Goodbye

Mike Kruger wrote:
Bill Sornson wrote:

What is the Left so afraid of? Why does it want to SILENCE opposing
opinions? ...Instead of debating issues,
the left goes personal almost immediately; then it has a conniption
fit if someone calls it.
Because you are generally on the "right", you see this happening from
the "left".
Because I am generally on the "left", I see this happening from the
"right".
I think the level of political discussion is generally at a low level.

Maybe you agree ... if not you are a stupid nazi asshole [that's a
joke, Bill]

I get the differing viewpoints, Mike, but just look at issues like Global
Warming or Illegal Immigration. Try going to a college campus like Columbia
with a "conservative presentation" and see what happens. Instead of
respectful or even heated debate, the /right/ side (more ways than one )
is shouted down, disrupted, prevented from speaking.

It really isn't rare or isolated, either.

If Chris Horner (author of "The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global
Warming and Environmentalism") appeared to give a talk, he'd be heckled and
/threatened/ so much he'd have to leave. (And, of course, Al Gore
absolutely REFUSES to debate him or any accredited scientist with differing
views.)

I honestly don't see right wing groups stopping Cindy Sheehan or George
Soros or whomever from appearing/talking anywhere. Ever.

YMMV.

Mike Kruger wrote:
Bill Sornson wrote:
Antti Salonen wrote:

The Usenet is dying simply because it isn't moderated.

I'm confused about something. Rec.Bicycles.Offroad completely DIED
because it was moderated -- I thought to keep Vandedrivel {tm} out?
Weirdly enough, spam got thru fairly regularly, but on-topic posts
took forever to show up...

How is it he (MV) doesn't post in these two rec groups? Is their
some "master filter" that blocks his stuff?

Maybe I'll go look for an ALT cycling group besides AM-B...

Well, there's alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.r...t/topics?hl=en

Good one!

At this moment, the link above shows the newest thread as "Dear
Diary: I didn't poo in my pants today."

LOL (literally)

The fourth thread on the list begins with "I joined this group a
couple of weeks ago because I am interested in
recumbent bicycles. All I have seen so far is tons of drivel from an
idiot named" [E.D. -- not going to name him]

Guess I'll pass on that one.

Seriously, what keeps Vandespammer out of here? He cross-posts to a whole
bunch of newsgroups; why not these?

On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 19:08:24 -0700, "Bill Sornson"
wrote:

I honestly don't see right wing groups stopping Cindy Sheehan or George
Soros or whomever from appearing/talking anywhere. Ever.

Baloney.

It's called "swiftboating" and it's about discrediting anyone who
attacks the current government. It's one thing to try to discredit
someone like me, who has always been liberal and never voted
republican. But it's quite another to attack people who may not have
been particularly political or partisan in the past as partisans
simply because of conclusions they have recently reached about
politics or reality.

Look at the current attacks on Pat Tillman's brother and on Jessica
Lynch. These are former soldiers who, when they *begin* talking in
ways critical of the US government, are made out to be partisans.

The same is true of attacks on the scientists who have demonstrated
the dangers of global warming. In fact, there are conscious efforts
within the US government to shut up *scientists.* These are not
ncessarily liberals, but they are people whose conclusions are aligned
with liberals, and they are being stifled by our own government for
what they want to say.

Moreover, the right wing has more systemic control of mass media about
politics in the US than people of any other political persuasion.
This is evident in coverage of the Iraq war, with most major news
organizations being very uncritical of the US government. It is still
the case on coverage of the war's impact on American and Iraqi
families. It is true too in business reporting -- with busines
reporting systemically biased in favor of major corporations and
investors. Unlike the swiftboating, this is not a conscious effort but
rather a systemic problem.

Finally, right wing pundits love avowed liberals like George Soros.
They dont' want to shut him up. Rather they want to distort his
messages and use those distortions to sow fear and angst among the
public, and most especially to energize their base. It's the very
definition of reactionary.

I'm sure you've seen Bill O'Reilly go off on Soros.

Which reminds me: where do you get your news, Sorni? Where *do* you
get your news?
--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

DI wrote:
"John Forrest Tomlinson" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 18:40:28 -0400, "David L. Johnson"
wrote:

John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 06:33:12 -0700, Mark Hickey
wrote:

JT's pernicious accusations are just the latest in a long series,
but they're the ones that opened my eyes to the reality that this
is no longer any fun, and there are many better ways I can spend
my time. I have a very full life, a wonderful family (including
four new granddaughters). I can ride my bike more.

You're a coward. All you have to do is not talk about politics
and I wont bring up your more disgusting political views. Or even
killfile me.

Actually you've been a coward and a bully (threatening to sue me
for libel!).

Well, you just made Mark's point.

It's not just Mark's point -- it's mine as well. I'm harsh.That pales
in significance to promoting torture and supporting the current
attacks on the rule of the law in the US.

I can't have a "civil"discussion about these things. So if Mark
can't deal, he shouldn't start. He shouldn't have started with me.

--
JT


Careful, you may break your arm trying to pat yourself on the back.
Backoff, you're not the hot **** you think you are, nor as informed
you would like to us to think you are.

"Promoting Torture". I'd like to know when Mark /promoted/ torture. It's
exactly like the helm*t threads, where the AHZs accuse pro-lidders of being
for MHLs even though they've expressly stated opposition to them.

I guess since Floglinson hasn't condemned that 12-year-old Taliban /child/
beheading a helpless hostage on camera, that means he's PRO CHOPPING OFF
HEADS. It's just ridiculous.

AndyMorris wrote:
Have fun, get some miles in.

I was always fascinated how someone who talked such sense about
bikes, could seem so wacko about politics. Which was kind of fun and
thought provoking.

Is everyone who disagrees with you or has a different viewpoint from yours
"wacko"?

Just wondering.

"John Forrest Tomlinson" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 19:08:24 -0700, "Bill Sornson"
wrote:

I honestly don't see right wing groups stopping Cindy Sheehan or George
Soros or whomever from appearing/talking anywhere. Ever.

Baloney.

It's called "swiftboating" and it's about discrediting anyone who
attacks the current government. It's one thing to try to discredit
someone like me, who has always been liberal and never voted
republican. But it's quite another to attack people who may not have
been particularly political or partisan in the past as partisans
simply because of conclusions they have recently reached about
politics or reality.

Look at the current attacks on Pat Tillman's brother and on Jessica
Lynch. These are former soldiers who, when they *begin* talking in
ways critical of the US government, are made out to be partisans.

The same is true of attacks on the scientists who have demonstrated
the dangers of global warming. In fact, there are conscious efforts
within the US government to shut up *scientists.* These are not
ncessarily liberals, but they are people whose conclusions are aligned
with liberals, and they are being stifled by our own government for
what they want to say.

Moreover, the right wing has more systemic control of mass media about
politics in the US than people of any other political persuasion.
This is evident in coverage of the Iraq war, with most major news
organizations being very uncritical of the US government. It is still
the case on coverage of the war's impact on American and Iraqi
families. It is true too in business reporting -- with busines
reporting systemically biased in favor of major corporations and
investors. Unlike the swiftboating, this is not a conscious effort but
rather a systemic problem.

Finally, right wing pundits love avowed liberals like George Soros.
They dont' want to shut him up. Rather they want to distort his
messages and use those distortions to sow fear and angst among the
public, and most especially to energize their base. It's the very
definition of reactionary.

I'm sure you've seen Bill O'Reilly go off on Soros.

Which reminds me: where do you get your news, Sorni? Where *do* you
get your news?
--
JT

I bet he doesn't get his news from the New York Times, CBS, or CNN, if he
does he's a fool.

"Moreover, the right wing has more systemic control of mass media about
politics in the US than people of any other political persuasion." there
goes all your credibility.

DI wrote:
"John Forrest Tomlinson" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 19:08:24 -0700, "Bill Sornson"
wrote:

I honestly don't see right wing groups stopping Cindy Sheehan or
George Soros or whomever from appearing/talking anywhere. Ever.

Baloney.

It's called "swiftboating" and it's about discrediting anyone who
attacks the current government. It's one thing to try to discredit
someone like me, who has always been liberal and never voted
republican. But it's quite another to attack people who may not have
been particularly political or partisan in the past as partisans
simply because of conclusions they have recently reached about
politics or reality.

Look at the current attacks on Pat Tillman's brother and on Jessica
Lynch. These are former soldiers who, when they *begin* talking in
ways critical of the US government, are made out to be partisans.

The same is true of attacks on the scientists who have demonstrated
the dangers of global warming. In fact, there are conscious efforts
within the US government to shut up *scientists.* These are not
ncessarily liberals, but they are people whose conclusions are
aligned with liberals, and they are being stifled by our own
government for what they want to say.

