looking at yourselves for a minute or two.  Y'all appear to have the self-awareness of a blind amoeba.  Maybe your over-abundance of self-aggrandizement is getting in the way of true objectivity.

Let me tell you.  This is survival for you guys.  Y'all ain't gonna get any help from Trump...he already thinks you and NATO are the enemy.  Your best bet over here is with Democrats, cause Trump is already selling you out to the Russians.  He's got to, he's in debt to them for $640-million.

Indeed, maybe--just  maybe--veya and wolf are right.

Original Quill wrote:

Eilzel wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

No, I'm just making the point that we in the US are divorced from any attitude you Brits may have toward colonists.  And now that you guys are so dependent upon us, get in line.

Eds, I've told you repeatedly that I am no pacifist.  It's just that I don't hasten willy-nilly into stupid and expensive wars.  It's called the Defense Department for a reason...WTF are our soldiers doing in foreign adventures thousands of miles away?  Our wars should be limited to when we are attacked at our borders.

Incidentally, that is money wasted on toys for Admirals and Generals, that if not spent could go to an elaborate health care system...which we lack.  What's the difference between saving lives from foreign external enemies, and saving lives from foreign internal enemies?  Only the ego thrills of fighting other humans, and killing their babies.

There is no 'attitude' from Brits to colonists, Quill. Stop makong everything tribal. There are Americans, Aussies and Brits with similar attitudes we share or disagree with. Why you a fabricating this colonist BS fuck knows.

Les, stop being naive.  I am as close to Canadians as I am to Americans.  The Chief of Litigation in my firm is a Canadian attorney.  She has hired Canadians and French lawyers, which I love about her, in that it shows her open-mindedness.  I have clients in both Australia and New Zealand, as well as Canada and Britain.

They all, at one time or another, have mentioned the British supercilious attitude toward the colonies and colonists.  For god's sake, everyone talks about it.  Maybe, if you are that naive, you Brits ought to be looking at yourselves for a minute or two.  Y'all appear to have the self-awareness of a blind amoeba.  Maybe your over-abundance of self-aggrandizement is getting in the way of true objectivity.

Let me tell you.  This is survival for you guys.  Y'all ain't gonna get any help from Trump...he already thinks you and NATO are the enemy.  Your best bet over here is with Democrats, cause Trump is already selling you out to the Russians.  He's got to, he's in debt to them for $640-million.

Indeed, maybe--just  maybe--veya and wolf are right.

Or maybe your own bias blinds you.

We see your tribalism everyday, be it for California vs the rest of the US. Democratic states vs Republican. America vs the world. And now 'former colonies' vs 'Britain'.

In my last job I spent 4 years working with a Canadian, two Australians, two South Africans and seven Americans and a fair few Brits. We all had a lot in common and only ever bantered about differences in our language.

Our biggest differences were with the Brexiteers and Trumpeteers in our own countries. We were all individuals, none of us displaying characteristics 'unique' to our nationality whatsoever.

Why? Because people aren't their nation, Quill. You are using a ridiculous short cut to try and explain away differences of opinion.

Pretty conservative minded, tbh. How's that for irony.

Original Quill wrote:

Eilzel wrote:

There is no 'attitude' from Brits to colonists, Quill. Stop makong everything tribal. There are Americans, Aussies and Brits with similar attitudes we share or disagree with. Why you a fabricating this colonist BS fuck knows.

Les, stop being naive.  I am as close to Canadians as I am to Americans.  The Chief of Litigation in my firm is a Canadian attorney.  She has hired Canadians and French lawyers, which I love about her, in that it shows her open-mindedness.  I have clients in both Australia and New Zealand, as well as Canada and Britain.

Jackanory

You know as much about Canadians, as you do Americans

Which is basically a small minute number

I have plenty of Canadian relatives who do not hold such views whatsoever

You keeep coming out with really poor stories, as if then people have to believe hearsay. I dont, I think you make up bullshit all the time. 

People can see with their own eyes, espcially as people like myself have been to Canada many times. 

All you are doing is trying to make it acceptable to hate people and not based off reality, but based off your own individual hate.

Eilzel wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Eilzel wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

No, I'm just making the point that we in the US are divorced from any attitude you Brits may have toward colonists.  And now that you guys are so dependent upon us, get in line.

Eds, I've told you repeatedly that I am no pacifist.  It's just that I don't hasten willy-nilly into stupid and expensive wars.  It's called the Defense Department for a reason...WTF are our soldiers doing in foreign adventures thousands of miles away?  Our wars should be limited to when we are attacked at our borders.

Incidentally, that is money wasted on toys for Admirals and Generals, that if not spent could go to an elaborate health care system...which we lack.  What's the difference between saving lives from foreign external enemies, and saving lives from foreign internal enemies?  Only the ego thrills of fighting other humans, and killing their babies.

There is no 'attitude' from Brits to colonists, Quill. Stop makong everything tribal. There are Americans, Aussies and Brits with similar attitudes we share or disagree with. Why you a fabricating this colonist BS fuck knows.

Les, stop being naive.  I am as close to Canadians as I am to Americans.  The Chief of Litigation in my firm is a Canadian attorney.  She has hired Canadians and French lawyers, which I love about her, in that it shows her open-mindedness.  I have clients in both Australia and New Zealand, as well as Canada and Britain.

They all, at one time or another, have mentioned the British supercilious attitude toward the colonies and colonists.  For god's sake, everyone talks about it.  Maybe, if you are that naive, you Brits ought to be looking at yourselves for a minute or two.  Y'all appear to have the self-awareness of a blind amoeba.  Maybe your over-abundance of self-aggrandizement is getting in the way of true objectivity.

Let me tell you.  This is survival for you guys.  Y'all ain't gonna get any help from Trump...he already thinks you and NATO are the enemy.  Your best bet over here is with Democrats, cause Trump is already selling you out to the Russians.  He's got to, he's in debt to them for $640-million.

Indeed, maybe--just  maybe--veya and wolf are right.

Or maybe your own bias blinds you.

We see your tribalism everyday, be it for California vs the rest of the US. Democratic states vs Republican. America vs the world. And now 'former colonies' vs 'Britain'.

In my last job I spent 4 years working with a Canadian, two Australians, two South Africans and seven Americans and a fair few Brits. We all had a lot in common and only ever bantered about differences in our language.

Our biggest differences were with the Brexiteers and Trumpeteers in our own countries. We were all individuals, none of us displaying characteristics 'unique' to our nationality whatsoever.

Why? Because people aren't their nation, Quill. You are using a ridiculous short cut to try and explain away differences of opinion.

Pretty conservative minded, tbh. How's that for irony.

THANK FUCK! IVE BEEN SAYING SOMETHING SIMILAR TO THIS FOR AGES!

Thank God it’s come from a LW poster that he respects!

Les, you’re starting to see the hypocrisy....keep watching mate.
Ps it’s not just the “the very LW Quill...” take a peek at others

Hallelujah. Someone else finally said it instead of me

eddie wrote:

Eilzel wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Eilzel wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

No, I'm just making the point that we in the US are divorced from any attitude you Brits may have toward colonists.  And now that you guys are so dependent upon us, get in line.

Eds, I've told you repeatedly that I am no pacifist.  It's just that I don't hasten willy-nilly into stupid and expensive wars.  It's called the Defense Department for a reason...WTF are our soldiers doing in foreign adventures thousands of miles away?  Our wars should be limited to when we are attacked at our borders.

Incidentally, that is money wasted on toys for Admirals and Generals, that if not spent could go to an elaborate health care system...which we lack.  What's the difference between saving lives from foreign external enemies, and saving lives from foreign internal enemies?  Only the ego thrills of fighting other humans, and killing their babies.

There is no 'attitude' from Brits to colonists, Quill. Stop makong everything tribal. There are Americans, Aussies and Brits with similar attitudes we share or disagree with. Why you a fabricating this colonist BS fuck knows.

Les, stop being naive.  I am as close to Canadians as I am to Americans.  The Chief of Litigation in my firm is a Canadian attorney.  She has hired Canadians and French lawyers, which I love about her, in that it shows her open-mindedness.  I have clients in both Australia and New Zealand, as well as Canada and Britain.

They all, at one time or another, have mentioned the British supercilious attitude toward the colonies and colonists.  For god's sake, everyone talks about it.  Maybe, if you are that naive, you Brits ought to be looking at yourselves for a minute or two.  Y'all appear to have the self-awareness of a blind amoeba.  Maybe your over-abundance of self-aggrandizement is getting in the way of true objectivity.

