View Full Version : This explains Off Topic lunacy.
http://www.alternet.org/politics/143357/the_untouchables%3A_right-wingers_put_themselves_in_an_uncompromising_%27wor ld_apart%27?page=entire
Any of you sit for the interviews? Fits like a glove
Elements of that brand of conservatism can be seen in a report issued Friday by Democracy Corps based on interviews with groups of conservatives and moderates in Cleveland, Ohio.
"The self-identifying conservative Republicans who make up the base of the Republican Party stand a world apart from the rest of America," the report says, not because they stand in fervent ideological disagreement with President Obama and the mainstream of the Democratic Party but because they "identify themselves as part of a ‘mocked’ minority with a set of shared beliefs and knowledge, and commitment to oppose Obama that sets them apart from the majority in the country."
Among the characteristics of what the report calls "a world apart":
These conservative Republican voters believe Obama is deliberately and ruthlessly advancing a ‘secret agenda’ to bankrupt our country and dramatically expand government control over all aspects of our daily lives. They view this effort in sweeping terms, and cast a successful Obama presidency as the destruction of the United States as it was conceived by our founders and developed over the past 200 years.
This concern combines with a profound sense of collective identity. In our conversations, it was striking how these voters constantly characterized themselves as part of a group of individuals who share a set of beliefs, a unique knowledge, and a commitment of opposition to Obama that sets them apart from the majority of the country. They readily identify themselves as a minority in this country – a minority whose values are mocked and attacked by a liberal me- dia and class of elites. They also believe they possess a level of knowledge and understanding when it comes to politics and current events, one gained from a rejection of the mainstream media and an embrace of conservative media and pundits such as Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh, which sets them apart even more. Further, they believe this position leaves them with a responsibility to spread the word, to educate those who do not share their insights, and to take back the country that they love. Their faith in this country and its ideals leave them confident that their numbers will grow, and that they will ultimately defeat Barack Obama and the shadowy forces driving his hidden agenda
Have you read Alinsky?
Have you followed the history of Cuba and Chavez?
Destroy and replace with an alternative infrastructure - ie, czars.
There is far more here to be concerned about than Bush wire tapping SELECT phone calls and using water boarding on SELECT candidates.
You Chamberlins need to wake and smell the coffee.
delayjf
10-21-2009, 10:20 AM
These conservative Republican voters believe Obama is deliberately and ruthlessly advancing a ‘secret agenda’ to bankrupt our country and dramatically expand government control over all aspects of our daily lives. They view this effort in sweeping terms, and cast a successful Obama presidency as the destruction of the United States as it was conceived by our founders and developed over the past 200 years.
As opposed to the loons on the left that believe Bush orchastrated 9/11 in order to drive up the costs of oil.
Actually, reading the above, sounds about right. At the very least Obamacare WILL increase Government in everyone's life - where do you see government decreasing in its size and scope?
The article sounds like the predictable attempt to marginalize those who oppose Obama - giving Fox ranting, I don't think its working. Obama is being exposed for what he is and what he believes.
rastajenk
10-21-2009, 10:37 AM
Democracy Corps + Alternet = No credibililty whatsoever.
Singling out Beck and Llimbaugh is the easiest thing in the world these days for brain-dead libs. Truth is, there were conservatives long before Angry White Male Talk Radio, and they will be here long after that medium has been replaced with something else.
Beck made a good observation today - if the MSM would start doing their jobs and reporting all the news, his rating would go down because he would no longer be the sole source of most of the information.
I keep waiting, but none of the libs have been able to challenge either his or Rush's reporting of facts. They just keep dismissing the tea parties, so it will be doublt fun when they get bit like they did in 1993.
jballscalls
10-21-2009, 11:15 AM
Beck made a good observation today - if the MSM would start doing their jobs and reporting all the news, his rating would go down because he would no longer be the sole source of most of the information.
I keep waiting, but none of the libs have been able to challenge either his or Rush's reporting of facts. They just keep dismissing the tea parties, so it will be doublt fun when they get bit like they did in 1993.
beck's actually grown on me, and i enjoyed his recent special "Obamacare, a second opinion" where he had lots of doctors, med students etc.
If we all agree the mainstream media is liberal biased, abc, nbc, cnn, cbs, msnbc and all their ratings combine absolutely trump fox's, then why does fox always brag about their high ratings??
it would seem to me, since they are the only conservative news station and half the country is conservative, their ratings should have way more than 3 or 4 million people watching their shows?? i mean all the other networks are splitting up the liberal viewers into fifths or more.
all that being said, i think Fox puts out the best cable news/entertainment product of the like channels. It's funny though, their viewers always talk about the truth etc. they just report the true bad things about the left and good things about the right. the other channels just report the good things about the left and the bad about the right. they are all telling the truth, it's just what truths they are showing. Beck could choose to report good thing about Obama and bad things about republicans, but why would he want to do that, there are already 5 or more other networks doing that.
Greyfox
10-21-2009, 11:29 AM
hcap
Most research studies I've ever read present their methodology and sample.
I can't seem to find any of that for the one you are presenting above.
How large was the sample? Where was it done? What were the age ranges? How many men? How many women?
It looks as if no one interviewed anyone.
Instead someone just sat down and wrote an opinion piece and you are presenting it here as research.
Sorry hcap, the fish aren't biting today.
Methodology? Study the herd and their foibles.
http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/graphics/bush_sheep.jpg
Greyfox
10-21-2009, 02:31 PM
Baa. Baa.
A study without methodology? Someone's pulled the wool over your eyes.
Baa.
bigmack
10-21-2009, 02:34 PM
Better than these two
http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/993.jpg
Being nursed by The Dysfunctional 5
http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/22.jpg
so.cal.fan
10-21-2009, 02:45 PM
delayjf:
"As opposed to the loons on the left that believe Bush orchastrated 9/11 in order to drive up the costs of oil".
Did you happen to see Rosie O'Donnell on the View a while back, where she got this smug smile on her face and announced to the audience "eveyone knows steel doesn't melt"?
People in that audience even applauded that comment.
It was repeated on news broadcasts.
Rosie believes the Bush administration set up the 9/11 terrorist attacks and it was an inside job.
"Everybody knows steel doesn't melt" Everytime I hear that, I laugh.
Didn't Rosie go to school? How do they make rail road tracks, etc?
At least they got rid of Looney "everybody knows steel doesn't melt" Rosie.
:lol: :lol: :lol:
See your five, and call. The worst bunch of no-talent in broadcast TV.
Don't be modest BM, it's obvious you and your bud toe are staff writers.....
http://www.rachelmarsden.com/redeye2.jpg
rastajenk
10-21-2009, 02:55 PM
Even veteran Fox watchers probably don't know who they are. MSNBC sends out their jokers in prime time.
mostpost
10-21-2009, 02:57 PM
http://www.alternet.org/politics/143357/the_untouchables%3A_right-wingers_put_themselves_in_an_uncompromising_%27wor ld_apart%27?page=entire
Any of you sit for the interviews? Fits like a glove
Elements of that brand of conservatism can be seen in a report issued Friday by Democracy Corps based on interviews with groups of conservatives and moderates in Cleveland, Ohio.
