I have not been over there in a few days, but did go today and I read a long thread discussing mostly me - a thread I can no longer respond to, having been banned.

Shame on you. Shame on all of you.

There is not one of you whom I would not vigorously defend were what people are doing to me happening to you. Many of you know that to be true from past experience, yet you are going along with or piling on in that ugly and ongoing character assassination, full of insinuations, speculation, and malicious and unfounded charges.

That thread is truly shameful, and cowardly as well, since you know that it would not be happening were I there and able to defend myself.

I don't think there has ever been a more malicious and ugly grave dancing thread ever at DU, and one less warranted and more full of inaccurate statements.

So many of you I have defended over the years and gone to bat for, and yet you join in with the howling mob and turn on me like that. Is it to curry favor? To be accepted by the pack leaders? The path of least resistance? It really made me physically ill to read that.

Shame on you.

This is no reflection on you (and you know this). I think the term "Lilliputian" applies to these sad, unfocused people. Yuppies, liberals; what worse epithets could possibly be born by someone? And these epithets are the most generous we can give them.

Shake their dust from your shoes. Times are coming...times are coming...

I am angry and just need to vent.

So many people turned their back, joined in when they know it is all lies, and when I had defended them so many times over the years when they were being attackd. Others were cynically and intentionally playing us.

AFAIK I still have an active account there. No reason to keep it, and I wonder if they wouldn't just quash the post immediately but let me know.

and you gave them so much more than they deserved. It is their loss on so many levels, and they will never realize it.

Working person: "Hey, fella! You are going to cut your finger off doing that."

Liberal/Progressive: "Ha! What a sheeple! You are blinded by the MSM and FAUXSNOOSE you know notnig! It takes enlitened people like me to guide you and protect you from the PTB!"

WP: "Whatevcer, dude. But if you keep up with that, you are going to lose some fingers."

L/P: Look, we are all onto your tricks! I bet you are on the payroll of YOU KNOW WHO! You are part of the conspiracy! If you don't know that, why am I surprised! You have no education and have no STATUS! You are just a laborer!"

WP: Sure. Okay. Whatever you say, boss..."

L/P: SCREECH! OH MY GOD I HAVE CUT OFF ALL OF THE FINGERS ON MY HAND! PLEASE HELP ME!

WP: Sorry, boss, I don't know nothin' 'bout none o that stuff. I'se watching FAUXSNOOSE and scratchin'. Heh heh..."

That is good.

Balantz, cornermouse, saracat, zalinda and a few others could have at the very least stayed quiet and not jumped in on the pile. I had a long, long history with them. I can't tell you the number of times I defended them. I used to jump in to help them all the time at DU when they were being attacked by a gang. Now they join in on a gang? Others there cringed and cowered "well, I guess if the bosses and bullies say those are bad people, they must be."

PH did a serious backstabbing thing there to all of us - that is just something you don't do to comrades.

I have had the unique chance to talk to off line people about the boards through an unusual set of circumstances, and I am discovering and meting lurkers and talking to them in real life. Many people, not necessarily political people, watch and read these boards though they would never post. PI is interesting, not something you can find anywhere else, and the blow ups are entertaining and dramatic to say the least. You don't have to know anything about politics to see through Andrea, Nikki, et al and what they are doing. Almost everyone can see the boss attitude, the bullying, the self-serving double talk a mile away, because they encounter it all the time in real life from superiors, managers, bosses and landlords, and they hate that shit and the people who pull it. That means that Nikki, PH, Jake and Andrea are the worst possible advertisement for liberalism there could ever be with the general public. People just HATE the shit they are pulling right now and are well able to recognize it for what it is.

So, they represent a very small percentage of the population, first of all. Secondly, they have it exactly backward when they think OUR tone or behavior is not selling our product (which we are not even trying to do.) It is their attitude and tone which hurts their sales efforts (which they are trying to do).

I think most people from the general public read chlamor or Kid and see that for what it is - the little guy getting back at the boss or the bullies and they side with that and have NO fucking problem with any tone or attitude or rudeness, while they see what Andrea and Jake and Nikki are doing as the bad attitude and bad tone and rudeness and bullying. It brings out every reason that people in the general public just hate liberals.

