PDA

View Full Version : How has D.C. changed?


banyon
06-04-2006, 02:29 PM
After reading this thread (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=123590&highlight=sub-forum) posted recently by Kotter and reading Vlad's threads about DC, I got to wondering how this place has changed. It seems like I hear a lot that "this place used to be a lot better" or "You can't post over there now without being shouted down by jAZ or Denise ."

And after realizing today that there are features at the bottom of the screen that let you view stuff, I noticed that you could set D.C. viewing back to "The Beginning" which gets you back to September 2004.

Here are my observations, which don't have the benefit of context or having been there.

1. There were almost certainly a lot more conservative posters than there are now. Several, like RINGLEADER (who seems to have posted 10 times a day) or Michael Michigan, or KCWolfman are just gone (of course maybe they just found something better to do. Others seem to have just withdrawn into the Lounge once things changed.

2. There was a greater volume of threads,which is to be expected as there was an election on. The style of each thread, and more importantly the style of the posts seemed a lot more off-the-cuff and whiz-bang.

3. People complain that DC now is a bitter and divise place, but it sure seems nastier back then when I look at some of those threads.

4. Sort of the converse of #2, threads and posts did not seem to be sourced and linked.

Keeping the recent forum change poll issues aside, and assuming that DC will just stay a separate sub-forum,

What do you think has changed for the better/worse about DC?

What else has changed that I didn't account for here?

Are the trends getting more or less pronounced?

Is there anything we can agree to to improve the place?

your thoughts are appreciated.

banyon
06-04-2006, 02:35 PM
an example day...

tiptap
06-04-2006, 03:38 PM
Having come in in the middle of this trend change, I would testify that the majority of the posters where conservative, republican and a great deal of the posts where directly from the talking head mill from the Republican Party for political digestion and election of Bush. Now I think most of those posters you mentioned are still reading but their personal lives have issues and they really have been disappointed in the realities of their championed candidate. They are still politically tied to the same positions. They just think that their interpretation has been hijacked or such. Democratic mill entries were later in finding entry into the DC forum. It will heat up when presidential elections roll around.

Mr. Laz
06-04-2006, 03:41 PM
the only thing that has really changed is that the conservatives used to own the place.



there were only a few liberals that dared post in here back then ........ and they got dog piled on by the conservatives.

then George W Bush arrived and the tide turned.


more liberals showed up and the conservative didn't like it when they could bully people around so they just all left ........ virtually all on the very same day.

they deny this planned exodus ... but it was quite the coincidence if it wasn't planned.

shortly after the mass exodus of 2005, all the conservatives that used to rule the place, started screaming to any mod that would listen that D.C need to be off the front page(sub forum).

They were adamant about how they didn't even want a link on the front page because it "trashed up the place"

the mods came up with some lame excuse about how they needed to "clean up" lounge page because of so many links. So D.C was gonna be moved. They said that all the ex-DC complainers had nothing to do with it ... yet another huge coincidence i suppose.

but there still 3 links on the lounge page ... amazely the clean up stopped after the D.C. link got moves. :shrug:


at one point they even petitioned the mods for their own special user group .... basically blocking themselves from even seeing the D.C. forum because they apparently just couldn't control themselves enough to not enter and read all the "liberal propaganda"


so the conservative just took their ball and went home and decided to try and wreck the place on the way out.


D.C is what it's alway been ......... a squabble-fest.

stevieray
06-04-2006, 04:00 PM
D.C is what it's alway been ......... a squabble-fest.

this is the only statement that is true, the rest is the liberal victim card.

Cochise
06-04-2006, 04:10 PM
Generally, I think in DC you have conservatives like me, who come in and out of here, sometimes posting sometimes not, generally not starting threads or engaging in long, drawn out debates. However the hardcore on the other side of the aisle seem to think shouting down conservatives on the internet is their job. And start all the threads, make most of the posts, etc.

I don't post over here as much as previously because it's boring. Everything has been beat into the ground already. Everyone knows what everyone else thinks. You can predict, seeing a new link on drudge or whatever, who will probably post the link and what all the major players in DC are going to respond with.

Less people watch the Royals in August... because you pretty well know what's going to happen, it's going to be the same thing you've seen a hundred times already, and that isn't particularly interesting. Same with DC

jspchief
06-04-2006, 04:11 PM
As someone who used to post here a lot more, I don't think things have changed as much as a lot of people like me have grown bored with the same tired tactics and rhetoric have just left.

There just aren't any topics that interest me here anymore.

WoodDraw
06-04-2006, 05:51 PM
Conservatives used to be the ones posting boring, partisan stories and now it's mostly liberals. Like jspchief said though, I'm sure a lot of people get bored. Things just get repetitive. There's the rare thread that spawns a decent debate, but mostly threads where the responses can be pretty well predicted ahead of time.

Mr. Laz
06-04-2006, 06:19 PM
this is the only statement that is true, the rest is the liberal victim card.
oh really ...


you didn't threaten to leave if phil didn't pull D.C off the front page?

i imagine i can pull up and quote your post :hmmm:




and HC Chief and cochise(i think) didn't ask to not be able to see D.C at all (thus the special user group)?

the ratio of conservative to liberal didn't change ... almost reverse when the current administration took over?

75% of the conservatives didn't stop posting in the same week?



my post is hardly fabricated ... you can disagree with the motives behind what happen, but most if not all of the stuff i said did happen.

stevieray
06-04-2006, 06:34 PM
oh really ...


you didn't threaten to leave if phil didn't pull D.C off the front page?

i imagine i can pull up and quote your post :hmmm:




and HC Chief and cochise(i think) didn't ask to not be able to see D.C at all (thus the special user group)?

the ratio of conservative to liberal didn't change ... almost reverse when the current administration took over?

75% of the conservatives didn't stop posting in the same week?



my post is hardly fabricated ... you can disagree with the motives behind what happen, but most if not all of the stuff i said did happen.

people stopped posting because of the incessant whining.

believe it or not laz, most of the country doesn't buy into constant negaitivity. ( though that is subject to change..by design) You are one of the few posters who carries it over to both forums.

look up the meaning of insurgent. it applies to some in this forum.

go bowe
06-04-2006, 06:35 PM
happen schmappen...

to the extent that former (?) d.c. posters seemed to lead the charge to banish it from sight in the lounge, it is a bit curious...

d.c. could be a lot more fun, but i think it will require some new blood, preferably from the d.u. or some other such suitable source...

Mr. Laz
06-04-2006, 06:40 PM
people stopped posting because of the incessant whining.

believe it or not laz, most of the country doesn't buy into constant negaitivity. ( though that is subject to change..by design) You are one of the few posters who carries it over to both forums.
you didn't answer the question(s)

they may have left because of "incessant whining" ... but that speaks to motive ... not whether my statement was true that so many left all in the same week.


you said my post was untrue ...


but all you have to refute it is "that i'm a negative, incessant whiner"



which has nothing to do with the validity of my post.

stevieray
06-04-2006, 06:45 PM
and HC Chief and cochise(i think) didn't ask to not be able to see D.C at all (thus the special user group)?

the ratio of conservative to liberal didn't change ... almost reverse when the current administration took over?

75% of the conservatives didn't stop posting in the same week?


[/b].

I can't speak for HC and cochise, both who still post in this forum.

same week? :rolleyes:

people don't hang with negativity. see your post as an example. I said the cause was incessant whining, and you claim I called you an incessant whiner.

"science is the debil" :rolleyes:

Mr. Laz
06-04-2006, 06:49 PM
I can't speak for HC and cochise, both who still post ib this forum.

same week? :rolleyes:

people don't hang with negativity. see your life as an example.
my posts have been civil


you don't have answers, just attacks


lets just move on shall we

go bowe
06-04-2006, 06:50 PM
aw c'mon...

we all hang with negativity here in the d.c. forum...

it's kinda the nature of the beast around these parts, isn't it?

jAZ
06-04-2006, 06:51 PM
this is the only statement that is true, the rest is the liberal victim card.
This statement is a documentable lie.

banyon
06-04-2006, 06:51 PM
I was looking for some history and cooperation here from both sides of the aisle.

Let's try not to make this a name-calling bi*** carnival.

go bowe
06-04-2006, 06:51 PM
my posts have been civil


you don't have answers, just attacks


lets just move on shall wecivil?

your posts are not supposed to be civil...

where's the entertainment value in that? :shrug:

stevieray
06-04-2006, 06:51 PM
my posts have been civil


you don't have answers, just attacks


lets just move on shall we


victim card.

At least I go after people who can defend themselves.

stevieray
06-04-2006, 06:52 PM
I was looking for some history and cooperation here from both sides of the aisle.

Let's try not to make this a name-calling bi*** carnival.

:rolleyes:

go bowe
06-04-2006, 06:52 PM
This statement is a documentable lie.lie, schmie...

everything is a lie with you...

well, maybe not everything... :) :) :)

stevieray
06-04-2006, 06:53 PM
This statement is a documentable lie.

oh look, another incessant insurgent.

banyon
06-04-2006, 06:55 PM
:rolleyes:

WTF is that for?

Does that mean that you are incapable of this? FTR I was speaking to everyone, not just you, that's why I didn't quote you.

stevieray
06-04-2006, 06:56 PM
aw c'mon...

we all hang with negativity here in the d.c. forum...

it's kinda the nature of the beast around these parts, isn't it?

dc forum...yes.

stevieray
06-04-2006, 06:57 PM
WTF is that for?

Does that mean that you are incapable of this? FTR I was speaking to everyone, not just you, that's why I didn't quote you.

