Re: In 2006 51% of Democrats wanted Bush to fail
“BAITING” Posting of singular or various items meant to elicit inappropriate response (in any manner) from other members is not allowed. When I posted the Fox poll done in 2006 showing 51% of Democrats wanting Bush to fail, Fritz's answer was More lies from the Fox, We Make Shit Up, not really the news network. Now I see that as baiting as you yourself define it... Now Fritz could have challenged the methodology, but no his response with what is essentially a taunt... And yet nothing was done precisely because the rule IS subjective... And that is precisely why it is so silly... There is no consistent standard... Secondly, after 8 years of megaphone trash talking by many on boards, many are seemingly incapable of participating in a seriously honest and stimulating debate... Take the entire issue of WMD... Using the UNSC's definition of WMD, Saddam had WMD in 2003... Yet you and other seek to chant no WMD... Did Saddam in 2003 have any stockpiled WMD, components thereof, dual use manufacturing capacity for WMD, delivery systems for WMD over a given distance, or any research project into WMD??? The answer given by all reports is YES... Your position was absolutely none which is simplely false... The question how much is required to constitute a threat? is another question is subject for serious and honest debate... I do enjoy your posts and hope they continue. I continuely hope for a honest and serious debate on this board... I am often disappointed... On Mar 10, 8:44 pm, THE ANNOINTED ONE markmka...@gmail.com wrote: jgg, This is the rule... it is subjective 6) “BAITING” Posting of singular or various items meant to elicit inappropriate response (in any manner) from other members is not allowed. “Baiting” is a moderator judgment call. The period of Moderation will be determined by a private vote of the Moderators. It has been and will continue to be enforced by the three moderators on this board. It requires an agreement of all for action to be taken. We accomplish this by leaving our emotions on the sideline when reading the posts. We have, as moderators, a die hard conservative, a flaming liberal and a centrist. The three of us are in constant communication over any and all matters. We do our scolding OFF BOARD. I feel the inappropriate response to baiting is just as bad as the baiting. We ARE after all ADULTS and responsible for our own actions OR reactions. I am sorry that you have a problem with this but it is solely YOUR problem. I do enjoy your posts and hope they continue. On Mar 10, 11:27 am, jgg1000a jgg1...@hotmail.com wrote: Wasn't there a much noisily made rule about baiting Yet Fritz is IMHO Baiting if one uses Mark's new shinning rule concerning baiting... How??? If you make a point and my standard reply is your guy is a clown, the conversation quickly turns to name calling, which IMHO, is what some poster WANT so they can demonize the other side for the name-calling they started... Frankly that is the point of baiting... Frankly, I thought the rule silly in the first place because is inability for a fair enforcement Now civil and reason debate is possible if those debating are serious about interchanging ideas... And yes, this type of serious debate can be had even if a certain measure of name calling is had IF the central purpose is an interchange about ideas... Sadly, too many see the name-calling as substance rather than the mindless fluff that it is, so they start, continue and end in name calling... So should Fritz be banned??? Why??? He does what many do here... But Mark in his unevenhanaded evenhanded application of the silly new rule warned some folks who should not have be warned... (Why the need to limit hurt feelings on a board where trash- talking is the common lingo is beyound me)... So am I mocking the brand new shinning rule concerning baiting here??? You betcha Consider the election in Minnesota... Here is an excellent case to debate voting rights and voting procedures, including the validity of SCOTUS's 2000 decision in Bush vs. Gore.. Where is there serious debate on that??? Not here... Sad really... On Mar 10, 12:48 pm, Keith In Tampa keithinta...@gmail.com wrote: Good Afternoon JGG!! I am curious, how do you see a moderator making such a debate civil, or maybe better said, how is it that you see a moderator interacting in some of the discussions? Surely you are not suggesting that an individual be restricted from posting his or her views just because they are unsubstantiated do you? I hope you might take the time to respond to this, I am genuinely interested to hear your perspective!! By the way, I enjoy your comments and posts to the group!! Have a great Tuesday!! Keith On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 10:02 AM, jgg1000a jgg1...@hotmail.com wrote:
Re: In 2006 51% of Democrats wanted Bush to fail
fritz is just a typical lib. when confronted with the truth, he goes into a snit, and call the truth bearer a liar. and when asked to provide facts to back up his assertions, he disappears. what a putz. On Mar 9, 10:30 pm, Keith In Tampa keithinta...@gmail.com wrote: Maybe you can give some examples and substantiate such a claim there Fritzie? Specifically, when, who, how and what did Fox News make up? On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 10:24 PM, Fritz da Cat fritz.da.cat...@gmail.comwrote: More lies from the Fox, We Make Shit Up, not really the news network. On Mar 9, 10:55 am, jgg1000a jgg1...@hotmail.com wrote: please remember this fact when complaining about Rush or anyone else... Too many Democrats demand that we acted as they REFUSED to act during the Bush Presidency... Either allow the same standard for opposition when Democrats were the opposition, or just shut up... Otherwise hypocrisy is they name... http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/FOX_230_release_web.pdf 10. Regardless of how you voted in the presidential election, would you say you want President Bush to succeed or not? SCALE: 1. Yes, want him to succeed 2. No, do not want him to succeed 3. (Don’t know) Yes No (Don’t know) 8-9 Aug 06 63% 32 5 Democrats 40% 51 9 Republicans 90% 7 2 Independents 63% 34 3 --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ Thanks for being part of PoliticalForum at Google Groups. For options help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: In 2006 51% of Democrats wanted Bush to fail
Inconvenient facts MUST be defined as lies by you to justify your ideology... But this has been true with the Leftie and Rightie nutcases for years... Was the poll taken??? yes. Now if you want to dispute it, dispute the methodology... Instead you seek to kill civil debate by trash talking... Typical... This was just the thing I was accused of when I replied to Mikey... Is there a Moderator in the House??? On Mar 9, 10:24 pm, Fritz da Cat fritz.da.cat...@gmail.com wrote: More lies from the Fox, We Make Shit Up, not really the news network. On Mar 9, 10:55 am, jgg1000a jgg1...@hotmail.com wrote: please remember this fact when complaining about Rush or anyone else... Too many Democrats demand that we acted as they REFUSED to act during the Bush Presidency... Either allow the same standard for opposition when Democrats were the opposition, or just shut up... Otherwise hypocrisy is they name... http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/FOX_230_release_web.pdf 10. Regardless of how you voted in the presidential election, would you say you want President Bush to succeed or not? SCALE: 1. Yes, want him to succeed 2. No, do not want him to succeed 3. (Don’t know) Yes No (Don’t know) 8-9 Aug 06 63% 32 5 Democrats 40% 51 9 Republicans 90% 7 2 Independents 63% 34 3 --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ Thanks for being part of PoliticalForum at Google Groups. For options help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: In 2006 51% of Democrats wanted Bush to fail
Good Afternoon JGG!! I am curious, how do you see a moderator making such a debate civil, or maybe better said, how is it that you see a moderator interacting in some of the discussions? Surely you are not suggesting that an individual be restricted from posting his or her views just because they are unsubstantiated do you? I hope you might take the time to respond to this, I am genuinely interested to hear your perspective!! By the way, I enjoy your comments and posts to the group!! Have a great Tuesday!! Keith On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 10:02 AM, jgg1000a jgg1...@hotmail.com wrote: Inconvenient facts MUST be defined as lies by you to justify your ideology... But this has been true with the Leftie and Rightie nutcases for years... Was the poll taken??? yes. Now if you want to dispute it, dispute the methodology... Instead you seek to kill civil debate by trash talking... Typical... This was just the thing I was accused of when I replied to Mikey... Is there a Moderator in the House??? On Mar 9, 10:24 pm, Fritz da Cat fritz.da.cat...@gmail.com wrote: More lies from the Fox, We Make Shit Up, not really the news network. On Mar 9, 10:55 am, jgg1000a jgg1...