Should discussions of Politics and Religion be banned from CSR?

Should CSR ban discussions of Politics and Religion?

  • Yes

    Votes: 101 48.1%
  • No

    Votes: 109 51.9%

  • Total voters
    210
  • Poll closed .
Interesting that conservatives and libertarians seem to favor the free exchange of ideas and information. There probably are people that want to silence left wing outlets (CNN,MSNBC,NPR) but for the most part, that group is pretty tolerant of the dissemination of propaganda (as long as its privately funded..., public funding understandably drives 'em nuts). On the other hand, "progressives" seem to be far quicker to favor of the censorship of ideas. I haven't thought it through completely, but I have the vague notion that it's back to the DNA of individualists vs. collectivists. I don't think it ever occurs to conservatives that they would have a vote regarding the possible silencing of the opposition, but it never occurs to collectivists that there is another (and possibly superior) interpretation.

That is the biggest pile of malarkey I have ever heard in my life. You can twist the facts all you want and I'm sure your buddies will dog pile the liberal for you too, but it doesn't make it true. Ever hear of a liberal burning books? yeah, neither have I. Its the so called conservatives who are always burning books and censoring information because to be truthful, people have to be kept ignorant to believe the conservative lie.

And saying anything about propaganda from the left in this day and age is ridiculous. Fox News and the entire Murdoch empire is wholly dedicated to providing 24/7 nonstop conservative propaganda at every level.

Back to the point of my post that you commented on. This is the wrong forum to post political and religious diatribe, conservative or liberal. It should be a place to discuss boats and not be goaded into political arguments. And frankly I think your rather rude to try and turn my post into another conservative vs. liberal free for all.
 
Face it guys. . . the Republican candidate for President in 2008;

a) Ran for the incumbent party with the Economy tanking.
b) Ran a strategically poor campaign
c) and got his butt whipped as a logical result of (A) and (B)
You forgot the most important part....RACE!! So many people voted for BHO just because he was black and now they got their hand out:smt013 If you don't believe that, then you surely are in a "fantasy" world:huh: Furthermore, the left is consistently using the race card to further their agenda:smt021 These libtards have set race relations back more than I can even think! Just because I have a "Impeach Obama" sticker on my truck, people think I'm racist, well except the black cop that pulled me over on I-10 in Louisiana for speeding. He loved my stickers and told me to have a good day:smt038
photo4.jpg
 
Last edited:
I was supposed to have court today, but it was canceled...leaving me here with a few extra minutes on my hands. I went through this thread, post by post. I tried to divide the posts into four categories...anti-censorship, pro-censorship, abstain, and off topic (I tried not to count duplicates and I didn't tabulate the off-topics), but got roughly a total of 2000 total posts from all of the commenters who believed the discussions should be banned. I pinned them against geography and found them identified primarily out of the US, San Francisco, the great NW and upper Michigan. The pro-holding tank crowd totalled almost 40,000 posts and seemed to be geographically random.

Given the subjectivity of the categorization, an admitted observational bias, and the substantial certainty of error in calculation, I would take this information with several grains of salt (lime and tequila).
That was a "no brainer"!!
 
That is the biggest pile of malarkey I have ever heard in my life. You can twist the facts all you want and I'm sure your buddies will dog pile the liberal for you too, but it doesn't make it true. Ever hear of a liberal burning books? yeah, neither have I. Its the so called conservatives who are always burning books and censoring information because to be truthful, people have to be kept ignorant to believe the conservative lie.

And saying anything about propaganda from the left in this day and age is ridiculous. Fox News and the entire Murdoch empire is wholly dedicated to providing 24/7 nonstop conservative propaganda at every level.

Back to the point of my post that you commented on. This is the wrong forum to post political and religious diatribe, conservative or liberal. It should be a place to discuss boats and not be goaded into political arguments. And frankly I think your rather rude to try and turn my post into another conservative vs. liberal free for all.
And we thank God every day for Fox, because without it look at all the BS we would be forced to watch...like msnbc!!
 