:rolleyes:

Mr. Laz
06-04-2006, 06:57 PM
aw c'mon...

we all hang with negativity here in the d.c. forum...

it's kinda the nature of the beast around these parts, isn't it?
instigating bastige ROFL

go bowe
06-04-2006, 06:58 PM
I was looking for some history and cooperation here from both sides of the aisle.

Let's try not to make this a name-calling bi*** carnival.you wanted to know what's changed, didn't you?

we used to get a regular diet of name-calling and both sides were guilty of it...

but due to the overwhelming majority of the posters being from, shall we say, to the right of attila the hun...

most of the hostility was directed at the small band of liberals who were able to stand the heat and give back some of the love they were getting...

once the majority of posters became leftish rather than rightish, a lot of pissing and moaning started about whining and divisiveness and the like, but imo things are much better than they were...

but we do need a little more traffic to liven things up a bit...

(liven, as in intelligent discussion of current topics)

banyon
06-04-2006, 06:59 PM
my posts have been civil


you don't have answers, just attacks


lets just move on shall we

It would seem that you are correct.

So does anyone have improvements, suggestions besides go bo? (not that you don't have any good ideas bo)

go bowe
06-04-2006, 06:59 PM
instigating bastige ROFLhey it's a tough job, but somebody's gotta do it... :D :D :D

go bowe
06-04-2006, 07:02 PM
It would seem that you are correct.

So does anyone have improvements, suggestions besides go bo? (not that you don't have any good ideas bo)more traffic...

more traffic...

more traffic...



we can't get any more from the lounge, despite the fact that when d.c. topics were allowed in the lounge (for one whole day) traffic went up dramatically on those threads...

out of sight, out of mind and out of traffic...

i really think we need to go to other boards and recruit more wreckingjakes and burning bushes....

Mr. Laz
06-04-2006, 07:02 PM
It would seem that you are correct.

So does anyone have improvements, suggestions besides go bo? (not that you don't have any good ideas bo)
move a D.C. link back to the lounge page to spur new traffic


get a D.C. mod .... one that can supervise without abusing any particular part of the political spectrum.

go bowe
06-04-2006, 07:06 PM
move a D.C. link back to the lounge page to spur new traffic


get a D.C. mod .... one that supervise without abusing any particular side of the political spectrum.ooh ooh, can i have that job?

i can abuse everyone from both sides, i'm fair-minded like that... :p :p :p



seriously, what's to supervise?

it's the only place where any topic is allowed...

and where you can basically say whatever you want without fear of being shipped off to the romper room for a slow(er) death...

WoodDraw
06-04-2006, 07:09 PM
It would seem that you are correct.

So does anyone have improvements, suggestions besides go bo? (not that you don't have any good ideas bo)

I don't mean to say that the forum is dead or boring. I still enjoy reading through most of the posts, and there are posters from all different political spectrums that I enjoy. A greater effort needs to be put on making posts with actual substance behind them. "Dem or Rep just did X, Y, Z" just doesn't make an interesting discussion. It invites the trash that many compain about. Plus, most people already have stock replys to the popular news subjects. To me, the best threads are ones that are about specific plans or issues (i.e. the ethanol one).

I'm as guilty of that as anyone though. It's hard and time consuming to make good posts. People just need to realize this is a message board and you get what you get. Sometimes there will be great stuff, sometimes trash, and most of the time the repetitive norm.

Mr. Laz
06-04-2006, 07:12 PM
ooh ooh, can i have that job?

i can abuse everyone from both sides, i'm fair-minded like that... :p :p :p



seriously, what's to supervise?

it's the only place where any topic is allowed...

and where you can basically say whatever you want without fear of being shipped off to the romper room for a slow(er) death...

people tend to act more restrained if they know that somebody is watching.


besides a neutral eye might end certain disputes when people don't want to deal with reality. If someone is just beyond rational a mod could give them a timeout to cool down a bit.


it might keep things from breaking out into all out warfare ;)

jAZ
06-04-2006, 07:21 PM
I'd just like to point out that I've been here since the beginning... LOOOONG before the beginning (of DC) actually. I've been posting with the same style since 2001.

Back then the Conservatives were the ones posting most of the threads and instigating most of the topics. Liberals were mostly in response mode (the role Cochise has adopted here lately).

Up through 2003/4 I was, at times, quite literally the only person speaking out on the liberal side of things. Most of the time there was at least one or two people, but it often seemed that there was a liberal tag team. One person would take on all 25 conservatives and do their best to reply to each thread and rebuttle. With liberals literally outnumbered 25-5, it was an exhaustive task at times. And the frustrating part (often) was that it seems that the conservatives would end up with 3-4 people each responding to the same thread/post/topic. Each would put a slightly different twist on the topic, and in doing so often required the one person to reply to each person. Can you imagine?

Liberal A posts (or responds to) a topic.

Conservative A replies.
Conservative B replies.
Conservative C replies.
Conservative D replies.
Conservative E replies.

Liberal A now has effectively 5-6 different conversations going on at one time, each will fork 2-3 times over the course of a single thread.

I (and the few long-timers) tried to keep up dilligently. But being outnumbered there shear volume of work required to keep up was extensive. It seemed that (maybe out of necessity), you would often only find 1 liberal willing to engage on a given topic, when the same topic would draw out 5 different conservatives. Maybe it was a tag-team thing in order to be able to keep up. I don't know.

From about January 2002 until after the election of 2004, the liberals remained out numbered and the badly. As support for Bush has fallen, so has the popluation of outspoken conservatives. As Laz pointed out there came a day, about a year or so ago, where the conservatives just gave up. They say it's because there was too much bitching from and whining from Dems, they had too much to do unlike Dems, they aren't on welfare like all Dems, they weren't going to steal from their employer like all Dems, or whatever... but it only takes a few brain cells to know what happened.

Bush got harder and harder to defend, and they basically gave up trying. Those that are left, are (like the liberals back in the day), fairly passionate folks willing to speak their minds in good times and in bad. The rest are the bandwagon jumpers.

There is a level of respect that I have (no matter how extensively I disagree on the value of their posts) for the folks that do remain and contribute. They deserve a great deal of credit for that commitment.

If they ever end up facing the reverse of the 2001 situation (25 liberals to 5 conservatives), I'll have even more respect for those 5.

Just a brief view of history via jAZ.

And those that are left are more libertarian types, rather than the GOP shills like RL and the religous conservatives like KCWolfman.

jAZ
06-04-2006, 07:24 PM
oh look, another incessant insurgent.
stevieray is harkening back to the days when 25 conservatives could each just throw out hate-america insults like this and wait for the board conservatives to fill up their box with rep and pile on with similar comments.

Now he stands alone, looking rather pathetic.

go bowe
06-04-2006, 07:27 PM
people tend to act more restrained if they know that somebody is watching.


besides a neutral eye might end certain disputes when people don't want to deal with reality. If someone is just beyond rational a mod could give them a timeout to cool down a bit.


it might keep things from breaking out into all out warfare ;)all out warfare?

why, what could be better?

that's when you see some interesting threads...

we don't need no stinkin' timeouts, we need controversy...

really... :harumph: :harumph: :harumph:

jAZ
06-04-2006, 07:29 PM
So does anyone have improvements, suggestions besides go bo? (not that you don't have any good ideas bo)
Support the effort to get the sub-forum status returned to the main lounge. It was a channel that brought a wider range of perspectives (mostly conservatives given the overall profile of the Planet, but that's ok) back to DC.

Short of that, I don't think it'd be wise to invite non-football fans to the board. Maybe invite the other donkey, charger and raider fans to the DC?

go bowe
06-04-2006, 07:33 PM
stevieray is harkening back to the days when 25 conservatives could each just throw out hate-america insults like this and wait for the board conservatives to fill up their box with rep and pile on with similar comments.

Now he stands alone, looking rather pathetic.that's a little harsh...

stevie ray is not pathetic...

cryptic sometimes, but not pathetic...

he doesn't look any different than you did when you were virtually all alone against the tide of rightwing abuse and venom...

except that there appears to be a lot less abuse and venom now that the libbies are in power around here...

probably because most of the more entertaining haters have left the scene and most of them seem to have been decidedly rightish in their outlook...

what we need is more traffic, more discussions, more sex...

er, wait...

go bowe
06-04-2006, 07:35 PM
* * *I don't think it'd be wise to invite non-football fans to the board. . .why not?

they (the vocal whiners of the planet) don't want us to have traffic from the lounge, so what are we supposed to do for entertainment...

we have as much right to be entertained discussing "political" topics as other planateers do to discuss poop...

don't we?

jAZ
06-04-2006, 07:58 PM
that's a little harsh...

stevie ray is not pathetic...

cryptic sometimes, but not pathetic...

he doesn't look any different than you did when you were virtually all alone against the tide of rightwing abuse and venom...
I take it as quite an insult that you claim that stevie's "another incessant insurgent" (or "liberal victim card" or any other one-line personal attack) comment reminds you of me back in the day. Seriously, I was nothing like that. In fact, stevieray himself was not much like that 2 years ago.

If in his "standing alone" he contributed his thoughts more like patteeu and less like Brock/Lattimer... he'd look something like me in 2002. But his chosen path is to abandon considered discussion in favor of "why do you have so much hate in your heart, you hate-america, pro-terrorist insurgent?" rhetoric.

Which is very definately pathetic.

As you pointed out, such spiteful posts have diminished as the liberals around here have gained equal footing in terms of population.

