Originally Posted by Vlad Logicslav

I actually agree with you, but you watch what happens if that link is not gone by Monday. You will find that Penchief and Laz's arguments that the reason for the desire are correct.


By the way I have to agree with Penchief that for as long as I have been at the Planet this is the only time I cannot remember the Conservatives being able to dominate political discussion and conduct beatdowns, for the first time that I can ever recall the liberals are at the advantage.


;) I like to think it is because I am arguing on their side more and more.ROFL

Originally Posted by raiderhader

Actually, it is you who are not taking into account "recorded posterity" of that forum, despite the fact I have explained it to you. You simply choose to ignore it (can you say "unilateral"?).

When you say -



It kind of sounds like you are questioning his integrity. You make it sound like he is determined to side against a certain group inspite of whatever "truth" you show him. That sounds like a case of integrity to me.

Originally Posted by penchief

but by expressing the above opinion maybe you are exposing your true affiliation. Not saying it's so but maybe you aren't all that neutral, after all.

Originally Posted by Vlad Logicslav

Jamie, sorry but even Parker has admitted he tends to fight with sides that are taking very strong or extreme positions no matter which side of the argument they are on. He definitely has admitted it when it comes to Carl Peterson, the front office and the draft. I specifically recall the day he told Laz that was his predisposition and that it caused people to misunderstand his positions on many issues.

Originally Posted by penchief

I respect htismaqe.

Please don't attempt to insinutate that I am trying to question his integrity. You are trying to stir up shit where it doesn't exist.

Stop it.

Originally Posted by raiderhader

Fine, so he has a problem with extremism. He fully admits it. Which to me further proves my point; when you realize and admit your tendencies, even if they be some what less desirable (not to say that this is) you are being honest with yourself and everyone else. Therefore, people know where you are coming from. You can be trusted.

htis has said I don't how many times in this thread that he sees both sides acting childish (and that would include me, yet I am still defending him, because I know he is right), yet he is taking his hardest hits at one side, why is that? Maybe because they are acting more childish (extreme) than the other? That should tell the one side something....

Originally Posted by penchief

I understand where you are coming from but what about the mentality that wants to end a good thing (the forum) because they are no longer in the driver's seat. That seems even more petty to me.

Granted, both sides have their problems, but by expressing the above opinion maybe you are exposing your true affiliation. Not saying it's so but maybe you aren't all that neutral, after all.

Maybe the only thing we on the left desire is an acknowledgement that we weren't the commies that we were accused of being. Maybe all we want is an acknowledgement that we were'nt nutjobs for forseeing that Bush was the incompetent boob that he is. Maybe all that we desire is the admission that we weren't a bunch of unpatriotic loony toons who hate America.

Maybe we just want to be recognized as people who love our country as much as conservatives do. Just maybe.

Originally Posted by chiefs4me

damn boys....there is football on.....:shrug:

Originally Posted by chiefs4me

damn boys....there is football on.....:shrug:

Originally Posted by Vlad Logicslav

In all honesty you lost me. I thought I was defending Parker.

Originally Posted by go bo

i'm waiting for hockey season...

Originally Posted by go bo

i'm waiting for hockey season...

Originally Posted by raiderhader

No I am not. I am reading your words, pure and simple. You accuse him of purposely coming down on one side inspite of your irrelevant "proof".

If your "proof" were relevant, you'd have case (though you would still be questiong his integrity in the matter).



Wether or not it is your intention, you are questioning his integrity.

Originally Posted by penchief

Generally, I would agree that htismaqe is fair. However, in this particular instance he seems intent on coming down in the middle of a specific debate in which one side's argument is not supported by historical evidence.

Originally Posted by penchief

It's not "DRIPPING with condescension."

I'ts dripping with historical evidence.

Look at any political thread that took place prior to the last several months and you will see complete derision on behalf of many conservatives toward those who disagreed with them. You will see very little evidence of such behavior returned on behalf of liberals. If there was, the ratio was disparate.