In which I extend an olive branch...

[Yonivore]

…to those, in this forum, with whom I most disagree.

Not since Ronald Reagan was president have I self-identified as a Republican and I have never found myself so in line with Democrats that I would ever have identified myself as such. Had I been born a decade or two before I was, that might have been different. With two notable and, yes, significant exceptions, I believe I can most easily be considered to hold a libertarian ideology. Do I hold conservative social and fiscal views? Absolutely, I do; and, unapologetically so. Liberal ones? I can’t think of any in the current iteration of that term – liberal.

I believe in limited government, personal liberty, and – most importantly – the right of the individual to control their lives and the responsibility to accept whatever consequences result from exercising that control. I also believe every decision we make and every act we commit can be – and should be – driven by these fundamental principles. I do believe it is that black and white – there are no shades of gray, no middle ground, no fence to ride. I just believe there is an abundance of disagreement over where the fine line is that separates one side of an issue from another.

As best as I can express and am able to articulate it right now, my views on the national political issues of the day dictate the federal government’s role in my life is limited to three things and I tend to support politicians, political positions, and ideals that are aligned with those. They are:

1) Protecting my inalienable rights to life, liberty, and the fruits of my legitimate labor (property) from being violated by those – foreign or domestic – who would seek to deprive me of them, without good cause, and over whom I cannot hope to prevail and who are not subject to the laws of my State government;

2) Providing services, necessary for the public good, common to all States and where it is in the best interest of the various states, or individual American citizens, the federal government bring continuity and uniformity to the provision of that service, where the various states cannot agree on a method to accomplish continuity and uniformity to the necessary service or, where the various states (through the individuals’ duly elected representatives) decide it would be more effective or efficient for the federal government to provide that service and then, give it the specific authority to perform the service; and

3) Settling disagreements, between the various states or between individuals, from two or more states, where the various states are unable to reconcile.

That’s it. And, right or wrong, agree or disagree, it is through the prism of this understanding I attempt to frame all of my political positions.

Where, in your opinion, my comments in this forum contradict the above, it is either because I didn’t properly apply my own beliefs before hitting the “post” button, I don’t fully understand how my opinion is in conflict, or I haven’t adequately explained how – in my mind – the opinion perfectly agrees with my ideology. Of course, it could just as well be that I’ve plagiarized content that mostly agrees with what I believe but, because of my own laziness, contains obvious contradictions.

Even this post may contain errors to this logic…but, I assure you, it contains no stolen content. I may not have considered all permutations of thought when I arrived at what I just said above. There may actually be four things I think the federal government should do and there may be more than two things over which I diverge from conventional libertarian thought. This is not an invitation for those who dislike my presence here to examine this post for contradictions and logical errors – although it probably will be done. This is pretty much a stream of consciousness exercise and, frankly, this venue isn’t important enough nor is it consequential enough for me devote more than that.

By the way, this is the same rationale I employ for plagiarizing content, with which I agree. Instead of spending an inordinate amount of my precious time coming up with an original way of saying something someone else has already said – probably better than I could have, anyway…I cut ‘n paste. I edit the information, to appear to be an original post, because experience has shown me that you are likely to fully read and respond to something you think a member wrote but will just as likely ignore “quoted” content.

In my opinion, we are not here representing ourselves – we’re here to compare and contrast disembodied positions over contemporary political issues. If our personal opinions, on these topics, were so unique or radical that we were able to propose them here for the first time, we wouldn’t be here posing them…we’d be there, driving opinion and causing forum participants – like us – to parrot our ideas, steal our words, or advance our narratives. Not many of us, in here, have had an original thought on any of the issues we discuss. Our opinions are all driven by the information we receive from other sources…most of which are beyond the lowest levels of the degrees of separation that define our relationship with the rest of the world. Some of us plagiarize, some parrot, some blindly stick to a narrative constructed by others whom we hold to be credible – for whatever reason. In fact, if you notice, we probably spend more time attacking each others’ sources than we do the content of the sources’ ideas. Very, very few of us ever make an original assertion because we have first-hand knowledge of the facts informing what we say. What we post here usually is some variation of an idea already in the public domain. Many times, it’s one that has already been “adjudicated” by world and to a reasonable conclusion; but, since we disagree with the outcome of that judgment, we attempt to re-hash the entire premise here. And re-hash it, we do.

Further, I’m not posting this because I care what you think of me or my opinions. I’m posting this because I care what I think of me and my opinions. And, honestly, I’m sick and tired of the threads, in which I engage, devolving into snarky, vituperative, and hateful flame wars that no longer resemble reasonable debate and that usually stray so far from the original topics they end up a hundred-page hate fest.

I accept fully my disproportionate role in that happening. I have done all those things; snarked, mocked, insulted and name-called my way through a thread. I’d like to believe I don’t usually instigate the devolution of our discussion but, in reality, I’m sure I do it more than my share. There are many posters in this forum, with whom I vehemently disagree on almost everything but, who refuse to get in the gutter when the rest of us roll off the curb of civility. And, there are others who, while occasionally lapsing into insult, generally maintain a respectable tone. I applaud you and hope to, in the future, emulate your demeanor. I won’t always be successful – I’m emotional and passionate about some things – but, when I fail, I hope to eventually be sufficiently humble enough to bring my temperament back around to civil discourse, apologize, and set about re-engaging in the legitimate debate being had.

For those I’ve offended in here, I sincerely apologize. Personally, I don’t believe it’s possible to be offended by the words of others with whom I have no relationship but, I recognize and accept there may be those of you who do. And, for those who think I’m being insincere, even now, I guess future behavior will either be your justification or my vindication. We’ll see.

I will admit I started not to even attempt this exercise because, well, I don’t know any of you personally and, quite frankly, I can count on one hand the number of you I would even want to meet...while, at the same time, recognizing that desire [to meet some of you], itself, is based on nothing more than how you represent yourself here. For all I know, the most reasonable-sounding among us could also only be able to project that air of sanity in this forum. You could be, in reality, a raving lunatic. That’s not to say your opinions don’t interest me, but the anonymity of the internet affords us all the freedom to engage in thought experiments and exercises that can fail miserably without having lasting consequences and without alienating friends and family. I want to maintain that anonymity because; it serves me to do so.

I also want to thank all of you, for helping me to understand the arguments of those, outside the virtual world, with whom I have a relationship but, with whom I also vehemently disagree on political issues. Because of your spirited and heartfelt postings, I’ve been able to avoid unnecessary personal strife. Family and friendship are more important than winning an argument over something which none of us controls. I know which topics to leave alone in polite conversation and I know how to respond when the subjects are broached – as sometimes happens. I also know how far I can go with good-natured razzing without sending my liberal friends (yeah, imagine that) or family members into a frothing-at-the-mouth maniacal rant. You’ve helped tremendously in that regard and I am grateful.

I briefly considered killing myself off – for a second time – and coming back in as someone new like I did with The Ressurrected One (Yeah, I misspelled it then too); but, decided against it. To have done it right, back then, I should not have claimed a relationship between the two identities. To do it at all, now, would be counter to what I am attempting with this effort…redefining my identity in SpursTalk without changing my name or sacrificing my anonymity. Who knows, this may be my way of ultimately leaving SpursTalk…I tell myself I’m going to do just that, every now and then with some variation of, “Why can’t I quit you!” With the way arguments are conducted in here now, it’s not much fun posting anymore. But, my personal circumstances are such that I legitimately spend a lot of time on this medium and can – without sacrificing other aspects of my life – engage in a favorite avocation, politics. So, instead of allowing myself to be driven away – I’ve decided to create this thread in an effort to create a benchmark of accountability for myself and, as a olive branch to those with whom I’ve sparred over the years.

So, there it is; my olive branch. Take it; leave it; ridicule it. I’m not asking any of you to similarly engage in an attempt to redefine your presence here; that’s your business. Let your conscience be your guide. I do this for me. In the grand scheme of things, I recognize it matters little.

If you’ve read this far, thanks for your attention. Carry on.

[clambake]

so....you STILL have nothing but your "black experience?"

[DarkReign]

Reading this later....but it doesnt seem copy+pasted.

Color me interested.

[clambake]

Reading this later....but it doesnt seem copy+pasted.

Color me interested.

i was just being snarky.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

"i'd like to give a laurel...............and hearty handshake to our new"

[nuclearfm]

…exceptions, I believe I can most easily be considered to hold a libertarian ideology. Do I hold conservative social and fiscal views? Absolutely, I do; and, unapologetically so. Liberal ones? I can’t think of any in the current iteration of that term – liberal.

I believe in limited government, personal liberty, and – most importantly – the right of the individual to control their lives and the responsibility to accept whatever consequences result from exercising that control. I also believe every decision we make and every act we commit can be – and should be – driven by these fundamental principles. I do believe it is that black and white – there are no shades of gray, no middle ground, no fence to ride. I just believe there is an abundance of disagreement over where the fine line is that separates one side of an issue from another.

.

Sounds pretty legit, props. I'm all the time for someone exploring their intellectual boundaries. If you're very much into Libertarianism (small or capital L) and liberty, I suggest you read Ayn Rand and some Objectivism, which has many aspects of libertarianism. Rothbard and Ayn Rand had a personal relationship in addition to their intellectual similarities. You also may find that the first modern Libertarians were hippies. Yes, hippies. Rand's comments regarding "liberty" could provide you with some insight or a downward spiral that will either lead you to hate her passionately or commit suicide.

[SnakeBoy]

Where, in your opinion, my comments in this forum contradict the above, it is either because I didn’t properly apply my own beliefs before hitting the “post” button, I don’t fully understand how my opinion is in conflict, or I haven’t adequately explained how – in my mind – the opinion perfectly agrees with my ideology.

I think it is because you're a hypocrite, just like the rest of us.

[hater]

jumping off a sinking ship

[iggypop123]

…to those, in this forum, with whom I most disagree.

Not since Ronald Reagan was president have I self-identified as a Republican and I have never found myself so in line with Democrats that I would ever have identified myself as such. Had I been born a decade or two before I was, that might have been different. With two notable and, yes, significant exceptions, I believe I can most easily be considered to hold a libertarian ideology. Do I hold conservative social and fiscal views? Absolutely, I do; and, unapologetically so. Liberal ones? I can’t think of any in the current iteration of that term – liberal.

I believe in limited government, personal liberty, and – most importantly – the right of the individual to control their lives and the responsibility to accept whatever consequences result from exercising that control. I also believe every decision we make and every act we commit can be – and should be – driven by these fundamental principles. I do believe it is that black and white – there are no shades of gray, no middle ground, no fence to ride. I just believe there is an abundance of disagreement over where the fine line is that separates one side of an issue from another.