Mr. Kotter
06-04-2006, 08:01 PM
....

seriously, what's to supervise?

it's the only place where any topic is allowed...

and where you can basically say whatever you want without fear of being shipped off to the romper room for a slow(er) death...
I agree with Laz that the place needs a fair-minded moderator, or two...

I wouldn't want to squelch the types of topics or the free speech component, but it's the personal and ad hominem stuff that needs to be curtailed...

I know, I know....I'm guilty of it too..... it's the way I'm wired, I respond in kind. You diss me, I'm coming back at you. You get in my face, I'm gonna get in yours. Taking the high road is not natural for me.

Without an threat of consequences, it's far too easy for people from both sides of the ideological divide to slip into that reptilian, tit-for-tat sort of demagoguery that does nothing in terms of helping to maintain civility. If I really thought there would be some consequences, I might be more restrained.

It wouldn't be as entertaining perhaps, but it might raise the level of discourse in here....and might, eventually, lead to increased traffic.

JMHO. :shrug:

Logical
06-04-2006, 08:07 PM
people stopped posting because of the incessant whining.

believe it or not laz, most of the country doesn't buy into constant negaitivity. ( though that is subject to change..by design) You are one of the few posters who carries it over to both forums.

look up the meaning of insurgent. it applies to some in this forum.

I feel so left out, I come to both forums for my own entertainment and to occasionaly get my message through to others. I don't go to either forum to be a victim nor do I want others to feel they are victims.

I will say that though I don't feel the motives were as nefarious as has been made out by Laz the symptoms he defines are essentially correct. There has been a mentality by some that they cannot control their impulse (for whatever reason) to enter this forum if they see the thread headers over here. This is a shame not because I feel them posting here is essential, but because newcomers don't even come to know this forum is available to them and some of them might find it of some interest. They in turn would bring new ideas to the discussions.

Finally I know for a fact there is a users group that specifically ensures the users cannot see the links to DC. Now if you are so unable to control your urge that you won't seek ouf the forum if it is available via a link that is out of sight that might say you really want to be here and feel you have lost personal control.

jAZ
06-04-2006, 08:14 PM
people don't hang with negativity. see your post as an example. I said the cause was incessant whining, and you claim I called you an incessant whiner.
They sure could hang when the negativity is directed at liberals, Clinton, Gore, Kerry, Hillary, Atheists, Euros or any other of the perfered conservative targets.

Mr. Kotter
06-04-2006, 08:15 PM
....except that there appears to be a lot less abuse and venom now that the libbies are in power around here......

I disagree that....that is the case, but if it were it's because Burn@stake, Thomas, Recount, and MadProphetMargin.....and the likes of those folks got bored, because many conservatives did take an extended vacation or just left.

If you read carefully though, I'd say we still have a few posters here in DC who quickly descend into personal and ad hominem attacks....on both sides of the isle. However, the ones on the left seem to think.....if I just call that conservative a moron, a sheep, totally fuggin' clueless, or whatever, that is somehow acceptable. And then they wonder why others respond in kind....:shake:

Logical
06-04-2006, 08:16 PM
...

people don't hang with negativity. ..

This statement is blatantly untrue whether you are in the lounge or DC. The fact that DEnise, Skip, jAZ, Laz and I draw some of the biggest thread response totals in both forums show this not to be true. We all tend to speak our minds whether it be positive or negative and the response are very significant. We all have one other thing in common, we are tough enough to take the abuse that will be thrown our way and give it back in equal measure. We may not be as popular as Rain Man (who is that does not have boobs) but our threads generate traffic. I don't appreciate recxjake but give the little bugger credit he is tough enough (some might sav oblivious) to take the shit and shovel it back, same thing with the current incarnation of gochiefs. People who are bland have one other thing in common they are usually boring. You want boring WPI will make for a happy poster.

WoodDraw
06-04-2006, 08:19 PM
I agree with Laz that the place needs a fair-minded moderator, or two...

I wouldn't want to squelch the types of topics or the free speech component, but it's the personal and ad hominem stuff that needs to be curtailed...

I know, I know....I'm guilty of it too..... it's the way I'm wired, I respond in kind. You diss me, I'm coming back at you. You get in my face, I'm gonna get in yours. Taking the high road is not natural for me.

Without an threat of consequences, it's far too easy for people from both sides of the ideological divide to slip into that reptilian, tit-for-tat sort of demagoguery that does nothing in terms of helping to maintain civility. If I really thought there would be some consequences, I might be more restrained.

It wouldn't be as entertaining perhaps, but it might raise the level of discourse in here....and might, eventually, lead to increased traffic.

JMHO. :shrug:

I agree. A couple moderators to weed out the unneeded posts could make a big difference.

Mr. Kotter
06-04-2006, 08:29 PM
They sure could hang when the negativity is directed at liberals, Clinton, Gore, Kerry, Hillary, Atheists, Euros or any other of the perfered conservative targets.Conservatives can handle negativity and criticism, in moderation, and presented in a rational way. Hearing "Bush Sucks" 1001 ways gets old, really fast. I'm know (from personal experience) hearing "Clinton Sucks" 1001 ways got old really fast too.

I wasn't around political message boards much until after 1999 or 2000. I can't imagine too many liberals stuck around to be abused, and inundated by conservatives when Clinton sunk into oblivion. Why you folks are surprised that conservatives are sick of hearing "Bush Sucks" a million different ways....displays a lack of understanding of basic human nature IMO.

It was understandable in 1998 and 1999, when liberals I knew just said "enough--shut up, already." Even as a conservative Democrat, I got SICK of hearing it. I just eventually tuned it all out.

Why can't you understand conservatives saying "enough," given the current climate? :shrug:

jAZ
06-04-2006, 08:35 PM
Why can't you understand conservatives saying "enough," given the current climate? :shrug:
You might have missed this...
Bush got harder and harder to defend, and they basically gave up trying. Those that are left, are (like the liberals back in the day), fairly passionate folks willing to speak their minds in good times and in bad. The rest are the bandwagon jumpers.

There is a level of respect that I have (no matter how extensively I disagree on the value of their posts) for the folks that do remain and contribute. They deserve a great deal of credit for that commitment.

go bowe
06-04-2006, 08:37 PM
I take it as quite an insult that you claim that stevie's "another incessant insurgent" (or "liberal victim card" or any other one-line personal attack) comment reminds you of me back in the day. Seriously, I was nothing like that. In fact, stevieray himself was not much like that 2 years ago.

If in his "standing alone" he contributed his thoughts more like patteeu and less like Brock/Lattimer... he'd look something like me in 2002. But his chosen path is to abandon considered discussion in favor of "why do you have so much hate in your heart, you hate-america, pro-terrorist insurgent?" rhetoric.

Which is very definately pathetic.

As you pointed out, such spiteful posts have diminished as the liberals around here have gained equal footing in terms of population.hold on now...

i didn't say stevie reminded me of you back in the "day"...

i said stevie standing virtually alone "looked" like you did when you were almost alone standing up to the righties...

you know, alone and outnumbered?

now, i thought incessant insurgent had a real ring to it... :p :p :p

Mr. Kotter
06-04-2006, 08:39 PM
You might have missed this...

My point is, if we can move on from "Bush Sucks!" said 1001 ways.....conservatives would be more inclined to re-engage liberals in some sort of rational dialogue. Instead of just saying, "screw it."

go bowe
06-04-2006, 08:40 PM
I agree. A couple moderators to weed out the unneeded posts could make a big difference.who's to say what post is "unneeded"?

hell, most of the posts on the planet are unneeded, but it's what makes the place entertaining...

i guess i don't see a need for a mod over here at the present time...

even Tom Cash was at least entertaining, i wouldn't have banned him if i was a mod...

see?

even bad posters are good to have around when there are so few left in the ghetto that is d.c., imo...

go bowe
06-04-2006, 08:42 PM
My point is, if we can move on from "Bush Sucks!" said 1001 ways.....conservatives would be more inclined to re-engage liberals in some sort of rational dialogue. Instead of just saying, "screw it."no, no, no...

you've got it all wrong...

bush doesn't suck,

bush is da debbil...

try to keep up, would ya?

Mr. Kotter
06-04-2006, 08:42 PM
who's to say what post is "unneeded"?

hell, most of the posts on the planet are unneeded, but it's what makes the place entertaining...

i guess i don't see a need for a mod over here at the present time...

even - ahem, shut your mouth - was at least entertaining, i wouldn't have banned him if i was a mod...

see?

even bad posters are good to have around when there are so few left in the ghetto that is d.c., imo...

Direct and indirect personal attacks, and clearly ad hominem sorts of posts....especially if they display no real substance. I know it isn't black and white, but.....:shrug:

jAZ
06-04-2006, 08:44 PM
My point is, if we can move on from "Bush Sucks!" said 1001 ways.....conservatives would be more inclined to re-engage liberals in some sort of rational dialogue. Instead of just saying, "screw it."
As long as the political landscape is defined by the issues that underlie why "Bush sucks" and as long as Bush remains "the decider", the other talk is of almost no meaninful consequence. Any discussion of fixing our problems needs to start with fixing the biggest one.

If I have AIDS, I'm not running around asking people for advice on how to more effectively clean my toe nails.

Mr. Kotter
06-04-2006, 08:44 PM
no, no, no...

you've got it all wrong...

bush doesn't suck,

bush is da debbil...

try to keep up, would ya?

You're right....so sorry.