Let me tell you.  This is survival for you guys.  Y'all ain't gonna get any help from Trump...he already thinks you and NATO are the enemy.  Your best bet over here is with Democrats, cause Trump is already selling you out to the Russians.  He's got to, he's in debt to them for $640-million.

Indeed, maybe--just  maybe--veya and wolf are right.

Or maybe your own bias blinds you.

We see your tribalism everyday, be it for California vs the rest of the US. Democratic states vs Republican. America vs the world. And now 'former colonies' vs 'Britain'.

In my last job I spent 4 years working with a Canadian, two Australians, two South Africans and seven Americans and a fair few Brits. We all had a lot in common and only ever bantered about differences in our language.

Our biggest differences were with the Brexiteers and Trumpeteers in our own countries. We were all individuals, none of us displaying characteristics 'unique' to our nationality whatsoever.

Why? Because people aren't their nation, Quill. You are using a ridiculous short cut to try and explain away differences of opinion.

Pretty conservative minded, tbh. How's that for irony.

THANK FUCK! IVE BEEN SAYING SOMETHING SIMILAR TO THIS FOR AGES!  

Thank God it’s come from a LW poster that he respects!

Les, you’re starting to see the hypocrisy....keep watching mate.
Ps it’s not just the “the very LW Quill...” take a peek at others

Hallelujah. Someone else finally said it instead of me  

Everyone has a tendency to generalise, I think (I'm doing it right there lol).

But hearing how all people from whole countries think the same thing about all people from another country, especially having evidence to the contrary, is just too simplistic of a view. He does do it a lot, but this takes the biscuit (or cookie, if you prefer Quill )

Les wrote:Or maybe your own bias blinds you.

Typical British response: Us?  Oh, no, we are British.  We can do no wrong.  It must be you.

Les wrote:We see your tribalism everyday, be it for California vs the rest of the US. Democratic states vs Republican. America vs the world. And now 'former colonies' vs 'Britain'.

At least my views on California are remedial, and beneficial.  It’s a new path, right, but at least I am suggesting an alternative.  I’m sure when America was founded, the British were all tsk-tsk, too.  How do you like us now?

I’m sick and tired hearing those people who wring their hands over Brexit or family separation at the borders, yet have only harsh words for the selfishness and dishonesty of the RW’ers who cause this.  You do nothing...the difference is, I’m doing something about it.

Les wrote:In my last job I spent 4 years working with a Canadian, two Australians, two South Africans and seven Americans and a fair few Brits. We all had a lot in common and only ever bantered about differences in our language.

Please, Les, “…some of my best friends are Canadian?”  We hear enough of that from southerners all the time: Way, sum 'o my bes frens is niggahs/

Les wrote:Our biggest differences were with the Brexiteers and Trumpeteers in our own countries. We were all individuals, none of us displaying characteristics 'unique' to our nationality whatsoever.

Why? Because people aren't their nation, Quill. You are using a ridiculous short cut to try and explain away differences of opinion.

Les, I’m a political scientist, not a psychologist.  If you want to provide counselling to the individual, I want to provide help to the political entity.  It needs it…every bit as much as Europe needed it in 1932.  Don't you know what that looks like? Have you forgotten?  It's here already, again.  If you are content saying nothing is happening—with the 1% taking over, and leaders who applaude murder and the nazi renaissance in Charlottesville—please don’t ask me to join you.  I can only stick my head in the sand for so long.

We, in Pacific America, can fight the good fight, but we don’t need the anchor of racism, sexism, killing and evil that drags us southward.  I still stand by the good people, but we need a respite from the evil-doers among us that drag us back.  We in California have wealth, we have strength…but we just need a bit of a blow to get over the heavy load of compensating for the jackasses of the south.

Then, strong and refreshed, we can come back and aid those who want it, and deserve it, but have been weakened and continue to be weakened by the pure selfishness and bigotry of the predominately RW in the south.

America once represented spirited new beginnings.  Now it represents destruction of families at borders, playing toss-a-towel at the brown people of Puerto Rico, and attempts to enslave the people by diminishing democracy through voter exclusion and elitist chicanery.  We don’t have to put up with it…we in California are wealthiest and strongest element in the US.  It’s utterly ridiculous that we are letting this happen.  No more.