As best as I can express and am able to articulate it right now, my views on the national political issues of the day dictate the federal government’s role in my life is limited to three things and I tend to support politicians, political positions, and ideals that are aligned with those. They are:

1) Protecting my inalienable rights to life, liberty, and the fruits of my legitimate labor (property) from being violated by those – foreign or domestic – who would seek to deprive me of them, without good cause, and over whom I cannot hope to prevail and who are not subject to the laws of my State government;

2) Providing services, necessary for the public good, common to all States and where it is in the best interest of the various states, or individual American citizens, the federal government bring continuity and uniformity to the provision of that service, where the various states cannot agree on a method to accomplish continuity and uniformity to the necessary service or, where the various states (through the individuals’ duly elected representatives) decide it would be more effective or efficient for the federal government to provide that service and then, give it the specific authority to perform the service; and

3) Settling disagreements, between the various states or between individuals, from two or more states, where the various states are unable to reconcile.

That’s it. And, right or wrong, agree or disagree, it is through the prism of this understanding I attempt to frame all of my political positions.

Where, in your opinion, my comments in this forum contradict the above, it is either because I didn’t properly apply my own beliefs before hitting the “post” button, I don’t fully understand how my opinion is in conflict, or I haven’t adequately explained how – in my mind – the opinion perfectly agrees with my ideology. Of course, it could just as well be that I’ve plagiarized content that mostly agrees with what I believe but, because of my own laziness, contains obvious contradictions.

Even this post may contain errors to this logic…but, I assure you, it contains no stolen content. I may not have considered all permutations of thought when I arrived at what I just said above. There may actually be four things I think the federal government should do and there may be more than two things over which I diverge from conventional libertarian thought. This is not an invitation for those who dislike my presence here to examine this post for contradictions and logical errors – although it probably will be done. This is pretty much a stream of consciousness exercise and, frankly, this venue isn’t important enough nor is it consequential enough for me devote more than that.

By the way, this is the same rationale I employ for plagiarizing content, with which I agree. Instead of spending an inordinate amount of my precious time coming up with an original way of saying something someone else has already said – probably better than I could have, anyway…I cut ‘n paste. I edit the information, to appear to be an original post, because experience has shown me that you are likely to fully read and respond to something you think a member wrote but will just as likely ignore “quoted” content.

In my opinion, we are not here representing ourselves – we’re here to compare and contrast disembodied positions over contemporary political issues. If our personal opinions, on these topics, were so unique or radical that we were able to propose them here for the first time, we wouldn’t be here posing them…we’d be there, driving opinion and causing forum participants – like us – to parrot our ideas, steal our words, or advance our narratives. Not many of us, in here, have had an original thought on any of the issues we discuss. Our opinions are all driven by the information we receive from other sources…most of which are beyond the lowest levels of the degrees of separation that define our relationship with the rest of the world. Some of us plagiarize, some parrot, some blindly stick to a narrative constructed by others whom we hold to be credible – for whatever reason. In fact, if you notice, we probably spend more time attacking each others’ sources than we do the content of the sources’ ideas. Very, very few of us ever make an original assertion because we have first-hand knowledge of the facts informing what we say. What we post here usually is some variation of an idea already in the public domain. Many times, it’s one that has already been “adjudicated” by world and to a reasonable conclusion; but, since we disagree with the outcome of that judgment, we attempt to re-hash the entire premise here. And re-hash it, we do.

Further, I’m not posting this because I care what you think of me or my opinions. I’m posting this because I care what I think of me and my opinions. And, honestly, I’m sick and tired of the threads, in which I engage, devolving into snarky, vituperative, and hateful flame wars that no longer resemble reasonable debate and that usually stray so far from the original topics they end up a hundred-page hate fest.

I accept fully my disproportionate role in that happening. I have done all those things; snarked, mocked, insulted and name-called my way through a thread. I’d like to believe I don’t usually instigate the devolution of our discussion but, in reality, I’m sure I do it more than my share. There are many posters in this forum, with whom I vehemently disagree on almost everything but, who refuse to get in the gutter when the rest of us roll off the curb of civility. And, there are others who, while occasionally lapsing into insult, generally maintain a respectable tone. I applaud you and hope to, in the future, emulate your demeanor. I won’t always be successful – I’m emotional and passionate about some things – but, when I fail, I hope to eventually be sufficiently humble enough to bring my temperament back around to civil discourse, apologize, and set about re-engaging in the legitimate debate being had.

For those I’ve offended in here, I sincerely apologize. Personally, I don’t believe it’s possible to be offended by the words of others with whom I have no relationship but, I recognize and accept there may be those of you who do. And, for those who think I’m being insincere, even now, I guess future behavior will either be your justification or my vindication. We’ll see.

I will admit I started not to even attempt this exercise because, well, I don’t know any of you personally and, quite frankly, I can count on one hand the number of you I would even want to meet...while, at the same time, recognizing that desire [to meet some of you], itself, is based on nothing more than how you represent yourself here. For all I know, the most reasonable-sounding among us could also only be able to project that air of sanity in this forum. You could be, in reality, a raving lunatic. That’s not to say your opinions don’t interest me, but the anonymity of the internet affords us all the freedom to engage in thought experiments and exercises that can fail miserably without having lasting consequences and without alienating friends and family. I want to maintain that anonymity because; it serves me to do so.

I also want to thank all of you, for helping me to understand the arguments of those, outside the virtual world, with whom I have a relationship but, with whom I also vehemently disagree on political issues. Because of your spirited and heartfelt postings, I’ve been able to avoid unnecessary personal strife. Family and friendship are more important than winning an argument over something which none of us controls. I know which topics to leave alone in polite conversation and I know how to respond when the subjects are broached – as sometimes happens. I also know how far I can go with good-natured razzing without sending my liberal friends (yeah, imagine that) or family members into a frothing-at-the-mouth maniacal rant. You’ve helped tremendously in that regard and I am grateful.

