others.
The fact that you've spent several pages defending your political stance
indicates to me that you've taken either my comments out of context or
applied others comments to me. It also seems to me that you consider this
Post article politically motivated and are this assuming that I'm
"defending" a political view in some way. I do not consider the article
politically motivated at all. I'm not defending a political viewpoint in
determining my view of the article's purpose.
In short I've never considered this particular argument politically
motivated at all. However the care with which you defend your political
beliefs below seems to indicate that you did (and do).
I've personally never made a judgment about you or your political standing.
I don't have a problem with you calling yourself whatever you wish to be
called. I'm pleased that you're secure enough in your beliefs to actually
make a stand on issues (damn few Americans are).
Be very clear on this Sam: I would level the same exact criticism on
anybody, left or right, top or bottom that made the same assertions,
attempted for force-feed me a label I didn't feel fit or implied the
negative things you've implied. My personal opinion of your views (which
doesn't matter) is that you're a conservative moderate (or moderate
conservative if you like). You seem to support the Bush administration and
the war rather stridently, but seem more liberally-minded on other topics.
This may be wrong since I only know you through this list.
You, however, do have a very clear tendency to label others out of hand.
Again let's reread the thread: any outright hostility, I believe, came from
you. Until then it was friendly (if heated), politic-free discussion about
slang and interpretation of an article (an article, I repeat, that I didn't
find political in any way). Long before I decided to question your personal
discussion style you implied clearly that I lacked reading comprehension,
had some group-based agenda (the "your kind" comment), was arguing like a
child and others.
The negativity, or we might say the "unconstructive negativity" (nearly
always through passive-aggressive implication), was all yours. This is what
I meant that you argue destructively. You ascribe hidden, unspoken agendas
to those you're discussing things with and deal with them based on those
ascriptions.
Be whomever you want to be Sam and I'll take your word on it, but allow me
the same courtesy.
Jim Davis
_____
From: Sam Morris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2004 12:31 AM
To: CF-Community
Subject: RE: Washinton Post issues mea culpa for prewar coverage
Thank you for passing judgment doctor.
I really didn't want to get into this but since you
have so many opinions about me and you needed to share
them I guess I need to reply.
> But, why do you - (you, Sam Morris, not "your kind")
> need to? Why do you
> always seem to reply to criticism with blanket,
> dismissive labels,
> projected-criticism and passive-aggression? It
> seems to me that you have
> trouble discussing political issues unless you can
> label those in the
> conversation.
It seems you haven't been paying attention. Sorry if
you take that as offensive, it's not meant to be.
Every day someone slams Bush and most times it's from
left-wing rumor sites like moveOn.org. When I first
jumped in it was about Michael Moore. Every time I
said something to defend Bush I would get slammed as a
Right wing extremist, Kool-Aid drinker, toeing the
party line, playing from the Republican play book, no
idea how to think for myself, brainwashed and the list
goes on. I never actually said anything extreme so
none of the criticism was deserved.
I have since said I agreed that we had to go to war
and everything above was said about me. Now Kerry
say's he'd still support the war today with what he
now knows and it's ok, he's considered a moderate.
I'm not a right wing religious nut. I share many
Liberal views. I don't jump in and say me-to every
time I agree, I just pipe up when I think someone is
unfairly attacking what I think are good ideas or
intentions.
There are a couple of things I consider to be extreme
on this list and one is when people say Bush went to
war to make his buddies rich. I realize many people
believe it was an after thought of his and that's a
fair opinion that I disagree with. But to actually
believe the war was a scandal to make money for his
friends is an extremist view. When I present facts to
disprove that theory some people dismiss them as
extremist views and continue to rant these crazy
theories. I just consider them extremist and move on.
But for me to even say it's not true, I get told to
come back when I can think for myself. Same thing with
the Saudi flights after 9/11. Even though Clark said
Moore was a liar and he approved the flights people
will still blame Bush. No matter how many times you
prove something they keep coming back with the same
nonsense. To me they will never recognize facts and
they are extremist.
There are a few people on the list that are extremist
and many lean a good bit to the left. There really is
no disputing that yet you probably will. There are a
few that are moderate and a couple to the right so I
am extremely outnumbered. But you can't seem to see
that because they support your views. You spend a lot
of time and criticizing me but you never seem to
notice I'm usually the one being attacked for my
moderate views while the people on the left that I
call Liberals are sometimes vicious and extreme. Yet
in your eyes I'm the one handing out labels.
I think you need to look at yourself and figure out
why you're so concerned with me. Why do you need to
analyze me so? If I tell you my point of view and you
don't agree that's fine, walk away. But not you, you
need to keep insisting my view makes no sense. Even
after I explain my view and use of a term and use your
dictionary definitions to support my usage you still
come back and say that I'm "stretching its application
drastically." That's just being anal-retentive.
There's something wrong here and I think you need to
find out what it is before you try to fix me.
In the future can you please analyze me in small
pieces? I really don't like spending a lot replying. I
have lots of other things I can be doing.
Thanks,
-sm
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
_____
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