Quill, your deluded, nuf sed !

nicko wrote:Quill, your deluded,  nuf sed !

I'm sure that is what they said to Revolutionary Americans, as well.

I don't expect understanding from you, nicko.  You've already made your commitments, and nothing of what I have to say is for you.

Good !!!

Who seriously calls anyone colonists these days? I don't know anyone who looks down on anyone else because they aren't British what rubbish. You may get some entitled tourists in Ibiza wanting fish and chips but I don't think they are the only ones its just that they are on a fairly lower rung of the evolutionary ladder.

Vintage wrote:Who seriously calls anyone colonists these days?

Are you kidding me? I see it everyday on this site. What convenient unconsciousness you have.

Everyone is a little bit racist, eh Quill?

Tommy Monk wrote:

eddie wrote:Something real is what I’m seeking, one clear voice in the wilderness.

Don't say what you mean, you might spoil your face...

?

Tommy Monk wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:

eddie wrote:Something real is what I’m seeking, one clear voice in the wilderness.

Don't say what you mean, you might spoil your face...

?

Nice. You get my thanks on this thread for you’re observation of my Paul Weller lyric.

Original Quill wrote:

Les wrote:Or maybe your own bias blinds you.

Typical British response: Us?  Oh, no, we are British.  We can do no wrong.  It must be you.

Les wrote:We see your tribalism everyday, be it for California vs the rest of the US. Democratic states vs Republican. America vs the world. And now 'former colonies' vs 'Britain'.

At least my views on California are remedial, and beneficial.  It’s a new path, right, but at least I am suggesting an alternative.  I’m sure when America was founded, the British were all tsk-tsk, too.  How do you like us now?

I’m sick and tired hearing those people who wring their hands over Brexit or family separation at the borders, yet have only harsh words for the selfishness and dishonesty of the RW’ers who cause this.  You do nothing...the difference is, I’m doing something about it.

Les wrote:In my last job I spent 4 years working with a Canadian, two Australians, two South Africans and seven Americans and a fair few Brits. We all had a lot in common and only ever bantered about differences in our language.

Please, Les, “…some of my best friends are Canadian?”  We hear enough of that from southerners all the time: Way, sum 'o my bes frens is niggahs/

Les wrote:Our biggest differences were with the Brexiteers and Trumpeteers in our own countries. We were all individuals, none of us displaying characteristics 'unique' to our nationality whatsoever.

Why? Because people aren't their nation, Quill. You are using a ridiculous short cut to try and explain away differences of opinion.

Les, I’m a political scientist, not a psychologist.  If you want to provide counselling to the individual, I want to provide help to the political entity.  It needs it…every bit as much as Europe needed it in 1932.  Don't you know what that looks like?  Have you forgotten?  It's here already, again.  If you are content saying nothing is happening—with the 1% taking over, and leaders who applaude murder and the nazi renaissance in Charlottesville—please don’t ask me to join you.  I can only stick my head in the sand for so long.

We, in Pacific America, can fight the good fight, but we don’t need the anchor of racism, sexism, killing and evil that drags us southward.  I still stand by the good people, but we need a respite from the evil-doers among us that drag us back.  We in California have wealth, we have strength…but we just need a bit of a blow to get over the heavy load of compensating for the jackasses of the south.

Then, strong and refreshed, we can come back and aid those who want it, and deserve it, but have been weakened and continue to be weakened by the pure selfishness and bigotry of the predominately RW in the south.

America once represented spirited new beginnings.  Now it represents destruction of families at borders, playing toss-a-towel at the brown people of Puerto Rico, and attempts to enslave the people by diminishing democracy through voter exclusion and elitist chicanery.  We don’t have to put up with it…we in California are wealthiest and strongest element in the US.  It’s utterly ridiculous that we are letting this happen.  No more.

1) Typical Quill (not all Americans, I'd never tar all with the same brush...), ignore the point and just pretend what someone has said only further proves your simplistic point.

2) "some of my best friends are..." Look back just one post fgs. You started it with "I work with people from..." silliness, not me...