I briefly considered killing myself off – for a second time – and coming back in as someone new like I did with The Ressurrected One (Yeah, I misspelled it then too); but, decided against it. To have done it right, back then, I should not have claimed a relationship between the two identities. To do it at all, now, would be counter to what I am attempting with this effort…redefining my identity in SpursTalk without changing my name or sacrificing my anonymity. Who knows, this may be my way of ultimately leaving SpursTalk…I tell myself I’m going to do just that, every now and then with some variation of, “Why can’t I quit you!” With the way arguments are conducted in here now, it’s not much fun posting anymore. But, my personal circumstances are such that I legitimately spend a lot of time on this medium and can – without sacrificing other aspects of my life – engage in a favorite avocation, politics. So, instead of allowing myself to be driven away – I’ve decided to create this thread in an effort to create a benchmark of accountability for myself and, as a olive branch to those with whom I’ve sparred over the years.

So, there it is; my olive branch. Take it; leave it; ridicule it. I’m not asking any of you to similarly engage in an attempt to redefine your presence here; that’s your business. Let your conscience be your guide. I do this for me. In the grand scheme of things, I recognize it matters little.

If you’ve read this far, thanks for your attention. Carry on.

hello glenn

[nuclearfm]

hello glenn

Dirty. Dirty.

[Cry Havoc]

Lots of stuff.

TL; DR.











....


:lol

Kidding.

It's nice to see something along these lines. I myself have thought about writing something relatively similar -- but I was skeptical of the response it would draw.

I think there are number of nice points you make here, and it's a good show of character and intelligence that you took all the time to type it out so meticulously for our sake (and yours, since you admitted to acting somewhat out of self-interest).

I would love to see a little less flaming on the boards, and not just the political forum. After SO many years of being a solid, reliable place for discussion about sports and anything else, SpursTalk as a whole seems to be finally being pulled downward toward the muck and the mire that constitutes the "general internet population". Some might have noticed I've been responding more harshly to certain posts as of late, and it's because I'm sick of watching this site that I've come to call my "internet home" slowly devolve into a frothing biomass of youtube comments. I don't think it's a coincidence that Kori had to shut down the NBA Forum for several hours or issue a soft-ban on homosexual slurs. It's sad to see.

In other words, cool post. I'd definitely like to see this place (that's full of Spurs fans no less) be a little kinder toward each other. Not necessarily going out of your way to be super extra huggy snuggle nice, but I left this forum for a good month or so simply because I was tired of the flamewars. Perhaps with the new NBA season it will settle down a little around here. One can hope.

[Yonivore]

hello glenn
Who's glenn?

[Yonivore]

It's nice to see something along these lines. I myself have thought about writing something relatively similar -- but I was skeptical of the response it would draw.
Because it was completely motivated by self-interest, the responses are irrelevant.


I think there are number of nice points you make here, and it's a good show of character and intelligence that you took all the time to type it out so meticulously for our sake (and yours, since you admitted to acting somewhat out of self-interest).
More than somewhat. But, thanks.


In other words, cool post.
Again, thanks.

I started out over at SpursReport with Chris Duel and the gang but, that place turned into a cesspool about 10 years ago (has it been that long?) and I only went back a couple of times to get Duel cranked up. Haven't been back in quite a while.

[SpurNation]

Thanks for the honesty. Thanks for the post. Thanks for being real.

So many of us loose that just to be indifferent.

[Marcus Bryant]

Right. You believe that our system of government and our society should be centered around individual liberty. Every man a king and every woman a queen...of themselves. Greater centralization in government and business threatens this notion. It also threatens the institution upon which Western civilization has been based...the family. Individualism is never popular among politicians, but the common people will rue it when it's gone.

[Nbadan]

Forums are addictive, and I know that some semi-regular posters in this forum come back later using other Avatars, its hard to hide where you are politically, but whatever...I'm glad you dropped the RO and came back as Yonivore

[Yonivore]

Forums are addictive, and I know that some semi-regular posters in this forum come back later using other Avatars, its hard to hide where you are politically, but whatever...I'm glad you dropped the RO and came back as Yonivore
The misspelling always bugged me.

[Mr. Peabody]

The misspelling always bugged me.

The whole RO thing must have happened during a period when I wasn't posting. I don't remember that avatar.

[Yonivore]

The whole RO thing must have happened during a period when I wasn't posting. I don't remember that avatar.
I don't remember during what time period it was either. I don't even really know how long I've been posting here...but, it's been a damn long time.

I followed a former regular -- who shall remain nameless -- over here, from SpursReport, after Duel got ridiculously mean-spirited. I think he drank quite heavily.

And, for the record, I'm not a Spurs fan or even a basketball fan. The sport bores me. Kori is aware of this and, yet, she tolerates my presence.

[MannyIsGod]

I'm not going to lie: I read that entire piece expecting the rug pulled out from underneath me. In fact I'm still waiting for it (kinda).

I too wish I never got into the proverbial gutter, Yoni. At times I do it because it is entertaining (some days are just better after pointing out how stupid Darrin and Viva can be) but I would like to think that whenever I do it I've made a conscious decision to do it and it is not because I've let my emotions get the better of me. Whether that matters or not is up to each individual but it matters to me.

I used to claim on this board that I was libertarian. I can't claim that any longer. I think the principles behind libertarianism are great but I don't believe they ever work in reality and I view it as more of an idealistic set of goals that we can strive to but for various reasons can and will never meet.

In any event, I personally (for what this is worth) would gladly engage a reborn Yonivore.

[MannyIsGod]

I do want to say one thing. I was never as disturbed as I am today about the way things play out in this forum. Not because of the way they play out on the forum so much but more because the attitudes present in "discussion" forums such as this have completely spilled out into every venue of political information we have.

