"Liberals" V.2.

[Chase]

So, the first Gold Medal in Rio this summer was won by an American...in an event that pertained to gun use.

It's okay for other countries to say "of course it was a gun sport" and roll their eyes, but it's really bad when Americans celebrate the fact by turning on you and make you out to be an awful person because of the means of which you acquired that gold medal you've only spent years training to win - or go so deep as to ignore the fact that you've trained for multiple years by instead highlighting your obvious resistance to "gun control" through past statements you've made.

This leads me to my second "kinda-ish" rant about liberalism's ugly side. I invite the other side of course, to find two or three things about conservatives that they feel are "typical". I also want to take this time clarify that this is NOT my interpretation of what liberalism is, but it's a easy-to-fall-into misconception. Finally, this is more directed at American liberalism, and not so much global liberalism.

Liberals are Anti-America in nature.

There are two responses to Donald Trump's "Make America GREAT Again" tag. The first one is something I can fully give credit to Hillary Clinton's campaign on - that "America is ALREADY great."...which is a very acceptable counter, especially from an aspiring president like Hillary is. The second response also comes from Democrats just as often, and many of these responses stem from the Bernie Sanders-Elizabeth Warren "liberal" wing of the party.

"America was NEVER great."

A popular term Liberals like to refer to themselves as ..is "progressives" - meaning that they are making progress by whatever reforms they hope to pass. It's easy for liberals in this kind of mindset to think "America won't be great until we've made these changes" - but to say "America was never great" would seemingly be a load of crap being spouted from those who hold American citizenship (as opposed to just being an opinion of those who have never been there.) Finally - the changes that progressives want to make mirror those of several failed governments in the past - such as changing the free market capitalist economic structure of America that has been largely successful into a socialist economic structure that (more closely, not completely) reflects the depravity of the Soviet Union and other Communist nations that America previously assisted in releasing from said depravity.

America has spent 240 years successfully operating a free market economy. It's not as "broken" as many outspoken liberals claim it is. Japan - who many of those same liberals defend - operates under the same economic structure.

You see this bleeding way outside of the economic and even political arena, where celebrities and sports icons are SHAMED by many of their high-profile peers for their achievements because of their views.

Liberals wish to be lower on the food chain -OR- value other forms of life over humanity.

One of the things that I keep hearing about is the tragic story of Harambe the gorilla, and it's one thing liberals can't seem to shut up about.

"Damn that human child for climbing into the gorilla exhibit. Damn his mother for not stopping him from doing so. Damn that zookeeper for protecting that child from certain harm. #FreeHarambe."

PETA - or that one group that hates Pokemon just as much as Southern Baptist ministers do for different reasons - has inspired the left into a culture that seemingly places animal life well above the importance of human life. Outlawing leather jackets or eating anything other than man-made food in order to preserve the other species has become the "trend" in many parts of the US,along with attacking your peers that don't do the same.

Anthropocentric people on the other hand, are much more likely to be conservative than they are liberal.

---

This means that it's easy for me to think that conservatives care more about governing over American people than Liberals do, who wish to govern in a matter that conforms to the rest of the world and eschew Americanism while placing other species above the people you are supposed to be governing.

[Ice Cream Sand Witch]

PETA - or that one group that hates Pokemon just as much as Southern Baptist ministers do for different reasons - has inspired the left into a culture that seemingly places animal life well above the importance of human life. Outlawing leather jackets or eating anything other than man-made food in order to preserve the other species has become the "trend" in many parts of the US,along with attacking your peers that don't do the same.

From my experience, PETA is universally disliked by liberals and conservatives and everyone else. And for good reason.

[Neo]

Most white moderates/liberals are jokes, fam. Their idea of being progressive is damn near maintaining the status quo. That being said:

So, the first Gold Medal in Rio this summer was won by an American...in an event that pertained to gun use.

It's okay for other countries to say "of course it was a gun sport" and roll their eyes, but it's really bad when Americans celebrate the fact by turning on you and make you out to be an awful person because of the means of which you acquired that gold medal you've only spent years training to win - or go so deep as to ignore the fact that you've trained for multiple years by instead highlighting your obvious resistance to "gun control" through past statements you've made.

This leads me to my second "kinda-ish" rant about liberalism's ugly side. I invite the other side of course, to find two or three things about conservatives that they feel are "typical". I also want to take this time clarify that this is NOT my interpretation of what liberalism is, but it's a easy-to-fall-into misconception. Finally, this is more directed at American liberalism, and not so much global liberalism.