3) So you draw the whole thing back to your even narrower 'us' vs 'them' scenario. You see how easily distracted you are from the point you were making when I remind you that Cal vs the Union is the real important fight

Not much point in going on when points 1 and 2 show how completely lacking in self-awareness you are sometimes.

Original Quill wrote:

nicko wrote:Quill, your deluded,  nuf sed !

I'm sure that is what they said to Revolutionary Americans, as well.

I don't expect understanding from you, nicko.  You've already made your commitments, and nothing of what I have to say is for you.

For a so-called progressive you seem awfully fixated on a mind set and terminology that was relevant circa 1775-1812

Eilzel wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Les wrote:Or maybe your own bias blinds you.

Typical British response: Us?  Oh, no, we are British.  We can do no wrong.  It must be you.

Les wrote:We see your tribalism everyday, be it for California vs the rest of the US. Democratic states vs Republican. America vs the world. And now 'former colonies' vs 'Britain'.

At least my views on California are remedial, and beneficial.  It’s a new path, right, but at least I am suggesting an alternative.  I’m sure when America was founded, the British were all tsk-tsk, too.  How do you like us now?

I’m sick and tired hearing those people who wring their hands over Brexit or family separation at the borders, yet have only harsh words for the selfishness and dishonesty of the RW’ers who cause this.  You do nothing...the difference is, I’m doing something about it.

Les wrote:In my last job I spent 4 years working with a Canadian, two Australians, two South Africans and seven Americans and a fair few Brits. We all had a lot in common and only ever bantered about differences in our language.

Please, Les, “…some of my best friends are Canadian?”  We hear enough of that from southerners all the time: Way, sum 'o my bes frens is niggahs/

Les wrote:Our biggest differences were with the Brexiteers and Trumpeteers in our own countries. We were all individuals, none of us displaying characteristics 'unique' to our nationality whatsoever.

Why? Because people aren't their nation, Quill. You are using a ridiculous short cut to try and explain away differences of opinion.

Les, I’m a political scientist, not a psychologist.  If you want to provide counselling to the individual, I want to provide help to the political entity.  It needs it…every bit as much as Europe needed it in 1932.  Don't you know what that looks like?  Have you forgotten?  It's here already, again.  If you are content saying nothing is happening—with the 1% taking over, and leaders who applaude murder and the nazi renaissance in Charlottesville—please don’t ask me to join you.  I can only stick my head in the sand for so long.

We, in Pacific America, can fight the good fight, but we don’t need the anchor of racism, sexism, killing and evil that drags us southward.  I still stand by the good people, but we need a respite from the evil-doers among us that drag us back.  We in California have wealth, we have strength…but we just need a bit of a blow to get over the heavy load of compensating for the jackasses of the south.

Then, strong and refreshed, we can come back and aid those who want it, and deserve it, but have been weakened and continue to be weakened by the pure selfishness and bigotry of the predominately RW in the south.

America once represented spirited new beginnings.  Now it represents destruction of families at borders, playing toss-a-towel at the brown people of Puerto Rico, and attempts to enslave the people by diminishing democracy through voter exclusion and elitist chicanery.  We don’t have to put up with it…we in California are wealthiest and strongest element in the US.  It’s utterly ridiculous that we are letting this happen.  No more.

1) Typical Quill (not all Americans, I'd never tar all with the same brush...), ignore the point and just pretend what someone has said only further proves your simplistic point.

2) "some of my best friends are..." Look back just one post fgs. You started it with "I work with people from..." silliness, not me...

3) So you draw the whole thing back to your even narrower 'us' vs 'them' scenario. You see how easily distracted you are from the point you were making when I remind you that Cal vs the Union is the real important fight

Not much point in going on when points 1 and 2 show how completely lacking in self-awareness you are sometimes.

Les.

You’re like a breath of fresh (LW) air, proving that it’s okay to point out the hypocrisy of others with the same political leaning.

I hope others follow your lead.

Tommy Monk wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:

eddie wrote:Something real is what I’m seeking, one clear voice in the wilderness.

Don't say what you mean, you might spoil your face...

?

Tommy, in honour of your brilliant observational lyric, by The Cure, I have changed my signature.

It’s both fitting to real life, forum life and this thread, in particular.

So... you did 'get it' after all...!

Tommy Monk wrote:So... you did 'get it' after all...!

Tommy, honey, I always “get it”.

I “get” what everyone means.

Get it?

When i first starting posting on skynews forum I just didn't know people were so judgemental and I found posters really rude because of my faith. That's another story and another forum war which I'd sooner forget. But it made me sit back and wonder whether it is worth really debating anything because I find most posters rude and I hold my hands up and admit I'm no angel and have given just as good as I've received.
Now i don't really add much opinion to debate because its not worth the battle . If we as individuals believe one thing no amount of debate will change our beliefs or views ,so I tend to just read and reply to posters who have added something nice and off topic , its easier for me .
I've had some very happy and enjoyable times on forums , I don't come on here much now but i like to pop in and see how everyone is doing.

I don't know any of the old skynews posters personally but I like to know they're doing okay . I am human and I am very caring and take things to heart so I need to be careful and that's why i don't contribute to debate now .

Not sure if that was what this thread was asking .

PS HF said when is his ban over ?

Vicar of Dibley (vod) wrote:PS HF said when is his ban over ?

I’ll speak to the other admin. I have no problem with him coming back.

eddie wrote:

Vicar of Dibley (vod) wrote:PS HF said when is his ban over ?

I’ll speak to the other admin. I have no problem with him coming back.

Good morning eddie, I've just logged in and noticed that some are not happy to have my husband rejoin , so its okay we don't want to cause any problems . Thanks anyway x

Let your Husband come back, all opinions should be heard, [seen] !

Vicar of Dibley (vod) wrote:PS HF said when is his ban over ?

Hi VOD, nice to see you posting...who is HF?

Vicar of Dibley (vod) wrote:When i first starting posting on skynews forum I just didn't know people were so judgemental and I found posters really rude because of my faith. That's another story and another forum war which I'd sooner forget. But it made me sit back and wonder whether it is worth really debating anything because I find most posters rude and I hold my hands up and admit I'm no angel and have given just as good as I've received.
Now i don't really add much opinion to debate because its not worth the battle . If we as individuals believe one thing no amount of debate will change our beliefs or views ,so I tend to just read and reply to posters who have added something nice and off topic , its easier for me .
I've had some very happy and enjoyable times on forums , I don't come on here much now but i like to pop in and see how everyone is doing.

I don't know any of the old skynews posters personally but I like to know they're doing okay . I am human and I am very caring and take things to heart so I need to be careful and that's why i don't contribute to debate now .

Not sure if that was what this thread was asking .

You should post more, your opinion is as valid as anyone elses, and probably more valid than some who just prefer to troll or repeat their own mantra.

I believe lots of people when they first start to post on a forum get the same treatment you received. I got loads because I was open about myself, you got in because your religion is important in your life....people will find what they imagine to be your achilles heel and prod prod away at it. Ignore them and carry on posting.....because for every online idiot there are plenty normal people who are on a forum to debate or chat.

Vicar of Dibley (vod) wrote:

eddie wrote:


I’ll speak to the other admin. I have no problem with him coming back.

Good morning eddie, I've just logged in and noticed that some are not happy to have my husband rejoin , so its okay we don't want to cause any problems . Thanks anyway x

Eh?

I never saw any such posts?????

Didge wrote:

Vicar of Dibley (vod) wrote:

Good morning eddie, I've just logged in and noticed that some are not happy to have my husband rejoin , so its okay we don't want to cause any problems . Thanks anyway x

Eh?

I never saw any such posts?????

The two reds may have ben an indication.

Syl wrote:

Didge wrote:

Eh?

I never saw any such posts?????

The two reds may have ben an indication.

She can't grumble about getting reds. I've just looked at her profile and noticed that she enjoys giving huge numbers of reds to people herself. 

I don't personally believe in giving reds. I never have and never will. Instead I prefer to actually say why I disagree with someone's post.

Vicar of Dibley (vod) wrote:I'm no angel and have given just as good as I've received.

I agree with that 100%. You are certainly no angel and yes you do give as good as you get, correct. 
So you're no victim. It's a forum, people will defo pull you up, if they disagree with some of your harsh views.
Hopefully without being rude to you - I disagree with rudeness about people's political opinions.
 
No idea who HF is, never heard of him. 