And it is the same reason that many of us are snarky on here I'm sure. Its entertaining. Whether you're doing the arguing on Spurstalk or watching 2 talking heads do it on cable TV. I think that this has done a great disservice to political discourse in this country.

[Yonivore]

I'm not going to lie: I read that entire piece expecting the rug pulled out from underneath me. In fact I'm still waiting for it (kinda).
No rug, dude. From the heart.


I too wish I never got into the proverbial gutter, Yoni. At times I do it because it is entertaining (some days are just better after pointing out how stupid Darrin and Viva can be) but I would like to think that whenever I do it I've made a conscious decision to do it and it is not because I've let my emotions get the better of me. Whether that matters or not is up to each individual but it matters to me.
In my opinion -- and one of the points of my post -- it's only important if it matters to you and those, on here, with whom you enjoy a real-world relationship. Everyone else can suck eggs, it certainly doesn't matter to me.


I used to claim on this board that I was libertarian. I can't claim that any longer. I think the principles behind libertarianism are great but I don't believe they ever work in reality and I view it as more of an idealistic set of goals that we can strive to but for various reasons can and will never meet.
Fair enough but, I think the old Reagan axiom fits here. "I didn't leave the [insert group here], the [insert group here] left me. Libertarian principles haven't changed and, whether or not you believe they're attainable should dictate whether or not you still believe in them.


In any event, I personally (for what this is worth) would gladly engage a reborn Yonivore.
well, pick up your ticket at Will Call, it's waiting...

[Yonivore]

I do want to say one thing. I was never as disturbed as I am today about the way things play out in this forum. Not because of the way they play out on the forum so much but more because the attitudes present in "discussion" forums such as this have completely spilled out into every venue of political information we have.

And it is the same reason that many of us are snarky on here I'm sure. Its entertaining. Whether you're doing the arguing on Spurstalk or watching 2 talking heads do it on cable TV. I think that this has done a great disservice to political discourse in this country.
It's nothing new, though...Think of the pamphleteers and soap boxers of yore. Hell, there was a time when our political leaders physically assaulted one another in the very chamber of Wilson's "unprecedented and outrageous" outburst. They challenged each other to duels and slandered one another with impunity.

Really, it's nothing new...it's just that we get to participate.

Interactive governance, I'd say.

[hope4dopes]

Right. You believe that our system of government and our society should be centered around individual liberty. Every man a king and every woman a queen...of themselves. Greater centralization in government and business threatens this notion. It also threatens the institution upon which Western civilization has been based...the family. Individualism is never popular among politicians, but the common people will rue it when it's gone.

Marcus, do you think your vision is more difficult to manifeist in a overpopulated highly industrialized, highly specialized, system than say in the pastoral , and simpeler systems of centuries ago.

[DarkReign]

Ive always enjoyed your takes, Yoni. I understand the premise behind this thread as I see your interactions with others, but I dont think it was necessary (even for self-interest's sake).

FWIW, props. I hope your conviction is as strong as your opinion.

[Yonivore]

Ive always enjoyed your takes, Yoni. I understand the premise behind this thread as I see your interactions with others, but I dont think it was necessary (even for self-interest's sake).

FWIW, props. I hope your conviction is as strong as your opinion.
Thanks, me too.

[exstatic]

You're a walking contradiction, Yoni. Social Conservativism is diametrically opposed to, and in direct conflict with individual liberty, unless you are strictly referring to your own. SC is about telling people what is fair and what is foul, what is good and what is bad, what they can and can't do.

[DarkReign]

Social Conservativism is diametrically opposed to, and in direct conflict with individual liberty, unless you are strictly referring to your own. SC is about telling people what is fair and what is foul, what is good and what is bad, what they can and can't do.

Your statement is true when it is applied to the current social application used in 21st century America.

While I realize that any indication of social bias must inherently be applied to modern interpretation, through hypothetical, one could be a social conservative without having that mantra applied across all 50 states.

Which would be a far better way of doing things instead of wholesale, sweeping national law on morality.

[Yonivore]

You're a walking contradiction, Yoni. Social Conservativism is diametrically opposed to, and in direct conflict with individual liberty, unless you are strictly referring to your own. SC is about telling people what is fair and what is foul, what is good and what is bad, what they can and can't do.


This is not an invitation ... to examine this post for contradictions and logical errors – although it probably will be done.
I'm not going to engage that debate. I know what I meant and it works for me.

[Wild Cobra]

I'm not going to engage that debate. I know what I meant and it works for me.
I agree and understand. Just because they cannot think outside the cardboard boxes they put themselves in doesn't mean others cannot.

There's believing in something to promote, or enforce. Promoting something does not infringe of others liberties.

[exstatic]

I'm not going to engage that debate. I know what I meant and it works for me.

Oh, I know exactly what you meant, and even made it a caveat in my original post. You're for your own personal liberties, but F everyone else's. That doesn't make you a libertarian, it just makes you selfish. Libertarians are interested in everyone's individual freedoms, not just their own. Social Conservatives are interested in limiting personal freedoms and actions based on their own personal tastes and preferences. Direct opposites.

[Yonivore]

Oh, I know exactly what you meant, and even made it a caveat in my original post. You're for your own personal liberties, but F everyone else's. That doesn't make you a libertarian, it just makes you selfish. Libertarians are interested in everyone's individual freedoms, not just their own. Social Conservatives are interested in limiting personal freedoms based on their own personal tastes and preferences. Direct opposites.
There's a whole range of socially conservative ideas. Exactly which ones do you think I hold that would deny anyone a personal liberty?