So whom do they think they are fooling? Any person off the street can read what they are doing. And why do people who represent such small numbers so dominate the political boards?

I swear, take a roomful of any 100 randomly selected people off the street, and read the stuff that our antagonists are posting. What percentage of people could omega convert or persuade? Not even one out of a hundred. Everyone else is just roaring with laughter over the aspartame causes ADD which causes texting which causes train wrecks shit. I mean who is kidding whom here?

folks at least as much due to the very visible "Liberal attitude" as to any FRWC. The way the average Liberal looks down on those "less fortunate"; refer to average people as "sheeple"; feel a strong upper class revulsion to working people. These are things that all working class people know in their bones - "Liberal" is usually said with a curl of the lip...

And why do people who represent such small numbers so dominate the political boards?

It's like this on all the boards. Keep the rabble out.

Although OET is no surprise to me. Just look at their mission statement.

[div class="excerpt"]Before the Revolution, colonists gathered under a great elm tree in Boston to rally together against the tyranny of the crown corporations. The Sons of Liberty hung the effigies of two tax collectors from the old elm tree in protest against the infamous Stamp Act. Ever since then, the old elm tree was called the Liberty Tree and became a focal point and symbol for the resistance to the tyranny of the crown corporations over the colonies
[/quote]

LOL the Sons of Liberty were merchant classers who tried to rile up the rabble to support THEIR interests against the Stamp Act.

It was bullshit then and it's bullshit now.

Sheer pettiness. And PH, if you see this: get bent, child. You will find in your life that good friends are not replaceable like plastic forks. What you did was subhuman and a perverse betrayal. In a way I'm glad your words are there for all to see. We will always have them there to remember that a dark toad squats where most people have a heart.

Community my ass. One of the most important committees at our Workers Center is the Worker Justice Committee. It's development has been real uneven. We've fought some fights, even won a few, but it just never seemed to be able to build momentum. People dropped in and out, and we doubled back on strategic approaches way too often.

About 2 or 3 months ago we approached one of our members who had been very active in the WC, and asked him to lead the WJ Committee. This guy was the village head of a bad ass national popular organization in a Latin American country (I originally named it, but decided that I don't know enough about his situation to make it public). Anyway, he accepted, and we went through a long and difficult discussion about how to move forward.

He insisted that to be a voting member of the committee, you had to be an official, have a title and responsibilities. That decision making was the job of the officials, and not just any WC member that showed up at a meeting. That the work be organized and channeled through the officials. I objected that we couldn't grow the Committee unless people had a hand in the decision making.

It took him a couple of hours to knock into my head that he was really talking about commitment. If people weren't serious enough to take responsibility for part of the work, he wasn't going to waste his time leading them. This comrade is no Mr. Nice Guy. Show up, do the work or get out.

It took him another hour to get me to understand that the anyone can be come an official of the Committee, but with conditions. Show up, promise to keep showing up, take responsibility for doing the work, and keep doing it. Without this commitment, it doesn't matter how many new people come to the meetings.

We had been so concerned about gaining new members, that we were afraid to ask them to be serious and committed. We accommodated almost anything, and overlooked much in order to appear open to outsiders.

So, last week ten of us stood up at our general membership meeting and swore that we would do the work, or they could cast us out. The people that have turned on you are not serious about politics, and take no responsibility for collective action. Their commitment is to some mystical community, and is not grounded in the work. So, again community my ass.

Well I've just been over reading the whack job they did on Mike. Interesting that they have to ban a bunch of people and then have their say - what a bunch of cowards. I honestly have more respect for Skinner & his DU than this bunch of folks. At least he's straight forward about his purpose and consistent in his behaviors. That I can respect although we may not agree on political philosophy.

I've known Andrea since the beginning of that site and wouldn't have expected more from her, but PH's back-stabbing was particularly disappointing. Ah well, live and learn.