@hotmail.com wrote: please remember this fact when complaining about Rush or anyone else... Too many Democrats demand that we acted as they REFUSED to act during the Bush Presidency... Either allow the same standard for opposition when Democrats were the opposition, or just shut up... Otherwise hypocrisy is they name... http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/FOX_230_release_web.pdf 10. Regardless of how you voted in the presidential election, would you say you want President Bush to succeed or not? SCALE: 1. Yes, want him to succeed 2. No, do not want him to succeed 3. (Don’t know) Yes No (Don’t know) 8-9 Aug 06 63% 32 5 Democrats 40% 51 9 Republicans 90% 7 2 Independents 63% 34 3 --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ Thanks for being part of PoliticalForum at Google Groups. For options help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: In 2006 51% of Democrats wanted Bush to fail
Wasn't there a much noisily made rule about baiting Yet Fritz is IMHO Baiting if one uses Mark's new shinning rule concerning baiting... How??? If you make a point and my standard reply is your guy is a clown, the conversation quickly turns to name calling, which IMHO, is what some poster WANT so they can demonize the other side for the name-calling they started... Frankly that is the point of baiting... Frankly, I thought the rule silly in the first place because is inability for a fair enforcementNow civil and reason debate is possible if those debating are serious about interchanging ideas... And yes, this type of serious debate can be had even if a certain measure of name calling is had IF the central purpose is an interchange about ideas... Sadly, too many see the name-calling as substance rather than the mindless fluff that it is, so they start, continue and end in name calling... So should Fritz be banned??? Why??? He does what many do here... But Mark in his unevenhanaded evenhanded application of the silly new rule warned some folks who should not have be warned... (Why the need to limit hurt feelings on a board where trash- talking is the common lingo is beyound me)... So am I mocking the brand new shinning rule concerning baiting here??? You betcha Consider the election in Minnesota... Here is an excellent case to debate voting rights and voting procedures, including the validity of SCOTUS's 2000 decision in Bush vs. Gore.. Where is there serious debate on that??? Not here... Sad really... On Mar 10, 12:48 pm, Keith In Tampa keithinta...@gmail.com wrote: Good Afternoon JGG!! I am curious, how do you see a moderator making such a debate civil, or maybe better said, how is it that you see a moderator interacting in some of the discussions? Surely you are not suggesting that an individual be restricted from posting his or her views just because they are unsubstantiated do you? I hope you might take the time to respond to this, I am genuinely interested to hear your perspective!! By the way, I enjoy your comments and posts to the group!! Have a great Tuesday!! Keith On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 10:02 AM, jgg1000a jgg1...@hotmail.com wrote: Inconvenient facts MUST be defined as lies by you to justify your ideology... But this has been true with the Leftie and Rightie nutcases for years... Was the poll taken??? yes. Now if you want to dispute it, dispute the methodology... Instead you seek to kill civil debate by trash talking... Typical... This was just the thing I was accused of when I replied to Mikey... Is there a Moderator in the House??? On Mar 9, 10:24 pm, Fritz da Cat fritz.da.cat...@gmail.com wrote: More lies from the Fox, We Make Shit Up, not really the news network. On Mar 9, 10:55 am, jgg1000a jgg1...@hotmail.com wrote: please remember this fact when complaining about Rush or anyone else... Too many Democrats demand that we acted as they REFUSED to act during the Bush Presidency... Either allow the same standard for opposition when Democrats were the opposition, or just shut up... Otherwise hypocrisy is they name... http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/FOX_230_release_web.pdf 10. Regardless of how you voted in the presidential election, would you say you want President Bush to succeed or not? SCALE: 1. Yes, want him to succeed 2. No, do not want him to succeed 3. (Don’t know) Yes No (Don’t know) 8-9 Aug 06 63% 32 5 Democrats 40% 51 9 Republicans 90% 7 2 Independents 63% 34 3 --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ Thanks for being part of PoliticalForum at Google Groups. For options help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: In 2006 51% of Democrats wanted Bush to fail