[Yonivore]

I guess I am going to engage the debate. :lmao

[nuclearfm]

Oh, I know exactly what you meant, and even made it a caveat in my original post. You're for your own personal liberties, but F everyone else's. That doesn't make you a libertarian, it just makes you selfish. Libertarians are interested in everyone's individual freedoms, not just their own. Social Conservatives are interested in limiting personal freedoms and actions based on their own personal tastes and preferences. Direct opposites.

I somewhat agree with this assessment, although it is an inherent problem many Libertarians. Ayn Rand talked about this a lot. It is the problem of how Libertarians define Liberty. It is often vague and destructive towards others. Sometimes, their interpretation can be without lack of a better phrase, evil. It does not exclude him from being strongly in favor of Libertarian views, however.

[spurster]

1) Protecting my inalienable rights to life, liberty, and the fruits of my legitimate labor (property) from being violated by those – foreign or domestic – who would seek to deprive me of them, without good cause, and over whom I cannot hope to prevail and who are not subject to the laws of my State government;


I agree, but I would add corporations to your list of foreign or domestic (which might be interpreted to apply only to governments).



2) Providing services, necessary for the public good, common to all States and where it is in the best interest of the various states, or individual American citizens, the federal government bring continuity and uniformity to the provision of that service, where the various states cannot agree on a method to accomplish continuity and uniformity to the necessary service or, where the various states (through the individuals’ duly elected representatives) decide it would be more effective or efficient for the federal government to provide that service and then, give it the specific authority to perform the service; and


I would replace "necessary for the public good" with "for the public good". I am not so devoted to states' rights. Having lived in a couple of states other than Texas, people in Texas place more importance as being citizens of Texas, evidenced by the Texas Pledge in schools and the secession talk. I don't think states should decide effectiveness or efficiency; I think the people should.



3) Settling disagreements, between the various states or between individuals, from two or more states, where the various states are unable to reconcile.


Again, I am not so devoted to states rights. The federal government should step in where states are denying the peoples' rights. I think governments (and corporations) should have responsibilities rather than rights, and if it's a question of government/corporation rights vs. a person, the person should have priority.

[FromWayDowntown]

I don't really care about anyone else's ideological positions, how true they are to those positions on a regular basis, or why they hold those positions (or claim to) in the first place. To each his own; I hope that when I'm here, I'm willing to express my disagreement with others' views in a respectful and reasonable manner, with an implicit understanding that those who disagree with me aren't "wrong."

I agree with the notion that this forum has been (and, at times, remains) a useful place to discuss, sometimes in a heated fashion, political issues that might sometimes be unwelcome or incongruous in other social settings. It has certainly afforded me opportunities to think about issues, to try to articulate my views of those issues, to make arguments attempting to support my views, and to sometimes learn that my arguments might not be as unassailable as I had thought. I can't say that much that's been posted here has actually changed my mind, but it certainly has forced me to think more critically about issues through the diversity of viewpoints offered.

I haven't read or posted here as much as I once did -- in part, I've been blessed that my life has changed in ways that have limited the availability of time to check out the forum; and I've found myself less satisfied with the opportunities for actual discourse that are present here. Whether I'm here or not, I hope that there can be actual discourse that doesn't simply devolve into unrefusing entrenchment and name-calling. Unfortunately, as I've written a few times before, I think all political discourse (from both sides) has become about noise and quantity. By and large, our society doesn't actually discuss political issues -- we shout what we believe about an issue and then just try to shout louder and louder when others express a differing viewpoint. It's silly to think that either side is absolutely right on any issue (IMO) and it's ridiculous to think that neither side could learn from the other's approach to those issues.

To the extent that I've strayed from those principles in my time here, I hope to do better going forward and to be part of what I hope will be a solution.

[SpurNation]

What works for some doesn't work for others.

Government tries to make it work for what they think is good for everybody all the while reducing our ability to make free and concise decisions to self govern and truly help through donations and volunteerism.

If left alone as it was originally meant to be...we wouldn't be having the problems we have now.

But alas...some think they need to think and decide for others.

[Winehole23]

Yoni's actually more restrained than most posters in here, and much better at keeping his posts clean, until personally provoked. IMHO.

What he seems to have trouble with is not substituting his own uber-uncharitable inferences for what people actually say; and he often responds with vicious ad hominems to what are fairly off-the-rack objections.

Yonivore is also a gifted at derailling, distracting and with the disinformation.

None of this makes him unusual, and he is often on the receiving end of the same.


If you'd like to disagree without the insane personalizations, Yoni, I'll make a good faith effort to do that.

[Yonivore]

Yoni's actually more restrained than most posters in here, and much better at keeping his posts clean, until personally provoked. IMHO.

What he seems to have trouble with is not substituting his own uber-uncharitable inferences for what people actually say; and he often responds with vicious ad hominems to what are fairly off-the-rack objections.

Yonivore is also a gifted at derailling, distracting and with the disinformation.

None of this makes him unusual, and he is often on the receiving end of the same.


If you'd like to disagree without the insane personalizations, Yoni, I'll make a good faith effort to do that.
Nah. In fact, I've recently posted about that, myself. It's something I'm working hard to correct.

Ooops! I did that in this thread. Sorry, I thought we were in anothe thread and that you might have been unaware of this effort.

My bad.

[Winehole23]

Nah. In fact, I've recently posted about that, myself. It's something I'm working hard to correct.

Ooops! I did that in this thread. Sorry, I thought we were in anothe thread and that you might have been unaware of this effort.

My bad.:lol

[LnGrrrR]

I'll take the olive branch. I know we don't see eye to eye on many issues, but such is America.