The irony is that we were continually being accused of failing to sell our product because of our poor salesmanship - we were rude, we were impolite, we were confrontational. Yet could there possibly be a worse face for promoting liberalism then the one they are presenting? Unlike us, they do claim to be concerned about persuading people and winning converts. If you wanted to destroy liberalism and get everyone to hate liberals you couldn't do a better job of it than they are doing.

and what just occurred to me is that if liberals hear such sentiment from the working class, they assume that it means the people are 'brainwashed by Faux Snooze' or that they're 'sheeple' or whatever. Because they don't seem to understand that there are other ways to look at things - eg through the lens of reality, for example, and that it's not as complicated as the libs like to make it.

It's obvious (to everyone but the libs) that the libs aren't really working on behalf of the people, eh?

Pretending to be a friend - it was just a couple of months ago the last time I got a friendly chipper call - so long as she needed us, and then as soon as she didn't turning on us viciously. That is a level of calculated dishonesty and deception that is staggering. Then she has to malign me and denigrate the contributions I had made there.

I hate to use a psychobabble buzz word like "projection" but it sure applies here. We are accused of having a secret agenda - as though we could ever get one together - yet clearly they were running the secret agenda.

We are accused of obnoxious behavior, yet have you ever seen such obnoxious behavior as we just saw from them? If every accusation they made were accurate, still their reaction to the supposed provocation is much more offensive and obnoxious than the provocation itself.

We are accused of personally attacking people, which I never did and only a handful of times did anyone else here ever respond in kind to their personal attacks. Now they are engaged in an orgy of personal attacks against people who can no longer defend themselves.

We are accused of being newcomers showing up only to cause trouble, yet I was there for months and months posting frequently and carrying the board through some very slow times, while newcomers Jake and Nikki and Code bullied their way into controlling the board and then egging on a purge of all those who disagreed with them.

We are accused of rallying the troops, but of course we did not, while all of the evidence suggests that there was a massive rallying of the troops against us. One person there has openly admitted that it was their intention all along to do whatever it took to eliminate me.

We are told that chlamor had broken the rules, and so had t be banned and the banning was justified, yet usrename and Dancing Bear posted nothing but personal attacks against me for months and months, breaking the rules on a daily basis. Apparently they are now valuable and honored members of the community, even though they spent most of their time there previous to this stalking and attacking me. Now they are gleefully grave dancing and making slanderous charges after I can no longer defend myself and now that anyone who could challenge them on their lies has been silenced.

We are accused of marching in lockstep, yet clearly we were unable to pull that off even had that been our intention, while they all fell into line and joined in with the attacks and supported the obviously absurd and illogical management position on this.

I would expect nothing less from her after the behavior I saw during the time I was involved.

The dirty, rude commies not only financed that site, did the technical work to build it, put in hours of man-power in tech/mod work (all evidence is destroyed on that now of course, but Mike and I always had the most hours of time in when you looked at the statistics of the board - and that continued until very recently - I hadn't posted in months and I still had put more time spent on that site in the first few months than others did in it's entirety). Andrea must own the domain name, and in true owner fashion has no problem stepping on the labor that created and got that site going while she declares that she "technically owns it".

Congratulations, you "own" it. Which is much like all the other "ownership" issues we deal with on a daily basis. Exploitation, censorship, slave labor, status quo... the list goes on and on. We've seen this historically since this country began of course, with the "ownership" claims made by the Europeans who decided that they had settled the land (after murdering the indigenous people of course). History repeats itself with liberals leading the charge.

I didn't read the whole thing, but enough. I hate the personal betrayal & all but how is the shit I saw there any different from what the shitheads at DU have thrown at us with monotnous regularity?

So let's set up that forum, call it Siberia or the Gulag, fuck 'em.

We have in common one bedrock proposition, Capitalism gotta go. For this we are considered every sort of fanatic. Which side are they on?

Let's put this sucker on the shelf, it is nonproductive.

I don't know if anybody noticed, but I posted an objection to all the "shut up" and "you should" (as far as I'm concerned that "vinegar" post was as bad as Rasputin's on DU that set off the Gay Purge) and asked to be removed. And I really haven't been back even to peek because I was really disgusted.

