Liberals here want to blame conservatives for Ariz shooting?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

I thought Jim jumped the shark when he commented on Pelosi's looks. I laughed that an actuary was actually talking about someone else's looks. It was the one of the funniest thing I've heard on here. The SOA meetings have more ungroomed people than any event I've ever been to.

When did I do that?

It must be nice to debate others when you allow yourself to put words in the mouth of the other person that are made up.

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by PaulS

The SOA meetings have more ungroomed people than any event I've ever been to.

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

When did I do that?

Different Jim I think.


While I have been repeatedly accused of being right wing on here, I really don't align myself with a wing. I watch the vitriol spittled from both sides and have for the last twenty years while I politically sway left or right abouts the center. I have seen many on the left turn into viscous fools, all the kooks are on the right, just as much as right shouts of the kooks on the left.

Are we really any better of this? Why are we so freikin' divided? We just mire ourselves down so deep and bring us all down.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by JohnR

Different Jim I think.


While I have been repeatedly accused of being right wing on here, I really don't align myself with a wing. I watch the vitriol spittled from both sides and have for the last twenty years while I politically sway left or right abouts the center. I have seen many on the left turn into viscous fools, all the kooks are on the right, just as much as right shouts of the kooks on the left.

Are we really any better of this? Why are we so freikin' divided? We just mire ourselves down so deep and bring us all down.

That's a great question John. We are more polarized in our differences than we were 20 years ago, and I am honest enough to include myself in that "we", I'm as guilty as anyone (although I like to think I list my reasons when I slam someone).

I cannot imagine how it gets any better. I'm part of the conservative movement that believes that small government, low taxes, fiscal responsibility, individual liberty, strong national defense, right to life, and personal responsibility are the correct ingredients for a better future for our kids. I believe those things to my core, and I see not a shred of credible evidence to the contrary.

People on the left believe differently (in some cases the exact opposite), and just as strongly. How do you bring people together who are so diametrically opposed? I haven't a clue. Part of the problem, I think, is that with the threats of Al Queda and the dire financial situation that local/state/federal gov't is in, more people feel like we're at the edge of a precipace, so our differences really come to the forefront, because we rightly feel a sense of urgency.

For the record, I am a "Casulty" actuary, not a life/health actuary (which is what the SOA governs). We are more handsome as a group, although lamentably, not in my case.

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

How do you bring people together who are so diametrically opposed?

We could start by removing terms like Moonbat, Wingnut, Obamorons, Nazi, Tea-Baggers, and other derogatory names from the conversation.

Pretty sure that name calling doesn't lead to the free expression of ideas and open dialogue between people.

[RIROCKHOUND]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

We could start by removing terms like Moonbat, Wingnut, Obamorons, Nazi, Tea-Baggers, and other derogatory names from the conversation.

Pretty sure that name calling doesn't lead to the free expression of ideas and open dialogue between people.

Line of the week for me:

A colleauge from the right of Congressman Gibbons:
"You can disagree without disagreeable, and thats what Gabby was"

This discussion is pretty interesting. Of course it is from MSNBC, so some will discount it automatically.

Morning Joe

Around 10min, Barnicle had a decent take on it.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

We could start by removing terms like Moonbat, Wingnut, Obamorons, Nazi, Tea-Baggers, and other derogatory names from the conversation.

Pretty sure that name calling doesn't lead to the free expression of ideas and open dialogue between people.

so you want to ban certain terms that you don't like in order to foster free expression?....OK...set up the parameters...what is acceptable and what is not?

need to ban "insinuations" of such as well because there is a lot of that going on and it is equally distasteful and somewhat gutless....if you tend to freak out over things like words

we should start a list.....

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by scottw

so you want to ban certain terms that you don't like in order to foster free expression?....OK...set up the parameters...what is acceptable and what is not?

need to ban "insinuations" of such as well because there is a lot of that going on and it is equally distasteful and somewhat gutless....if you tend to freak out over things like words

we should start a list.....

I was thinking more along the lines of people actually doing it ON THEIR OWN.....maybe taking the high road and showing a little class in the process.

How does anybody think they can sway somebody to their way of thinking if they continuously insult people......

[scottw]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

I was thinking more along the lines of people actually doing it ON THEIR OWN.....maybe taking the high road and showing a little class in the process.

How does anybody think they can sway somebody to their way of thinking if they continuously insult people......

I'm offended by those that refer to"class"...the insinuation is that someone deemed to be without class is a lesser human and probably on a lower rung on the social ladder which is highly offensive particularly to minorities...

oh, and it's sooooo 70's

[Chesapeake Bill]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

I was thinking more along the lines of people actually doing it ON THEIR OWN.....maybe taking the high road and showing a little class in the process.

How does anybody think they can sway somebody to their way of thinking if they continuously insult people......

The basic problem is that you use the term "taking the high road." Unfortunately, many confuse this with taking the moral high ground...thus defending their stance from those who disagree. Getting this group to the table is like negotiating the Panmunjom ceasefire...

The preceding discussion thread about funding pensions has merit (much like the need to convert today's youth from social security to a form of 401K). However, how do we move off center? Do we pick a date, after which the new program is implemented? I say this because the existing groups have contracts that should be kept (lest the tables turn and everyone loses at any point). How to implement and maintain fairness would be a more appreciable diatribe IMHO.

Unfortunately, we have grown accustomed to the CNN "shock and awe" style of discussion.

[stcroixman]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

We could start by removing terms like Moonbat, Wingnut, Obamorons, Nazi, Tea-Baggers, and other derogatory names from the conversation.

Pretty sure that name calling doesn't lead to the free expression of ideas and open dialogue between people.

I'll second this. These guys on both sides calling each other names is childish. I guess there is no respect either? these are our leaders?

Like I always say - what the heck are voting for? they all get in office
and do what they want, not what we want.

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

When did I do that?

It must be nice to debate others when you allow yourself to put words in the mouth of the other person that are made up.

If you didn't say that, then I'll apologize. When I see insults in the first post, I usually just ignore the thread.