Who is it that's spreading hate?

[S.A. Boggs]

Sam, you were never a clinician. You were never licensed in a clinical practice. So I guess your talk about delusions is spot-on. Notwithstanding, you should not join Vernon in his delusion. I know you are a stubborn fellow, but your mental gears still turn a little where Vernon's have rusted solid.

Time to put him back on the too disturbed list for congruent thought list. I was hoping for a change, appears not to be the case. Oh well, I have problems dealing with people as I watched them go to prison.
Sam

[lyman]

Gish Gollop

I'll admit, I had to look that up,

I think it applies to both sides, honestly,

however you are correct, there has been things typed lately the are for violence,, which is just wrong,

I'm afraid there are folks on both sides on the forum that have lost the ability to rationally discuss, and agree to disagree on some matters


sad

[Roadkingtrax]

I'll admit, I had to look that up,

I think it applies to both sides, honestly,

however you are correct, there has been things typed lately the are for violence,, which is just wrong,

I'm afraid there are folks on both sides on the forum that have lost the ability to rationally discuss, and agree to disagree on some matters


sad

Sad indeed.

I could only point to those that have suggested acts of violence are their solution to the myriad of problems that seem to consume their time. Think first, type second would be sound advice to follow in their case.

[JohnPeeff]

Any comments from the "brain trust" on what happened in Portland with the Antifa ?

[PWC]

I see people are still quoting the political trolls so they can spread their version of reprisal.

[JOHN COOK]

I see people are still quoting the political trolls so they can spread their version of reprisal.

PWC, you are correct. They just fall right into the sewer with them .

john in SC

[lyman]

Any comments from the "brain trust" on what happened in Portland with the Antifa ?

if you have them on ignore,, then why ask?

[Roadkingtrax]

if you have them on ignore,, then why ask?

[Vern Humphrey]

if you have them on ignore,, then why ask?

Because other people keep posting quotes from them and keep stoking the fire.

[lyman]

Because other people keep posting quotes from them and keep stoking the fire.

not the point I was making Vern,


if you place someone on Ignore, then you are saying you don't want to read anything they post, for whatever reason,

if you don't want to read anything they post, why would you care what they post? (as asked by Mr Peeff)



all comments are part of the discussion, even those I don't agree with,

my thoughts are if I ignore some, and read others, then I am not getting a clear picture of the conversation, in fact, it is not a conversation, it basically becomes preaching to the choir,

what does that accomplish?

[Allen]

if I ignore some, and read others, then I am not getting a clear picture of the conversation, in fact, it is not a conversation, it basically becomes preaching to the choir,

what does that accomplish?

But some are commonly ignored here, should be ignored and should be banned. He/they are nothing but the voice of resistance--they agree with nothing, period. They are here to destroy what little is left of this forum. Is this what you consider part of a conversation?

In case you haven't noticed the more posting quotes that are presented the fewer members we have here that make contributions. This is to the stooges delight.

W/O the socialist BS comments made here there would be no preaching and no need for preaching. Why preach to the choir if we're all in agreeance? When their quotes are posted then that shows that SOME might be interested or actually agree with them.

The increased frequency of posting their BS will increase the frequency of ending this forum.

Except for the "mission accomplished" by the stooges what would that accomplish?

[Roadkingtrax]

But some are commonly ignored here, should be ignored and should be banned. He/they are nothing but the voice of resistance--they agree with nothing, period. They are here to destroy what little is left of this forum. Is this what you consider part of a conversation?

In case you haven't noticed the more posting quotes that are presented the fewer members we have here that make contributions. This is to the stooges delight.

W/O the socialist BS comments made here there would be no preaching and no need for preaching. Why preach to the choir if we're all in agreeance? When their quotes are posted then that shows that SOME might be interested or actually agree with them.

The increased frequency of posting their BS will increase the frequency of ending this forum.

Except for the "mission accomplished" by the stooges what would that accomplish?

This is based on what?

[Vern Humphrey]

But some are commonly ignored here, should be ignored and should be banned. He/they are nothing but the voice of resistance--they agree with nothing, period. They are here to destroy what little is left of this forum. Is this what you consider part of a conversation?

Whining is not a conversation.

[Roadkingtrax]

Whining is not a conversation.

No, it's clearly a circular argument.

[togor]

Back to the original topic, the secret Facebook page lends credence to the idea that hate expressed on the job is a more widespread problem than some would like to admit.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/02/u...oc-border.html

I would like the next President to put some emphasis on cooling off the hotheads. Hopefully no one finds fault with that!