<p>They had some pretty good models to follow to develop that approach. Personally, I don’t like listening to any of that kind of stuff.</p>
<p>Hey, I’ve listened to Michael Savage. Nobody tops him for King of The Vituperatives. The point is, no single party has cornered the market on insufferable partisan blow hards.</p>
<p>Sorry, spideygirl, I guess my take is different. My observation is that some people can dish it out, but they can’t take it.</p>
<p>@Hunt: This is not an issue of dishing out or taking it. Let’s focus again:</p>
<p>It is inappropriate in a debate to attack a person personally, to label them as any number of terrible things, just because they differ in their opinions from what you might like to hear.</p>
<p>Acting in such a way as to quash the free speech of others is not only wrong, it is also likely to lead to a place where even the bullies are unhappy. This is because when free speech is all gone, even the bullies suffer.</p>
<p>I don’t see many people on this board who dish it but can’t take it. I’ve had a lot of nasty things said about me on a few threads but I’m still here. Spidey’s still here. Razor is stil here. Poets, Garland and a lot of other folks take a licking but keep on ticking. To what are you referring? Personal shots are the only thing that should be off-limits. No one is running away and hiding or calling other people cowards, except you.</p>
<p>Also Hunt, if I saw someone who is on the liberal side getting attacked personally and slapped with cruel labels merely for expressing an opinion, I would jump in to speak for civility as well. I’m not talking about what happens in the media - I mean what happens here. I have done that before, but I have to be honest that I see WAY more attacking of conservatives on these threads.</p>
<p>Trust me, either way, I can take it. Bulllies can go for it, really. Most people are smart enough to recognize bullying when they see it, so when it happens it only makes the perp look bad.</p>
<p>Sorry, I don’t see anybody labelling you as terrible things. I just shake my head when I read these complaints about the mean ol’ liberals. When I say that people can dish it out, but can’t take it, I’m talking about that.</p>
<p>Hunt, when people are dishing it out, when they are slapping cruel labels on individuals with whom they are debating, or attacking them personally, getting the same thing back would not be a problem, would it. But that isn’t what is happening. </p>
<p>Had I seen that, I would not have gotten involved in this debate. I see people being attacked personally, and either being called awful names or having awful labels and judgements obviously inferred, when all they have done is express an opinion from the conservative side of things about the issue at hand (having spoken in general terms, not attacking anyone personally).</p>
<p>And trust me, it HAS happened to me as well.</p>
<p>Poetsheart:
</p>
<p>I totally agree with most of this quote. The only part I disagree with is the Michael Savage reference. Have you ever listened to Bob Grant in the NY market? Oh man, you’d be shocked. Grant is way worse (although he may be off the air now - he’s been around a long time). Second to Grant is Mark Levin. Have you ever listened to him? He’s a wild one. Savage would be third after those two.</p>
<p>I admit, if the McCain campaign did something like this I WOULD react differently. I would be baffled, for instance, at why they felt the need to do it- as far as I am concerned, McCain hasn’t had to grapple with vicious rumors about his religious beliefs, or dealt with nicknames such as “B. Hussein Obama”. I don’t agree with what the volunteers did here, (nor do I believe Obama himself agrees with it, and I will give him the benefit of the doubt as I would give McCain) but I can understand why they felt the need to do it. Damned if they do, damned if they don’t.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>:eek:—Worse than Michael Savage?! I wouldn’t have thought it possible. (See Poet shaking her head in amazement…)</p>
<p>All three are as you describe, but to me, they are often hillarious (in small doses). I do get to the point when I need to turn it off. Meanness bums me out. I do like edgy political humor from both sides, though. Jon Stewart can be pretty hillarious.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>But some can’t see it in themselves.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I guess the only equivalent I could think of vis-a-vis McCain might be if a bunch of white elderly folks wanted to sit behind him at a rally and some campaign staff said no because they wanted to have non-white folks or at least some young ones featured and told the old folks that they’d have to sit elsewhere. I honestly think my reaction with McCain doing something like that would be about the same as it is with Obama’s doing so: 1) Duh, of course campaign staff help produce image. How many rallies are set up to make them appear on TV as if a lot of people are attending when in fact often many aren’t? Image-making is part of the game. 2) It’s hard to say what hurts more – letting the “unwanted” go ahead and sit or taking the risk that the refusal will be written about. 3) I’d be happy that McCain was alienating parts of his base.</p>
<p>Would I pile on McCain for the fact that his staff did so? I might, I don’t know. I actually think probably not. But if I did, I’d never convince myself that I was an avid guardian of rights of the elderly. I’d realize that I appreciated the opportunity to peel off support. I am in fact for rights for the elderly, but I am not so sanctimonious as to suggest that I avidly pursue this issue.</p>
<p>Again, since we’ve descended into conservative-liberal jibing, those of you I recognize as Obama bashers or opponents don’t have a lot of credibility with me when you suggest that you really care about a girl with a head scarf getting turned away from a political rally.</p>
<p>If I were you, I’d probably be happy Obama’s campaigned messed up, and I’d pile on with the feigned moral outrage.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>My friend here may be an exception to feigning moral outrage.</p>
<p>I also think it is pretty humorous to watch some of these people expressing their outrage on behalf of Muslim women. Talk about opportunism.</p>
<p>“I guess the only equivalent I could think of vis-a-vis McCain might be if a bunch of white elderly folks wanted to sit behind him at a rally”</p>
<p>A rough equivalent was the Republican convention a few years back when, as far as I could tell, there were about 10 black people in the arena and half of them were on stage. That bugged me not because it was a photo op, but because the party took the position that it’s wrong to give black people a boost in order to increase racial diversity. I don’t agree with that position, but if they think it’s wrong, then it ought to be wrong all the time.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>unregistered, you nailed it in your posts, and the point here was my point. I am expecting to take a lot of fire for what I wrote, but I will point out that I think Obama’s campaign messed up on this in a moral sense, I understand exactly why they would do so however (and am even sometimes glad to think they are paying attention to such image issues since so many of their opponents are), and I see little point in staying on a thread which has a large share of Obama bashers bashing him about something that really isn’t defensible. The laughable thing to me is that some (not all) convince themselves they really care about this issue.</p>
<p>I wonder how many of the people bashing him have also accused him at one point or another of being a Muslim himself. Which is it? I can’t keep track of all the nastiness.</p>
<p>He isn’t? :rolleyes:</p>
<p>I think he is a Muslim when he isn’t following the hateful sermons of Reverend Wright or discriminating against Muslim women!</p>
<p>A Conservative lecturing about a bullying liberal is an oxymoron, as that is the number one Conservative ploy.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, a Conservative who is engaged in complaining about bullying doesn’t understand the definition or behavior of bullying, and is unaware that they are bullies. Otherwise, they wouldn’t be a Conservative.</p>
<p>Our current administration is the perfect example.</p>
<p>Bush was the CANDIDATE who invented STAGING his audience.</p>
<p>Anybody complaining about Obama learning from the past is very funny.</p>