"The self-identifying conservative Republicans who make up the base of the Republican Party stand a world apart from the rest of America," the report says, not because they stand in fervent ideological disagreement with President Obama and the mainstream of the Democratic Party but because they "identify themselves as part of a ‘mocked’ minority with a set of shared beliefs and knowledge, and commitment to oppose Obama that sets them apart from the majority in the country."
Among the characteristics of what the report calls "a world apart":
These conservative Republican voters believe Obama is deliberately and ruthlessly advancing a ‘secret agenda’ to bankrupt our country and dramatically expand government control over all aspects of our daily lives. They view this effort in sweeping terms, and cast a successful Obama presidency as the destruction of the United States as it was conceived by our founders and developed over the past 200 years.
This concern combines with a profound sense of collective identity. In our conversations, it was striking how these voters constantly characterized themselves as part of a group of individuals who share a set of beliefs, a unique knowledge, and a commitment of opposition to Obama that sets them apart from the majority of the country. They readily identify themselves as a minority in this country – a minority whose values are mocked and attacked by a liberal me- dia and class of elites. They also believe they possess a level of knowledge and understanding when it comes to politics and current events, one gained from a rejection of the mainstream media and an embrace of conservative media and pundits such as Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh, which sets them apart even more. Further, they believe this position leaves them with a responsibility to spread the word, to educate those who do not share their insights, and to take back the country that they love. Their faith in this country and its ideals leave them confident that their numbers will grow, and that they will ultimately defeat Barack Obama and the shadowy forces driving his hidden agenda
If I may highlight another portion of the article you linked to:
Having opted out of political discourse, they are not susceptible to any suasion. Rationality won't work because their arguments are faith-based rather than evidence-based. Better message control won't work. Improved strategies won't work. Grass-roots organizing won't work. Nothing will work because you cannot convince religious fanatics of anything other than what they already believe, even if their religion is political dogma.
We have seen proof of this right here. One of the Conservatives on this forum posts something, perhaps on health care. You or I, or one of the other
progressive voices, proves them wrong. We do this by pointing to language in the actual bill that says the opposite of what they are claiming.
The response from the right? They deny what is right in front of their eyes. Or they say that their interpretaion is different. Or they say it's all a trick. Or they ignore our posts and two days later we find the same silly opinion in another thread or further down in the same thread.
bigmack
10-21-2009, 03:04 PM
See your five, and call. The worst bunch of no-talent in broadcast TV.
As usual our team at least has women with decent gams. Beats the heck outta Andrea Mitchell & Rachel Maddow.
http://unmanly.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/chicken-legs1.jpghttp://z.about.com/d/hairremoval/1/0/p/1/-/-/moNique-legs1.jpg
Agreed, they're an unfunny bunch. Far less so than Mahr & Colbert.
Touché
Show Me the Wire
10-21-2009, 03:08 PM
mostpost:
Very humorous. When you post text from a bill, being asked which version of the six bills is it in, is not denying fact. What you post may be text in one version and not text in another. Until there is one final version there is no factual text anyone can point to.
So your conclusion about proving anyone wrong is based on a very faulty premise.
PaceAdvantage
10-21-2009, 03:16 PM
The very existence of this thread by hcap is proof that "they" are becoming very nervous...for whatever reason....
http://unmanly.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/chicken-legs1.jpg
Yeah, not the most attractive, but at least Andrea and Rachel have human brains. Unlike this bird-brained, pea-brained duo.
http://snarkerati.com/celebrity-gossip/files/2008/01/john_gibson.jpg
http://the44diaries.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/glenn-beck-goes-crazy-in-radio-show-pin-head-funny-comedy.jpg
Tell me beck is not the most MAUDLIN man on TV.
if you are not nervous , you are not paying attention! ;)
Show Me the Wire
10-21-2009, 03:31 PM
The very existence of this thread by hcap is proof that "they" are becoming very nervous...for whatever reason....
For many legitimate reasons. First, the progressive wing championed a man without leadership qualities or governing experience for leadership of the dem party and the Nation. It is evident Obama and his administration has no governing ability and its only leadership ability is to lead attacks on any person or organization that does not accept the administration's propaganda.
Second, the late Sen. Kennedy was to be the real power behind the throne. Kennedy would have held the Clinton faction of the party at bay while helping Obama govern. Without Kennedy Obama can not control his own party and is easy prey for the Clinton faction and has nobody helping him govern. I am serious as a heart-attack about the Kennedy-Clinton dynamics. This dynamic will be Obama's downfall.
The progressives have plenty to worry about.
We have seen proof of this right here. One of the Conservatives on this forum posts something, perhaps on health care. You or I, or one of the other progressive voices, proves them wrong. We do this by pointing to language in the actual bill that says the opposite of what they are claiming.
The response from the right? They deny what is right in front of their eyes. Or they say that their interpretaion is different. Or they say it's all a trick. Or they ignore our posts and two days later we find the same silly opinion in another thread or further down in the same thread.The study may not be scientific, but as soon as I read it I could have aworn they used the right here as their survey group. It is absolutely uncanny how accurate their results and analysis is for Pa off-topic.
It is obvious the righties here are a 100% accurate microcosm of what is happening among the extreme rightwingnuts out there. No longer necessary to scan the internet for the extreme rights' crazy antics. Like the Nielsen ratings. Take a small control group and record their viewing habits. Same could be done by President Obama to be one step ahead of current loonie conspiracy theories. Just assign a staffer to monitor the Pa off topic board.
Probably take a load off the Secret Service and help keep the President safe :cool:
bigmack
10-21-2009, 03:36 PM
Unlike this bird-brained, pea-brained duo.
Gibson & Beck debating Maddow & Mitchell would be like William Buckley & John McLaughlin debating you & Anita Dunn.
http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/1630-political-bush-three-s.gif
Show Me the Wire
10-21-2009, 03:37 PM
Let me remind you hcap, 3 out of 5 on the opposite side of you.
PaceAdvantage
10-21-2009, 03:41 PM
Probably take a load off the Secret Service and help keep the President safe :cool:Now now, don't be a total asshole.
You usually know how to dance the line, but in this instance, you just crossed over.
I love this. Even in victory - they got the House, the Senate, the White house - they still whine and cry! They are still losers. :lol::lol::lol:
They are mellllllllting!
Now now, don't be a total asshole.
You usually know how to dance the line, but in this instance, you just crossed over.How many times have Tom and others called for ***** assasination or ******* elimination as traitors. And no smiley faces after their remarks lightening the accusation. I joke about off topic and you get upset..
Probably take a load off the Secret Service and help keep the President safe :cool:
If this crosses the line what about calling Obama a lying, murdering POS
I would think that crosses a line.
rastajenk
10-21-2009, 03:56 PM
But it's the truth.
Show Me the Wire
10-21-2009, 04:02 PM
But it's the truth. :lol:
How many times have Tom and others called for ****** assasination or ***** elimination as traitors. And no smiley faces after their remarks lightening the accusation. I joke about off topic and you get upset..
If this crosses the line what about calling Obama a lying, murdering POS
I would think that crosses a line.
Never.