Liberals are Anti-America in nature.

There are two responses to Donald Trump's "Make America GREAT Again" tag. The first one is something I can fully give credit to Hillary Clinton's campaign on - that "America is ALREADY great."...which is a very acceptable counter, especially from an aspiring president like Hillary is. The second response also comes from Democrats just as often, and many of these responses stem from the Bernie Sanders-Elizabeth Warren "liberal" wing of the party.

"America was NEVER great."

A popular term Liberals like to refer to themselves as ..is "progressives" - meaning that they are making progress by whatever reforms they hope to pass. It's easy for liberals in this kind of mindset to think "America won't be great until we've made these changes" - but to say "America was never great" would seemingly be a load of crap being spouted from those who hold American citizenship (as opposed to just being an opinion of those who have never been there.) Finally - the changes that progressives want to make mirror those of several failed governments in the past - such as changing the free market capitalist economic structure of America that has been largely successful into a socialist economic structure that (more closely, not completely) reflects the depravity of the Soviet Union and other Communist nations that America previously assisted in releasing from said depravity.

Let's keep this shit 100. Capitalism has an expiration date, and the system that replaces it will look very similar to Communism/Socialism. It's also important to note that the USSR was not Marxist, so mixing all of those ideologies into a bag just because they happen to be within the same ideological sphere is just wrong, my guy. America, depending on whom you ask, really never was great. It's a nation founded on great ideals, ideals written by hypocrites, but great nonetheless. Real talk, women,people of color, and LGBTQ folks haven't given any sort of fair shake in this nation, and it would really be hard to sit down and say "no, yeah, it was great for them too".

America has spent 240 years successfully operating a free market economy. It's not as "broken" as many outspoken liberals claim it is. Japan - who many of those same liberals defend - operates under the same economic structure.

Japan participating in hypercapitalism isn't exactly similar to the US with its corporatism problem.

You see this bleeding way outside of the economic and even political arena, where celebrities and sports icons are SHAMED by many of their high-profile peers for their achievements because of their views.

Happens on both sides of the ideological fence, regardless of how shitty it is.

Liberals wish to be lower on the food chain -OR- value other forms of life over humanity.

One of the things that I keep hearing about is the tragic story of Harambe the gorilla, and it's one thing liberals can't seem to shut up about.

"Damn that human child for climbing into the gorilla exhibit. Damn his mother for not stopping him from doing so. Damn that zookeeper for protecting that child from certain harm. #FreeHarambe."

Harambe is a meme, fam. #dicksout

PETA - or that one group that hates Pokemon just as much as Southern Baptist ministers do for different reasons - has inspired the left into a culture that seemingly places animal life well above the importance of human life. Outlawing leather jackets or eating anything other than man-made food in order to preserve the other species has become the "trend" in many parts of the US,along with attacking your peers that don't do the same.

Anthropocentric people on the other hand, are much more likely to be conservative than they are liberal.

I don't know a person that knows about how PETA operates that actually supports them. Liberal OR Conservative.

---

This means that it's easy for me to think that conservatives care more about governing over American people than Liberals do, who wish to govern in a matter that conforms to the rest of the world and eschew Americanism while placing other species above the people you are supposed to be governing.

Replies in pink because I'm feeling pretty today

[Combat]

Alright, without going overly deep into the dark pit that is politics on the internet, I think I will throw in a few points/opinions.

• First off, I consider myself to be a democrat, though I don't consider myself a full on Liberal.
• Saying a group is anti-American is unfair, as the definition of "American" varies. Is it the mindset, the birthplace, the patriotism?
• The saying "America Was Never Great" is debatable. I mean, America is just now allowing people to marry those of their same gender, making certain drugs that have been used for centuries legal, and has only just had a President of color. While America is good, it certainly is a far cry from great.
• If I had the gun, I would have shot the gorilla. My family says they would have shot the gorilla. People on both sides would have shot the gorilla.
• Almost everyone I knows hates Peta. In fact, I've never actually met a member of Peta, and I go to a biology/natural resources based school, and have lived with biologist. Peta is a vocal minority, much like the Klan, that sided with the democrats. Nothing more, nothing less.
• When this election finally comes, I'm not voting because of a party. I'm voting for the lesser of two evils. I'd take a splinter to the hand over a knife to frontal lobe any day.

