On 17 Jan 2007 08:56:04 -0800, "Chuck Gould"
wrote:


"There are several posters who do not participate in most of the normal
exchange on the NG, but never fail to show up and make some nasty
contributions to heated, offensively OT threads. If they don't see "Let's
go shoot some n***ers and liberals"..."

I totally agree with your motive for the post. I can't understand why you
use your post(s) to take a poke at conservatives!


You're presupposing that the only person who would want to shoot a
n***er or a liberal would be a conservative, or that any conservative
would subscribe to such an ideal.

I don't know a single conservative who would actually shoot, or
seriously threaten to shoot
a liberal. Do you?

Extremism cannot, by definition, be "conservative". Right wing
extremists responsible for posting much of the divisive, racist, poison
so commonly seen any more are hardly the "conservatives" with which you
and a high percentage of other Americans self identify.

I wouldn't call that gang of murderers in Texas responsible for
dragging that randomly selected black person down the road behind their
pickup truck "conservatives". Folks who gun down doctors outside of
abortion clinics are hardly conservative. Nor should anybody look at
the worst excesses of the radical left (eco-terrorism, etc) and attempt
to make a case that such behavior typifies all "liberals."

Could it be that your pre-awareness of my admitted bias is prompting
you to be ultra-senstitive?

Your reference was to people in the newsgroup who show up to make nasty
contributions. You referred to these people with your shooting liberals
comment. If not to the conservatives in the group, to whom in the group was
your comment directed? It was simply a cheap shot.

No, I don't think I'm being ultra-sensitive. As I said, I agree with the
motivation for your post.
--
******************************************
***** Have a super day! *****
******************************************

John H