jgg, This is the rule... it is subjective 6) “BAITING” Posting of singular or various items meant to elicit inappropriate response (in any manner) from other members is not allowed. “Baiting” is a moderator judgment call. The period of Moderation will be determined by a private vote of the Moderators. It has been and will continue to be enforced by the three moderators on this board. It requires an agreement of all for action to be taken. We accomplish this by leaving our emotions on the sideline when reading the posts. We have, as moderators, a die hard conservative, a flaming liberal and a centrist. The three of us are in constant communication over any and all matters. We do our scolding OFF BOARD. I feel the inappropriate response to baiting is just as bad as the baiting. We ARE after all ADULTS and responsible for our own actions OR reactions. I am sorry that you have a problem with this but it is solely YOUR problem. I do enjoy your posts and hope they continue. On Mar 10, 11:27 am, jgg1000a jgg1...@hotmail.com wrote: Wasn't there a much noisily made rule about baiting Yet Fritz is IMHO Baiting if one uses Mark's new shinning rule concerning baiting... How??? If you make a point and my standard reply is your guy is a clown, the conversation quickly turns to name calling, which IMHO, is what some poster WANT so they can demonize the other side for the name-calling they started... Frankly that is the point of baiting... Frankly, I thought the rule silly in the first place because is inability for a fair enforcement Now civil and reason debate is possible if those debating are serious about interchanging ideas... And yes, this type of serious debate can be had even if a certain measure of name calling is had IF the central purpose is an interchange about ideas... Sadly, too many see the name-calling as substance rather than the mindless fluff that it is, so they start, continue and end in name calling... So should Fritz be banned??? Why??? He does what many do here... But Mark in his unevenhanaded evenhanded application of the silly new rule warned some folks who should not have be warned... (Why the need to limit hurt feelings on a board where trash- talking is the common lingo is beyound me)... So am I mocking the brand new shinning rule concerning baiting here??? You betcha Consider the election in Minnesota... Here is an excellent case to debate voting rights and voting procedures, including the validity of SCOTUS's 2000 decision in Bush vs. Gore.. Where is there serious debate on that??? Not here... Sad really... On Mar 10, 12:48 pm, Keith In Tampa keithinta...@gmail.com wrote: Good Afternoon JGG!! I am curious, how do you see a moderator making such a debate civil, or maybe better said, how is it that you see a moderator interacting in some of the discussions? Surely you are not suggesting that an individual be restricted from posting his or her views just because they are unsubstantiated do you? I hope you might take the time to respond to this, I am genuinely interested to hear your perspective!! By the way, I enjoy your comments and posts to the group!! Have a great Tuesday!! Keith On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 10:02 AM, jgg1000a jgg1...@hotmail.com wrote: Inconvenient facts MUST be defined as lies by you to justify your ideology... But this has been true with the Leftie and Rightie nutcases for years... Was the poll taken??? yes. Now if you want to dispute it, dispute the methodology... Instead you seek to kill civil debate by trash talking... Typical... This was just the thing I was accused of when I replied to Mikey... Is there a Moderator in the House??? On Mar 9, 10:24 pm, Fritz da Cat fritz.da.cat...@gmail.com wrote: More lies from the Fox, We Make Shit Up, not really the news network. On Mar 9, 10:55 am, jgg1000a jgg1...@hotmail.com wrote: please remember this fact when complaining about Rush or anyone else... Too many Democrats demand that we acted as they REFUSED to act during the Bush Presidency... Either allow the same standard for opposition when Democrats were the opposition, or just shut up... Otherwise hypocrisy is they name... http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/FOX_230_release_web.pdf 10. Regardless of how you voted in the presidential election, would you say you want President Bush to succeed or not? SCALE: 1. Yes, want him to succeed 2. No, do not want him to succeed 3. (Don’t know) Yes No (Don’t know) 8-9 Aug 06 63% 32 5 Democrats 40% 51 9 Republicans 90% 7 2 Independents 63% 34 3- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ Thanks for being part of PoliticalForum at Google Groups. For options help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other