"Bush is da debil" and "Clinton Sucks".......it should be easy to keep straight...:p

go bowe
06-04-2006, 08:45 PM
Direct and indirect personal attacks, and clearly ad hominem sorts of posts....especially if they display no real substance. I know it isn't black and white, but.....:shrug:until the personal attacks descend into threats of physical violence or racial epithets, i don't see any need to police them...

and what's no real substance? to who?

no, i don't think i'd be very proactive as a mod...

in my view, the less moderation the better... :D :D :D

Mr. Kotter
06-04-2006, 08:48 PM
As long as the political landscape is defined by the issues that underlie why "Bush sucks" and as long as Bush remains "the decider", the other talk is of almost no meaninful consequence. Any discussion of fixing our problems needs to start with fixing the biggest one.

If I have AIDS, I'm not running around asking people for advice on how to more effectively clean my toe nails.

When are you gonna accept the fact the man is going to be President until January 2009? Just like conservatives, eventually had to accept Clinton was going to fill-out his term.

Bush-bashers today (not you, unless you wish to apply the label to yourself,) are every bit as petty, vindcitive, pathetic, irrational, and juvenile as the Clinton-bashers were back then. Why the need to stoop to their level? I realize revenge can be sweet, but it detracts from civil discourse and actually addressing the real issues.

go bowe
06-04-2006, 08:48 PM
You're right....so sorry.

"Bush is da debil" and "Clinton Sucks".......it should be easy to keep straight...:pno, no, no...

clinton doesn't suck, he gets sucked...

big difference...



btw, did you catch bill on the aids global summit on cnn last night?

he's still got the juice...

and he's still using his position to lend support and direction to good causes like this...

all in all, i still like the guy and wish he could run again...

oh wait, hillary... :p :p :p

go bowe
06-04-2006, 08:49 PM
careful kotter, jaz has aids...

Mr. Kotter
06-04-2006, 08:50 PM
no, no, no...

clinton doesn't suck, he gets sucked...

big difference...



btw, did you catch bill on the aids global summit on cnn last night?

he's still got the juice...

and he's still using his position to lend support and direction to good causes like this...

all in all, i still like the guy and wish he could run again...

oh wait, hillary... :p :p :p
If not for the 22nd amendment....he could run for President in 2008, and I'd bet he'd win. He's amazing. The quintessential politician of our time.

jAZ
06-04-2006, 08:51 PM
When are you gonna accept the fact the man is going to be President until January 2009? Just like conservatives, eventually had to accept Clinton was going to fill-out his term.

Bush-bashers today (not you, unless you wish to apply the label to yourself,) are every bit as petty, vindcitive, pathetic, irrational, and juvenile as the Clinton-bashers were back then. Why the need to stoop to their level? I realize revenge can be sweet, but it detracts from civil discourse and actually addressing the real issues.
I've long since accepted that. That doesn't mean I have to (nor should anyone) accept the continued policies and actions that made "Bush suck".

Mr. Kotter
06-04-2006, 08:53 PM
I've long since accepted that. That doesn't mean I have to (nor should anyone) accept the continued policies and actions that made "Bush suck".

Fine, fight the policies. Disagree when you need to. But why does nearly everything you post seem to scream "Bush sucks!".....er, eh.....or "Bush is da debil."

Let it go, Justin.

jAZ
06-04-2006, 09:00 PM
Bush-bashers
The difference is substantial.

Bush Bashers bash Bush over policy choices that are a failure.
Bush Bashers have been proven right on the policy front repeatedly.

Clinton Bashers tried bashing Clinton on his policy choices.
Clinton Bashers were proven wrong on the policy front repeatedly.,
They gave up ans switched to bashing Clinton on his penis location and personal integrity.

jAZ
06-04-2006, 09:02 PM
Fine, fight the policies. Disagree when you need to. But why does nearly everything you post seem to scream "Bush sucks!".....er, eh.....or "Bush is da debil."

Let it go, Justin.
Because you dismiss all criticism of Republican policy or performance into "Bush sucks" rhetoric.

Logical
06-04-2006, 09:11 PM
As much as I hate to admit it, watching a thread with interesting potential for improving this place devolve into a jAZ/Kotter pissing match pretty much tells the story.

stevieray
06-04-2006, 09:16 PM
They sure could hang when the negativity is directed at liberals, Clinton, Gore, Kerry, Hillary, Atheists, Euros or any other of the perfered conservative targets.


Using a negative to validate a negative? two wrongs don't make a right.

People complain about government being too overinvolved in our lives, but the only reason they are forced to is because we can't figure it out on our own. Together. We don't trust form elected officials to paying for our gas.

Of the people, by the people, for the people....our actions and choices are what define these terms. The more we are divided, the weaker we are. I think the hostility towards our politicians is just mirroring our own inequities.

It's not a right or left thing, it's an us thing.

stevieray
06-04-2006, 09:20 PM
As you pointed out, such spiteful posts have diminished as the liberals around here have gained equal footing in terms of population.

BS.

RRWNJ, ad nausem.

Taco John
06-04-2006, 09:23 PM
the only thing that has really changed is that the conservatives used to own the place.



there were only a few liberals that dared post in here back then ........ and they got dog piled on by the conservatives.

then George W Bush arrived and the tide turned.


more liberals showed up and the conservative didn't like it when they could bully people around so they just all left ........ virtually all on the very same day.

they deny this planned exodus ... but it was quite the coincidence if it wasn't planned.

shortly after the mass exodus of 2005, all the conservatives that used to rule the place, started screaming to any mod that would listen that D.C need to be off the front page(sub forum).

They were adamant about how they didn't even want a link on the front page because it "trashed up the place"

the mods came up with some lame excuse about how they needed to "clean up" lounge page because of so many links. So D.C was gonna be moved. They said that all the ex-DC complainers had nothing to do with it ... yet another huge coincidence i suppose.

but there still 3 links on the lounge page ... amazely the clean up stopped after the D.C. link got moves. :shrug:


at one point they even petitioned the mods for their own special user group .... basically blocking themselves from even seeing the D.C. forum because they apparently just couldn't control themselves enough to not enter and read all the "liberal propaganda"


so the conservative just took their ball and went home and decided to try and wreck the place on the way out.


D.C is what it's alway been ......... a squabble-fest.



This is more or less how I remember it... The Bush monkies were getting worked over and didn't have the intestines to stand up for their guy and their beliefs... except for a few, like patteau. They started crying about the link even being on the front page, because it apparently tempted them to come back in here and have to defend their beliefs in a time when they were falling apart.

Slowly, they are filtering back in.

jAZ
06-04-2006, 09:24 PM
Using a negative to validate a negative? two wrongs don't make a right.
Not at all, I'm using an example to point out that this statement is false.
people don't hang with negativity

Logical
06-04-2006, 09:24 PM
...

People complain about government being too overinvolved in our lives, but the only reason they are forced to is because we can't figure it out on our own. Together. We don't trust form elected officials to paying for our gas.

Of the people, by the people, for the people....our actions and choices are what define these terms. The more we are divided, the weaker we are. I think the hostility towards our politicians is just mirroring our own inequities.

It's not a right or left thing, it's an us thing.Possibly your best post ever, other than that first statement I deleted.

stevieray
06-04-2006, 09:25 PM
This statement is blatantly untrue whether you are in the lounge or DC. The fact that DEnise, Skip, jAZ, Laz and I draw some of the biggest thread response totals in both forums show this not to be true. We all tend to speak our minds whether it be positive or negative and the response are very significant. We all have one other thing in common, we are tough enough to take the abuse that will be thrown our way and give it back in equal measure. We may not be as popular as Rain Man (who is that does not have boobs) but our threads generate traffic. I don't appreciate recxjake but give the little bugger credit he is tough enough (some might sav oblivious) to take the shit and shovel it back, same thing with the current incarnation of gochiefs. People who are bland have one other thing in common they are usually boring. You want boring <a href="http://chiefsplanet.com">WPI</a> will make for a happy poster.


I'm talking about in general. I think your obssesion about where this forums stands in the planet community is overshadowing your thoughts.

Taco John
06-04-2006, 09:25 PM
However the hardcore on the other side of the aisle seem to think shouting down conservatives on the internet is their job.



Bah... That used to be the Bush monkeys jobs around here until his approval ratings started to go into the toilet, and they all left.

stevieray
06-04-2006, 09:29 PM
Possibly your best post ever, other than that first statement I deleted.

Thnak you, Jim, I appreciate that.

We have to give our system some benefit of the doubt, otherwise, we are just like thirdl world countries we looked down our noses on.

Mr. Kotter
06-04-2006, 09:33 PM
As much as I hate to admit it, watching a thread with interesting potential for improving this place devolve into a jAZ/Kotter pissing match pretty much tells the story.
Anyone else notice the irony of this statement? Heh. :)

Logical
06-04-2006, 09:34 PM
I'm talking about in general. I think your obssesion about where this forums stands in the planet community is overshadowing your thoughts.Skip and gochiefs don't post over here for the most part. How does this example I have given focus on this forum. I understand you personally do not like negativity, but Stevie you have to realize that others react differently than you do.

Logical
06-04-2006, 09:41 PM
Anyone else notice the irony of this statement? Heh. :)There was nothing personal intended, I just thought that the way this thread got diverted by you two pissing on each other is really what a lot of people cannot handle. It was an excellent example of little to no substance and all accusation.

Mr. Kotter
06-04-2006, 09:45 PM
There was nothing personal intended, I just thought that the way this thread got diverted by you two pissing on each other is really what a lot of people cannot handle. It was an excellent example of little to no substance and all accusation.

Pissin' matches are a Planet staple. Here, or in the lounge. And we both are in the middle of our share.