It slayed me that Nikki admitted to disappearing stuff in her little corner, and that the owners would allow that on their board. So much for being better in that respect than DU.

Mike, I am so sorry about the disgusting spectacle recounted here. I wish I had seen through that place sooner.

Thanks. Not only did they prove to be no better than DU - and griping about DU was always the most active topic there - but they are actually worse I think. That is the inevitable result of trying to form splinter groups of "real" liberals or "real" progressives - it only exacerbates and accentuates the inherent contradictions. They are trying to move to the left of the administration, then to the left of the Democrats, then to the left of the progressive Democrats, then Kucinich betrays them, and all the time they are also trying to maintain a fundamentally anti-left wing position. The tension increases and increases until they hate everyone on the Left, and yet want to deny they have anything to do with anyone on the right. There is little if any ground between the two, and they can no longer be on the right and pretend to be on the Left. They have now arrived at the point where it takes the most ludicrous and illogical thinking to maintain their footing.

No problem, we can move on. There are a few people over there who were willing to do some really shitty things, and I was pissed last night about that. Nothing to do with politics, just some really shitty things that you shouldn't do to anyone under any circumstances. But it is over now.

And why was it again that we were supposed to worry about those evil Republicans and Palin and tea baggers, those insane illogical people, those dangerous nutcases? I am much more worried about the people who insist that they are "potential friends and allies." Right, sure they are. "We are your friends and allies, and are going in the same direction, and are on the same team. Anyone saying otherwise will be killed."

Mike, read it twice. Its past time to move on.

http://www.oldelmtree.com/discussion/index.php?topic=7849.0


What a total cesspool.

I say that in brotherly love. You think you are tired of me mucking around with the liberals? You have no idea how tired I am of you telling me to move on, brother. YOU fucking move on, wouldya already?

Get over on my ag thread. I need your input and criticism there. We are going to have that showdown about farming that we have been putting off for a couple of years. Ready to move on? Or are you stuck on lecturing others about how they should deal with liberals?

I'd say, based on what I've seen now, a "community" run by a two-faced, hypocritical, back-stabbing, manipulating asshole.

I am highly suspicious of the sudden appearance there of the very people who made all of the trouble here. They are manufacturing a story about how we took over this place and threw them out, and were trying to take over OET.

I think that in their accusations against us, they are actually revealing what they themselves have been doing.

Only I from this group was posting over there, for the most part over the last few months. There was no attempt to take it over, there was no gang, there was no plot involved.

HOWEVER, I do not believe that Montag, Code et al just HAPPENED to show up at this point. There had to have been behind the scenes communications going on, and a lot of it. The constant provocations by usrename and Dancing Bear set the table. Montag et al had to have been watching that, or were alerted to it. No doubt the asses of Andrea and her team of weak and groveling sycophants were being lavishly kissed - balantz and Waiting For Hope and zalinda and saracat - WFH you pm-ed me as a friend, we talked about personal things - shame on you, as you know damned well I am not the person being described by that gang of thugs there with their malicious slander and insinuation, yet you are supporting that bullshit - shame on you; saracat did I ever fail to come to your defense at DU when you asked me to? Shame on you for this; Zalinda - was it all a lie? You are awfully quick to join in with the mob there. Have I ever done anything to you? Shame on you. Balantz - you have given lip service for years to principled positions that you are now acting directly against - shame on you. Was it all a lie all along? Or were you uncomfortable that anyone would ever challenge your conspiracy theories, and was this a chance to get some sort of petty revenge? Were you just biding your time, and lying all along about how you didn't mind having your 911 theories challenged? was I ever anything other then courteous and respectful with you? Did I not pm you repeatedly to make sure there were no personal animosities between us and no misunderstandings? Did you not reply again and again thanking me for that? Shame on you balantz for now turning on me and completely contradicting everything you ever said to me.

And Mairead - always suddenly there on the scene at the very moment that leftists are about to be banned, and that is the only time she ever shows up on any of the boards. This is board number 6 that she has now played in important role in destroying over the last 6 years.

