Black is Black (an honest criticism of some fellow FReepers and also of liberals)

TBA | 10-10-04 | Jonathan M. Stein

[jmstein7]

I should have revised the post with that in mind before posting it.

Apparently, clarity isn't my strong suit today; I clearly haven't been getting enough sleep :)

[hosepipe]

[ This is how liberals lie so effectively -- because they really believe it, and they have mastered believing it, and they never believed otherwise. ]

"The problem with our liberal friends, is not that they know so much, but that they know so much that isn't so." -- Ronald Reagan

[jmstein7]

Good quote.

[Pukin Dog]

Wrong, I don't mock them, just you.

[Toonces T. Cat]

JM,

Thanks for reading that the right way. I got out of the service in 1975, after 12 years of active duty, so I could have all the letters after my name instead of in front of my name. Three degrees later...including a Masters in American Lit. after the Civil War...I am now 58 years old and I still have someone edit my stuff before I release it.

Your passion is a gift from God. Unfortunately, writing with passion often leads us to shake a finger at the reader. Sometimes you simply cannot avoid it. Just be sure that the finger is pointed in the right direction...;-)

-Toonces

[Capt. Tom]

If they believe what they say is true they haven't lied. To lie requires one to knowingly deceive.

That's why some people who mistate facts can pass a lie detector test.

Another way of looking at it is a lie; is telling the opposite of something you know to be true to a person who has a legitimate reason to know the truth. -Tom

[jmstein7]

Sage advice.

[meyer]

Conservative freedom bump.

One of the supporters of the "shut-up" theory is being a little bit hypocritical, when compared with their behavior on another thread.

[Libertina]

"Just shut up"

Agreew ith you on this one, JM. Regarding the twisted, sick mental process of liberals, did you read this morning that a Nobel Peace Prize winner says that AIDS was created deliberately? Liberals destroy everything of meaning before them, including the Nobels.

I wish that everyone would think back to the propaganda-filled lifestyle of the old Soviet Union. Each person should ask themselves, how on earth did an entire people come to believe those things, even turning in any family member or neighbor or child that they suspected of "speaking against the party." After all, the people of the Soviet Union are basically no different from us, they weren't born to be deceived. The change was, of course, a gradual process.

Now look around the US - pretzel-shaped conspiracy theories, black is now white, taking our money is good, giving it back to us is bad, failing schools are to be defended to "help" the children!, free speech should be curtailed for the good of all, and bad "thought" must be punished. The people vote yes, one judge votes no - without a whimper from the majority. We have a RIGHT! to other people's money - those evil greedy ones. Corporations who employ millions are bad, and if they try to leave the country, the government will stop them! Every person can do anything he wants in life if he tries hard and he should be helped by the government if he cannot achieve the dream by merit. The clean Boy Scouts are a hate group, the boy child loving b*tt buddy NAMBLA is NOT a hate group...

This is how it was done in the old Soviet Union, we just resisted a bit longer...

[jmstein7]

Boos are okay if they are substantive boos. Constructive criticism is always useful. However, empty defeatism does nothing but hurt us, e.g. "the sky is falling, we're finished, woe is me, etc."

That type of stuff is not only unnecessary and unproductive -- it is harmful.

If you are going to boo, let people KNOW exactly what it is you are booing... and how to fix it.

[jmstein7]

I couldn't agree with you more.

[bootless]

Having known jms's very sharp viewpoints for some time now, I understand what he is saying. One of the things that makes DU so unpleasant and basically ineffective is that they are flooded with emotion - mostly negative. They are stuck in a whopper of an energy sink, and they remain stuck. I don't believe we need to do that. There's a huge difference between honest discourse and hyperemotional flailing.

I believe jmstein7 is asking us to exercise some discretion and discernment.

[jmstein7]

Yes, and there is a reason that... before you post... FR warns you, in bright, red letters: "Loose lips sink ships."

That is exactly my point, and I think Jim would agree.

[jmstein7]

Yes, please.

[jmstein7]

Is "the sky is falling" constructive criticism?

[bootless]

:-) That's what I got from it. And good morning to you, my FRiend!

[jmstein7]

Good morning, and THANK YOU for "getting it."

;)

[mountainfolk]

I agree with your assessment of our current position in the election campaign. While some posters are rankled by the suggestion that they cool it with the criticism of our candidates, IMO it is high time that somebody state the obvious. Any criticism we make against our side can and will be used against Bush/Cheney. Further, there is nothing adverse to be said that can't wait until after the election. Edwards and Kerry both have used the names of McCain, Hagel, and several other Republicans in all three debates to buttress their argument that even members of the President's party don't agree with him on one or more aspects of the war. I certainly do not see your suggestion as a suppression of self expression of any kind. It is a tactic that the other side uses to their advantage.