As far as elimination as traitors, yes - of course, as they ARE traitors and we have a criminal procedure to be followed. As far a POS, just my version of rutabaga, which you had no problems with. Man up, hcap. You guys won - I am the loser here. It just ain't right I get to STILL have all the fun! :lol:
And all the abuse I have to take around here. One wonders why I don't just cut back to 200-300 posts a day. Man oh man! :rolleyes: (You ever wonder how many of my post were lost when the first board crashed? Boggles the mind!)
DJofSD
10-21-2009, 04:08 PM
I love this. Even in victory - they got the House, the Senate, the White house - they still whine and cry! They are still losers. :lol::lol::lol:
They are mellllllllting!
BTW, Blur-ray version of The Wizard of Oz is pretty good. Recommended.
So Tom do you think I crossed the line by saying..
Probably take a load off the Secret Service and help keep the President safe :cool:
His bias is so total and complete, that he is not capable of even pretending to be "fair and balanced":lol:
mostpost
10-21-2009, 04:19 PM
delayjf:
"As opposed to the loons on the left that believe Bush orchastrated 9/11 in order to drive up the costs of oil".
Did you happen to see Rosie O'Donnell on the View a while back, where she got this smug smile on her face and announced to the audience "eveyone knows steel doesn't melt"?
People in that audience even applauded that comment.
It was repeated on news broadcasts.
Rosie believes the Bush administration set up the 9/11 terrorist attacks and it was an inside job.
"Everybody knows steel doesn't melt" Everytime I hear that, I laugh.
Didn't Rosie go to school? How do they make rail road tracks, etc?
At least they got rid of Looney "everybody knows steel doesn't melt" Rosie.
:lol: :lol: :lol:
Are you using the above to make fun of Rosie or to prove that the fires from the jet fuel caused the towers to collapse? If the former, knock yourself out.
If the latter, you have knocked yourself out. Steel melts at 2500 degrees farenheit. The temperature of jet fuel burning in the open air, according to wikipedia, is 549 degrees.
Jet A-1
Flash point: 38 °C (100.4 °F)
Autoignition temperature: 210 °C (410 °F)
Freezing point: −47 °C (−52.6 °F). (−40 °C (−40 °F) for JET A)
Open air burning temperatures: 287.5 °C (549.5 °F)
Density at 15 °C (59 °F): 0.8075 kg/L
Specific energy 43.15 MJ/kg [4]
Therefore the burning jet fuel could not have melted the steel in the WTC.
Which of itself does not prove that the buildings collapsed due to previously set charges. Nor does it prove that there was a conspiracy, known or unknown to the White House.
Gibson & Beck debating Maddow & Mitchell would be like William Buckley & John McLaughlin debating you & Anita Dunn.
http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/1630-political-bush-three-s.gifP-u-l-e-a-s-e! Gibson and beck are not fit to mentioned in the same sentence as Buckley or McLaughlin. Beck would have to bring his blackboard, and Gibson supply the chalk. Those 2 tasks alone would deplete both of all further mental energy required for debate. Pathetic.
Show Me the Wire
10-21-2009, 04:42 PM
Notice how hcap and mostpost ignore facts. The fact they backed an inexperienced person to lead the dem party and the Nation. The fact that Obama's administration is showing its inability to govern everyday. The fact of the rift in their own political party, which will culminate in Obama being a one-term president.
Instead they prefer tangental issues, like Rosie and Gibson and beck are not fit to mentioned in the same sentence as Buckley or McLaughlin.
Nothing of substance is posted. ddog is right no bread, but alot of circus.
delayjf
10-21-2009, 05:05 PM
Therefore the burning jet fuel could not have melted the steel in the WTC.
Agreed, but nobody is contending that jet fuel by itself melted the steel which led to the buildings collapse. You don't have to melt steel to induce structural failure. Damage caused by the impact, plus the weakening of the structure due to the heat generated AND the weight of the building combined is what caused the building to fail.
A few years back in LA, a fuel truck crashed and caught fire under a overpass, the overpass collapsed due to the same factors that brought down the WTC.
DJofSD
10-21-2009, 05:12 PM
If I recall what Nova had concluded, the WTC collapsed when the heat of the fire caused the cross beams to sag enough that the structural integrity of the entire building was compromised.
http://quicksilverscreen.com/watch?video=34488
Notice how hcap and mostpost ignore facts. The fact they backed an inexperienced person to lead the dem party and the Nation.
You are out of it. What exactly does your claim about an "inexperienced person" have to do with the study? Other than when you repeat this absurd mantra-make your extreme rightwing brain explode into mush?
I posted a study that has an uncanny almost word for word repetition of the right wing here. That is a fact. Read the study, and I am sure you will think you wrote the comments yourself or with the help of every righty on the board.
So whether or not it is scientific, it describes the righties here to a tea. (Party?)
The Original study PDF..
http://www.gqrr.com/articles/2398/5488_TheVerySeparateWorldofConservativeRepublicans 101609.pdf
BenDiesel26
10-21-2009, 05:44 PM
Are you using the above to make fun of Rosie or to prove that the fires from the jet fuel caused the towers to collapse? If the former, knock yourself out.
If the latter, you have knocked yourself out. Steel melts at 2500 degrees farenheit. The temperature of jet fuel burning in the open air, according to wikipedia, is 549 degrees.
Therefore the burning jet fuel could not have melted the steel in the WTC.
Which of itself does not prove that the buildings collapsed due to previously set charges. Nor does it prove that there was a conspiracy, known or unknown to the White House.
You want to get into what happens to steel at high temperatures? I have a Master's degree in structural engineering, and I am a year away from a doctorate. Let's rock. By the way, the steel didn't have to melt to take the building down. Temperatures that high are most likely going to lower the yield point of steel, and most certainly cause excessive deflections within the building, which was a tube structure relying on the floor diaphragms for stability. We can talk more if you want. Go right ahead. By the way, it makes absolutely 100% perfect sense why the building fell down to about 99.9% of structural engineers in America. You can pick my brain if you want.
bigmack
10-21-2009, 05:50 PM
We can talk more if you want. Go right ahead. By the way, tt makes absolutely 100% perfect sense why the building fell down to about 99.9% of structural engineers in America. You can pick my brain if you want.
Be careful, he has Wikipedia on his side. His take on CBS news usurped a gentleman who has worked there for 28 years.
Your hands are full. Good luck.
http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/table_cat_distracted.gif
Show Me the Wire
10-21-2009, 06:02 PM
You are out of it. What exactly does your claim about an "inexperienced person" have to do with the study? Other than when you repeat this absurd mantra-make your extreme rightwing brain explode into mush?
I posted a study that has an uncanny almost word for word repetition of the right wing here. That is a fact. Read the study, and I am sure you will think you wrote the comments yourself or with the help of every righty on the board.
So whether or not it is scientific, it describes the righties here to a tea. (Party?)
The Original study PDF..
http://www.gqrr.com/articles/2398/5488_TheVerySeparateWorldofConservativeRepublicans 101609.pdf
As PA posted the whole reason for this thread is deflection of the real issues. Real issues as Obama's inexperience to lead, which Hillary was correct about when she leveled her charge. Also, the civil war in the dem party. The study is a smoke screen so the progressives can avoid any real discussion of the problems. It is just as relevant as all those polls you use to post.