The worst of the worst most notorious trolls plotted and seized control of OET, and a whole bunch of people - perhaps embarrassed over the years when some of their weak arguments and pet beliefs were challenged and refuted - flushed all integrity and decency and honesty down the toilet for the sake of - the sake of what? Acceptance and approval by the in crowd? To get their noses firmly jammed up the asses of the bullies? WTF? Shame on those people for their cowardly, dishonest and hypocritical behavior.

Montag and Code I expected it from - they have been badly stung and embarrassed over the years. Nikki and Jake are bullies of the first order. Usrename and Dancing Bear have simply been trolling - transparently, obviously, repeatedly, and in flagrant violation of all of the rules at OET. But saracat, zalinda, balantz - shame on you for turning on me the way you did. Enjoy your new "friends." That goes for you to Andrea - you will never have a more loyal and consistent friend than you had in me, despite profound disagreements. I was in a position for along time to hurt you and your project, and did nothing but support you. Hell, I invited dozens of members there - most of whom you have now alienated and who are completely disgusted by what you have done.

Shame on you Edwards supporters.
I never treated you with anything other than kindness and respect, with compassion and with love. We have all talked personally many times.
I always had your backs, no matter what.
You all KNOW that to be true. And yet you turned on me, threw me to the wolves, watched that slanderfest go on and even joined in on it. You have betrayed the things you claimed to believe in far worse than your hero ever did.

I am not in charge of anything.

Message moved to "T!me Out to Chill Out" forum. You can visit it [link:www.progressiveindependent.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=217&topic_id=338 | here] .

Enough of this shit, curt

What I am tired of is the whole thing. There is no showdown about farming. Your ag thread is what you think about farming. I really don't care. I'll start a thread on swizzlesticks and we can have a showdown about that, too.


I don't see how your stuff about family farms isn't "small scale capitalism" redux. I think the problem with Norman Bourlag has nothing to do with his practices, techniques or ideas. I think it has to do with the fact that it made America the breadbasket of the world and this was yet another guise for exploitation across the globe. Even so, it is only a tragedy that subsistence farming gets overrun because of the fact that even greater immiseration was sure to follow, and it did.

I am not at all concerned about biodiversity or the fact that farming takes 18x as much energy as the food it produces yields (or whatever the number is). That stuff is no more political than debating what the EROEI of fossil fuels is.

Finally, I think % of population in agriculture has been one of THE defining social relationships for the entire 20th century. The fact that its like 2 out of every 100 in America (and for most of the century was greater than 50 out of 100 in many countries) has quite a bit to do with the social conditions and disparities in various countries. Do you really intend to circumvent that movement (or even think you can) with shitty ideas about "returning to the land"?

Why not pick some other cause celebre? Why not stand up for family grocerers -- Mom and Pop corner stores? The difference between the two eludes me.

But that is secondary to the question: what the fuck are you talking about at all? You think I'm lecturing you about how to talk to liberals? Please. What I would like you to do is stop talking about them period. If you want a gossip corner, you currently have one because that is what you've turned PI into.

Just stop this shit. Your opinion on family farming. Your opinion on aspartame. Your opinion on train engineers. Your opinion of the liberals at the Treehouse.

I care about none of those things (or the billion others I could list, these are just du jour), and, more to the point, they ARE NOT political. Neither is "underground computing" or writing your own operating system, or finding a better webhost or any of that dumb shit.

I would add a few folks to that kettle (which Mike has outlined nicely) but you are correct that it is not all. I stand corrected on that and apologize to those who were not part of it.

I also hear what Kid is saying about moving on, good point there too. Mike and I both invested a lot of time in OET so I think that is why it is more emotional for us, but yes he's correct that it can't be something we harp on forever. There's more important work to do.

It's kind of weird how the very people who were here from the start and built this board up (Marxists) keep getting referred to as usurpers.

It's also quite funny that liberal philosophy has been challenged at PI since day 1 but Montag just noticed it after we banned his ass for littering this board with childish insults against socialists?

Weird. Too weird even.

But seriously, we got rid of those people because they proved they would fight Socialists harder than they'd fight anyone else because their priorities were to keep this system- just make it a little, ya know, friendlier.

