quote:Even if they are poor at hiding them, that is no reason to force them to say something they fear would offend someone whom they respect.
Again, how can Kat, who is in Texas, force Paul who IIRC is in Massachusetts to do anything? If they were actually sitting in the Card's living room having a heated discussion, I could see maybe making an accusation like that. But in this medium, he can always take a deep breath, walk away from the computer, leave the room, go get a drink, watch TV for a while...
Yet he still chose to make a rude remark. If he truly didn't want to, he wouldn't have.
Posts: 2069 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
About his only recourse to Katharina while maintaining his integrity would have been to say "I'm sorry, I can no longer reply." Or something similar.
Is that passive aggressive or not?
Posts: 438 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh, no. Now I'm going to have to be serious.
Curses.
What did Kristine condemn?
She condemned the misinformation that Rabbit posted.
She did not condemn Rabbit. She did not condemn Rabbit's viewpoint, except as it misinformed the audience.
Here it is:
quote:I hate the kind of attitude that this perpetuates and the truth should be known. Out of context and unsubstantiated quotes are so unfair and inappropriate.
And then she laid down the truth. Bully for her.
So enough of this talk of condemnation. She didn't condemn anyone or anything except for that thing ALL Jatraqueros should condemn-- lies and misinformation.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Right, scott, but she did it in an official capacity.
The condemnation is actually important, because the lies of the right have NOT been officially condemned in the same manner as this particular lie of the left.
So the lies of the right are, currently, more acceptable to hatrack then are the lies of the right. Which makes this a more hostile place for kerry supporters to be then bush supporters.
Posts: 4112 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Am I biased because I think there has been far more slander and criticism here against Bush than against Kerry? That is honestly my perception. I don't really see the mods action changing that.
Posts: 7050 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's probably because he is the president. It is easier to criticize the man who has been doing the job for the last 4 years than to criticize the one who hasn't had the chance yet.
I just don't think this fiasco is going to change much, if anything. Except maybe for people leaving because they don't like what happened.
Posts: 7050 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Right, scott, but she did it in an official capacity.
What does this matter?
Do you normally fear women with power, Paul?
I get that you're afraid that the conservative side of the argument is getting the soft side of Kristine's whooping stick. I haven't seen evidence of this, however, so I'm afraid our viewpoints must remain unreconciled.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I must be missing something but aren't there levels of offensiveness and slander?
Isn't the comparison with Hitler (albeit a somewhat oblique one) of an order much more offensive than, say, misrepresenting or caricaturizing or even slandering the other side?
Isn't the entire point of Godwin's Law that any mention of Hitler shuts down rational discussion?
I guess I'm just not seeing how the locking of a thread where Pres. Bush is compared with Hitler sets a precedent that should make either liberals or conservatives nervous.
Obviously, I understand that the liberals here feel like they have to be more careful than conservatives because they are fewer in number and differ in politics with the hosts. The LDS comparison that Tom makes is rather apt in this regard, I think.
But it's not clear to me why Tom, Paul, Ela etc. see this as such an omninous portent.
Which is not to say that they might not have justifiable reasons for what they've expressed, but rather that I haven't seen it articulated in a way that makes sense to me.
Nor do I find the "it's their house, they make the rules" argument very convincing. The liberals know that. What they would like to know is if the application of those rules are going to be such that they will continue to feel welcome in the home.
At this point I would normally go into my normal rant about civilty, but I've done that enough on Hatrack so I won't.
---
Not that it should matter, but it seems to so -- just to be clear, although my politics is muddled and confused when it comes to how I view Bush, I tend to agree with this recent Slate column.
Posts: 3423 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have seen many intelligent discussions here that criticize Bush and his policies and they have not been locked or deleted. i don't feel in any way the Cards' own political opinions are influencing locking of threads. I am rather liberal and have never felt I could not speak my mind here.
Posts: 2711 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hey, all people are fallible. The Cards are doing their best, but they will inevitably react more strongly to some things than to others, depending on what their own deeply-held beliefs happen to be.
That is true of anybody, I'm sure.
I'm also sure that slogging through every single thread every single day, to the bitter end, is a fate I wouldn't wish on anybody, certainly not our hosts.
That said, the "Al Gore or the Unibomber" quote thread wasn't locked, and it compared a presidential candidate to somebody who blew up or maimed several people. I'm sure some people found it amusing. It's also possible that no one whistled it, or the Cards didn't see it or didn't care (There is the idea of degree I suppose-- personally killing a few people vs. being responsible for attempted genocide).
My own political leanings are those of learned helplessness, best summed up by a tag line from a summer movie:
Either way, We LosePosts: 1664 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: Obviously, I understand that the liberals here feel like they have to be more careful than conservatives because they are fewer in number and differ in politics with the hosts.
Seeing all the threads created for the sole purpose of bashing OSC's latest column I doubt liberals here feel they have to be careful. It also seems that there are more liberals than there are conservatives, maybe the liberals are just more outspoken.
Posts: 3446 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
newfoundlogic- Yes, the liberals are more outspoken, although I'm not sure if there actually is less of them. Most of the conservatives, save one friend of mine, are quiet. It seems to be the case here as well, although there are a few outspoken conservatives.
posted
Hatrack swings left or right, on average, depending on how vocal a small handful of posters are feeling at any given time. As a forum, and as a whole, it's fairly moderate: a little bit to the right on social issues, and perhaps a bit left on economic ones. This doesn't mean that there aren't people here who belong to either fringe, or that there aren't individuals possessed of a given ideology who're excessively passionate about it, but the forum overall manages to maintain a pretty steady and even keel -- largely through the technique of dogpiling. In general, if anyone posts anything excessively "fringe," the other side will bury it in criticism, the moderates on the same side will nitpick it, and everything will calm down until the "other side" goes too far with their criticism of the original point and the moderates start criticizing them.
posted
As one who has been allowed to be offensive to our hosts -- usually completely unwittingly -- for the sake of making fun of things on countless occassions, I have to jump in to say that their forebearance is admirable. And I love it here because of that.