Pack66Dad, part of the freedom of this country is to allow people like you to believe what you want to believe, regardless of the facts. Several times I've offered to let you defend any of your positions, or talk Nevada football, but you just keep leading with your chin.

Ever hear of a liberal burning books? Both sides have tried the Fahrenheit 451 education model (by the way, that's not the temperature of burning books). Religious people of every stripe try and censor ideas, and so do liberals when the topic isn't politically correct. Economic conservatives and libertarians are not book burners. [We could get into a philosophical discussion of whether believing the state should enforce your religion, through book burning or anything else, makes one a collectivist, but you are having trouble at a much shallower end of the pool].

And saying anything about propaganda from the left in this day and age is ridiculous. Not sure what planet you are on, but in the rest of the country, where both sides are presented, Fox at least offers a choice...and unlike you, I listen to all of them.

And frankly I think your rather rude to try and turn my post into another conservative vs. liberal free for all. This was actually funny enough that I showed it to my nine year old as an example of deflection. Yours don't qualify for the liberal/conservative appelation...but rather simply uninformed copy/paste. You have raised half a dozen issues and been absolutely skewered on all of them. Comsnark kept you from completely drowning (see, a boat reference) when you ventured into health care, and you didn't either read or comprehend either the health care studies you posted or the Der Spiegel economic analyses. Your last post on this was another great example of why open discussion is important...some poor shmuck might have read it and believed it without a challenge.

In one respect, I think you are right...there is no question that unqualified people shouldn't discuss politics or religion. Better to be silent and be thought a fool than open your mouth and remove all doubt.

Now to the important stuff...where do you think Colin Kaepernick will be drafted? Under rated? Over rated? I thought he looked awesome against Boise State.
 
Seriously. If a State Certified Copy doesn't satisfy the critics. . .do you think the original will?

Com, you and I don't agree all the time, but I do respect your opinion and positions. I don't know if you are familiar with the argument about the presented birth certificate, but this is a pretty good outline of the problems.

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2008/07/atlas-exclusive.html

At the end of the day, I'm not sure that I care. The current situation of a rudderless executive branch and divided legislative branch actually is the most effective form of non-government possible and prevents any of them from doing any real damage.
 
As my dad used to say: "never get in a p!ss!ng match with a skunk, you'll never win." Your argument is a good example of it. You have not enough to support your opinion so you attack. I thought that liberals were accepting. It must be only if you agree with them.
Face it: Liberals are intolerant of opposing views, religion, capitalism, and freedom of speech.

I'm out

66: Oh. . .be serious. I mean. . . you consider my post an *ATTACK*. Come on! Get a grip! Did I call someone Racist? Did I slur someones name? Did I even question anyone's patriotism?

Did Pack do any of that?

The MOST you could accuse me of not fully footnoting every discussion point. Oh. . . and stating a position you don't agree with.

Com, do you not agree there are some pretty valid questions that should have been answered prior to the election?

The fun part about this is that all these questions HAVE been asked. And HAVE been answered. I am not going to answer them point by point because there is no specificity to the questions. Just random mudslinging. All that there is are vague "When did you stop beating your wife?" and "We heard your neighbor once smoked pot, why have you not submitted a urine sample to prove you are not high on Crack?" accusations.

Is this any different than the left wing Crazies who are demanding that Sarah Palin produce Trig's birth certificate? Except here, there have been actual state certified documents and suitable legal challenges.

You forgot the most important part....RACE!! So many people voted for BHO just because he was black and now they got their hand out:smt013

Dude. . .get a grip. I know this has not been in the press. . .but think about it for a minute. Of course a whole pile of people voted based upon race. Isn't that obvious?

Do you think the net effect is positive or negative? Did more people vote for him, or against him because of this?