My point, which jAZ (and you, I guess) seem oblivious to, is there is a difference between a pissin' match, and personal attacks.

stevieray
06-04-2006, 09:46 PM
Skip and gochiefs don't post over here for the most part. How does this example I have given focus on this forum. I understand you personally do not like negativity, but Stevie you have to realize that others react differently than you do.

Fair enough.

Logical
06-04-2006, 09:53 PM
Pissin' matches are a Planet staple. Here, or in the lounge. And we both are in the middle of our share.

My point, which jAZ (and you, I guess) seem oblivious to, is there is a difference between a pissin' match, and personal attacks.I rarely see a true personal attack with the exception against DEnise, in which case they are common. Teasing and pulling someone's chain is not a personal attack. People are far to sensitive sometimes. The only other common personal attack is one person calling the other a liar. Now that is personal and happens all to frequently.

banyon
06-05-2006, 12:02 AM
As much as I hate to admit it, watching a thread with interesting potential for improving this place devolve into a jAZ/Kotter pissing match pretty much tells the story.

Yeah, Vlad. You got me thinking that this place had achieved some level of stagnation. Let's have a pact to keep this thread clear of the asinine slap-fights to try to get the forum back to where it was.

go bowe
06-05-2006, 12:29 AM
I rarely see a true personal attack with the exception against DEnise, in which case they are common. Teasing and pulling someone's chain is not a personal attack. People are far to sensitive sometimes. The only other common personal attack is one person calling the other a liar. Now that is personal and happens all to frequently.ok, you double breasted highpocket prevaricator you...

CHIEF4EVER
06-05-2006, 12:42 AM
Yeah, Vlad. You got me thinking that this place had achieved some level of stagnation. Let's have a pact to keep this thread clear of the asinine slap-fights to try to get the forum back to where it was.

If you bidge azz Libs would just STFU everything would just be peachy...:p:p:p:p

go bowe
06-05-2006, 12:53 AM
i can't believe you brought wagging tongues to a slap fight... :shake: :shake: :shake:

CHIEF4EVER
06-05-2006, 01:36 AM
i can't believe you brought wagging tongues to a slap fight... :shake: :shake: :shake:

Shhhhhhhhhhhhhh! Can't you see I'm tryin' to instigate some mess?

Mr. Laz
06-05-2006, 10:03 AM
If you bidge azz Libs would just STFU everything would just be peachy...:p:p:p:p
what a lame ass insult :shake:




must be the conservative in-breeding program slowly melting your brainpan.














:)

patteeu
06-05-2006, 11:01 AM
I don't really think the DC forum has changed very much since it was created other than traffic dropping off since the last election. The real change came when the DC forum was created and all political topics were kicked out of the Lounge. That change has more to do with the population of posters that would contribute to political discussions than it does with the personalities/posting styles of the people who still post here. E.g. Rain Man used to post on political threads from time to time although he didn't really do so in a way that exposes his personal political beliefs very much.

P.S. I agree that there has been a shift in the balance of posting power from conservatives to liberals since DC was created but I don't necessarily agree to the psychology behind it.

banyon
06-05-2006, 11:10 AM
P.S. I agree that there has been a shift in the balance of posting power from conservatives to liberals since DC was created but I don't necessarily agree to the psychology behind it.

Since you've been identified by other posters as being one of the few to have the "courage" to stay (whatever they mean by that), I'm curious to see what is your amateur psychological diagnosis of the situation?

patteeu
06-05-2006, 11:12 AM
There were several votes about whether or not to create a politics subforum before the measure finally achieved a majority.

I think Big Daddy and jAZ deserve a disproportionate amount of blame for politics being segregated from the main board. They are the two traitors that I can remember changing sides in the debate and becoming vocal advocates of segregation. Mr. Kotter is the same kind of turncoat when he decrys the lack of civility in DC despite the fact that he was in the middle of creating that image.

Mr. Kotter
06-05-2006, 11:17 AM
... Mr. Kotter is the same kind of turncoat when he decrys the lack of civility in DC despite the fact that he was in the middle of creating that image.Hey, I resemble that remark! :harumph:

Growing up as I did, it's hard for me to take the "high road" if others are going to get personal....I don't shy away from bullies.

In my case though, I've explained it; I'll be nice to those who are nice...I think my insults or personal "attacks" are much more indirect and couched in qualifiers, than the in your face "you are a moron," "you are an idiot," or "you are a loser" sort of direct attacks by a handful here.

If I lob an insult or ad hominem remark your way, I've often left you an "out" if you wish to take it.....:shrug:


While some may not see that as a big distinction, in my mind....I'm leaving room for someone to not be offended....if they choose to take the "out."

Mr. Laz
06-05-2006, 11:27 AM
Hey, I resemble that remark! :harumph:

Growing up as I did, it's hard for me to take the "high road" if others are going to get personal....I don't shy away from bullies.

In my case though, I've explained it; I'll be nice to those who are nice...I think my insults or personal "attacks" are much more indirect and couched in qualifiers, than the in your face "you are a moron," "you are an idiot," or "you are a loser" sort of direct attacks by a handful here.

If I lob an insult or ad hominem remark your way, I've often left you an "out" if you wish to take it.....:shrug:


While some may not see that as a big distinction, in my mind....I'm leaving room for someone to not be offended....if they choose to take the "out."
hehe

Mr. Kotter
06-05-2006, 11:30 AM
hehe

I'm good a rationalizing. My wife says I'm "world class"...... :D

Or was it "world class ass"......:hmmm: :spock:

patteeu
06-05-2006, 11:38 AM
Since you've been identified by other posters as being one of the few to have the "courage" to stay (whatever they mean by that), I'm curious to see what is your amateur psychological diagnosis of the situation?

I think the biggest factor was that after Bush was re-elected, there wasn't as much incentive for the pro-Bush folks to stick around and argue. Prior to that, there was Afghanistan, and Iraq, and the 2004 elections to energize Bush supporters, but after the election, it was easier for the anti-Bush forces to maintain their energy level than for those who had just seen their side win.

I'm not saying that approval ratings (either nationally or here on ChiefsPlanet) don't have any impact, but I don't think they are the biggest factor in why there has been a swing from right to left here in DC.

patteeu
06-05-2006, 11:49 AM
Hey, I resemble that remark! :harumph:

Growing up as I did, it's hard for me to take the "high road" if others are going to get personal....I don't shy away from bullies.

In my case though, I've explained it; I'll be nice to those who are nice...I think my insults or personal "attacks" are much more indirect and couched in qualifiers, than the in your face "you are a moron," "you are an idiot," or "you are a loser" sort of direct attacks by a handful here.

If I lob an insult or ad hominem remark your way, I've often left you an "out" if you wish to take it.....:shrug:


While some may not see that as a big distinction, in my mind....I'm leaving room for someone to not be offended....if they choose to take the "out."

It's not your occasional lack of civility that bothers me (most of us are guilty of that), it's your preaching against the sins of DC that bothers me. You are entitled to your opinion about whether or not DC should remain a seperate subforum, I guess, but it rubs me the wrong way in the same way your professed membership in and goodwill toward the democrat party despite seeming to generally side with the Republicans rubs democrats wrong. I might be way off the mark, but it comes across to me as if you are just trying to fit in with the cool kids from the Lounge and hoping they won't see you as one of the geeks from DC anymore.

But despite you being a self-hating, traitorous weasel and all, I still like you and don't intend these to be fighting words (same with jAZ and Big Daddy). :p

Chief Faithful
06-05-2006, 12:06 PM
My point is, if we can move on from "Bush Sucks!" said 1001 ways.....conservatives would be more inclined to re-engage liberals in some sort of rational dialogue. Instead of just saying, "screw it."

That is exactly why I don't post much in the DC forum and why I am a strong proponent of keeping DC subjects out of the Lounge. After a liberal has expressed "Bush Sucks!" over and over I understand their opinion. I still chime in when there is a rational dialogue otherwise I just lurk.

Jaz,
You are the TJ of the DC forum. After a while most of us just don't care to hear another post from you telling us how much somebody sucks. The reality is few care enough about what you have to say anymore to even post a response. It has nothing to do with Bush.

Count me as a person more dissatisfied with Congress, on both sides of the isle, than Bush. I am proud of our troops and President for their sacrifices in Afghanistan and Iraq. I am pissed at the Senate for their handling of the Budget and the border and will vote anti-incumbent next election.

Mr. Kotter
06-05-2006, 01:00 PM
...I might be way off the mark, but it comes across to me as if you are just trying to fit in with the cool kids from the Lounge and hoping they won't see you as one of the geeks from DC anymore...If I come across that way, I'll have to blame it on the inadequacies of communicating on the internet.....because it is hardly the case.

1. Fitting in with "the cool kids" has never been a problem for me....ever. First because I've always been one of the "cool kids".....and even if (a few times) I didn't fit in, with a particular group---I generally didn't give a shit. If nothing else, I choose to be me....regardless. I think posters who have met me in real life will back me up on that. Historically, that's served me well regardless of whether I've been with the "cool kids" or the "nerds." :shrug:

2. I say whatever is on my mind, at a given point in time. Sometimes that rubs people the wrong way, especially when they don't really KNOW me and how I am in real life. The multiple usernames.....that's me in real life to; I adapt to the situation and like to play along, and be entertained. Even if it isn't always entertaining to others. Sometimes I have regrets....words in haste, over-reactions, or under the influence. I'm usually man enough to apologize, if it is warranted.

3. Hoping I'm not a DC geek? That's too late....a huge part of my identity, in real life....is political aficionado, and policy wonk. That's why it's tough for me to stay away from this place. It may be I come off as "hoping I'm not...." a technical computer-geek type, because I'm not. I'm entirely self-taught, and know I have technical limitations.