Re: In 2006 51% of Democrats wanted Bush to fail
They left a question out. Should President Bush be impeached? Yes! On Mar 9, 12:55 pm, jgg1000a jgg1...@hotmail.com wrote: please remember this fact when complaining about Rush or anyone else... Too many Democrats demand that we acted as they REFUSED to act during the Bush Presidency... Either allow the same standard for opposition when Democrats were the opposition, or just shut up... Otherwise hypocrisy is they name... http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/FOX_230_release_web.pdf 10. Regardless of how you voted in the presidential election, would you say you want President Bush to succeed or not? SCALE: 1. Yes, want him to succeed 2. No, do not want him to succeed 3. (Don’t know) Yes No (Don’t know) 8-9 Aug 06 63% 32 5 Democrats 40% 51 9 Republicans 90% 7 2 Independents 63% 34 3 --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ Thanks for being part of PoliticalForum at Google Groups. For options help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: In 2006 51% of Democrats wanted Bush to fail
More lies fronmthe Fox, We Make Shit Up, not really the news network. On Mar 9, 10:55 am, jgg1000a jgg1...@hotmail.com wrote: please remember this fact when complaining about Rush or anyone else... Too many Democrats demand that we acted as they REFUSED to act during the Bush Presidency... Either allow the same standard for opposition when Democrats were the opposition, or just shut up... Otherwise hypocrisy is they name... http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/FOX_230_release_web.pdf 10. Regardless of how you voted in the presidential election, would you say you want President Bush to succeed or not? SCALE: 1. Yes, want him to succeed 2. No, do not want him to succeed 3. (Don’t know) Yes No (Don’t know) 8-9 Aug 06 63% 32 5 Democrats 40% 51 9 Republicans 90% 7 2 Independents 63% 34 3 --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ Thanks for being part of PoliticalForum at Google Groups. For options help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: In 2006 51% of Democrats wanted Bush to fail
More lies from the Fox, We Make Shit Up, not really the news network. On Mar 9, 10:55 am, jgg1000a jgg1...@hotmail.com wrote: please remember this fact when complaining about Rush or anyone else... Too many Democrats demand that we acted as they REFUSED to act during the Bush Presidency... Either allow the same standard for opposition when Democrats were the opposition, or just shut up... Otherwise hypocrisy is they name... http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/FOX_230_release_web.pdf 10. Regardless of how you voted in the presidential election, would you say you want President Bush to succeed or not? SCALE: 1. Yes, want him to succeed 2. No, do not want him to succeed 3. (Don’t know) Yes No (Don’t know) 8-9 Aug 06 63% 32 5 Democrats 40% 51 9 Republicans 90% 7 2 Independents 63% 34 3 --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ Thanks for being part of PoliticalForum at Google Groups. For options help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: In 2006 51% of Democrats wanted Bush to fail
Maybe you can give some examples and substantiate such a claim there Fritzie? Specifically, when, who, how and what did Fox News make up? On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 10:24 PM, Fritz da Cat fritz.da.cat...@gmail.comwrote: More lies from the Fox, We Make Shit Up, not really the news network. On Mar 9, 10:55 am, jgg1000a jgg1...@hotmail.com wrote: please remember this fact when complaining about Rush or anyone else... Too many Democrats demand that we acted as they REFUSED to act during the Bush Presidency... Either allow the same standard for opposition when Democrats were the opposition, or just shut up... Otherwise hypocrisy is they name... http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/FOX_230_release_web.pdf 10. Regardless of how you voted in the presidential election, would you say you want President Bush to succeed or not? SCALE: 1. Yes, want him to succeed 2. No, do not want him to succeed 3. (Don’t know) Yes No (Don’t know) 8-9 Aug 06 63% 32 5 Democrats 40% 51 9 Republicans 90% 7 2 Independents 63% 34 3 --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ Thanks for being part of PoliticalForum at Google Groups. For options help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