[Chevaleresse]

Please for the love of all that you consider of value in this world or the next do not presume to stereotype me in with the likes of PETA or other extremist liberal groups - especially since that group in particular is known to be hypocritical in their ways.

Standing on a podium and shouting about how terrible liberals are because we supposedly want to be lower on the food chain and shame athletes and the like for their accomplishments. I consider myself very liberal, speak to a lot of other liberals because of the area I live in and the places I go to school, and not once have I heard anything close to the statements you are trying to apply to all liberals as a blanket. Would I say that we should think more about animals and rights that an animal should or should not possess? Yes. Do I think the accomplishments of athletes and actors are overvalued in our society? Of course; there are billions of dollars going to them that could be funding the sciences or fine arts. But that doesn't mean I somehow hold it against these people that they succeeded in life, and you shouldn't assume any other liberal does unless you hear it out of their mouths.

As a liberal, I feel that we should emulate other places in the world when we govern because it fucking works. Most European countries have measurably better standards of living and measurably more freedoms than American citizens have. Does wanting everyone to live better and wanting to see systems that seem, from my perspective, to achieve that goal make me anti-American? If so, then, well, I don't want to be pro-American.

Quite frankly these statements come off as absurd and needlessly inflammatory. Even with the disclaimer, you basically wrote a thinly-disguised rant that relentlessly pigeonholes everyone identifying themselves with an ideology that you don't agree with.

As a side note, Neo, I'm not overly appreciative of being dismissed as a joke because of my skin tone.

[Tacos]

To use a small radical portion of a group for an argument that generalizes the entirety of a group is a fallacy I don't even want to begin adressing

[Felicity]

I mean hey I'm just a white guy living in the place known as somewhere else, I figure many things but i also figure most of those things could be picked apart or utterly dismissed in a critical, rational analysis, partially because of my said status as a white guy *Cough* Neo *Cough* living somewhere else.

I'm not sure these discussions help anyone. Some lines of thought aren't meant to be followed, some speeches never given.

[Chase]

I guess I'll just ask what liberals think about something next time because I didn't adequately make the intent clear. That's my fault and I will indeed say that I was being abrasive for many of the reasons you guys have pointed out despite being liberal as opposed to me being conservative. If I give a disclaimer, it's me trying (despite the mood I may be in) to offer an olive branch and indicate that I don't want this to be ONLY about complaining about people. I would reserve that for the status bar.

My intent with a post such as this isn't some grand scheme of making the world a better place, but to gather understanding of what the other side actually thinks on these issues, and despite many of you seemingly taking offense - you've responded as I had hoped.

---

Starting with you Neo, you bring up some fair points - and I haven't addressed in specific women/others, people of color, and those with differing sexual orientations. Looking at history as I did in general when making the post, you can definitely say that the angles are slightly different for those groups. African Americans specifically have had it pretty bad, while Native Americans have....probably seen better days (and the same could be said for other groups.)

That being said, it's not as if reparations have been completely nonexistent. Yes, there is absolutely evident racial tension with regards to the American Justice System that has been present for ....pretty much ever. There's also opportunities out of being an African American, such as specific scholarships one could earn. As a white person looking at it in the scope of 2016 I could argue that this isn't exactly fair that I can't earn that scholarship because I never had the chance to BE black.

In some areas, there's room for improvement (which can be said for most groups) - but that doesn't mean American greatness is non-existent. It's a country that has millions of immigrants every year coming in looking for opportunity. If America didn't have positives in place, why would people go there in such great numbers?

I'll be waiting for that expiration date with baited breath.

---

We all seem to agree that PETA is a joke. I'll take this as a landmark occurrence.

---

I can see the standard the points you make on Americanism potentially not being great because other countries have other kinds of economies that succeed, Murdoc. I don't see how this translates to other kinds of economies (key word - economies) that work much better than America's does. I also fail to see how other countries are so much better off to the point where Americanism is something that can be said is outright "bad" to the point - and I would like to hear what you guys have to say. Contrary to popular belief, I can be agreeable, so long as I can see why it's to be believed. I was hoping to earn some explanations.

---

I feel like Tacos just read the title of the thread already convinced I was talking about everyone in the tent. Not addressing issues in the first place is how they don't get resolved.

---

I'm selfish, alright? Talk at me, and I'm helped. That's really the only reason I spoke up first.

[5hift]

To use a small radical portion of a group for an argument that generalizes the entirety of a group is a fallacy I don't even want to begin adressing

Agreed.