Think about it - as you pick your jaw off the floor - think about the whole "Kenyan Muslim" thing. How much of the population believes as you do? Think about the size of the minority population. Think about all the classic red states, and the population in those states. Do you really think a racial minority candidate has an advantage on a national level?

Think about all the people who have their hand out: Do you think those people are Republicans? Well. . the ones on Wall Street probably are. . but what about the rest of them?

If you don't believe that, then you surely are in a "fantasy" world:huh: Furthermore, the left is consistently using the race card to further their agenda:smt021 These libtards have set race relations back more than I can even think! Just because I have a "Impeach Obama" sticker on my truck, people think I'm racist

And indeed I do live in a fantasy world. My fantasy world is an amazing place. I should invite you guys over for a beer some time. :grin:

Oh. . .and "Racist" was not the term I would have used to describe you. :smt043

Comsark,
is Obama native born?

Are you Native Born? Is Sarah Palin? Is George Bush?

Does any of these questions merit a serious answer? Does the fact that I didn't answer your question prove a point?
 
Pack66Dad that is the biggest pile of malarkey I have ever heard in my life. You can twist the facts all you want and I'm sure your buddies will dog pile the liberal for you too, but it doesn't make it true. Ever hear of a liberal burning books? yeah, neither have I. Its the so called conservatives who are always burning books and censoring information because to be truthful, people have to be kept ignorant to believe the conservative lie.

Liberals just want to change history by editing books they don’t like. Example below. I have never been aware of censorship of books for thought content by conservatives in my adult life. I have seen efforts to keep adult words and situations away from children, but that is not censoring.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_newsroom/20110104/en_yblog_newsroom/huck-finn-gets-some-changes


And saying anything about propaganda from the left in this day and age is ridiculous. Fox News and the entire Murdoch empire is wholly dedicated to providing 24/7 nonstop conservative propaganda at every level.

I am exasperated with all the Fox bashing!!! Fox has unequivocally the most “fair and balanced” news on TV. I am sick of the ignorance that it springs from the left. If these complainers cannot decipher the difference between news and opinion they need to go back to class. What actually is Fox big sin? They put conservative opinion on the air. Their reporters also ask questions of elected officials conservatives want to know. No one did that before they did. They have won numerous awards for their news, given by the industry. They have also created a rating juggernaut by giving conservative voices a place to be heard. So who’s banning now? Liberals and their so called “fairness doctrine” to make it harder to express conservative thought.

As for Fox empire and Murdoch bashing as propagating “conservative propaganda” you are way off base on this one and need to get around more. Fox television network puts out some of the vilest material out there. Many family organizations complain to the FCC over their gross descriptions in shows in family hours on broadcast TV. Example below. If you think you think Fox is conservative based you would be wrong. They are profit based no matter the subject.

From Brent Bozell: Fox's "Family Guy" is always looking for a new low in sick jokes. They found one when baby Stewie and his dog, Brian, were accidentally locked in a bank vault. The baby orders the dog to eat the contents of his diaper. When the dog actually eats the baby feces, the baby vomits and then says, "Got some dessert for you." The dog then eats the vomit. The dog also licked the baby's rear end clean, so Stewie could boast to the otherwise empty vault that the dog "French-kissed my bottom clean."

Back to the point of my post that you commented on. This is the wrong forum to post political and religious diatribe, conservative or liberal. It should be a place to discuss boats and not be goaded into political arguments. And frankly I think your rather rude to try and turn my post into another conservative vs. liberal free for all.[/quote]

I agree that we should keep politics to the pertinent points such as oil, water regulation, and fishing regulation etc. anything that is boating related not did you see this cut and paste trash.


MM


 
Com, you and I don't agree all the time, but I do respect your opinion and positions. I don't know if you are familiar with the argument about the presented birth certificate, but this is a pretty good outline of the problems.

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2008/07/atlas-exclusive.html

At the end of the day, I'm not sure that I care. The current situation of a rudderless executive branch and divided legislative branch actually is the most effective form of non-government possible and prevents any of them from doing any real damage.

Thank you for the compliment. Actually, I enjoy a good reasoned argument. Agreement is not the goal -> education is the goal.

I was really amused by your link. I will post a link in return: http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html

And yes. . .I was predicting a Democratic Party over-reach back in 2008, and that a Republican swing would occur in 2010. I am fervently hoping the Republican house can reign in prior excesses, while the President reigns in new excesses that will be attempted. Worked for Clinton and Gingrich from 1994 to 1999. The budget was in Surplus by the time the Republicans took all three branches of the government in 2000.

And at this point. . .I think I will sign off this thread.

(unless a juicy point comes up!)
 
Last edited:
Think about it - as you pick your jaw off the floor - think about the whole "Kenyan Muslim" thing. How much of the population believes as you do? Think about the size of the minority population. Think about all the classic red states, and the population in those states. Do you really think a racial minority candidate has an advantage on a national level?






Oh. . .and "Racist" was not the term I would have used to describe you. :smt043
Absolutely...in this day and age!

So what would the "term" be?
 
Bait 'em up and reel them in. You guys are FAR too easy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama_citizenship_conspiracy_theories

Ok. . .back to regularly scheduled programming. You can open a thread in the holding tank if you like. .. but isn't much more to add.

Hehe... WE'RE far too easy? You're kidding, right? I crack a joke about a pig have a BC, and ya'll run with it for another 20+ posts. I think you're the one that got had.

My position on the matter is that its too late to do anything about BO because he is already sworn in. We should correct the problem before it happens again by simply requiring that all future candidates have to produce a valid, US birth certificate BEFORE running for office. Then, the argument never comes up again. I still stand by the fact that BO is a Keynesian.
 
Was McCain really in the running for NY and California?


I would describe you as the "Target fox news demographic".
 
Speaking of Obama and birth certificates. Anyone get a look at this gem?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gBrHkxqNT7s&feature=youtube_gdata_player

That's a classic. It does a great job of highlighting the IQ level of the typical Obama supporter...

That's almost as good as the video I saw where where some guys went to a liberal protest somewhere and got a buch of people to sign a petition to ban dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) because "big oil companies use it, tobacco companies use it, they use it to make styrofoam...". That one is hillarious, too.
 
Com's way off this time.

96% of the black vote voted for obama, and 41% of white men voted for him. That 41% is MORE, I repeat MORE than any democratic presidential candidate has ever gotten since Carter.

Where does the racisim lie here? I think it's rather obvious.

Scott;

I do not understand your point. What is your point here?

Edit: Oh. I see now. I may have diluted my original point: My original point was that the Republicans had a bad economy and a weak candidate. And they got whooped as a result.

Those two points (bad economy / weak candidate) trump all the racial/fear theory crap in my view. I apologize for being sucked into that part of the discussion.

- - - - - - - -

But here are some stats I dug up; because I was intruiged by the question; I am not claiming the numbers as gospel. They are pulled from different sources. . but I think they are illustrative. I am a bit reluctant to even post it, as it will prolong the discussion; but I do want to make a point.

Sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_states_and_blue_states
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/US/P/00/epolls.0.html

D/R split

By Race:

            2008      2004
White (74%)       43/55       41/58
Black (13%)       95/4       88/11
Latino (9%)       67/31       44/53

Overall         53/46      48/51


What *I* read in all these numbers is: The Republicans got whooped across the board.

You run as an incumbent party candidate with a weak campaign in a bad economy: You gonna get whooped.

Held true in 2008.
Can easily hold true in 2012.
 
Last edited:
No arguement about the Republicans getting whooped. McCain was a horrible choice as a candidate. Hopefully 2012 will yield someone better, and I don't mean Sarah Palin. (Love her, but she's not President material, at least not yet.)

I think a very warm place has just frozen over because I think we actually agree!


