Posted on 08/08/2005 10:42:02 PM PDT by Mo1
I think this is my first time in this thread.
I'm looking for a place where I can park and be accepted.
Been granted person non grata status in other threads. They didn't put it in those words, but that's the way it felt like.
What is this dementionale door thing?
WELCOME TAquinas
That's how I fell in here it seem no one wanted to listen even here many pass me by but...
Its like a neightborhood pub you can just sit around and listen or jump in!
Welcome!
It really is cyberhood hang out!
Thanks.
I'll come here.
I don't drink though.
Hey hey!
I'm a straight man. Straight like a board.
Muchos grecias for the welcome.
Many of us don't drink here, lol, but resty's description is perfect, I think! Including the bar brawls.
Welcome!
"men of the cloth"
Ok. Got it now.
I misunderstood you before.
"men of the cloth." Gotta remember that.
Hey, I seem to have revitalized the thread.
Good thing 'cause it's a very boring Sunday here for moi. A little french lingo there.
Now, y'all just act normal. We don't want him to think we been acting up in his absence, now do we?
neither do I drink...:)
Why yes indeed, I can make a Cajun gumbo that you'd slap your mamma for, truly. But, I'm not inviting you because I calls it supper and you calls it dinner. LOL
Looks cozy!:)
5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary 'attack the messenger' ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach.
Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as 'kooks', 'right-wing', 'liberal', 'left-wing', 'terrorists', 'conspiracy buffs', 'radicals', 'militia', 'racists', 'religious fanatics', 'sexual deviates', and so forth.
This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.
A few more:
1) Avoidance. They never actually discuss issues head-on or provide constructive input, generally avoiding citation of references or credentials. Rather, they merely imply this, that, and the other. Virtually everything about their presentation implies their authority and expert knowledge in the matter without any further justification for credibility.
2) Selectivity. They tend to pick and choose opponents carefully, either applying the hit-and-run approach against mere commentators supportive of opponents, or focusing heavier attacks on key opponents who are known to directly address issues. Should a commentator become argumentative with any success, the focus will shift to include the commentator as well.
5) Anti-conspiratorial. They almost always have disdain for 'conspiracy theorists' and, usually, for those who in any way believe JFK was not killed by LHO. Ask yourself why, if they hold such disdain for conspiracy theorists, do they focus on defending a single topic discussed in a NG focusing on conspiracies? One might think they would either be trying to make fools of everyone on every topic, or simply ignore the group they hold in such disdain. Or, one might more rightly conclude they have an ulterior motive for their actions in going out of their way to focus as they do.
Welcome stranger.........assuredly you can park here, and some will accept you, and some will not, depending on where you're coming from. Just like any other place.
ru around? Or just being quiet?
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.