[BartSimpson]

[CanadianJeff]

actually it's not so much sticking one's head in the ground so much as pulling it out and realizing that there is a LOT more to politics then a single line.

The concept of "left and right" fails to address how Libertarian or Authoritarian a view is or how religion will often effect someones social policy without touching on other areas such as trade nearly as much.

I don't pretend to have all the answers or even fully comprehend how grey everything really is but you may as well be saying the world is square when you approach politics in such a linear way.

[2Cdo]

CanadianJeff CanadianJeff:

I don't pretend to have all the answers or even fully comprehend how grey everything really is but you may as well be saying the world is square when you approach politics in such a linear way.

But you are pretending that you know more than myself and you SEEM to refuse to accept that there are some posters here who are rigid party ideologues who fit perfectly within the linear method.

Fortunately most posters/political pundits do dip a little into all camps and post according to the topic at hand, whatever the party.

[CanadianJeff]

I'm saying your worldview is very linear and presenting some actual extra lines of comparison to demonstrate how the "left or right" premise you present fails to even meet some of the most basic elements of disagreement of issues.

There are certainly people here who accept almost everything they are told by a certain worldview but it doesn't mean that group does not have other dynamics in play.

I think the worst offenders that get under my skin though are people who will claim that one group has a certain trait that's negative while ignoring they belong to a group that share that exact same trait.

[2Cdo]

CanadianJeff CanadianJeff:

I'm saying your worldview is very linear and presenting some actual extra lines of comparison to demonstrate how the "left or right" premise you present fails to even meet some of the most basic elements of disagreement of issues.

So now we fall back to insults. Maybe I should state that your worldview is a fantasy that doesn't exist anywhere but in your head.

$1:

There are certainly people here who accept almost everything they are told by a certain worldview but it doesn't mean that group does not have other dynamics in play.

With some it does, not once did I ever say an entire group. I specified individuals.

$1:

I think the worst offenders that get under my skin though are people who will claim that one group has a certain trait that's negative while ignoring they belong to a group that share that exact same trait.

And on this I agree wholeheartedly.

[RUEZ]

2Cdo 2Cdo:

Sorry CanadianJeff, but Curtmans bias is well known. The ONLY articles he posts are those that show the Conservative Party or the PM in a bad light.

Bingo. If this had been posted by someone else it wouldn't have been a big deal, but when certain posters only post their agenda they incur the wrath.

[Curtman]

2Cdo 2Cdo:

Curtman Curtman:

My bias is well known.

Yes it is. Pretending it isn't just reveals you're not an honest person.

I don't claim to be unbiased, never did. For two days in a row, I've been attacked for simply submitting an article for discussion, and in both cases I didn't have a comment to make. I deliberately made no comment on either, because I didn't want my bias to taint the discussion. You and two others are ensuring that this discussion is about my bias though I've given no opinion to be biased about! Don't you see how strange that is? Don't you see how it makes this forum less instead of more when you do that?

[2Cdo]

Curtman Curtman:

2Cdo 2Cdo:

Curtman Curtman:

My bias is well known.

Yes it is. Pretending it isn't just reveals you're not an honest person.

I don't claim to be unbiased, never did. For two days in a row, I've been attacked for simply submitting an article for discussion, and in both cases I didn't have a comment to make. I deliberately made no comment on either, because I didn't want my bias to taint the discussion. You and two others are ensuring that this discussion is about my bias though I've given no opinion to be biased about! Don't you see how strange that is? Don't you see how it makes this forum less instead of more when you do that?

Would you like a little cheese to go with that whine?

[BartSimpson]

Curtman Curtman:

I don't claim to be unbiased, never did. For two days in a row, I've been attacked for simply submitting an article for discussion, and in both cases I didn't have a comment to make. I deliberately made no comment on either, because I didn't want my bias to taint the discussion.

The choice of what to post is the comment.

(Just playing the game you've played with me. )

[Curtman]

That's fine. You're at least civil about it. Its rare that we agree, but it rarely devolves to mudslinging either.

[Xort]

2Cdo 2Cdo:

The feds should send them a complete list of all weapons that are registered by Quebec gun owners, but not a single name.

Or a list of last names. Just pages and pages of Trombley and LeBlanc.

[BartSimpson]

Curtman Curtman:

That's fine. You're at least civil about it. Its rare that we agree, but it rarely devolves to mudslinging either.

Good enough, brother.

[Unsound]

Seems to me that most people post articles that tend to suppost their own biases or opinions. That's only normal as far as I'm concerned.

Why should Curtman post things that go against what he believes? That's a job for thise who diagree with Curt.

If you don't like the articles he posts, don't comment. They'll disappear soon enough if they're not worth discussing. Only about 1 in 3 of Bart's muslim articles stays on my board index for more than a few hours, same with Andy's poverty articles. If they bring something new to one of the never-ending discusions here it'll get discussed for pages before everyone gets tired of everone else not changing their minds. If nothing new, it'll disappear and we can go back to picking on spammers and newbies.

[Thanos]

Curt's ideas on authoritarianism in Canada, which more-or-less equate the ban on marijuana with fascism, and his insulting Canadian police officers by saying they were as bad as the Gestapo kind of earned him a permanent black mark from the CKA conservatives. He's also a regular with the "Stephen Harper is a tyrant" nonsense, which is obviously really annoying to a lot of the non-Liberal non-NDP folks here. What he said was dumb and he sort of deserved it. Hence the knee-jerk reaction that he now gets whenever he posts anything. He's got no one else to blame but himself.

[Unsound]

That may be Thanos, but this place is gonna get real lame real fast if we have to start every thread with a 2 page discussion of how awful the OP is before we start talking about the actual subject of the thread.