USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
Re: Married? Again?
This round clearly goes to Bob. Anyone who has tried to raise kids to conform to their own personal desires and outcomes is in for a very humbling experience. Children are "indocrinated" by influences far, far beyond their parents' politics, like it or not.
It's important to note that all children deserve, and I hope children usually receive, unconditional love from their parents even when those political differences end up being dramatic.
This round clearly goes to Bob. Anyone who has tried to raise kids to conform to their own personal desires and outcomes is in for a very humbling experience. Children are "indocrinated" by influences far, far beyond their parents' politics, like it or not.
It's important to note that all children deserve, and I hope children usually receive, unconditional love from their parents even when those political differences end up being dramatic.
Last edited:
You don't know much about raising kids, do you?
Bob, I'm not the one with the black and white view on things. Conservatives consider gays to be heathens, correct? So, how did they get that way. Well, it sure seems if they're from a liberal family, the social 'wingers love to blame the parents, but if the parents are rock ribbed conservatives, suddenly we get you and geezer's schpiel about "oh, well, uhhh, there nuttin' you can do about that. Must be the internet's fault".
Re: Married? Again?
I have no idea where you're digging up this load of outrageous bile. My point is that children ought to be loved and respected as individuals that belong to themselves, not some kind of vessel for you to pour your fears and inadequacies into. Don't know much about parenting, do you?
I have no idea where you're digging up this load of outrageous bile. My point is that children ought to be loved and respected as individuals that belong to themselves, not some kind of vessel for you to pour your fears and inadequacies into. Don't know much about parenting, do you?
Take a look at the comments section sometimes after a story is posted wherever gay marriage gets legalized, then let me know "where I'm getting this from". Somebody's writing these things.
Re: Married? Again?
I understand they're out there, but you got personal when you put that nonsense in quotation marks and attributed it to "geezer." As a more mainstream conservative than the people who comment on online news stories, I don't feel that way.
As an aside, I detest the general ignorance of comments that tend to follow online news stories, and I avoid reading them, and I wish more outlets would simply disable them; at least disable anonymity.
Yes, I see the irony...
I understand they're out there, but you got personal when you put that nonsense in quotation marks and attributed it to "geezer." As a more mainstream conservative than the people who comment on online news stories, I don't feel that way.
As an aside, I detest the general ignorance of comments that tend to follow online news stories, and I avoid reading them, and I wish more outlets would simply disable them; at least disable anonymity.
Yes, I see the irony...
Fair enough and I should have left you out of it.
My problem is often stated but I'll repeat it. I think a lot of good people on the right are being driven nuts by an effective media campaign designed to place them in a perpetual state of outrage. Outrage, instead of honest disagreement. Outrage sells; just look at some of the contracts Limbaugh/Hannity/etc have signed. Problem is a lot of real world people have to deal with the consequences. In this case people who aren't harming anybody by getting married (except for maybe each other, which is a whole other discussion!)
Last edited:
MinnesotaNorthStar
Minding the gap
Re: Married? Again?
Well, there's the problem. Never expect anything intelligent to come from a comment section, no matter what side of an argument they're on.
unofan
Well-known member
It doesn't help. I believe Gannett has switched its newspapers to requiring people to post from their Facebook account in an effort to stem the worst comments. I've stopped being surprised at the vileness people seem to have no problems posting under their real names.
XYZ
Smoking in the selection room.
Re: Married? Again?
Citing a comment section on anything political in attempt to prove much of anything is rather pathetic. With that method one could find comments to diminish and destroy every ideology, ethos, race, religion, etc. in the world in a matter of minutes. