Comment on "Watch What You Say You May Get Beat Up at the Post Office"
From FreeThinker:
So, in your "progressive liberal minded" logic, it's okay for you to spew whatever happens to come into that small mind of yours, but for someone else to voice an opposing view is somehow wrong? What happened to "freedom of speech"???? Or does that particular freedom only apply to those who voice similar opinions to yours? Sounds to me like you'd rather revert to the thought police of the former USSR or Nazi Germany, where the only views allowed would be yours. Sorry, that's NOT going to happen! deal with it. You have YOUR views, others have theirs, and BOTH are equally free to voice them! YOUR rights to freedom of speech do NOT impede others from their dissenting views! Will you libbypukes EVER get that through your heads???????? I doubt it, since you ALL seem to share the single braincell allocated to "Progressives"!
I Think he/she makes my point ever better than I did. He/she is the problem, we cannot have a polite conversation where opinions differ, in this country anymore. I really think that is the difference between us and them. If we have an opinion that differs with someone we are more than willing to sat down and discuss it without telling the other side if you don't like it leave. That's just crazy and scary too. Freethinker says the lady was giving me her side, if she had turned and said I believe what you are saying is wrong then fine I would have been OK with that, but she didn't offer any opinion she just said "Leave America." She was the one wanting to stifle my free speech not the other way around.
posted by Gingersnapp at 4/15/2005 06:00:00 AM
6 Comments:
gingersnapp says "I Think he/she makes my point ever better than I did. He/she is the problem, we cannot have a polite conversation where opinions differ, in this country anymore. I really think that is the difference between us and them. If we have an opinion that differs with someone we are more than willing to sat down and discuss it without telling the other side if you don't like it leave".... Would that be like as in all the "discussions" that went on during the recent electoral period, such as the union representatives breaking into the Republican campaign offices, waving their guns & threatening people, or are you talking about, maybe the more recent phenomenon of the protestors throwing pies & eggs and other items at speakers at events presenting a viewpoint other than their own? Or would you be more inclined to link your "discussions" to the protestors disrupting events such as the campus career days, where they, through intimidation of their fellow students, chase out the Armed Services representatives, for having the unmitigated gall to explain how a career in the military can be of benefit? Yeah, I'd say thats some real compassion & discussion that you people on the other side show.
4/16/2005 7:28 AM
Well that's more like it I feel like I'm having a good discussion now, so let's make sure we tell about the loonies on your side. The ones who jammed the phone lines at the Democratic party and who are in jail right now. Or the ones who called people to tell them to vote on Wednesday, or if they had a parking ticket they would be arrested if they tried to vote. How about the ones who intimidated blacks, telling them if they had any kind of warrants the police would be watching for them at the polls. The ones that said John McCain had a black illegitimate child and the ones that put out ads about triple amputee Vietnam vet, Max Cleland featuring him with Saddam and bin Laden. And of course we can't forget the real loonies, the far right like the white supremacists, the abortion clinic bombers and the rapture people who want to "rape" the environment so the end of the world will come sooner. Sure there are looney tunes on both sides.
4/16/2005 8:41 AM
yes, you are correct, there are loonies on both sides, however YOUR loonies are the far more prominent liars and dissimlators of misinformation and downright lies. How many times was "fahrencrap9/11" disproved? Yet many on your side atill believe in, still spout the lies found therein. Lies, which have not ben substantiated by the 9/11 comission reports, Duelfer, nor any others. Maybe, yes, I will grant you this MAYBE, there were some dirty tricks played by people on the Rep side, none so bad as the intimidation of voters in lines leading up to the polls, none so bad as threatening physical violence to suspected right wing voters from the loonies on the left, none so bad as slashing the tires of republican vans which were going to be sent out to pick up voters to take them to the booths, see, the most your side can come up with is unfounded, false accusations, whereas the actions of those loonies on your side are VERY well documented.However, I digress, my wle main point is, people, politicians MAINLY, need to stop the lies and the scare tactics. If the truth is on their side, simply speak it, but the misinformation and lies, simply to promote "their" cause or candidacy, is THAT what the Founding Fathers envisioned? I see in your heading where you state "I have also learned an important lesson in the last year, it is that reading is the only way to get real information, you cannot depend on the news you see on TV"... I will agree with you on that... to a point. In order to make sure one is getting the most accurate information, one must read the viewpoints, not only of their party, or of their causes, one must read ALL the viewpoints presented, for only by digging through it all, will one come to the kernel of truth buried amidst the Bulls**t. Not only is this a tactic practiced by the left, but yes, the right does a fair amount of it also. I am concerned about many of those on both sides who do not see the truth or know what is REALLY going on, and no, I'm not talking about the whacko theories being promulgated by democraticunderground, or moveon.org or others, I mean the TRUTH. Check it out, be wise, there is far more to things than may appear at first glance.
4/16/2005 5:44 PM
lei, were you there? did you witness the "transgression" against her "freedom of speech"? Are you not able to understand that there are as many sides to every story as there are witnesses? Do you not understand that, for that reason, that is why "eyewitnesses" are considered undesireable in a court of law, unless there is NO other evidence?Where in my posts do you see that I have lumped anyone in with the "pie-throwers"? Obviously, you (as with most left wingers who scan through things, reading what you think may be applicable in order to prove your point, thereby missing the complete and total point of the article) totally missed the point of my post, if this is the best you can do, PLEASE, remain in the cheap seats, making your catcalls anonymously(a sports analogy, in case you're not a sports fan). Until such a time as you can address the complete totality of the point of my post...stay out of it! At this point, you are doing exactly what you accuse the woman in the Post Office of doing, "butting in to a "private" conversation"!
4/18/2005 8:24 PM
and, while you have my attention, Lei,your comments about "It was really more about the close-minded attitudes she and many others are up against every day. She, and you, and anyone else should be able to have a conversation without someone else butting in to yell at them". .... How, exactly does this pertain to "freedom of Speech"? Unless this was a completely "private" conversation, held in a situation where no one else could possibly hear, are YOU the one to deny another person's "freedom of speech"? Reading the US Constitution, I only see where it says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech". Are you, or I or anyone else the "Congress"? How does someone else exercising THEIR right to "Freedom of Speech" impugn anothers Freedom of Speech? Can you answer that, or is the best you can do is say "She, and you, and anyone else should be able to have a conversation without someone else butting in to yell at them". IF you dont want anyone else butting in, then keep your conversations private. Much like cell phone conversations, if they are so loud that everyone else can hear them, then that is not private. Much like a "family dispute" if it is so loud that the neighbors can hear it and call the police, is that abridging your "freedom of speech"? Your logic is disappointing.
4/18/2005 8:39 PM
lei, since when does a discussion constitute someone being ignorant & frustrating? When does talking about things, working on understanding someones thoughts constitute putting people down and shit stirring? Talking opens avanues of discussion, only by talking can you understand another. I haven't attacked anyone, I havent been rude to anyone, I havent been "shit-stirring" Ive simply discussed things. Maybe you should try actually reading the comments.
4/20/2005 8:02 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home