If your *point* is about being mean tempered, unwilling to accept views
opposing yours and being egotistical, then I guess Bert did prove it. You
fit it to a T as evidenced by your posts scattered throughout this NG.

My point is that those unable to discuss issues resort to hurling strings of
insults.
An insult is an emotional reaction, not an intellectual response.

Thank you for your additional validation of my point.

Right wing insults always welcome. Particularly funny when offered to support
an argument that many right wingers don't specialize in slander. :-)

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
If your *point* is about being mean tempered, unwilling to accept views
opposing yours and being egotistical, then I guess Bert did prove it.
You
fit it to a T as evidenced by your posts scattered throughout this NG.

My point is that those unable to discuss issues resort to hurling strings
of
insults.
An insult is an emotional reaction, not an intellectual response.

Thank you for your additional validation of my point.

Right wing insults always welcome. Particularly funny when offered to
support
an argument that many right wingers don't specialize in slander. :-)



Why are you so hung up on right wing/left wing? Can't you accept a person
and their viewpoint without having to label or insult them?

You started out as a nice guy in this forum. 'Tis no longer the case Chuck.
Too bad you can't see that.

Take some time away from this place. As evidenced by a recent thread it
looks like you spend every waking moment here.

Gould 0738 wrote:

My point is that those unable to discuss issues resort to hurling strings of
insults.
An insult is an emotional reaction, not an intellectual response.


You mean like krause, kanter, jps, basskisser, gould, etc?

Too bad you're not fair or balanced so as to apply the same standard to
those of your own ilk.

-- Charlie


----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

Have you read any of the posts by Harry, jps, basskisser etc? You keep
highlighting mild insults from the people on the right, but high five the
left while the hurl profanity and hate speech to those they disagree with.

While I have not listen to many of the right radio shows, I don't believe I
have heard any of them use the intensity of hate shown by the 3 mentioned
above.
"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
If your *point* is about being mean tempered, unwilling to accept views
opposing yours and being egotistical, then I guess Bert did prove it.
You
fit it to a T as evidenced by your posts scattered throughout this NG.

My point is that those unable to discuss issues resort to hurling strings
of
insults.
An insult is an emotional reaction, not an intellectual response.

Thank you for your additional validation of my point.

Right wing insults always welcome. Particularly funny when offered to
support
an argument that many right wingers don't specialize in slander. :-)

Have you read any of the posts by Harry, jps, basskisser etc? You keep
highlighting mild insults from the people on the right, but high five the
left while the hurl profanity and hate speech to those they disagree with.

Left wing individuals are not an "institution". Nor are right wing individuals
an "institution".

Many people exhibit outrageous behavior here in the NG. It's funny to watch how
the
accusations fly. In virtually every case, those who complain about various
individuals overlook the hateful flaming done by people on their own "side" and
point out the equally offensive antics by somebody else and label that "the
problem".

Right wing radio *is* an institution, and it rather unfortunately sets the tone
for its listening audience. The largest such audience in the US.

Did you know the largest owner of radio stations in the country is the
corporation that broadcasts the Rush Limbaugh show?

In some small towns, they own *every* station, and are buying up TV stations,
newspapers, etc literally as fast as possible.

And I don't high-five anybody. You must be new here.


This statement applies to everybody:

My point is that those unable to discuss issues resort to hurling strings
of
insults.
An insult is an emotional reaction, not an intellectual response.

It was included in a response to a couple of the resident right wingers because
they were the individuals involved in the discussion at the time.

It would be ridiculous to say that a right wing poster flames and insults when
he has nothing intelligent to offer, but that a left wing poster can do the
same thing and it's a sign of inspired genius.

But hey. It's an election year. The dirtiest ******* will win, and both sides
are out to
make sure they're dirtier than the other. Same old thing.

On 09 Jan 2004 16:16:30 GMT, (Gould 0738) wrote:


Right wing radio *is* an institution, and it rather unfortunately sets the tone
for its listening audience. The largest such audience in the US.

A highly profitable and successful business. Did you ever wonder why
liberal talk radio went over like a fart in a space suit (and they
have tried on many occasions)? You may want to claim that delivery is
the reason, but most people will not stick by and listen to what they
don't like. I offer then that the greatest majority of citizens in
this country can relate better to conservatives than liberals. I know
this is an especially tough pill to swallow for those liberal urban
types who judge the rest of the country's demographics by their own
small microcosm of idealogues.


Did you know the largest owner of radio stations in the country is the
corporation that broadcasts the Rush Limbaugh show?

More reason to grab those nitro pills.....


It would be ridiculous to say that a right wing poster flames and insults when
he has nothing intelligent to offer, but that a left wing poster can do the
same thing and it's a sign of inspired genius.

You say that, but you and many of your biased compadres have done
exactly that in the past. Maybe not to the extreme in your example,
but the lefties have been guilty of posting outlandish comments and
unsubstantiated news stories, and attempted to pass them off as truth.




But hey. It's an election year. The dirtiest ******* will win, and both sides
are out to
make sure they're dirtier than the other. Same old thing.

Your signature rationale. You make a basically accurate, if a bit
cynical, statement when you say that "hey they're all bad", but then
later on in another thread, you slowly attempt to justify the reasons
why the bad guy on the left is somehow a better choice than the bad
guy on the right.

Dave

A highly profitable and successful business. Did you ever wonder why
liberal talk radio went over like a fart in a space suit (and they

vs conservative talk radio?
Same reason that the National Enquirer outsells the Harvard Review.

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
A highly profitable and successful business. Did you ever wonder why
liberal talk radio went over like a fart in a space suit (and they

vs conservative talk radio?
Same reason that the National Enquirer outsells the Harvard Review.

The funny thing, is the National Enquirer readers are more likely the
Democrat voters, that will accept cigarettes to vote for a specified
candidate.

The funny thing, is the National Enquirer readers are more likely the
Democrat voters, that will accept cigarettes to vote for a specified
candidate.



Nah. The stereotypical democrat is against smoking. :-)

But, it's easy to see how easy it is to fool some folks. If you stood outside
the polling place and said, "Here's a coupon for five gallons for free diesel,
pull the handle for Bush.........." I'd most likely take your five free gallons
and, in the privacy of the booth, vote as I darn well pleased.
Dishonest, sure.....but some acts are so
contemptuous they cannot command an honest response.

How do you vote in CA? The urban legends about the Democratic precinct
committee people going down to skid road and loading up minivans full of
transients to go and vote as instructed could *not* happen in my state. Not
unless the tansients were registered to vote in the precinct they were taken
to.

One could speculate that if the pollworkers are crooked they could allow the
transients to vote without checking registration, but if the pollworkers are
that crooked who needs transients? Just grab a stack of ballots and get to
work.

One of the safeguards we use to prevent just that sort of thing from happening
is that we enlist representatives from *both* parties to work at the polling
places. The R's can't cheat to beat hell, or vice versa, without the other side
catching on.

It would take a flawed process, as we recently observed elsewere, to completely
screw up the election.