If your definition of a conservative is someone that understands Obama is inexperienced and clueless than you are correct.
As PA posted the whole reason for this thread is deflection of the real issues. Real issues as Obama's inexperience to lead, which Hillary was correct about when she leveled her charge. Also, the civil war in the dem party. The study is a smoke screen so the progressives can avoid any real discussion of the problems.I don't care what Pa said. I started this thread to illustrate the flakiness of the Pa off topic paranoids. Like you.
Remove the timber in thine own repug eye before you say anything about the Dems "civil war". You guys are broken up good. Just the fact that Palin is favored among the extreme righties, is gonna keep you fighting for years.
Show Me the Wire
10-21-2009, 06:46 PM
Stating that an inexperienced man is inexperienced is paranoia :lol: You are a hoot.
I guess flattery is the sincerest form of imitation, since the dems are fragmenting themselves like the pubs.
The difference the closer it comes to the elections the dems will fragment more over Obama, while the pubs will congeal. How do you tell a sitting president not to run? Jimmy carter part deux.
BTW I don't believe I am part of the underdog minority. I am in the 3 out of 5 majority. :bang:
mostpost
10-21-2009, 06:59 PM
You want to get into what happens to steel at high temperatures? I have a Master's degree in structural engineering, and I am a year away from a doctorate. Let's rock. By the way, the steel didn't have to melt to take the building down. Temperatures that high are most likely going to lower the yield point of steel, and most certainly cause excessive deflections within the building, which was a tube structure relying on the floor diaphragms for stability. We can talk more if you want. Go right ahead. By the way, it makes absolutely 100% perfect sense why the building fell down to about 99.9% of structural engineers in America. You can pick my brain if you want.
I am not a structural Engineer. In fact as a kid I failed at everything I tried to build with my Tinkertoys and Erector Set. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
To the limited extent that I understand it, your explanation makes sense. Are you saying that the heat caused the beams to move or bend? And that put undue stress on areas which were not accustomed to that stress? And this process cascaded and multiplied until the stresses were too severe to be withstood?
BTW my intention in my reply to So. Cal.fan was to show that the heat from the fire ALONE was not enough to collapse the towers. And, I thought I was clear in my last two sentences that I did not believe there was prior knowledge.
DJofSD
10-21-2009, 08:12 PM
To the limited extent that I understand it, your explanation makes sense. Are you saying that the heat caused the beams to move or bend? And that put undue stress on areas which were not accustomed to that stress? And this process cascaded and multiplied until the stresses were too severe to be withstood?
BTW my intention in my reply to So. Cal.fan was to show that the heat from the fire ALONE was not enough to collapse the towers. And, I thought I was clear in my last two sentences that I did not believe there was prior knowledge.
The building was designed to be stressed. That stress and the ability to transfer loads is what makes it possible to sway in a stong wind and remain standing. Or, to be able to absorb the impact of a passenger airliner and remain standing. And it is the way all modern high rises work -- the outer wall works in conjuction with the cross elements. It is just like the interior structure of your bones.
When the cross members that was a part of the floor structure were able to deform due to the heat, the floor collapsed and set off a chain reaction.
BenDiesel26
10-21-2009, 08:40 PM
I am not a structural Engineer. In fact as a kid I failed at everything I tried to build with my Tinkertoys and Erector Set. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
To the limited extent that I understand it, your explanation makes sense. Are you saying that the heat caused the beams to move or bend? And that put undue stress on areas which were not accustomed to that stress? And this process cascaded and multiplied until the stresses were too severe to be withstood?
BTW my intention in my reply to So. Cal.fan was to show that the heat from the fire ALONE was not enough to collapse the towers. And, I thought I was clear in my last two sentences that I did not believe there was prior knowledge.
First off, nobody will ever know exactly what happened. The most accepted explanations make sense though and in some ways are similar to one another. Computer modeling has shown them to make sense to the extent that computer modeling can (for a building that complex, its tough). The building was a tubular structure, in that it was a series of closely spaced columns around the perimeter of the building (resembling a tube) with a core tube in the middle w/the elevator and staircases etc. I believe. The building is obviously more complex than this, but in short summary the perimeter columns play a large role in both lateral (wind, etc.) and gravity load resisting capacity. With that, most theories generally accept that 1. Exterior columns were severed on impact forcing the structure to redistribute the loads (obviously, less columns means other columns are taking on more load then they were previously) 2. Fire proofing was damaged on impact (fire proofing is designed to last for so many hours on structural elements)
A couple of theories are plausible. The main ones revolve around where the floor joists connect to the exterior columns. Heat from the fire (doesn't have to be melted steel) would most assuredly due to the design of the building cause the joists and floors to sag excessively and create undue stress at the connections (pulling the exterior columns inward towards the building center). On the other hand, its quite possible thermal expansion of the floor could have pushed the columns outward. Either way, you have a huge stability problem. In addition, heat in that range generally lowers the yield point, stiffness (important in buckling) and ultimate strength of steel. It is from here that a lot of theories begin.
The most prominent theory for the two main towers is the "pancake theory" in which these connections fail. It is somewhat evidenced by phone calls on people from the floors above that stated the floors below were missing. Once the connections failed the floors would collapse onto those below, until those floors could no longer handle the floor above and would continue to collapse. At some point, once enough floors had collapsed, the unbraced length of the columns (distance from top non-collapsed floor to the next floor still in existence) in the building had increased tremendously and the columns would buckle (the longer a column is, the less load it can carry), causing the floors above to go as the building could not longer carry their weight. Keep in mind it was missing columns from impact as well. Other reports blame thermal expansion of the floor system rather than straight connection failures, but in either case the pancake is plausible and evidenced by seismic activity and photographs which showed the towers leaning and bulging in some locations.
But the thing with the steel melting is VERY misunderstood--did fire bring the building down, YES. Did fire melt the steel, NO. Rosie did not know what she was talking about. It didn't have to melt. That is the point that most people do not understand. I also remember reading somewhere that had the water main not been severed by one of the buildings collapsing, then WTC 7 would have never collapsed as its sprinkler system would have prevented it.
mostpost
10-21-2009, 08:58 PM
First off, nobody will ever know exactly what happened. The most accepted explanations make sense though and in some ways are similar to one another. Computer modeling has shown them to make sense to the extent that computer modeling can (for a building that complex, its tough). The building was a tubular structure, in that it was a series of closely spaced columns around the perimeter of the building (resembling a tube) with a core tube in the middle w/the elevator and staircases etc. I believe. The building is obviously more complex than this, but in short summary the perimeter columns play a large role in both lateral (wind, etc.) and gravity load resisting capacity. With that, most theories generally accept that 1. Exterior columns were severed on impact forcing the structure to redistribute the loads (obviously, less columns means other columns are taking on more load then they were previously) 2. Fire proofing was damaged on impact (fire proofing is designed to last for so many hours on structural elements)
A couple of theories are plausible. The main ones revolve around where the floor joists connect to the exterior columns. Heat from the fire (doesn't have to be melted steel) would most assuredly due to the design of the building cause the joists and floors to sag excessively and create undue stress at the connections (pulling the exterior columns inward towards the building center). On the other hand, its quite possible thermal expansion of the floor could have pushed the columns outward. Either way, you have a huge stability problem. In addition, heat in that range generally lowers the yield point, stiffness (important in buckling) and ultimate strength of steel. It is from here that a lot of theories begin.
