Originally Posted by Fish
I don't believe your white knight benefactor selection process is quite as unbiased as you would like to think. Just from my observation at least... I would argue that it's not necessarily based on party affiliation though. Seems to me you like to find creative ways to justify sticking up for the underdog sometimes, in effort to point out how unbiased you are. Sometimes it comes across as inconsistent over all. Not all the time, but I think that's what Cosmo is commenting about.
I wouldn't say it's unbiased either. I'm more likely to stand on the sidelines in a political tiff if it's a liberal and I'm more likely to stand on the sidelines during any tiff if the person taking the heat is (a) popular here, (b) usually someone who dishes it out, or (c) not receiving the pile on treatment (i.e. in a fair fight).
Oh, and politically correct over-reach is a pet peeve of mine so I'm more likely to defend someone that I think is being attacked on that basis.
I'm sure there are other biases at work as well, but those are some big ones. And in most cases, I like the people here even if I'm at odds with some of them at times. I can't think of anyone I really despise, although there might be a couple. For example, I like ThatGuy even though he's way over the top and I like loneiguana even though his posting schtick is retarded liberal.
"Well, it is one thing for Bill Clinton to say, I feel your pain. It is another thing for Barack Obama to say I feel your pain that I have caused." - George Will