Mike are you really surprised? You served a useful purpose supporting Edwards for highlighting poverty- gave that DLC trash a respectable veneer. You were useful then. Right now you're not so useful.

We have nothing in common with the liberals whose political philosophy is that throwing just want a few more breadcrumbs to the masses is going to make everything peachy-keen again.

It's a waste of time trying to find something that doesn't exist- common ground.

both in the sense that they're part of "Us" and also in the sense that for all the bandying about we do, the difference in political philosophies remains largely superficial.

Putting a socialist veneer on our discussion is useful in some capacities and provocative -- but its lip service if we don't back it up and produce a foundation from which we can start building..something. Building ANYTHING, really.

Maybe we are just building and fortifying a place where we can talk about talking. But so far all we have is a bitch board for rants and self-congratulation.

Gotta ask What Matters? and Why?

Revising history to make this place into something it wasn't ( a haven for socialists let alone Marxists..pretty sure there were 1.5 Marxists at the time of the 06/07 purge -- how many are there now anyway?). Nor was it a place that challenged liberal philosophy (is it presently? seriously..)

You say the differences are largely superficial. If that's true then many of us are on the wrong board.

Tell me what the differences are? Lip service to socialism and a couple coats of paint change what?

Are you sure that doesn't amount to simply more one desperate attempt to modulate one's thinking as a response to "the problem"? Isn't that liberalism to a tee -- complete denial of reality that looks solely and avowerdly inward to find "answers"?

Pretty sure you've told me in the past that you have little interest in theory, right? So tell me, without theory and an analytical framework to start/operate from what exactly do you have..feel good slogans? The smug assurance of your own superiority?

To me it seems half of what you're calling "the difference" is simply your self-issued license to be snide.

I am tired of the whole thing as well, and question the value of anything I have been writing.

What do you suggest?

:shrug:

Just trying to keep perspective and try to resolve what we're doing into better focus.

I realize it may come off a little inflammatory, but there is a tad of latent hostitlity around here, and we might as well dispel that too if we have the chance.

We should be digging through the nitty gritty of economic crisis (as an example) -- not just who, where, and when but what and why? We hone ourselves by sharpening our analysis, sharpening our critical edge, sharpening the line/distinction between "Us" and "Them". None of those things happen in a vacuum or are advanced with what is going on here right now.

Can't take anymore kvetching about liberals. "They" aren't really the obstacle anyway, so much as political liberalism itself -- which it is probably correct to say is ascendant, even though its ascendancy is very much in a state of uncertainty right now.

You do realize the subtext to your question is that probably half the content written here has purported to describe exactly that. Surely we can glean something from all of that accumulated commentary?

If not..well, maybe now you see what I'm getting at..

You claimed we had much in common with "liberal philosophies" and I asked you to describe your own term.

... but, there has been quite enough drama, thank you.

The confusion of personal loyalty with political perspective, declarations of personal independence, a glut of self-indulgence, rhetorical tricks ...none of these are rare or unusual in the society at large but they are a bankrupt starting point.

Take a moment. Think about it. The former-Kid is right on the face of it. That they should pop up here is not surprising. That we rise in their defense is a much more serious mistake. We correct and we move on. No harm, no foul.

This isn't personal.

Which, no, I don't care to discuss

Just looking for clarification

Which I still haven't gotten....

and offered a definition, which I was not so much challenging but holding a mirror up to.


We have nothing in common with the liberals whose political philosophy is that throwing just want a few more breadcrumbs to the masses is going to make everything peachy-keen again.

Then I said this


Are you sure that doesn't amount to simply more one desperate attempt to modulate one's thinking as a response to "the problem"? Isn't that liberalism to a tee -- complete denial of reality that looks solely and avowerdly inward to find "answers"?

Other than the typos in both quotes I don't have any further clarity to offer.

I gathered that you took exception to what was said. If not, what are you even asking?

Kid's response to Tin was...muddy.

qualifies as a rhetorical gimmick.