I do my best to give my opponents the benefit of the doubt, and not assume they're evil people trying to take down America. I think the forum might be better off if we all did that.

Of course, I have my fair share of snark, or just being pissy in general. It happens.

Anyways, appreciate the post Yoni. Cheers.

[101A]

I haven't read or posted here as much as I once did -- in part,

and for those of us who remember when you DID have more time; we miss you.

[101A]

BTW Yoni, good post.

[Winehole23]

and for those of us who remember when you did have more time; we miss you.+1

[Spurminator]

I think a lot of people in here are capable of rational ideological discussions when they're not diverted into lazy punditry. People are more concerned with winning points for the team than having an actual exchange of ideas. This is most disappointing with people who are really capable of good insight, but their talents and intelligence are wasted on playing scoreboard.

It was a good post by Yonivore but I will be more convinced when he posts on any issue whatsoever with a take that registers as unexpected. As it stands, regardless of how he or we dissect his ideology, his position on anything can always be predicted based on how it relates to (R) or (D). Not that he's alone in here.

As for me, in the last year or so I have been prone to lazy posts that don't really contribute to heightened discussion here... I don't favor one party or the other, but I have become so jaded with the cheerleading that the better part of my input has devolved into insults. Frankly, it's not worth reading. So my own olive branch to everyone for the time I've wasted being a bitter prick. I'll try to do better not to be so predictable in my own way.

[Yonivore]

I'll take the olive branch. I know we don't see eye to eye on many issues, but such is America.

I do my best to give my opponents the benefit of the doubt, and not assume they're evil people trying to take down America. I think the forum might be better off if we all did that.

Of course, I have my fair share of snark, or just being pissy in general. It happens.

Anyways, appreciate the post Yoni. Cheers.
Back at'cha! :toast

[Yonivore]

BTW Yoni, good post.
Thanks. It's been a long time coming.

[Yonivore]

I think a lot of people in here are capable of rational ideological discussions when they're not diverted into lazy punditry. People are more concerned with winning points for the team than having an actual exchange of ideas. This is most disappointing with people who are really capable of good insight, but their talents and intelligence are wasted on playing scoreboard.

It was a good post by Yonivore but I will be more convinced when he posts on any issue whatsoever with a take that registers as unexpected. As it stands, regardless of how he or we dissect his ideology, his position on anything can always be predicted based on how it relates to (R) or (D). Not that he's alone in here.

As for me, in the last year or so I have been prone to lazy posts that don't really contribute to heightened discussion here... I don't favor one party or the other, but I have become so jaded with the cheerleading that the better part of my input has devolved into insults. Frankly, it's not worth reading. So my own olive branch to everyone for the time I've wasted being a bitter prick. I'll try to do better not to be so predictable in my own way.
Fair enough...and Kum-bah-yah, dude.

[RandomGuy]

By the way, this is the same rationale I employ for plagiarizing content, with which I agree. Instead of spending an inordinate amount of my precious time coming up with an original way of saying something someone else has already said – probably better than I could have, anyway…I cut ‘n paste. I edit the information, to appear to be an original post, because experience has shown me that you are likely to fully read and respond to something you think a member wrote but will just as likely ignore “quoted” content.

I don't think that is too far off base, and always thought the slams on plagarism were a bit overmuch.

This is not strict acedemia, and if one agrees with the premise of an author, and pretty much everything in the piece, than that isn't altogether that deceptive in my mind.

I would not do it, though.

[Blake]

What happened that got your internet feelings hurt so badly that you had to post this thread on top of you almost leaving for good?

[Yonivore]

What happened that got your internet feelings hurt so badly that you had to post this thread on top of you almost leaving for good?
Gross mis-characterization aside, (I neither got my "internet feelings" hurt and that wasn't the reason for considering quitting), I'm human. Sue me.

I'm sure I said in there, somewhere, I wasn't perfect and would probably fall off the proverbial wagon. Manny's chumpdumperesque "Prove it" posts earned the chumpdumperesque designation as a gnat.

Harsh? I apologize. Let's move on.

Manny can prove the benefits of tinkering with this so-called "wealth inequality" if he wants to debate the issue.

Let me know when the poor in Section 8 housing start giving up their flat screens and spinner rims.

[Blake]

Gross mis-characterization aside, (I neither got my "internet feelings" hurt and that wasn't the reason for considering quitting), I'm human. Sue me.

99% of the time these threads are due to severe butthurt.


I'm sure I said in there, somewhere, I wasn't perfect and would probably fall off the proverbial wagon. Manny's chumpdumperesque "Prove it" posts earned the chumpdumperesque designation as a gnat.

So Manny told you to "prove it" and you called him a gnat?

you are a butthurt pussy, imo.

Harsh? Stop crying if someone criticizes you and grow a fucking pair or move on.

[Yonivore]

Damn, Manny! When did your girlfriend join the forum?

[Yonivore]

Or, maybe your mother.

[ChumpDumper]

Further, I’m not posting this because I care what you think of me or my opinions. I’m posting this because I care what I think of me and my opinions. And, honestly, I’m sick and tired of the threads, in which I engage, devolving into snarky, vituperative, and hateful flame wars that no longer resemble reasonable debate and that usually stray so far from the original topics they end up a hundred-page hate fest.



Damn, Manny! When did your girlfriend join the forum?


Or, maybe your mother.

Not so sick of it after all.

[Blake]

Not so sick of it after all.



I'm human. Sue me.

[Parker2112]

…to those, in this forum, with whom I most disagree.