One final time on the B.C. thing: Read the wikipedia article closer. If you call the State of Hawaii and ask for a certified birth certificate, the document the Obama campaign posted is what you get. The complaint is that the state certified document is not the original, and therefore is not good enough. (or a fraud!)
 
Not quite.

What I am saying is that when you ask for a "Certified Birth Certificate", in the 2005-2011 timeframe, they don't go to the file room and photocopy the original document. They verify the original, then send you the "Certificate of Live Birth", with a suitable seal. That document is meant to serve as the birth certificate for all purposes. They don't actually send you the original. Some are making an issue of the fact that the documents don't look the same, and (if I understand correctly) have exactly the same information.

But in terms of serving as a birth certificate for legal purposes, that document is the real deal. That IS a state certified copy of the original. The state does not provide an option to get "the real original" or a "certified photocopy"
 
Last edited:
Pack66Dad that is the biggest pile of malarkey I have ever heard in my life. You can twist the facts all you want and I'm sure your buddies will dog pile the liberal for you too, but it doesn't make it true. Ever hear of a liberal burning books? yeah, neither have I. Its the so called conservatives who are always burning books and censoring information because to be truthful, people have to be kept ignorant to believe the conservative lie.

Liberals just want to change history by editing books they don’t like. Example below. I have never been aware of censorship of books for thought content by conservatives in my adult life. I have seen efforts to keep adult words and situations away from children, but that is not censoring.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_newsroom/20110104/en_yblog_newsroom/huck-finn-gets-some-changes


And saying anything about propaganda from the left in this day and age is ridiculous. Fox News and the entire Murdoch empire is wholly dedicated to providing 24/7 nonstop conservative propaganda at every level.

I am exasperated with all the Fox bashing!!! Fox has unequivocally the most “fair and balanced” news on TV. I am sick of the ignorance that it springs from the left. If these complainers cannot decipher the difference between news and opinion they need to go back to class. What actually is Fox big sin? They put conservative opinion on the air. Their reporters also ask questions of elected officials conservatives want to know. No one did that before they did. They have won numerous awards for their news, given by the industry. They have also created a rating juggernaut by giving conservative voices a place to be heard. So who’s banning now? Liberals and their so called “fairness doctrine” to make it harder to express conservative thought.

As for Fox empire and Murdoch bashing as propagating “conservative propaganda” you are way off base on this one and need to get around more. Fox television network puts out some of the vilest material out there. Many family organizations complain to the FCC over their gross descriptions in shows in family hours on broadcast TV. Example below. If you think you think Fox is conservative based you would be wrong. They are profit based no matter the subject.

From Brent Bozell: Fox's "Family Guy" is always looking for a new low in sick jokes. They found one when baby Stewie and his dog, Brian, were accidentally locked in a bank vault. The baby orders the dog to eat the contents of his diaper. When the dog actually eats the baby feces, the baby vomits and then says, "Got some dessert for you." The dog then eats the vomit. The dog also licked the baby's rear end clean, so Stewie could boast to the otherwise empty vault that the dog "French-kissed my bottom clean."

Back to the point of my post that you commented on. This is the wrong forum to post political and religious diatribe, conservative or liberal. It should be a place to discuss boats and not be goaded into political arguments. And frankly I think your rather rude to try and turn my post into another conservative vs. liberal free for all.


I agree that we should keep politics to the pertinent points such as oil, water regulation, and fishing regulation etc. anything that is boating related not did you see this cut and paste trash.


MM


[/QUOTE]

in case you missed it here is a repost.
 
Was McCain really in the running for NY and California?


I would describe you as the "Target fox news demographic".

Cali...well never mind. New York...hmmm, Unions plus race=BHO:smt021

Yup! Work 7 days a week, never see my home in the daylight! And I gotta hear effin libtards tell me how they are going to spend my money:smt013 Is this what you call the "target Fox News demographic"?
 

Forum statistics

Threads
112,950
Messages
1,422,861
Members
60,932
Latest member
juliediane
Back
Top