There will always be pretty ignorant and radical people on each side of the political spectrum. It can't be helped.

However cringy or ridiculous some people may be about certain topics, its best not to give it any attention and stay with logic and reason.

@Neo, I've seen some pretty crazy liberals who're black so not really sure what exactly race has to do with any of this.

Edited August 8, 2016 by 5hift

[Neo]

Starting with you Neo, you bring up some fair points - and I haven't addressed in specific women/others, people of color, and those with differing sexual orientations. Looking at history as I did in general when making the post, you can definitely say that the angles are slightly different for those groups. African Americans specifically have had it pretty bad, while Native Americans have....probably seen better days (and the same could be said for other groups.)

That being said, it's not as if reparations have been completely nonexistent. Yes, there is absolutely evident racial tension with regards to the American Justice System that has been present for ....pretty much ever. There's also opportunities out of being an African American, such as specific scholarships one could earn. As a white person looking at it in the scope of 2016 I could argue that this isn't exactly fair that I can't earn that scholarship because I never had the chance to BE black.

Affirmative Action and reparations aren't really in the same boat. The US HAS given out reparations to select groups of people that the govt. has wronged. Black folks are not among those groups. Race based scholarships are Affirmative Action in action. They're there to present opportunities that wouldn't otherwise be available because of systemic oppression.

In some areas, there's room for improvement (which can be said for most groups) - but that doesn't mean American greatness is non-existent. It's a country that has millions of immigrants every year coming in looking for opportunity. If America didn't have positives in place, why would people go there in such great numbers?

Like I mentioned, America is a nation built on great ideals, they're really not acted on to the extent that they could and should be. I think America is definitely great in some regards, but it really really does have a long way to go before it can hold itself up as a truly great nation. I think we're on the same page here, actually. I think the phrase "America was NEVER great" is used to highlight our nation's past, our issues, and more importantly to question precisely for whom America is being "made great again" for.

[Chase]

Now that's different. I actually think the American government DOES have a debt to pay for the mistreatment of African Americans in the past as opposed to you. (and to be fair, maybe you still do too and it's just you explaining AA to me.) I also think Affirmative Action is - in most areas mind you - a good thing to have because there definitely is a need.

I'll say I've been enlightened here too. As Tacos pointed out, I did need to specify a bit. As a white male who happens to be straight, life hasn't been so bad for me or my family that I have a vendetta or a problem to really fix in order to level the playing field. If anything, I could afford to be knocked down a peg (although I'd much rather just pull everyone else to the level I'm at unless sacrifice is absolutely needed.) - I still think America "never" being great is hyperbole to an extent, but it definitely varies in degree.

[Chevaleresse]

I never said Americanism (whatever the term actually means) was bad. I meant to imply that something being "un-American" doesn't necessarily make it bad, and conversely that if something is American, it isn't necessarily good. All I'm saying is that emulating a good thing is, at minimum, a step in the direction of making our situation better - because what we have is imperfect. I'm not in the group that thinks the system is completely busted and needs to be set on fire or what have you - but I do think we could improve it. There are plenty of issues with the system that I feel could be fixed with liberal policies. There are also some problems I think we should take a more conservative approach to. Still, regardless of your intentions, going off on a rant like this is symptomatic of one of the biggest issues I see with the system: people get more concerned with party lines, the red vs. blue, conservative vs. liberal, us vs. them mentality, than actually doing their best to think of what's best for the country. It classes all liberals as essentially the same person - a person who cannot be reasoned with and only holds their own bizarre agenda as a priority. I see liberals doing the same thing, and it's something that I would actually describe as cancerous, because it keeps growing uncontrollably and is incredibly bad for the country.

Pardon my rambling.

[Shamitako]

Hunter, I gotta say, I'm disappointed in this thread. Usually you do a really good job of sparking discussion, but this just doesn't feel very well thought out. There's so much lacking. And even if you do wish to dismiss it offhandedly (another thing you got wrong here BTW), Tacps has a point

Not really gonna bother saying much to reference the topic as a whole, since I'm just a conservative independent

[Shadow Tack]

pretty much all i can provide

[Neo]

Now that's different. I actually think the American government DOES have a debt to pay for the mistreatment of African Americans in the past as opposed to you. (and to be fair, maybe you still do too and it's just you explaining AA to me.) I also think Affirmative Action is - in most areas mind you - a good thing to have because there definitely is a need.