If what you're really after is if I'm calling you a dirty name (liberal), I'm not. I'm not calling anyone anything. I'm saying that the proof is in the pudding and right now those plums in the plum pudding..aren't plums.

I can't find any SFW pics to illustrate my point sry. But if you want links to steaming turd pudding you can Message me :)

I wouldn't want to be accused of rhetorical gimmicks.

http://the44diaries.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/englandplumpudding.jpg

I am just saying that talking in guarded circles does not accomplish anything, especially if it is some kind of "finesse".

Besides which, none of what is being written is any kind of statement pertaining to individuals (or it shouldn't be). Its not a commentary on you or on me (except in relief I guess, ha).

Explain what you are talking about. Explain what your complaint is. Explain what it is you want to see happening that isn't happening.

What "political philosophies" are you talking about? What do you mean by "socialist veneer?"

What do you want to build?

We ask what matters and why all the time, as far as I can see.

What is "a haven for socialists let alone Marxists?"

Of course there are going to be issues of personal loyalty as well as political perspective, but where and how are they being confused? Yes there will be declarations of personal independence, a glut of self-indulgence, rhetorical tricks but who is trying to make that stuff a starting point?

I don't know that the Kid is right about this or not, because I don't know what he is saying.

I can't see how runs made anything personal or introduced any drama.

Seriously, what specifically is the bad stuff that we want to eliminate or not indulge in, and what is the good stuff we want to do?

are just me transcibing what Tinoire wrote.

but if it does to you that's cool


Rest assured I take no exception, no umbrage, no offense, etc, etc, etc to your statement. I just don't get it.

Calm down

:)

Liberals are right-wing capitalists. They (mostly) are not actual, functioning capitalists, but they are firmly attached to the assholes of all and any capitalist ya' got. Now, tell me again how we and they are only superficially different...

If you have criticism of members, here, the criticism should be very clear. We all want to benefit from the criticism. (That's what it is for, right?) So don't be defensive - clarify...

That is what it really comes down to.

How many on here write primarily about feelings or their opinions or, more charitably, their expert opinions on things that may be relevant, but in some other arena? Thats what I am calling out.

The criticism is that what has been going on here since the OET "incident" has been utter crap. When Tinoire comes on and wants to talk about how her heart is breaking over this or that issue, thats crap.

Go-nowhere bitching about liberals, crap.

Dithering about whether we need a new site, a new name, a new look, a new webhost, a new layout, a new mission statement..crapx10.

If I come across defensive its for two reasons: 1. I can't believe this shit 2. I DON'T want to talk about it, I want to close my eyes and hopes it goes away.

that what you just said to me is very clear and concise and direct. I like it! You know, you can take that "Mr. Nice guy" thing too far.

Now I get exactly what you're saying and I agree (I only went to OET once about two months ago and thought, "Not for me."). Let us move on. Liberals are the enemy, let us not anguish over their behavior, let's fight them...

unless someone offers me enough money to pay off the house or something. I still peek at DU from time to time, but OET is *really* disgusting.

I have but he is more known for his bon mots I think. Anyway, I was thinking you were a prime candidate to jump in on the Pisarev piece Rusto went to such efforts to put up.

I think you said you were taking a few days to read through it right?

Anax once said that he thought Pisarev and Chernyshevsky were about the same. While it seems like Chernyshevsky was the more influential of the two (someone, maybe Lenin himself, said he had more influence in Russia than Marx), the distinction between the two I think is that you can almost WATCH the gears turning for Dimitri in print.

Its almost like there is a second allegory underneath the first one in his piece, but a self-referencing one. Pisarev was one of those who took De Omnibus Dubitandum (Descartes) and turned it into Jujitsu.

ya!) Liberals are a dead set. End of discussion. We have so much to learn and so much to do, we can't be wasting time on dry leafs. Let's get to it!

You shamed me, you putz! I will be over on Rusty's thread reading. See you tomorrow. Yes I have read most of Voltaire's stuff (the fuckin' lawyer sumbitch). I'll get back to you, (ya bastid!)...

I wasn't thinking about how to pronounce it when I picked my user name, obviously.... ;->