Not since Ronald Reagan was president have I self-identified as a Republican and I have never found myself so in line with Democrats that I would ever have identified myself as such. Had I been born a decade or two before I was, that might have been different. With two notable and, yes, significant exceptions, I believe I can most easily be considered to hold a libertarian ideology. Do I hold conservative social and fiscal views? Absolutely, I do; and, unapologetically so. Liberal ones? I can’t think of any in the current iteration of that term – liberal.

I believe in limited government, personal liberty, and – most importantly – the right of the individual to control their lives and the responsibility to accept whatever consequences result from exercising that control. I also believe every decision we make and every act we commit can be – and should be – driven by these fundamental principles. I do believe it is that black and white – there are no shades of gray, no middle ground, no fence to ride.

I must stop you here and say...why should anyone trust your value system to protect their own interests, interests such as safety, welfare, health, resources, etc? You want liberty to do what you want, and we should all accept the consequences?

I dont trust that you are responsible. I wont trust my kids future to your value system, which (if it tracks conservative values) boils down to personal wealth. The balance in your bank account doesnt = a good future for me.

Your throttle friendly take on consumption does not preserve anything for my kids or grandkids to enjoy.

I want the freedom to shut right-wing, consumption-happy, my wealth is the bottom line, fuck you/pay me style short sighted bastards the fuck down, and I would like you to enjoy the consequences.

[DarrinS]

I want the freedom to shut right-wing, consumption-happy, my wealth is the bottom line, fuck you/pay me style short sighted bastards the fuck down, and I would like you to enjoy the consequences.


Sounds like you would like to live in Greece. I hear they are doing great over there.

[Parker2112]

Sounds like you would like to live in Greece. I hear they are doing great over there.

Sounds like I want to live in a place that my kids might want to live. An America that is more than posturing and bellowing about freedom. There is no freedom unless the basic components are there...like food, natural resources, economic stability.

The present course threatens all those things.

Greece borrowed their way into a hole. We are doing the same. But in America, even as our economy stumbles, a small select few are walking away from our mess with a pocket full of loot. I dont want the loot for myself. I just want to make sure the select few quit grabbing the loot.

[DarrinS]

Sounds like I want to live in a place that my kids might want to live. An America that is more than posturing and bellowing about freedom. There is no freedom unless the basic components are there...like food, natural resources, economic stability.

The present course threatens all those things.

Greece borrowed their way into a hole. We are doing the same. But in America, even as our economy stumbles, a small select few are walking away from our mess with a pocket full of loot. I dont want the loot for myself. I just want to make sure the select few quit grabbing the loot.


Sounds like you value equality over liberty.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Sounds like you value equality over liberty.

Sounds like you have been listening to too much talk radio...

[Parker2112]

Sounds like you value equality over liberty.

I think we all have a right to see our way of life continue. Not be dwindled away to benefit the pockets of a few.

Sorry, did the founding fathers not believe in equality?

It is modern conservatives who have conveniently stripped this belief from our heritage, because it interfere with their respective profits. I mean freedom.

[DarrinS]

I think we all have a right to see our way of life continue. Not be dwindled away to benefit the pockets of a few.

Sorry, did the founding fathers not believe in equality?

It is modern conservatives who have conveniently stripped this belief from our heritage, because it interfere with their respective profits. I mean freedom.



Yes. Equality at creation. Equality of potential. Not necessarily equality of education, wealth, etc. etc.

[Parker2112]

Yes. Equality at creation. Equality of potential. Not necessarily equality of education, wealth, etc. etc.

Who said anything about these other things?

I believe that a man should be able to reap what he sows. But I don't believe that because the wealth of a few is powerful and toxic enough to consume evrything in sight and lay waste to our pristine nation, that it should be allowed to do so in the name of freedom.

We need business to have an economy. But we cant turn the asylum over to the patients. As inaffective and inefficient as big govt is, there is no other means to protect our nation from those who would reduce us to ruins in the name of profits.

[rjv]

personally i think anytime one wanders into the domain of personal attacks or insults they blatantly concede that they have nothing left to offer accept fallacies, which are redundant and unoriginal. best thing to do when given such a response is to just move on or continue the argument if, that is, there is even an argument left to work with.

[Parker2112]

personally i think anytime one wanders into the domain of personal attacks or insults they blatantly concede that they have nothing left to offer accept fallacies, which are redundant and unoriginal. best thing to do when given such a response is to just move on or continue the argument if, that is, there is even an argument left to work with.

Sometimes you find the continuing barrage of lies and mistruths, misinformation and propoganda so infuriating that it becomes hard to stomach the messenger.

[johnsmith]

personally i think anytime one wanders into the domain of personal attacks or insults they blatantly concede that they have nothing left to offer accept fallacies, which are redundant and unoriginal. best thing to do when given such a response is to just move on or continue the argument if, that is, there is even an argument left to work with.

Or some people recognize this website for what it is, an internet forum where random people can come together to talk about an NBA basketball team and that those opinions put forth in the very, very sub forum of said website are all nonsense anyway so making personal attacks are just as helpul to mankind as is making a well thought out argument on the state of politics in America.


Just sayin'

[rjv]

Or some people recognize this website for what it is, an internet forum where random people can come together to talk about an NBA basketball team and that those opinions put forth in the very, very sub forum of said website are all nonsense anyway so making personal attacks are just as helpul to mankind as is making a well thought out argument on the state of politics in America.


Just sayin'

you're an idiot. :lol

[DarkReign]

win

[johnsmith]

you're an idiot. :lol

why?

[Wild Cobra]

Sounds like you have been listening to too much talk radio...
You cannot dictate equality when it is redistribution of others freedoms.