|This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies.|
Locked on 01/11/2004 7:18:13 AM PST by Lead Moderator, reason:
OK, we are getting back into the old patterns of things, so maybe this will snap people back to the fact that I am determined to not have the old pattern return. On this thread, there was a ton of baiting, a ton of personal attacks, some veiled racism, and quite a few posts that striked me as literally indicative of insanity on the part of the poster— if the poster meant what he said. Y’all have to do a better job self-policing or these discussions won’t happen. And I do not buy the argument that one side wants that to happen. I see threasds where one side starts it, I see threads where the other side starts it. I see threads started where it seem the person posting the thread is the one who is doing things to start the thread down the path to being pulled, backroomed, or locked. I’m going to post to the individuals I see doing these unconstructive things but anyone who thinks “I am talking about them not me” is not getting the point. Everyone can do their part to make these threads better. Even someone who never has posted anything which is bad can help by helping to tell those they agree with on issues to back off when they are doing things like flaming or tinfoiling or baiting. This is going to take effort, and some are making it and some are not. Please make it.
Skip to comments.Hill Cool to Bush Immigration Plan
Posted on 01/10/2004 9:33:03 PM PST by KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
President Bush's proposal to give temporary legal status to millions of undocumented immigrants is running into stiff resistance from both left and right on Capitol Hill and stands little chance of enactment this year, according to supporters and opponents. While this assessment is based on early responses, with the lobbying effort barely begun, some lawmakers say the measure's only chance of passage this year would require an all-out push by the president, and even that might not be enough.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
If your "real world" is one where "socialists" are anti-abortion, anti-tax and pro-defense, then it's certainly a far, far different one that that which all the rest of us have been calling the "real" one all these years. Put down the crack pipe, and back away slowly.
REAL conservatives work to thwart REAL liberal extremist threats. Here in the real world, that threat is (in all likelihood) Howard Dean, come November; and the only realistic means of blocking same is GWB. If simple reality causes your panties to knot all in a bunch, sweetcheeks... then: politics may not be your game, after all. Try something more effeminate, like cribbage or Mah-Jong.
Try this, remove your hands from the keyboard. Did it stop flashing? Problem solved, the bill is in the mail. Blackbird.
More promises broken from 1986, you know, the last round of amnesties. Blackbird.
Get off your knees, child. See, I can be as demeaning as you can troll. You're not trapped in Liberal Seattle, you love it there by choice. Blackbird.
Possibly... but: neither as cleverly, nor with the same lucidity in word choice, punctuation and grammar.
The day I take some faux "conservative's" insult of trolldom to heart, sunshine: you'll get a memo from your masters at MoveOn.org, to that effect. I'm not the one busily reciting DU/Howard Dean talking points, and slaving feverishly to bring down a sitting Republican president.
I don't mind that your stated positions make no earthly sense -- that's your problem, after all -- and you're certainly entitled to define 'conservatism" anyway that
Hillary tells you to best pleases you. Asking me to genuinely respect it, however, and to treat it as adult commentary, simply doesn't pass the barf test.
CHILD: See you at the Polls loser!
Please don't bother wasting your mom's 200 free hours of AOL attempting to prove my case for me, moppet. I can manage just fine without you.
Interesting how you don't even bother to refute that you ARE, in fact, robotically reciting Dean/DU/MoveOn anti-Bush talking points; and that you ARE, in fact, attempting to unseat a sitting Republican president (not really very "conservative" of you, huh, kiddo?).
Tell Mad Howard for me, the next time you see him -- I presume that's simply a matter of rolling over and nudging him gently -- that he's going down in '04.
......borderlock is even better ;-)
I see a pattern here.
Jorge steals the 'RATs issues and supporters of his Amnesty for Illegals plan steal the 'RATs playbook.
Disagree and you're a Racist, Sexists, Homophobe.
Pardon me for pointing this out, but that is a bit nuts.
There is certainly some truth to what you posted here. But there are two things that weren't helpful about your post. First, the #$%!. Yeah, sometimes we let that go and it is certainly better than throwing the f-bomb, but when we are trying to clean things up it is helpful if people avoid doing it.
Second, starting a thread with a statement about how one group is 'faux conservatives' is bound to lead to the very type of flame war that we can do without. There are undoubtably faux conservatives on that side. There are just as undoubtably faux conservatives on the other side. Agent provocateurs stir up crap from all sides. Maybe there is more on one side than the other, maybe not, but starting a thread by going down that path just invites the thread to be a Bushie/anti-Bushie flamewar over who are 'real conservatives'. Maybe those arguments are needed, but certainly not on most immigration threads. It ends up overwhelming the topic.
See how that can easily be taken as offensive or personal by someone?
Please, work with us here.
Note for those who end up reading this far in this thread, I am not pointing this out for WackyKat's benefit. He made it clear on another thread what he really thinks of Freepers and this place, and as such since he was so unhappy with you all and with us and our forum, I have escorted him off the forum.
That doesn't change the fact that his post here was a mindless one and its only purpose was to bring this thread down to a flamewar.
Obviously, based on this reply, it was taken as the former. And the result was a reply calling KC unchurched and unshepherded.
I don't know, KC, if you were trying to mix an insult in your reply or not. You do. If you were, please stop doing it.
And CJ, you can help by not always reading everything in the most personally insulting (to you) way-- and by not taking the bait when you feel insulted by insulting back, even more directly.
From a Bible verse to insults in two posts, with each person having a case that they were responding appropriately to the post before them. That's a perfect example of what I mean when I say that we are going to need people to work with us to cut down on the crap.
Does every personal attack need to be met in kind?
Kinda makes for a good rough-and-tumble exchange for you and the guy you are in it with, but it kinda makes for a flamewar distracting away from the thread for everyone else.
How on earth did you not think it was when you made it? Or do you think the rules should only apply to those who disagree with you?
I'm not going to point out each of them that you did on this thread. Suffice it to say, I am requesting you to severely curtail your flaming in the forum.
Get yer ya-yas out flaming over on the other forums you participate in, if you have an uncontrollable need to engage in it. Don't do it here.
C'mon. We don't need this.
You sound like DUers and MoveOn-ers and DeanieWeenies.
Is that your intent? If not, you may want to reconsider that approach. Thanks, LM
There are people on several different sides of the immigration issue who are tired of the threads always degenerating into flamewars. The answer is partly for those who want to have the substantive discussions to actively help keep those threads from degenerating by pointing out to those bringing it down what they are doing.
We need more of that sort of butting in, not less.
I've harshed on you a few times lately, and I just wanted to commend you, for being a better man on this thread than a lot of people on both sides of the issue.
Don't do what you did on this thread again.
Can't say I don't see why you would have here, but that isn't really the point. When the majority of the posts on a thread are flames, the whole topic of the debate is lost in the crud. And those who care about the issue are the ones who lose then, not the guy you are flaming, even if he flamed first or baited for it.
It's got to change, or people are going to be shown the door to prevent them from running people off.
And I suggest you look closely. It was both sides doing it. Both sides. If you are thinking your side is justified in acting this way because of the way the other side acts, think again. Both are doing it to the point where that excuse doesn't cut it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.