4. As for the conservative Democrat status.....I am what I am. I liked and supported Carter--but realized he wasn't up to the task by 1979; I would have voted Carter in 76, did vote Clinton in 92, and even Gore in 2000. However, I also vote Republican, at the federal level, often. I vote issues, not party or even candidate so much. Taxes, defense, and deregulation/federalism are the issues that are most important to me.

I began as a Southern Democrat-Reagan Democrat-Boll Weevil Democrat (minus the white hood and secret handshake).....and have since gravitated toward the DLC/Blue Dog wing of the party since the 90s. People like me were the "silent majority" for Nixon, the "Reagan Democrats," and the pro-defense, pro-military fiscal conservatives who reluctantly backed the Bush's--as the lesser of two evils (though I did support Gore)....I also voted Clinton, until he showed his true colors.

If the "mushy middle" or unprincipaled moderate are the labels you wish to apply.....so be it. I am what I am. It is what it is. Yadda, yadda, yadda.

What it is NOT, is "trying to be cool." I already am cool. :p

Bob Dole
06-05-2006, 01:05 PM
1. Fitting in with "the cool kids" has never been a problem for me....ever. First becasue I've always been one of the "cool kids".....and even ife I didn't fit in, with a particular group---I generally didn't give a shit. If nothing else, I choose to be me....regardless. I think posters who have met me in real life will back me up on that. Historically, that's served me well regardless of wheter I've been with the "cool kids" or the "nerds." :shrug:

Bob Dole was mostly impressed by the way you refused to play the race card to get your way.

Mr. Kotter
06-05-2006, 01:11 PM
Bob Dole was mostly impressed by the way you refused to play the race card to get your way.:spock:

You'll have to excuse me, Bob.....I must be missing something.....:hmmm:

Now I'm black??? :eek:


(while technically, I may be 1/32 or 1/64 or whatever...I sure don't look like it; heck, I'm almost as white as BigRedChief!)


EDIT: Okay, Bob....I sense sarcasm, though my meter may need to be adjusted.....but if your comment is TIC, and is directed at this comment:

(minus the white hood and secret handshake)

....I hope you are joking; because Civil Rights was not the only issue to define the Southern-Boll Weevil-Reagan Democrats.....contrary to what the politically correct historical revisionists would have you believe. Taxes, defense, and other issues led to the alliance with Republicans....

Taco John
06-05-2006, 01:25 PM
Jaz,
You are the TJ of the DC forum.





That's a pretty lofty compliment, Justin...

Bob Dole
06-05-2006, 01:52 PM
:spock:

You'll have to excuse me, Bob.....I must be missing something.....:hmmm:

Now I'm black??? :eek:


(while technically, I may be 1/32 or 1/64 or whatever...I sure don't look like it; heck, I'm almost as white as BigRedChief!)


EDIT: Okay, Bob....I sense sarcasm, though my meter may need to be adjusted.....but if your comment is TIC, and is directed at this comment:

(minus the white hood and secret handshake)

....I hope you are joking; because Civil Rights was not the only issue to define the Southern-Boll Weevil-Reagan Democrats.....contrary to what the politically correct historical revisionists would have you believe. Taxes, defense, and other issues led to the alliance with Republicans....

Bob Dole doesn't read enough in this forum to direct TIC comments to anything posted.

Maybe that's why nobody ever seems to know who Bob Dole is referring to when Bob Dole mentions his "little brown friend".

CHIEF4EVER
06-05-2006, 02:23 PM
That's a pretty lofty compliment, Justin...

Actually that's a pretty harsh slam. It pretty much accuses him of posting nothing but inflammatory bullshit intended to stir the pot.

Logical
06-05-2006, 05:48 PM
That's a pretty lofty compliment, Justin...Dammit and I was shooting for that. I guess I will just have to settle for being the "Logical" of the DC forum.

penchief
06-05-2006, 06:06 PM
I think the biggest factor was that after Bush was re-elected, there wasn't as much incentive for the pro-Bush folks to stick around and argue. Prior to that, there was Afghanistan, and Iraq, and the 2004 elections to energize Bush supporters, but after the election, it was easier for the anti-Bush forces to maintain their energy level than for those who had just seen their side win.

I'm not saying that approval ratings (either nationally or here on ChiefsPlanet) don't have any impact, but I don't think they are the biggest factor in why there has been a swing from right to left here in DC.

I agree with your premise but I don't think it was the biggest factor. If Bush was All-World right now the righties would all be here rubbing our noses in it, as we speak. Only because he's sucking hind tit are they nowhere to be found. We progressives who have stuck to our guns through the thin of it have every right to wonder where the righties are now that Bush is perceived as a failure and we have been proven more right than wrong.

patteeu
06-06-2006, 06:01 AM
...we have been proven more right than wrong.

I'd say you're getting out ahead of yourself there, pen.

penchief
06-06-2006, 12:16 PM
I'd say you're getting out ahead of yourself there, pen.

Maybe, but it has been fun to watch the tide turn.

At the least, much of what we predicted and much of what we warned against did turn out to be legitimate concerns now that we are witnessing some of the results/consequences.

All in all, I'd say that we definitely look smarter than we did three years ago while the sheep are missing.

Velvet_Jones
06-06-2006, 03:07 PM
The difference is substantial.

Bush Bashers bash Bush over policy choices that are a failure.
Bush Bashers have been proven right on the policy front repeatedly.

Clinton Bashers tried bashing Clinton on his policy choices.
Clinton Bashers were proven wrong on the policy front repeatedly.,
They gave up ans switched to bashing Clinton on his penis location and personal integrity.
You have got to be kidding me. Do you really think anyone is buying this BS? I take it history is not your favorite subject. All you do is biatch about Bush-Cheney integrity issues. About 90% of your thread are BS and are usually debunked within a day. Come on man, reality can be your friend.

penchief
06-06-2006, 04:57 PM
You have got to be kidding me. Do you really think anyone is buying this BS? I take it history is not your favorite subject. All you do is biatch about Bush-Cheney integrity issues. About 90% of your thread are BS and are usually debunked within a day. Come on man, reality can be your friend.

That's a really good response. I know that you've convinced me that your position is supreme. What was your position again? Was it that Jaz's posts are BS? Or was it that Jaz's favorite subject was not history? Or was it that you can make unsubstantiated claims about the factual content of Jaz's threads?

If you really want a reality check, you need to take a long hard look at that which you have chosen to defend.........and then get back to Jaz.

htismaqe
06-06-2006, 05:49 PM
Maybe, but it has been fun to watch the tide turn.

At the least, much of what we predicted and much of what we warned against did turn out to be legitimate concerns now that we are witnessing some of the results/consequences.

All in all, I'd say that we definitely look smarter than we did three years ago while the sheep are missing.

Not to single you out, dude, but...

I'm not certain this is "new" but I think part of what's wrong with DC is that people are more concerned with being right and patting themselves on the back than they are engaging in an actual discussion about not only what the problems are but how we might go about changing things.

BucEyedPea
06-06-2006, 05:52 PM
Not to single you out, dude, but...

I'm not certain this is "new" but I think part of what's wrong with DC is that people are more concerned with being right and patting themselves on the back than they are engaging in an actual discussion about not only what the problems are but how we might go about changing things.

Good observation.:thumb:

BTW my bro-in-law...knows some of the MCI big-wigs....I'll have to arrange a raise for you. :)

htismaqe
06-06-2006, 05:59 PM
Good observation.:thumb:

BTW my bro-in-law...knows some of the MCI big-wigs....I'll have to arrange a raise for you. :)

Please don't call attention to me! :D

BucEyedPea
06-06-2006, 06:01 PM
Please don't call attention to me! :D

I promise I won't tell then you're here in the day.
:D ;)

jAZ
06-06-2006, 06:12 PM
I'm not certain this is "new" but I think part of what's wrong with DC is that people are more concerned with being right and patting themselves on the back than they are engaging in an actual discussion about not only what the problems are but how we might go about changing things.
That was never a widespread complaint until it was the liberals patting themselves on the back and calling the conservatives to task for being wrong. When it was the conservatives, it was a massive circle jerk of joy and back slapping. Only the liberals bitched about it, and no one gave a crap.

That's not to say that your point isn't valid, it's that the only thing "new" about the issue is that the liberals finally have enough critical mass and politically favorable events around here to have their back slapping events outnumber the conservative's back slapping events.

That's something this board will not tollerate.

htismaqe
06-06-2006, 07:44 PM
That was never a widespread complaint until it was the liberals patting themselves on the back and calling the conservatives to task for being wrong. When it was the conservatives, it was a massive circle jerk of joy and back slapping. Only the liberals bitched about it, and no one gave a crap.

That's not to say that your point isn't valid, it's that the only thing "new" about the issue is that the liberals finally have enough critical mass and politically favorable events around here to have their back slapping events outnumber the conservative's back slapping events.

That's something this board will not tollerate.

I've never spent much time in this forum, conservatively-dominated or liberally-dominated.

I DID say that it wasn't necessarily new.

As for actually CHANGING the outlook of DC, look no further than your post right here. Because they did it, it's impossible for you to take the high road?

penchief
06-06-2006, 08:21 PM
Not to single you out, dude, but...

I'm not certain this is "new" but I think part of what's wrong with DC is that people are more concerned with being right and patting themselves on the back than they are engaging in an actual discussion about not only what the problems are but how we might go about changing things.