Syl wrote:

Vicar of Dibley (vod) wrote:PS HF said when is his ban over ?

Hi VOD, nice to see you posting...who is HF?

Hi thanks , he's my husband lol

Jules wrote:

Vicar of Dibley (vod) wrote:I'm no angel and have given just as good as I've received.

I agree with that 100%. You are certainly no angel and yes you do give as good as you get, correct. 
So you're no victim. It's a forum, people will defo pull you up, if they disagree with some of your harsh views.
Hopefully without being rude to you - I disagree with rudeness about people's political opinions.
 
No idea who HF is, never heard of him. 

Not sure I've been in debate with you and not sure where I've had harsh views. I have noticed that you were very quick to be rude towards me in the past when I don't even know who you are and wasn't even debating with you .

HF is my husband .

Jules wrote:

Vicar of Dibley (vod) wrote:I'm no angel and have given just as good as I've received.

I agree with that 100%. You are certainly no angel and yes you do give as good as you get, correct. 
So you're no victim. It's a forum, people will defo pull you up, if they disagree with some of your harsh views.
Hopefully without being rude to you - I disagree with rudeness about people's political opinions.
 
No idea who HF is, never heard of him. 

Not sure I've been in debate with you and not sure where I've had harsh views. I have noticed that you were very quick to be rude towards me in the past when I don't even know who you are and wasn't even debating with you .

HF is my husband .

Didge wrote:

Vicar of Dibley (vod) wrote:

Good morning eddie, I've just logged in and noticed that some are not happy to have my husband rejoin , so its okay we don't want to cause any problems . Thanks anyway x

Eh?

I never saw any such posts?????

reds didge . says it all doesn't it .

Jules wrote:

Syl wrote:



The two reds may have ben an indication.

She can't grumble about getting reds. I've just looked at her profile and noticed that she enjoys giving huge numbers of reds to people herself. 

I don't personally believe in giving reds. I never have and never will. Instead I prefer to actually say why I disagree with someone's post.

If you're on about me giving reds then yes it is true and i would have given reds when Israel was being slated . I'm of Jewish heritage right down the line of females . I have a passion for Israel its in my blood . But don't follow the Jewish religion I am Christian .

Everyone knows I don’t mind hav8ng anyone back - bar the one person who keeps threatening me - so I don’t mind him coming back.

I will, however, go with the majority of the admin vote.

eddie I think just leave it as I don't want to cause problems so its okay .

Vicar of Dibley (vod) wrote:eddie I think just leave it as I don't want to cause problems so its okay .

You’re not causing problems. If you were, I’d say so.

eddie wrote:

Vicar of Dibley (vod) wrote:eddie I think just leave it as I don't want to cause problems so its okay .

You’re not causing problems. If you were, I’d say so.

okay thanks .

Jules wrote:

Syl wrote:



The two reds may have ben an indication.

She can't grumble about getting reds. I've just looked at her profile and noticed that she enjoys giving huge numbers of reds to people herself. 

I don't personally believe in giving reds. I never have and never will. Instead I prefer to actually say why I disagree with someone's post.

She didnt grumble about being given reds though did she?
I was answering Didge who wondered who was objecting..

Vicar of Dibley (vod) wrote:

Syl wrote:

Hi VOD, nice to see you posting...who is HF?

Hi thanks , he's my husband lol

Was HF short for his forum name?

Your pic is lovely, is it you as a child?
We had a nice thread on here a while ago where a few of us posted pics of ourselves when we were children, so it's nice to see.

Vicar of Dibley (vod) wrote:
Not sure I've been in debate with you and not sure where I've had harsh views. I have noticed that you were very quick to be rude towards me in the past when I don't even know who you are and wasn't even debating with you .

HF is my husband .

I've pulled you up a couple of times, for some of your harsh, heartless RW comments. 
Disagreeing with you, is NOT ''being rude''.  I dunno why you are so fixated with the word ''rude.'' 
Are you a fragile china doll who no one should say ''boo'' to ?


Anyway imo it is far better to be upfront and actually say why you disagree with someone's post (my method)
than to sit there silently, secretly pressing the red stripe button (your method).


Are you seriously saying that on a PUBLIC forum, people should only challenge your views if they know you personally, and if you are speaking directly to them???? .