The most prominent theory for the two main towers is the "pancake theory" in which these connections fail. It is somewhat evidenced by phone calls on people from the floors above that stated the floors below were missing. Once the connections failed the floors would collapse onto those below, until those floors could no longer handle the floor above and would continue to collapse. At some point, once enough floors had collapsed, the unbraced length of the columns (distance from top non-collapsed floor to the next floor still in existence) in the building had increased tremendously and the columns would buckle (the longer a column is, the less load it can carry), causing the floors above to go as the building could not longer carry their weight. Keep in mind it was missing columns from impact as well. Other reports blame thermal expansion of the floor system rather than straight connection failures, but in either case the pancake is plausible and evidenced by seismic activity and photographs which showed the towers leaning and bulging in some locations.
But the thing with the steel melting is VERY misunderstood--did fire bring the building down, YES. Did fire melt the steel, NO. Rosie did not know what she was talking about. It didn't have to melt. That is the point that most people do not understand. I also remember reading somewhere that had the water main not been severed by one of the buildings collapsing, then WTC 7 would have never collapsed as its sprinkler system would have prevented it.
Thank you. A clear and logical explanation. I appreciate it.
Show Me the Wire
10-21-2009, 09:04 PM
Today Rosie's publicist announced Rosie and her special someone are working through couple's issues. Timely announcement.
GaryG
10-21-2009, 09:13 PM
I'll bet Rosie gave her a good tongue lashing.....:eek:
PaceAdvantage
10-21-2009, 11:00 PM
How many times have Tom and others called for ****** assasinationNEVER. And I should ban your ****ing lying ass just for insinuating such ****ing bullshit.
Sailwolf
10-21-2009, 11:24 PM
http://wonkette.com/411731/liberals-finally-did-this-savvy-pr-thing
bigmack
10-22-2009, 02:23 AM
P-u-l-e-a-s-e! Gibson and beck are not fit to mentioned in the same sentence as Buckley or McLaughlin. Beck would have to bring his blackboard, and Gibson supply the chalk. Those 2 tasks alone would deplete both of all further mental energy required for debate. Pathetic.
I trust you'd be willing to admit you're an inclusive/diversive/progressive. All these accusations sound straight from your cranium. Or fed to it from the usual suspects.
If nothing else, Beck brings out the complete absurdity of your camp.
JjSE3qQvgsk
NJ Stinks
10-22-2009, 02:43 AM
If nothing else, Beck brings out the complete absurdity of your camp.
I'm just curious. How is Beck for blue collar workers but against unions as he said in this video? Is that like having your cake and eating it too? :rolleyes:
I guess he really likes Wal-mart employees too because they are doing so well without a strong-armed union or any other kind of union. ;)
I say this
Probably take a load off the Secret Service and help keep the President safe
And you say this
Now now, don't be a total asshole.
You usually know how to dance the line, but in this instance, you just crossed over.
My statement in context.....
It is obvious the righties here are a 100% accurate microcosm of what is happening among the extreme rightwingnuts out there. No longer necessary to scan the internet for the extreme rights' crazy antics. Like the Nielsen ratings. Take a small control group and record their viewing habits. Same could be done by President Obama to be one step ahead of current loonie conspiracy theories. Just assign a staffer to monitor the Pa off topic board.
Probably take a load off the Secret Service and help keep the President safe :cool: And I crossed the line? Maybe claiming posts calling for the Presidents assassination was overboard, but Tom has said the following.
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=59129&page=2&pp=15&highlight=murderer
Post 15
Tom
Obama is a far greater threat than Osama.
We need to focus on the real enemy.
Tom post 26
Obambi = liar, murderer, thieve, smoker, coward. Sums him up pretty good.
Oh, forgot, enemy of the people.
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=58860&highlight=murderer
Tom post 15
Obama is an enemy of America and we better all realize that and take appropriate actions soon. This nut case is more dangerous tha Bin Laden ever was and more than Al Qeda ever will be.
A proven liar, murderer, and thief is what he is.
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=57485&highlight=murderer
Tom post 9
We KNOW he has killed un-indicted Pakistanis at least twice.
We KNOW he has declared that all terrorists have the same rights as we do.
Therefore, I conclude, Obama is a:
1. liar
2. murderer
3. probably not a citizen
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=55797&page=2&pp=15&highlight=murderer
Tom post 17
This applies to the Obama's as well.
A Terrorist president and a pig of a first lady who was ashamed of this country until she got outed.
Neither one is fit to walk the streets of this country.
And I crossed the line?
Obama is an enemy of America and we better all realize that and take appropriate actions soon.What does this mean?
Problem searching for Tom's posts are that 1) There are so many and 2)the search facility is limited. To find these I have only gone back as far as March without checking ever thread on off topic.
Found another questionable Tom quote.
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=60424&highlight=murderer
Tom post 5
Obama is evil.
He is not stupid.
He is not naive.
He is evil, rotten to the core.
I called him the Anti Christ and I still believe it.
The new Axis of Evil - Obama, Pelosi, Reid, they are enemies of America.
Top of the list - above Bin Laden.
BTW, libs, your boy murdered another one in Pakistan.....was he read his rights?
Barry Obama - mass murdering serial killer.
He is of the same class and caliber ( calibrate?) as Jeffery Dahmer.
Maybe lower.
Not a smiley anywhere
And I crossed the line?
So Tom do you think I crossed the line by saying..
No. But it presses the envelope. I do it all the time, too.
Just take responsibility for it if you do it.
BTW, the difference is, all that you qouted me as saying is TRUE.
You lied.:D
His bias is so total and complete, that he is not capable of even pretending to be "fair and balanced":lol:
Prove that, Mr. Hanky. Prove that. I dare you.
You will not be able to find anything I threw at Obama I did not throw at the repubs as well, including Bush,
Put up of shut up.
NJ Stinks
10-22-2009, 10:00 AM
No. But it presses the envelope. I do it all the time, too.
Just take responsibility for it if you do it.
BTW, the difference is, all that you qouted me as saying is TRUE.
You lied.:D
No. The big difference is that PA already told us that there is no line for you to cross, Tom. In football parlance, the liberals here are the Oakland Raiders. We know if a play is reviewed, we're screwed.
But, like the Silver & Black, that doesn't mean we won't show up to play every week! :jump: So you can spare me the "if you don't like it here, why do you keep coming back?", PA. I'll just assume you said it. ;)
Bochall
10-22-2009, 10:18 AM
Cant we get back to talking about Rosie O'donnell?...wonder if SHE would melt. Hey Tom, I thought you liked talking about Rosie...you have a picture of her in your avatar!!:D :D :D :lol:
GaryG
10-22-2009, 10:23 AM
No. The big difference is that PA already told us that there is no line for you to cross, Tom. In football parlance, the liberals here are the Oakland Raiders. We know if a play is reviewed, we're screwed.
But, like the Silver & Black, that doesn't mean we won't show up to play every week! :jump: So you can spare me the "if you don't like it here, why do you keep coming back?", PA. I'll just assume you said it. ;)You left of center types are always the victims and the downtrodden. The lefties here at PA rarely post on racing, just here for the pain I guess.
exactaplayer
10-22-2009, 10:28 AM
No. The big difference is that PA already told us that there is no line for you to cross, Tom. In football parlance, the liberals here are the Oakland Raiders. We know if a play is reviewed, we're screwed.
Well put NJ stinks,
This is the reason I do not get into extended debates with those on the right here. No way to go tit for tat with the ref being against me before the game starts.
A prime example is the neo-nazi flag being used here and on the horsey side against tos. (Political statement)
jballscalls
10-22-2009, 10:35 AM
You left of center types are always the victims and the downtrodden. The lefties here at PA rarely post on racing, just here for the pain I guess.
is that all you do is make untrue stereotypes?
46zilzal
10-22-2009, 11:22 AM
You left of center types are always the victims and the downtrodden. The lefties here at PA rarely post on racing, just here for the pain I guess.
That is not true at all
HUSKER55
10-22-2009, 11:28 AM
I think toms avitar is of someone else
NJ Stinks
10-22-2009, 11:30 AM
You left of center types are always the victims and the downtrodden. The lefties here at PA rarely post on racing, just here for the pain I guess.
I rarely post on racing because this is not the only horseracing forum I'm in. I prefer not to repeat myself online if possible. But I do read up there from time to time...
But when it comes to politics, this forum is primarily my choice online. :ThmbUp: The entertainment value here is huge! :D
As for feeling like a victim, you must be referring to those 8 years living with GWB in charge.
No. The big difference is that PA already told us that there is no line for you to cross, Tom. In football parlance, the liberals here are the Oakland Raiders. We know if a play is reviewed, we're screwed.
But, like the Silver & Black, that doesn't mean we won't show up to play every week! :jump: So you can spare me the "if you don't like it here, why do you keep coming back?", PA. I'll just assume you said it. ;)
Oh, the victim card again. Sucks to be you, right? Mean old PA is on your case all the time.
For the record, I have had posts deleted, I have had numerous threads closed that I was in........try growing up. Like I told hcap - if you press it, accept the consequences. I cross lines some time, and I get deleted or closed - that's life. No whining allowed.
Here's a little secret - this is PA's borad. We are just guests here.
Well put NJ stinks,
This is the reason I do not get into extended debates with those on the right here. No way to go tit for tat with the ref being against me before the game starts.
A prime example is the neo-nazi flag being used here and on the horsey side against tos. (Political statement)
:lol::lol: You actually believe that?
Perhaps if you tried to go tit for tat with FACTS instead of name calling or personal attack, you would get somewhere. Try that once and see what it gets you. Better yet, lead us to one thread where what you accuse occurred. One thread. You and Mr, Hanky can confer if you like.
One thread.
Greyfox
10-22-2009, 01:00 PM
:lol::lol: Better yet, lead us to one thread where what you accuse occurred. One thread. .
One thread? Maybe earlier in this very thread??:blush:
Post #?
I do not see it anywhere and I just re-read every post.
Greyfox
10-22-2009, 01:11 PM
Post #?
I do not see it anywhere and I just re-read every post.
That's okay Tom. If you don't see it.
But "reading into," beneath the lines, and connecting the dots on hcap's
defence of self re: some Posts you made , there is some merit to the Oakland Raiders vs. Referees argument. No direct accusations have been there, but even the stupidest jury in the world might conclude that there were innuendos.
At any rate, it doesn't matter to me. I still love your posts.
(P.S. It might be a hoot to see the ones that you had deleted.)
You want to get into what happens to steel at high temperatures? I have a Master's degree in structural engineering, and I am a year away from a doctorate. Let's rock. By the way, the steel didn't have to melt to take the building down. Temperatures that high are most likely going to lower the yield point of steel, and most certainly cause excessive deflections within the building, which was a tube structure relying on the floor diaphragms for stability. We can talk more if you want. Go right ahead. By the way, it makes absolutely 100% perfect sense why the building fell down to about 99.9% of structural engineers in America. You can pick my brain if you want.
Yep.right on point and obviously correct.
The whole Bush conspiracy thing is so nuts that even nuts shouldn't be conned into that IF they were still thinking beings.
Prove that, Mr. Hanky. Prove that. I dare you.
You will not be able to find anything I threw at Obama I did not throw at the repubs as well, including Bush,
Put up of shut up.
???? i missed the Bush is anti-christ ref?????
Perhaps you could throw that up now??? Just to keep your f/b deal intact.
It's doesn't take much reading between the lines to see the intent behind the posting in light of contributions(praise) of the "White bro" dudes.
Is the "term" not allowed here? Interesting, or is it just my browser or has the takeover started already?
:D
NJ Stinks
10-22-2009, 02:40 PM
Oh, the victim card again. Sucks to be you, right? Mean old PA is on your case all the time.
For the record, I have had posts deleted, I have had numerous threads closed that I was in........try growing up. Like I told hcap - if you press it, accept the consequences. I cross lines some time, and I get deleted or closed - that's life. No whining allowed.
Here's a little secret - this is PA's borad. We are just guests here.
Where to begin....
a) I enjoy being a guest here at PA in case you haven't noticed. And I grasp that it's PA's board. Having said that, who doesn't enjoy complaining about the ref? :p
b) Having a post deleted or a thread closed is not the same as PA telling Hcap in this thread that:
Now now, don't be a total asshole.
You usually know how to dance the line, but in this instance, you just crossed over.
Am I wrong about b) above, Mr. Fair & Balanced? (That's you just in case you were wondering, Tom. ;) )
hazzardm
10-22-2009, 02:43 PM
I'll bet Rosie gave her a good tongue lashing.....:eek:
Eeeewwwwww. LOL :lol:
Where to begin....
a) I enjoy being a guest here at PA in case you haven't noticed. And I grasp that it's PA's board. Having said that, who doesn't enjoy complaining about the ref? :p
b) Having a post deleted or a thread closed is not the same as PA telling Hcap in this thread that:
Am I wrong about b) above, Mr. Fair & Balanced? (That's you just in case you were wondering, Tom. ;) )
Your post makes no sense whatsoever. PA thought he crossed the line and called him out. What the hell is your point here? He should keep quiet? Hint....English.
Tom, I never said you should not post anything you want. For that matter I am against censorship in general.
My post mentioned an Obama staffer and/or the Secret Service following Pa off topic-using it as a sample of rightwing conspiracy theories. As the Nielsen ratings-give advertisers a feel for what the larger audiences are following. It was joking as well as a serious point. My overall point was that the study I linked to, whether "scientific" or not was spot on as to what was going on in the minds of many rightwingers here, many rightwingers as a whole, and the minds of pundits like Beck and Hannity.