I'll say I've been enlightened here too. As Tacos pointed out, I did need to specify a bit. As a white male who happens to be straight, life hasn't been so bad for me or my family that I have a vendetta or a problem to really fix in order to level the playing field. If anything, I could afford to be knocked down a peg (although I'd much rather just pull everyone else to the level I'm at unless sacrifice is absolutely needed.) - I still think America "never" being great is hyperbole to an extent, but it definitely varies in degree.

Yeah, to clarify I'm definitely in support of reparations. I just don't see Affirmative Action in the same category as them.

[Chase]

You know, there are times where I just automatically assume Reborn will put the blinders up and my messages get received as an attack thread even if it isn't, and then Reborn surprises me.

Then there are times that Reborn seems like it's going to be tracking with me enough to have a very intelligent discussion even if I throw inadequate approach and fallacy into my original posts, and Reborn mirrors my insolence on purpose because they know I can do better.

In short, you're right, Lexi. I'll never claim to be the best thread author on the site. I bring up serious issues and the like because I'm much better at it than I am at shitposting, and then occasionally there's...not much difference other than shitposts being appreciated and my posts just literally being shit.

While I don't want to sweep Taco's criticism under the rug at all (he's right, don't hastily generalize people. It makes you look like an ass and your argument will fail to engage others.) - I stand by what I've said. For as popular as the phrase "if you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything" is - there will be times when the only time I can communicate an idea as effectively as possible is to emulate how I feel about the subject at that moment.

In that moment, I felt pretty put off by liberalism because it seemed militant. In turn, it made me reply in a militant manner as opposed to filling my thread with any substance. I did my best with a disclaimer, and even if it wasn't enough to avoid nerves being grazed I got what I wanted.

-some- positive discussion from the other side.

The resounding message seems to be "don't judge all based on a few" as most responses have labled PETA as extremists and have actually been rather agreeable where I didn't expect it. Murdoc, you're absolutely on target when you say that partisanship is an issue in this country that is toxic.

I feel like I'm on the side that gets attacked the most. Maybe it's because I always feel like I get attacked.

[Shamitako]

I feel like I'm on the side that gets attacked the most. Maybe it's because I always feel like I get attacked.

Partially yes, conservatives do have a bigger target on their backs than liberals, because mainstream media is liberal. but at the same time it is mostly because you are a conservative. You don't feel attacked by attacks on liberals, so you don't notice that they are attacked near as often. And it goes both ways of course, plenty of liberals feel like the world is out to get them too

And then there's moderates who just get shit on by everyone. I think I identify best with them even though my policies tend to lean towards a conservative direction, simply because conservative has become synonymous with republican which I am most certainly not

[Raindrop Valkyrie]

I feel like I'm on the side that gets attacked the most. Maybe it's because I always feel like I get attacked.

Think of it this way. When you came at somebody with a blade.. they aren't exactly going to run up and hug ya. They'll fight themselves or they'll run.

Shitty metaphor aside, the worst way to start a conversation is to start it with a militant agenda or, to assume the other side will do as such. Even if that's the only thing you've gotten from them that you've seen, DON'T continue it in kind. NEEEEVER continue the aggressive approach. Don't make it an Offensive against the other side. ((this is without going into the whole thing about how sides are a giant fallacy and we need to stop making things Us vs. Them regardless but this isn't the time.)) Don't come into things going "Well, they've been aggressive so should I!!!" It's not how things work. It leads to more misunderstandings, etc... and negotiations break down before they even begin. Someone's gotta make that step, the step to stop the aggressive approach, the overarching attacks etc... and come at it at a much more grounded level. A conversation that begins with yelling and ad hominem attacks... tends to stay that. A baseless yelling fest. One that loses all point in meaning. It's not until someone breathes, settles and begins discussing calmly, and from a well thought out position that things can get moving.

You know, there are times where I just automatically assume Reborn will put the blinders up and my messages get received as an attack thread even if it isn't, and then Reborn surprises me.

^ Firstly, don't assume this. DO NOT ASSUME IT. ((not yelling, trying to make sure that's clear.)). Because assuming that all we will give you is negative means that you will write in a manner that expects it. That you taint your argument before it even comes to the table. Having that preconceived notion that others will instantly shoot you down or not listen, is the first issue. Don't assume people are jsut out to do those things, or that they will only assume that you are an attack thread. No offense meant by this, but this is how folks start ending up writing attack threads. Because they feel that if the other side won't listen they must take extreme actions, up their game, and do things to be heard. Trust me, that's when one starts losing. When their arguments cease to be based in things other than personal opinion, bias and emotion. These things cannot afford to be laced with them. It poisons the argument from the beginning, it's dangerous. Now, I'm not saying this is your intent or that it's consciously being down, but your flirting with that line and really do need to be careful. I can tell this from lines later on.