I agree to a point. I admit that I'm guilty of what you're talking about. But the reason I keep pushing is because I don't think anything's going to change. I don't have faith in the system anymore. I see people defending gross abuses of power because they agree with the rhetoric.

stevieray
06-06-2006, 08:44 PM
Because they did it,

:clap:
coupled with their psuedo "victories", it's just self inflating BS.

jAZ
06-06-2006, 09:04 PM
I've never spent much time in this forum, conservatively-dominated or liberally-dominated.

I DID say that it wasn't necessarily new.

As for actually CHANGING the outlook of DC, look no further than your post right here. Because they did it, it's impossible for you to take the high road?
To be clear, unless we are talking about... how we talk about something... there is very little back-slapping on the liberal side of things. There is also far less on the conservative side of things, but that's by way of attrition.

That's not to suggest that liberals are some how morally suprior to cons on this issue. But I'd suspect it's one of those "I'm not going to be like them". And while that's not always literally possible... There is definately a "I'm not going to be near as bad as them" thing going on.

There is also a lot less of a united liberal front. We aren't always on the same "team" as the cons on this board seem to have tradtionally been. We agree on the fact that Bush sucks rotten balls, but fracture from there to some extent. That is a reflection of the national parties as well, IMO.

jAZ
06-06-2006, 09:08 PM
:clap:
coupled with their psuedo "victories", it's just self inflating BS.
I've not seen any "victories" around here. No one will admit anything explictly aside from Logical. There are some who stopped talking, and that's sort of a moral victory I guess. But guys like patteeu and kotter, keep up the "good fight" regardless of the facts.

stevieray
06-06-2006, 09:11 PM
I've not seen any "victories" around here. regardless of the facts.

irony.

Logical
06-06-2006, 09:33 PM
irony.Not polite to misquote someone that way just to make a point.

stevieray
06-06-2006, 09:36 PM
Not polite to misquote someone that way just to make a point.

I used two quotes from the same post.

Logical
06-06-2006, 09:42 PM
I used two quotes from the same post.You should have put a ... to indicate it was out of context.

stevieray
06-06-2006, 10:25 PM
You should have put a ... to indicate it was out of context.

should have? for who? those who can't determine the meaning of the post?

Mr. Kotter
06-06-2006, 10:31 PM
...there is very little back-slapping on the liberal side of things.....

ROFLROFLROFL

If this place were a Japanese bath house, the health department would have to close the place....with all the wanking off of each other liberals have been doing for the last year.

go bowe
06-06-2006, 10:36 PM
You should have put a ... to indicate it was out of context.a ... ?

outstanding...

at last, someone else sees the poetry of ellipsis...

go bowe
06-06-2006, 10:40 PM
ROFLROFLROFL

If this place were a Japanese bath house, the health department would have to close the place....with all the wanking off of each other liberals have been doing for the last year.wanking off?

come on, other than a small handful of slightly overzealous lefties, most people around here are really pretty reasonable and engaging, even entertaining (but you should know that you, kotter, are the greatest entertainer in the history of the whole planet, we wish you would come back out of your shell and start a few meltdown threads)...

Mr. Kotter
06-06-2006, 11:07 PM
wanking off?

come on, other than a small handful of slightly overzealous lefties, most people around here are really pretty reasonable and engaging, even entertaining (but you should know that you, kotter, are the greatest entertainer in the history of the whole planet, we wish you would come back out of your shell and start a few meltdown threads)...
Maybe.....but, "Would you still respect me in the morning?"




And drink my beer again next year at Joe's? :p

Mr. Kotter
06-06-2006, 11:08 PM
a ... ?

outstanding...

at last, someone else sees the poetry of ellipsis...
I usually use four dots....:hmmm:

go bowe
06-06-2006, 11:11 PM
my msn dictionary says three dots, so there...

Mr. Kotter
06-06-2006, 11:16 PM
my msn dictionary says three dots, so there...

Hmmmm. Could be difference between MLA and APA too. :hmmm:

Logical
06-06-2006, 11:19 PM
should have? for who? those who can't determine the meaning of the post?First it is extremely clear to anyone who reads his full quote that he did not mean what you turned his quote into by changing it. 2nd I would think you would want to be honorable, it is never honorable to distort someone elses words by misquoting them. Finally if you want to contrast two statements then the full sentences should be used and any missing text replaced by the ... so the reader knows you have altered the information.

go bowe
06-06-2006, 11:30 PM
ahhh, more ellipsis talk...

it's freaking music to my ears boys, music i say...

Mr. Kotter
06-06-2006, 11:30 PM
First it is extremely clear to anyone who reads his full quote that he did not mean what you turned his quote into by changing it. 2nd I would think you would want to be honorable, it is never honorable to distort someone elses words by misquoting them. Finally if you want to contrast two statements then the full sentences should be used and any missing text replaced by the ... so the reader knows you have altered the information.
Pulllllleaaaaaaaaaaaaase, Jim. ROFL

Like Stevie the first to do something like that.....it's a staple of several regular and prominent posters here in DC: a couple of them, at least, whom you often defend and/or "side with" these days....

I've been the victim, NUMEROUS times. So knock it off with the false indignation already. My goodness.

And people wonder why some avoid this place.....:rolleyes:

jAZ
06-06-2006, 11:33 PM
irony.
At least throw in a :p so people know you aren't just trying to lie your way into smack talk, but you are just joking around.

jAZ
06-06-2006, 11:35 PM
Pulllllleaaaaaaaaaaaaase, Jim. ROFL

Like Stevie the first to do something like that.....it's a staple of several regular and prominent posters here in DC: a couple of them, at least, whom you often defend and/or "side with" these days....

I've been the victim, NUMEROUS times. So knock it off with the false indignation already. My goodness.

And people wonder why some avoid this place.....:rolleyes:
If stevie is serious, then Jim is right.

If stevie was just kidding, then stevie was wrong not to be a little more clear about that fact.

I'm going to assume he was just trying to make a joke.

If he doesn't understand the difference between what I'm assuming is a joke and what Jim is pointing out is a problem if he isn't... then stevie has some serious issues.

Like I said, I'm assuming it's a joke.

go bowe
06-06-2006, 11:36 PM
Pulllllleaaaaaaaaaaaaase, Jim. ROFL

Like Stevie the first to do something like that.....it's a staple of several regular and prominent posters here in DC: a couple of them, at least, whom you often defend and/or "side with" these days....

I've been the victim, NUMEROUS times. So knock it off with the false indignation already. My goodness.

And people wonder why some avoid this place.....:rolleyes:a staple?

does that come with an easy button?

Taco John
06-06-2006, 11:50 PM
I'm an elipsis whore...

Taco John
06-06-2006, 11:51 PM
I'm ... a whore

go bowe
06-06-2006, 11:56 PM
I'm an elipsis whore...you can't be the ellipsis whore...

i've already got that job...

Logical
06-07-2006, 12:25 AM
Pulllllleaaaaaaaaaaaaase, Jim. ROFL

Like Stevie the first to do something like that.....it's a staple of several regular and prominent posters here in DC: a couple of them, at least, whom you often defend and/or "side with" these days....

I've been the victim, NUMEROUS times. So knock it off with the false indignation already. My goodness.

And people wonder why some avoid this place.....:rolleyes:I will castigate anyone who misquotes someone else and I have. If you search you will find me slamming some liberals for this in the past including DEnise if that is who you are implying.

patteeu
06-07-2006, 02:37 AM
I've not seen any "victories" around here. No one will admit anything explictly aside from Logical. There are some who stopped talking, and that's sort of a moral victory I guess. But guys like patteeu and kotter, keep up the "good fight" regardless of the facts.

LOL

Velvet_Jones
06-07-2006, 07:06 AM
That's a really good response. I know that you've convinced me that your position is supreme. What was your position again? Was it that Jaz's posts are BS? Or was it that Jaz's favorite subject was not history? Or was it that you can make unsubstantiated claims about the factual content of Jaz's threads?

If you really want a reality check, you need to take a long hard look at that which you have chosen to defend.........and then get back to Jaz.
My point is that jIZ is the master of posting BS. He “cleverly” supports his arguments with questionable information or links from some whacko web site. When his premise is proven wrong he usually drops it but sometimes he uses the “Its not the evidence, but then seriousness of the charge” BS. Apparently you’re too full of shiate to recognize that. In my book, jIZ has zero credibility because he continuously makes “unsubstantiated claims” or bizarre threads and leaves when the heat gets turned up on him. That is reality. Apparently, you where not paying attention.

Velvet_Jones
06-07-2006, 07:11 AM
First...information.
This is irony at it's finest.

jAZ
06-07-2006, 09:09 AM
My point is that jIZ is the master of posting BS. He “cleverly” supports his arguments with questionable information or links from some whacko web site. When his premise is proven wrong he usually drops it but sometimes he uses the “Its not the evidence, but then seriousness of the charge” BS. Apparently you’re too full of shiate to recognize that. In my book, jIZ has zero credibility because he continuously makes “unsubstantiated claims” or bizarre threads and leaves when the heat gets turned up on him. That is reality. Apparently, you where not paying attention.
First let me begin by rolling around on the floor for a few minutes at the irony of you posting a thread bitching about "unsubstantiated claims" and "it's not the evidence" sans any quotes, links or evidence... leaving you with only a list of "unsubstantiated claims".

ROFL

Ok, that's better. Now back to my original post.

I think you have me confused with someone else (Tom "my name shall not be spoken" Money-baby?). I am among the most consistent of posters when it comes to linking to sources of information for all the board to see and judge for themselves. In fact, I dare say that (certainly with any new information) I *always* follow this practice. I certainly intend to.