My objection is that my post was singled out. It was rather tame compared to some of your gems. I might add that although I searched for your comments about an armed march on DC to kick out politicians (the Dems), I did not find them. I am sure you remember me commenting sarcastically that the out of condition "arm-chair" marchers doing a semi-revolutionary "march" could not be very effective and would get their butts kicked royally :rolleyes: I also realize that much of your armed march on DC was a joke. At least I thought so then. But you were not joking in all in your incendiary remarks about Obama? Some of which I posted. So were you serious about the armed march?
And very hard to tell if you were joking here or not.....
Obama is an enemy of America and we better all realize that and take appropriate actions soon. This nut case is more dangerous tha Bin Laden ever was and more than Al Qeda ever will be.
A proven liar, murderer, and thief is what he is.
Are you joking? What does "take appropriate actions soon" mean?
Prove that, Mr. Hanky. Prove that. I dare you.
You will not be able to find anything I threw at Obama I did not throw at the repubs as well, including Bush,
Put up of shut up.
Ahh.. I was referring to PA, but hey I'll take two birds with one stone.:lol:
PaceAdvantage
10-22-2009, 09:35 PM
Found another questionable Tom quote.
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=60424&highlight=murderer
Tom post 5
Not a smiley anywhere
And I crossed the line?Yes, you certainly 100% did cross the line. You know you crossed the line, and nothing you have posted comes close to what you tried to do in your now edited post.
Evidently, you are unaware of the seriousness of what you posted earlier, and you continue to be blissfully unaware.
Good thing I'm here to remind you.
PaceAdvantage
10-22-2009, 09:38 PM
Well put NJ stinks,
This is the reason I do not get into extended debates with those on the right here. No way to go tit for tat with the ref being against me before the game starts.
A prime example is the neo-nazi flag being used here and on the horsey side against tos. (Political statement)We've been through this already. When Warner Bros. eliminates the flag from their Dukes of Hazzard movie (a movie that was not about racism or Neo-nazis) which was released only a few years ago, I will add that to the list of banned images here on PaceAdvantage.com.
You let me know when Warner Bros. makes that move.
That Flag flew long before there was a nazi.
PaceAdvantage
10-22-2009, 09:42 PM
b) Having a post deleted or a thread closed is not the same as PA telling Hcap in this thread that:
Am I wrong about b) above, Mr. Fair & Balanced? (That's you just in case you were wondering, Tom. ;) )I take pride in the fact that I RARELY, RARELY, RARELY call anyone names.
Hcap's post completely crossed such a serious line in my book, that he is lucky I didn't ban him immediately.
If you can't understand this, that's not my problem.
PaceAdvantage
10-22-2009, 09:45 PM
Are you joking? What does "take appropriate actions soon" mean?It means vote the idiot out...what the hell else do you think it would mean?
You DO NOT MESS AROUND with what you are messing around with here on a public message board.
It's simply not done...not on my watch. If you still don't know what I'm talking about, I invite you to answer the Private Message I sent you a day or two ago that has still gone unanswered.
PaceAdvantage
10-22-2009, 09:50 PM
This is the reason I do not get into extended debates with those on the right here.No, the reason you don't get into extended debates is because you were already kicked off of this board once already, and it's likely you don't wish to get kicked off again...
Such bitching and moaning and crying, yet they ALWAYS come back for more...
hcap, keep searching with my name in the blank space and you will find many posts where I have advocated a national strike, a shutting down of America by the non-anchors, to show the free loaders what it is like when we stop taking care of them and to show the world what a dipstick OBama is.
That is appropriate action soon.
I have said we should take the Alinsky method to the dems - follow them home, disrupt their lifes, protest in front of their houses, you know, likw ACORN did when they bussed union thugs to the homes of AIG exectives. I have advocated that we totally adopt the community organizing tactics that OBama used to get elected.
That is approriate action soon.
I have advocated we petion the World Court to arrest Obama and cahrge him with murder for his attack on innocent Pakistanis in a non-war zone.
That is approriate action soon.
Your reading skills are spotty at best. Cherry picking is so unbecoming yet so convenient.
cj's dad
10-22-2009, 10:19 PM
Every single working American who is dis-enchanted with the direction the country is taking should stay home for a week. As Tom said, shut it down and let the anchors see what would happen if the $$$ dried up. Not that they wouldn't receive their gov'mint checks on time; it would at least draw attention to who is actually PAYING THE BILLS !!!
Maybe we should all just sneak into Mexico and regroup there! :D
exactaplayer
10-22-2009, 11:14 PM
No, the reason you don't get into extended debates is because you were already kicked off of this board once already, and it's likely you don't wish to get kicked off again...
Such bitching and moaning and crying, yet they ALWAYS come back for more...
One post expressing an opinion on the bias on this board and I am threatened with banishment.
See ya later.
boxcar
10-22-2009, 11:40 PM
One post expressing an opinion on the bias on this board and I am threatened with banishment.
See ya later.
He's moaning about a "bias" on an internet OT forum? :bang: :bang: What's next? I wonder if he'd want the FCC coming in to shut the PA site down because the forum isn't "fair and balanced"? :rolleyes:
Boxcar
riskman
10-23-2009, 12:22 AM
Mostpost-
It’s not whether you win or lose, but how you place the blame.
PaceAdvantage
10-23-2009, 03:55 AM
One post expressing an opinion on the bias on this board and I am threatened with banishment.
See ya later.Such a persecution complex, and yet he keeps coming back for more! :lol:
Tell me EP...what words did you interpret as "threatening with banishment."
Where exactly did I state or even imply that "if you do this or that, I'll kick you off!"
Never happened. A figment of your imagination.
More crying and bitching and moaning about boogie monsters under the bed...and less and less constructive debate on the issues.
HUSKER55
10-23-2009, 06:31 AM
QUIT DEFENDING YOURSELF TO THESE CLODS PA.
BY DOING SO YOU GIVE THEM CREDIBILITY.
BANISH THEM OR FORGET THEM. ONLY A COMPLETE IDIOT WOULD LISTEN TO THEM
BTW, YOU CAN'T SAVE THEM
exactaplayer
10-23-2009, 10:23 AM
Such a persecution complex, and yet he keeps coming back for more! :lol:
Tell me EP...what words did you interpret as "threatening with banishment."
Where exactly did I state or even imply that "if you do this or that, I'll kick you off!"
Never happened. A figment of your imagination.
More crying and bitching and moaning about boogie monsters under the bed...and less and less constructive debate on the issues.
You are right. I replied too quickly last night. My original note was in reference to your bias when policing this board. We all know it is there and accept it as part of posting here.
I stated i do not get into extended debates here because of this bias. In the past I have demonstrated my ability to be just as sarcastic/mean/nasty as any here from the right. And have done so. I do not get into extended debates because they usually devolve into personal attacks. At this point when someone suggests I need psychiatric help I may respond by asking them how they are doing with their psychiatric problem. You usually jump in at this point and i have yet to find a case of the poster from the right being chastised.
You went to some length to explain why you accept a political avatar from the right, no need to do this. We know and accept your bias and an explanation is not required.
Have not looked yet but did you ever come up with any instances of someone from the left calling Bush a pos, prick or murderer ?
Now, you have a nice day.
mostpost
10-23-2009, 11:03 AM
Mostpost-
It’s not whether you win or lose, but how you place the blame.
