Rove Case shows this forum is a waste of time.

[catzmeow]

it's exasperating, exhilerating, intimidating, exciting, and scary all at once.

But I'm far, far happier than I was, though I don't think he is...but then, haven't we ever felt that actions have consequences, stekim?

[stekim]

There is no free ride. It's rare when you can really screw up and come out unscathed!

it's exasperating, exhilerating, intimidating, exciting, and scary all at once

Hell, so is life. But you are happier now. You can deal with the rest of it. It's hard when relationships end. Even ones that clearly should. As you see everyday at work, lots of people have it FAR worse than you.

[amepro]

Originally Posted by catzmeow";p=&quot

go hug a tree and take a bath...

Actually, i see the same kool-aid drinking mentality from the left here that I did on b-net...people like Markh, amepro, kaladrew...non-critical thinkers the lot, they eat whatever pap is fed to them on indymedia.com and spew it back again without any fact-checking or critical reasoning on their own part.

If I see another "bush flip-flopper thread" that doesn't involve flip flops I think I'll puke.

On a lighter note, my company has an anti-"thong" policy...i guess our president is a little out of touch with current terminology involving this sort of footwear...and there is much speculation as to how it will be enforced.



by the way, tell your better half hi for me...she's a doll.

FACT, I am partisan...and so are you. I have admited mistakes I've made on this forum, that is a fact. So what exactly does "kool-aid" drinking mean? That I lean left? Yes I do.

Also, you claimed to be opened minded about sources and then wouldn't read the one I gave you because I did not read your National Review Source. If you're so open minded, you would have read my source regardless.

[catzmeow]

From a biased source. YOU are the one who refused to even look at different, and relevant information, on a source you considered biased.

Hmmm....

That's the definition of a kool-aid drinker. I read a dozen sources today, from both the left and the right. I don't limit myself to only leftist sources (as you clearly do).

Catz

[amepro]

Originally Posted by amepro";p=&quot

FACT, I am partisan...and so are you. I have admitted mistakes I've made on this forum, that is a fact. So what exactly does "kool-aid" drinking mean? That I lean left? Yes I do.

Also, you claimed to be opened minded about sources and then wouldn't read the one I gave you because I did not read your National Review Source. If you're so open minded, you would have read my source regardless.

FACT, I am partisan...and so are you. I have admitted mistakes I've made on this forum, that is a fact. So what exactly does "kool-aid" drinking mean? That I lean left? Yes I do.

Also, you claimed to be opened minded about sources and then wouldn't read the one I gave you because I did not read your National Review Source. If you're so open minded, you would have read my source regardless.

"Up-to-the-minute conservative commentary on politics, news, and culture."
Here are the tags on the National Review magazine when I googled it.

I wouldn't expect forum members to check out references from magazines like the "Nation" or "Mother Jones." You pointed out that SF news is liberal (MSNBC was the other source on same subject), I did not know this because I do not live in CA. I will remember that next time I look for references.

*** "I will, just as soon as you read the article relevant to your original topic that I've already posted here."
I didn't think you read article because of your statement.

[catzmeow]

If you're going to quote a source, wouldn't you at first attempt to determine if it were a reliable one (that is, if you weren't a Kool-aid drinker)?

[amepro]

Originally Posted by catzmeow";p=&quot

If you're going to quote a source, wouldn't you at first attempt to determine if it were a reliable one (that is, if you weren't a Kool-aid drinker)?

I never said it was unreliable. YOU said it was liberal....I don't know if this is true or not. I am taking your word that it is liberal and just because it is liberal doesn't mean its unreliable.

I wouldn't have used it as a source on this forum if thought it was liberal, that's all and I will keep that in mind next time.

You know, that is very ugly what your doing (kool-aid drinker) I could say the same about you (National Review) but I won't.

[catzmeow]

drinker, dear....

It's a refusal to look at any alternative viewpoints. That's the difference between us. It didn't bother me in the least to read the SF Gate article, I've used them as a source many times in the past to make points about liberalism. But you adamantly refused to read the National Review article, in spite of the fact that it was written by an expert in the field who was a GUEST to the publication, and wasn't one of their stock articles.

That steadfast refusal to open one's self up to alternative sources of information that might undermine your particular paradigm is what makes one a kool-aid drinker.

[amepro]

Originally Posted by amepro";p=&quot

I never said it was unreliable. YOU said it was liberal....I don't know if this is true or not. I am taking your word that it is liberal and just because it is liberal doesn't mean its unreliable.

I wouldn't have used it as a source on this forum if thought it was liberal, that's all and I will keep that in mind next time.

You know, that is very ugly what your doing (kool-aid drinker) I could say the same about you (National Review) but I won't.

[catzmeow]

That steadfast refusal to open one's self up to alternative sources of information that might undermine your particular paradigm is what makes one a kool-aid drinker.