- there will be times when the only time I can communicate an idea as effectively as possible is to emulate how I feel about the subject at that moment.

Mostly this line. And trust me, I get it I really do. As a very emotionally driven person and one who functions more highly on Intuition than logic. I geeeeeeeeeeeeeeet it. But, I've learned that in something that takes logic, this is 100% the WRONG time to start a discussion. If I cannot use logic, if I cannot calm myself, then I put it aside until I can be level-headed when I construct what I'm saying, until I can research to know what I'm saying isn't groundless. Because the more errors you have in your points the less and less credible you seem, the more and more it seems a rant, a rave... something that has no substance and either warrants no response or... responses in kind the minds of others. While personal experience, and using what one has seen is something one should do, one should clarify this is what they've seen, and that this is the picture they have and make this CLEAR and KNOWN. Here, you paint your points almost as if fact or that they are widely held amoungst a group without truly knowing that political faction or the points your making. ((since anyone that truly knows about Peta knows that NO ONE wants them to represent them period.)) Having good knowledge to work with, instead of pulling the trigger in the moment goes a long way.

I'll note this, I'm neither really Conservative, or Liberal. Least from my perspective. I'm probably not a moderate either. I don't believe in defining my political outlook personally, cause I believe therein lies a problem with politics. It is too focused on "He's that, but I'm this!!!" and it dilutes what's really important. Actually making progress. These discussions to some degree at least how it started out are why. We spend more time being pissed at the other "side" when we should be focusing on the goal at hand. We all on the same exact side. Every single one of us, our priorities and ideologies might be different but we all want the same thing. We all wants what's best for us, our familes, and our nation. ((and those are different priorities for different folks.)) So... to some degree, I'm not sure a discussion on particular points of certain groups matter. As these groups are vastly diverse in their meaning, how they function etc... And it makes it hard to say as a whole they are a certain way. Because it might seem like it on the surface but groups such as these are hardly united. Just look at how fractured Conservatives are right now in the US for one. We're only a solid group so long as it serves our cause but as soon as things start to not go a way the individuals in the whole agree with they diverge and split. Because Individuals may seem small but in reality they aren't.

I'm not really sure what I'm saying here, but... if you want people to listen to your message and you want them to truly discuss don't come at them with aggression. It's the fastest way to say yourself "I THINK THIS. WHAT YOU THINK IS IRRELEVANT" because you already belittle them or make them out to be your enemy. Regardless if that's your intended message, it comes implied, it's within the subtext, between the lines. It's seeped into the nooks and crannies and spoiled your argument, your stance. It didn't entirely backfire... this time. But remember, folks won't always be inclined to be respectful to someone who's treating them as an enemy right away. Because if you treat them as a threat a foe... why should they treat you different? Whether it's hard or not, one must bear an olive branch. One must come from a place of logic, cold and hard evidence. Speculation, generalization, and ad hominem attacks, have no place in a discussion. They only muddy the waters. They only serve to lump people together, make them easier to attack... take away their words, confuse or misdirect. Do not let them spoil what you have to say. Because, I know you have a lot to say. You can do a much cleaner job, one that is more impactful and respects the subjects you are speaking about. Show them respect and they will be more inclined to show you some as well. Don't accuse... ask. Don't assume... ASK. Ask them. Talk to them. Start a dialog. But, do this without the baggage that weighs you down. Don't be shackled to that stuff. Don't let it drag down your questions, your stance, your points. Don't let it drag them through the mud.

Your words and arguments deserve better Hunter. Don't let them be filled with these things and be dismissed becasue of it. Let them be what they can be. Put in the thought, the care and the needed to bridge the gap, rather than take shortcuts and drive it further open in haste. Luckily, there are those here, that despite the widening, are willing to reach out anyway. Be glad for that. Not many people would be willing to do so.

Anyway, I've probably overstayed my welcome and I'm not exactly a person that can easily discuss politics... I'm just not made for them. But, I hope you understand my words and why I choose to speak. It's because when I do speak, I reeeeeeeeally freaking care. I doubt it really makes my words hold anymore weight at all, but I hope you listen to me in those regards and understand why I decided to. Anyway, Hukuna out~