:confused:
cj's dad
10-23-2009, 11:15 AM
. My original note was in reference to your bias when policing this board. We all know it is there and accept it as part of posting here.
I have yet to find a case of the poster from the right being chastised.
Wrong !!
I have had 3 posts deleted by PA moderators (once by my son :eek:) and I would think that I am considered to be from the right. Lighten up a bit- do you really think anyone here takes this stuff seriously ?? I have been going to the Saratoga tent party for 5-6 years now and have yet to see a fight break out or even heard any OT discussions take place; then again maybe that's why there haven't been any fights.:rolleyes:
Note *** your post was partially edited by me !!
jballscalls
10-23-2009, 11:29 AM
Wrong !!
I have had 3 posts deleted by PA moderators (once by my son :eek:) and I would think that I am considered to be from the right. Lighten up a bit- do you really think anyone here takes this stuff seriously ?? I have been going to the Saratoga tent party for 5-6 years now and have yet to see a fight break out or even heard any OT discussions take place; then again maybe that's why there haven't been any fights.:rolleyes:
Note *** your post was partially edited by me !!
first of all, you are definately considered from the right! lol
but i agree that nobody should take this stuff seriously. it's just a pass time and a way to avoid being bored for a bit.
i imagine that i would get along great with Boxcar, arljim and many of the righties on here, or even the far lefties like zil and hcap. probably enjoy going out for a diet coke with any of them. it's just good fun. nobody is going to change their politics or beliefs because of whats said back here, it's just fun.
46zilzal
10-23-2009, 11:36 AM
I don't give a damn about this forum when racing is in as serious trouble as I am sorry to report.......We need to shelve all of this hooey and work to save racing or we won't have ANYTHING to talk about here or anywhere else on the subject.
Quagmire
10-23-2009, 11:39 AM
I don't give a damn about this forum when racing is in as serious trouble as I am sorry to report.......We need to shelve all of this hooey and work to save racing or we won't have ANYTHING to talk about here or anywhere else on the subject.
Did you just come out of a coma?
Oh gosh oh golly gee.
How can we worry about the first amendment being reduced or our economy going south, or millions out of work when they are breeding too much speed into horses and putting down polytrack! What the hell were we thinking????
Greyfox
10-23-2009, 11:49 AM
I don't give a damn about this forum when racing is in as serious trouble as I am sorry to report.......We need to shelve all of this hooey and work to save racing or we won't have ANYTHING to talk about here or anywhere else on the subject.
Hmm? It seems like only yesterday that you started a thread about
transgenic seed control is established by Monsanto under the title of corrosive revolution.
Oh, my God, it was only yesterday. Aside from a panel at Saratoga what lit a flame under your butt?
You're talking about saving horse racing. Have you joined H.A.N.A.??
exactaplayer
10-23-2009, 12:07 PM
Wrong !!
I have had 3 posts deleted by PA moderators (once by my son :eek:) and I would think that I am considered to be from the right. Lighten up a bit- do you really think anyone here takes this stuff seriously ?? I have been going to the Saratoga tent party for 5-6 years now and have yet to see a fight break out or even heard any OT discussions take place; then again maybe that's why there haven't been any fights.:rolleyes:
Note *** your post was partially edited by me !!
ok,
i do not recall having any of my posts deleted. But that was not my point. Years ago a rightwinger made a joke using the f word. This joke was allowed to stand because the moderator thought it was funny. A leftwinger posted a joke using the same word with a left slant. Can you guess which one was deleted?
Again, just pointing out the bias on this board. I will not lose any sleep over this.
So start your own board. Bias it left.
That is your right.
I'll come to your board and take whatever you can dish out.
I got moxy. :D
Warren Henry
10-23-2009, 12:45 PM
ok,
i do not recall having any of my posts deleted. But that was not my point. Years ago a rightwinger made a joke using the f word. This joke was allowed to stand because the moderator thought it was funny. A leftwinger posted a joke using the same word with a left slant. Can you guess which one was deleted?
Again, just pointing out the bias on this board. I will not lose any sleep over this.
OK, we will concede that PA is coming from the right.
Maybe it actually is possible that his own personal bias causes him to shade his decisions on TOS violations in favor of his own viewpoint.
So what? Is this not his right as operator of this forum. You think that the government should regulate his decisions? If you want to post on a site that favors your viewpoint, I am sure that they are out there.
Mike and the other moderators rule with a fairly light hand as is evidenced by the number of previously banned folks who are regular posters again.
exactaplayer
10-23-2009, 02:28 PM
OK, we will concede that PA is coming from the right.
Maybe it actually is possible that his own personal bias causes him to shade his decisions on TOS violations in favor of his own viewpoint.
So what? Is this not his right as operator of this forum. You think that the government should regulate his decisions? If you want to post on a site that favors your viewpoint, I am sure that they are out there.
Mike and the other moderators rule with a fairly light hand as is evidenced by the number of previously banned folks who are regular posters again.
So nothing. I think it is humorous how some here have up to this point denied any bias on this board. Glad to see some of you are finally admitting it.
As for Tom being able to "take whatever I can dish out" that is questionable. How many times have you used the ignore list ?
A rhetorical question please do not answer.
GaryG
10-23-2009, 02:30 PM
Will this whining never stop? Suck it up like you had some huevos.
Warren Henry
10-23-2009, 02:37 PM
So nothing. I think it is humorous how some here have up to this point denied any bias on this board. Glad to see some of you are finally admitting it.
PLEASE. I for one did not admit that the board is biased. I did admit to the possibility that the moderation could be slightly biased.
I suggest to you that the largest volume of posting is being done by those whose party is out of power. From sheer volume of posts and tone of posts, I would submit that the board as a whole was left leaning when Bush was in office and may be right leaning now. I further suggest that could be because those who currently feel without representation are the most vocal while those who feel that their guys are running the country are no longer as worried.
Of course, I could be biased :D
NJ Stinks
10-23-2009, 02:47 PM
OK, we will concede that PA is coming from the right.
No. I did not know that! That is - I did not know someone on the right would concede the point. :p You are a brave man, Warren! :ThmbUp:
NJ Stinks
10-23-2009, 02:51 PM
PLEASE. I for one did not admit that the board is biased. I did admit to the possibility that the moderation could be slightly biased.
I suggest to you that the largest volume of posting is being done by those whose party is out of power. From sheer volume of posts and tone of posts, I would submit that the board as a whole was left leaning when Bush was in office and may be right leaning now. I further suggest that could be because those who currently feel without representation are the most vocal while those who feel that their guys are running the country are no longer as worried.
Of course, I could be biased :D
Less brave, Warren. :p
But us lefties may still vote for your ascent to the Supreme Court. :)
I use the IGGY button when a poster is too moronic to bother reading and not entertaining. Some have been very moronic, but so funny to read, they escape.
QUIT DEFENDING YOURSELF TO THESE CLODS PA.
BY DOING SO YOU GIVE THEM CREDIBILITY.
BANISH THEM OR FORGET THEM. ONLY A COMPLETE IDIOT WOULD LISTEN TO THEM
BTW, YOU CAN'T SAVE THEM
You can't make this stuff up.:lol::lol:
vBulletin® v3.8.9, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.