Moreover, the right wing has more systemic control of mass media
about politics in the US than people of any other political
persuasion. This is evident in coverage of the Iraq war, with most
major news organizations being very uncritical of the US government.
It is still the case on coverage of the war's impact on American and
Iraqi families. It is true too in business reporting -- with busines
reporting systemically biased in favor of major corporations and
investors. Unlike the swiftboating, this is not a conscious effort
but rather a systemic problem.

Finally, right wing pundits love avowed liberals like George Soros.
They dont' want to shut him up. Rather they want to distort his
messages and use those distortions to sow fear and angst among the
public, and most especially to energize their base. It's the very
definition of reactionary.

I'm sure you've seen Bill O'Reilly go off on Soros.

Which reminds me: where do you get your news, Sorni? Where *do* you
get your news?
--
JT

I bet he doesn't get his news from the New York Times, CBS, or CNN,
if he does he's a fool.

"Moreover, the right wing has more systemic control of mass media
about politics in the US than people of any other political
persuasion." there goes all your credibility.

Floglinson apparently doesn't glean the distinction between /denouncing/
someone (fair game) and /denying/ them the right to speak (as un-American as
it gets). Minutemen get physically thrown off stage. Code Pinkettes have
the run of the ballroom.

It's like Harry Reid. Cheney criticizes his /positions/ without a single
personal attack, and Reid says he won't engage in name-calling with an
"attack dog" with a 9% approval rating (all ad hominem and zero issue).

It's just too classic.

still me wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 19:40:23 -0700, "Bill Sornson"
wrote:


Careful, you may break your arm trying to pat yourself on the back.
Backoff, you're not the hot **** you think you are, nor as informed
you would like to us to think you are.

"Promoting Torture". I'd like to know when Mark /promoted/ torture.
It's exactly like the helm*t threads, where the AHZs accuse
pro-lidders of being for MHLs even though they've expressly stated
opposition to them.

I guess since Floglinson hasn't condemned that 12-year-old Taliban
/child/ beheading a helpless hostage on camera, that means he's PRO
CHOPPING OFF HEADS. It's just ridiculous.


I hope this is an intentional comedy act just for this thread.
Otherwise you two guys are demonstrating exactly what the OP
complained about.

If its for real, I suggest you take the advice of those here with cool
heads and "let it go". Left and right will never meet, neither of you
will ever "win" the argument, you will never agree on anything - even
the time of day.

Who let THIS guy in here?!? :-P

Bill "too dark to see my keyboard now (yes, there's a light switch nearby)"
S.

On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 06:33:12 -0700, Mark Hickey
wrote:

JT's pernicious accusations are just the latest in a long series, but
they're the ones that opened my eyes to the reality that this is no
longer any fun, and there are many better ways I can spend my time. I
have a very full life, a wonderful family (including four new
granddaughters). I can ride my bike more.

So, it's with absolute joy and anticipation that I bid you all a fond
farewell. I've got the same kind of feeling that you get when you're
finishing up a tedious task before walking out the door on a long
vacation. I'm psyched. For this, I can only thank JT for doing his
part to bring this long, glorious waste of time to an end.

Take the rest of the spring off, enjoy your family, and drop back in
towards the middle of the summer. Bicycle-oriented and technical
content is rare enough that I'd hate to lose a source of it.

OT now; how do some posters manage to post such large volumes of
material? I've wondered on occasion if real people spontaneously
generate the quantity posted under a given name, or if there's just
large files sitting around on some number of hard disks, out of which
random paragraphs are posted. (It's often hard to tell by reading the
posts, too.)

Pat

Email address works as is.

Mark Hickey wrote:
JT's pernicious accusations are just the latest in a long series, but
they're the ones that opened my eyes to the reality that this is no
longer any fun, and there are many better ways I can spend my time. I
have a very full life, a wonderful family (including four new
granddaughters). I can ride my bike more.

At some point you have to devote your life to yourself and your family.

So, it's with absolute joy and anticipation that I bid you all a fond
farewell. I've got the same kind of feeling that you get when you're
finishing up a tedious task before walking out the door on a long
vacation. I'm psyched. For this, I can only thank JT for doing his
part to bring this long, glorious waste of time to an end.

Happy trails,

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame

May the wind always be at you're back.
Like that's really gonna happen.
Have a good life, Mark.
Bill Baka