I have not yet gone to see the offending thread, so I can't comment on that.
But I will come back to one irrefutable fact: - this is theirs to do with as they please. - they are paying for it with money they earn - they maintain it with time they could spend elsewhere
Well, okay, three irrefutable facts.
Given that, I don't sweat the rules. Given that I don't sweat the rules, (What a difference a comma makes) I am simply happy to be able to come here and spend time.
I really hope that OSC was not entirely serious about the earning his loathing for life. Truly I am. I do think that Kristine is owed an apology for any comments that even bordered on ridicule. I don't think the comments were intended that way, but clearly they could be taken that way and those who made them would do well to beg her pardon.
And another thing. It's five weeks until the election. It's a bitterly fought contest for something less than 10% of the voters. That means the vast majority of us have already decided. So why are we arguing. I'm going to vote for Kerry. You're going to vote for Bush. You aren't going to change my mind and I'm not going to change yours.
And the people who are undecided are so few that chances are they missed that offensive thread entirely. And they've probably missed the equally offensive stuff on the other side.
Mainly because, I fear, if one is undecided at this point, one has either decided to tune EVERYTHING out, or one is a true seeker of knowledge and wouldn't pay attention to vitriolic junk anyway.
In other words, we're all just sneering at intractable opponents and looking silly or repellent to the few lone holdouts.
Let me close by saying that I recognize that I have, in the past, said some rather unkind things about President Bush's motives. As such, I imagine myself included in OSC's group of folks who crossed the line. If my comments offended our hosts at any time, I would like to offer my apologies. Clearly, this was not the place and yet I said it all anyway. (and usually got my head handed to me, but that's beside the point.)
At any rate, before we go further down this path, might I call again for people to step back and realize that what really matters here is not a set of rules, but a set of people? Chief among them our hosts.
posted
It's their house. They don't have to be consistent or right, and we don't have to post.
The Rabbit's integrity is unimpeachable. In my eyes, she was trying to put together an analogy to show why we should approach, with due wariness, who all those who legislate with god's inspiration, Osama Bin Laden is similarly blessed, as opposed to attending to the matter itself.
Posts: 5600 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Drat it, it's six weeks and six days. Now I look like I was being sarcastic, and I really wasn't. I hadn't checked. Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dana, my love, you know how often I misremember supposed "facts." If you were sincerely doubting me, you have ample experience to bolster your opinion.
Even with that, it didn't sound sarcastic at all to me.
Plus, I don't have a lot of ego involvement in being right about such things.
I have involved my ego in having earned your love!
And now I must apologize for turning this in to a mushy thread.
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote: You are all right that "out of context lies" was a poor choice of words. It now says "out of context and unsubstantiated quotes" -- a better expression of what I meant. Thanks for ridiculing me for it
One thing that I don't see that's been discussed is this quote. Is it accurate to say that Tom is ridiculing Mrs. Card? I don't see it and I am curious if I am missing something? It seems to me that his only concern was that there was some bias in locking the thread.
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
I'm glad to know the facts on some of those statements (real versus just attributed). Thanks Kristine for posting a thorough review.
I wish the thread wasn't locked because I think there are some interesting things to discuss about the subtleties of political propaganda and the history of campaign-induced vitriol in America. But this is too raw a subject, I fear. I hesitate to start a new thread on it because it might come off as rubbing salt in wounds. But based on my reading of late, we are far less nasty in our politics today than Americans were throughout our early history. I'm glad and I think we can get better.
On another note, might I suggest that we all vow to check our facts as much as possible for the next (almost) 7 weeks and to make it clear when we are stating opinion versus when we are claiming to state facts?
At least when it comes to discussions of the election?
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I sincerely hope that Kristine didn't feel that my quoting of her phrase "out of context lies" was done to ridicule her. Frankly, when Scott mentioned that someone had mocked her, I immediately -- and I mean immediately; I didn't even seriously consider it -- dismissed the possibility that he meant me and wondered whose post had been deleted before I'd had the chance to see it.
I quoted her not because I felt the term was inaccurate, clumsy or ridiculous, but because I felt that it best described -- being her own words, and managing to encapsulate the two things she disliked most about the thread -- what she thought of the text of Rabbit's post.
Did anyone else see some other comment to which Scott might have been referring? If not, I might just shoot an E-mail off to the Cards just to make sure.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I looked through the thread and I didn't see another one, Tom. That's why I brought it up for attention.
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hey, I was having a way intense day. Yes, I felt ridiculed by Tom and and a couple of others who quoted my clumsy prose -- but heck, I never stay mad at Tom for long. I like him too much
And thanks one and all for baiting me with that lovely "Who Said It" part 2. Like my day wasn't hard enough. Oh well, I think I'm giving up and going to bed.
posted
So, um, does Scott know that I wasn't ridiculing you? Because, y'know, I kind of like the guy, and would really, really hate to have earned his contempt for life. I don't THINK he has a "list," but just in case....
Wait a second. . . Have you been. . . abducted???!!!
GREAT SCOTT!!
There really ARE goose-stepping zombies! I was just kidding about that!
Holy crap!
Someone, we have to rescue the cards from the Zombie Nazis! Or the Nazi Zombies! The fate of the free world hangs in the balance!
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[The Wave]](graemlins/thewave.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Monkeys]](graemlins/monkeys.gif)
![[Taunt]](graemlins/taunt.gif)
![[Party]](graemlins/party.gif)
![[Wave]](graemlins/wave.gif)
)