Whether you choose to accept or reject the source and the information is up to you, but I'm not hiding anything around here.

jAZ
06-07-2006, 09:11 AM
My point is .... BS. Apparently you’re ... not paying attention.
This is honesty at it's finest.

ROFL

Taco John
06-07-2006, 09:55 AM
he usually drops it but sometimes he uses the “Its not the evidence, but then seriousness of the charge” BS.



Just curious... Can you name even a single instance in which your statement here is true? A single instance will be fine.

Logical
06-07-2006, 12:19 PM
This is irony at it's finest.You might have removed too much information, because the word "first" mixed with the word "information" is not really ironic in nature. Perhaps you were looking for another word and incorrectly settled on ironic.:hmmm:

Velvet_Jones
06-07-2006, 01:05 PM
Just curious... Can you name even a single instance in which your statement here is true? A single instance will be fine.
Rove (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=140495)

This is the last of many BS threads.

You can apologize to me later.

Velvet_Jones
06-07-2006, 01:13 PM
You might have removed too much information, because the word "first" mixed with the word "information" is not really ironic in nature. Perhaps you were looking for another word and incorrectly settled on ironic.:hmmm:
I was just fuggin with you.

It’s just ironic that a little thing like ‘…’ can be such a big deal and how using it can be just as misleading as misquoting someone. It can be used in the same manor is as misquoting.

Example:
jIZ used to suck at cribbage but his uncle bought him a cribbage book at Dicks.

jIZ used to suck … Dicks.

Velvet_Jones
06-07-2006, 01:23 PM
Just curious... Can you name even a single instance in which your statement here is true? A single instance will be fine.
Do you want me to do you next? You come up with crazier shiate the jIZ does.

jAZ
06-07-2006, 01:35 PM
Rove (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=140495)

This is the last of many BS threads.

You can apologize to me later.
Is this your way of admitting that you made up the “Its not the evidence, but then seriousness of the charge” statement?

Velvet_Jones
06-07-2006, 02:59 PM
Is this your way of admitting that you made up the “Its not the evidence, but then seriousness of the charge” statement?
The Rove deal is fine example of your BS and that is exactly what you did here. Your thread title was not factual and your references where not factual. When the indictment(s) didn’t materialize, you still kept hammering on about the “indictable offense(s)”. Hence “Its not the evidence, but the seriousness of the charge”.

Said another way: The evidence is Rove was not indicted. The seriousness of the charge is that you still hammered on about the “indictable offense(s)" as if they where fact.

jAZ
06-07-2006, 03:07 PM
When the indictment(s) didn’t materialize, you still kept hammering on about the “indictable offense(s)”.
Where did I do this? Because that quote isn't anywhere on the thread in question. Don't tell me... you made it up?

:eek:

Velvet_Jones
06-07-2006, 03:26 PM
Where did I do this? Because that quote isn't anywhere on the thread in question. Don't tell me... you made it up?

:eek:
Deflection at it's finest.

jAZ
06-07-2006, 03:31 PM
Deflection at it's finest.
Hardly, it's the central quote in the statement you are ascribing to me. You can't find that quote or even that sentiment anywhere in the thread that you pretend to have quoted it from.

At this point, having had the opportunity to provide a link to the quote, you've pretty well shown yourself to be a liar.

Good work.

banyon
06-07-2006, 04:20 PM
At this point, having had the opportunity to provide a link to the quote, you've pretty well shown yourself to be a liar.

Good work.


Congratulations, Velvet! You are the 1,000th post to have been called a liar by jAZ! You win this lovely photo of Mr. Ed McMahon!

http://www.kepplerspeakers.com/speakers/pics/mcmahon-e.jpg
ROFL

jAZ
06-07-2006, 04:36 PM
Congratulations, Velvet! You are the 1,000th post to have been called a liar by jAZ! You win this lovely photo of Mr. Ed McMahon!
Don't forget the fireworks...

http://www.fireworks-london.co.uk/images/template_5_06.jpg

Velvet_Jones
06-07-2006, 08:24 PM
At this point, having had the opportunity to provide a link to the quote, you've pretty well shown yourself to be a liar.

Good work.
Tstststs. Look you need to look at you links better. They are and you are submitting that there is one or more "indictable offenses". So is this the game you're wanting to play? If you don't like the content the attack the source or how it's presented. Honestly, I didn't think that anyone would take this as a quote from jIZ. Maybe I should have wrote 'what jIZ judges an indictable offense(s)'. Not to apologize but I was simply trying to emphasize the gist of your argument. In hind site, I can understand that you could have misconstrued this. That being said, I'm not surprised at you using this tactic because you refuse any attempt to refute that you are full of shiate and that I have submitted an example of your modus operandi. If you don't refute this than I will call you a liar back and everyone will think I'm cool. Apparently, this is how you think.

Now - put up or shut up.

Boozer
06-07-2006, 08:32 PM
Man, I'm really missing out on some unintentional comedy by having ol' VJ as the lone member of my ignore list. If he'd fix that recockulously long "location" that f's up my formatting, he'd be amusing me on accident even without the benefit of being quoted.

Logical
06-07-2006, 08:38 PM
I was just fuggin with you.

It’s just ironic that a little thing like ‘…’ can be such a big deal and how using it can be just as misleading as misquoting someone. It can be used in the same manor is as misquoting.

Example:
jIZ used to suck at cribbage but his uncle bought him a cribbage book at Dicks.

jIZ used to suck … Dicks.

Although I see the humor in what you did there, an educated person knows the ... means that text was purposely omitted and that to know the true meaning they need to read the original full quote.

Logical
06-07-2006, 08:43 PM
Man, I'm really missing out on some unintentional comedy by having ol' VJ as the lone member of my ignore list. If he'd fix that recockulously long "location" that f's up my formatting, he'd be amusing me on accident even without the benefit of being quoted.

Actually Velvet fixed it you can take him off iggy.

Boozer
06-07-2006, 08:53 PM
Actually Velvet fixed it you can take him off iggy.

Thanks for the heads up. Fixing now.

go bowe
06-07-2006, 09:16 PM
well, s0mething is wrong...

i still have to scroll over to see the right side of the page...

and i never have to do that unless there's some giant ass picture or url on a page...

frankly, it's annoying...


edit, it's fixed now...

never mind...

Velvet_Jones
06-07-2006, 09:27 PM
Man, I'm really missing out on some unintentional comedy by having ol' VJ as the lone member of my ignore list. If he'd fix that recockulously long "location" that f's up my formatting, he'd be amusing me on accident even without the benefit of being quoted.
I'm sorry for that. I had no idea that this was an issue. Someone, I think frankie, wrote me on a Friday about this being an issue. By the time I checked in the next Monday, I was a SOB about it. My browser doesn't display this as a problem. This has been my location since sometime in 2003.

Velvet_Jones
06-07-2006, 09:31 PM
I'm sorry...that...I was a SOB'

Boozer
06-07-2006, 09:32 PM
I'm sorry for that. I had no idea that this was an issue. Someone, I think frankie, wrote me on a Friday about this being an issue. By the time I checked in the next Monday, I was a SOB about it. My browser doesn't display this as a problem. This has been my location since sometime in 2003.

No problem. Donger figured out that its just a Firefox 1.5.0.3/4 problem. I never had a problem with it on previous Firefox releases. Too bad, because it was fairly clever, at least as locations go.

Velvet_Jones
06-07-2006, 09:41 PM
No problem. Donger figured out that its just a Firefox 1.5.0.3/4 problem. I never had a problem with it on previous Firefox releases. Too bad, because it was fairly clever, at least as locations go.
What sucks is that it was accurate.

Boozer
06-07-2006, 09:43 PM
What suck it that it was accurate.

I've heard of worse places. Count your blessings.

Velvet_Jones
06-07-2006, 10:08 PM
Although I see the humor in what you did there, an educated person knows the ... means that text was purposely omitted and that to know the true meaning they need to read the original full quote.
MS - 'puter Science. Give me a math problem, not an English problem.

jAZ
06-08-2006, 12:30 AM
Honestly, I didn't think that anyone would take this as a quote from jIZ. Maybe I should have wrote 'what jIZ judges an indictable offense(s)'. Not to apologize but I was simply trying to emphasize the gist of your argument. In hind site, I can understand that you could have misconstrued this.
Your non-apology & clarification accepted. Let's move forward with your assertions.
Look you need to look at you links better. They are and you are submitting that there is one or more "indictable offenses".
...
I have submitted an example of your modus operandi.
You are aware that in that link, my entire "modus operandi" was to submit a link to a video clip of MSNBC's David Schuster saying:
"Well, Karl Rove's legal team has told me that they expect that a decision will come sometime in the next two weeks. And I am convinced that Karl Rove will, in fact, be indicted."
A video clip and a typed transcript (per patteeu's request since he's usually on dialup). That is the real "gist" of my "modus operandi". That's always my m.o., and I'm quite proud of it.

jAZ
06-08-2006, 12:36 AM
well, s0mething is wrong...

i still have to scroll over to see the right side of the page...

and i never have to do that unless there's some giant ass picture or url on a page...

frankly, it's annoying...


edit, it's fixed now...

never mind...
So the problem seems to have been my fireworks photo. It was a very wide photo that I used an HTML IMG tag to shrink down by 50% so it wouldn't screw up people's browsers.

The weird thing is that the picture displayed 50% smaller but the page was still stretched like it was the full size image (leaving a bunch of whitespace to the right).

So I just switched to a smaller picture. Sorry about that!