New America Foundation to US - The World's Changed: Get Over It

[tw]

Originally Posted by aimeecc

Its about a free exchange of ideas and opinions on this board, and no insulting labels should be attached to anyone who makes an informed opinion/decision on an issue -

aimeecc - did you really think "anti-American" is derogatory? It's not and was never intended to be. Why do you assume otherwise? Did you find that post reprehensible? Good. I don't make a habit of attacking people which is obviously different from Urbane Guerrilla. If you saw insult, that is the first indication that you did not read it logically. My definition of anti-American is apparently quite different from what you may have assumed.

Only thing you might cite as derogatory is the description of a president who remains so anti-American as to be a scumbag. But I don't make that claim without reams of facts. Just a few examples. As president, he did not know what countries were adjacent to Israel? Every country that went to war with Israel. Could the answer be any simpler? He sat for 15 minutes in a child's chair doing nothing as planes were slamming into the World Trade Center. He was told "American is under attack." The exact quote. And yet he just sat there doing nothing. He is that anti-American. It is not an insult. It is a fact.

That post also defines a 30% who still remain in total denial. Are they insulted. No. They are defined by their own actions. Reasons define them logically. They don't logically know the president is that bad? They only know by what they feel? Well that is the definition of anti-American. But I never called them brainless or uneducated. You made those assumptions.

In another post, I referred to "dittoheads". Is that a derogatory comment? Of course not. Large numbers of Rush Limbaugh supporters refer to themselves as "dittoheads". Did you learn or ask for a definition before assuming a derogatory comment? Insulting is not what I do. Posting politically incorrect so as to appear insulting? Of course. Why respect people who need everything carefully worded; to appease their emotions? Your job to read through and ignore perception - always grasp the facts. You are expected to grab hold of and quash your emotions.

It is "how ideas and opinions get exchanged" - to paraphrase your own post. When an idea is not based in facts, then a blunt factual reply may easily result in a reader's emotion outburst. Did you get emotional in what was posted in post 23? If so, then cite the specific phrases that are demeaning, insulting, completely reprehensible, and not based in logical statements? Again, I defined "anti-American". Did you learn that definition before assuming it is "completely reprehensible"?

aimeecc - it is how you get measured – also part of the free exchange of ideas. You claimed something was "completely reprehensible". But not even one example – a supporting fact? How am I to judge your post as anything but an emotional outburst? How am I to reply to conclusions that don't include specific examples AND reasons why? And if your last post is justified by 'feelings', then your post is, by your own definition, "completely reprehensible". Where are supporting facts for your post? Is it based in a logical reply or have I now exposed you as one who entertains your emotions?

If you think I have attacked someone, then go back and read it again with your emotions quashed like a bug. It may be the only way for you to separate that post's purpose (what it says) from 'baited emotions'. I don't apologize for posting politically incorrect. The baiting causes those without 'opinions based in logic' to become emotional. And this IS the free exchange of ideas.

So where are your supporting facts that demonstrate "completely reprehensible"? A logic based post would have included such examples.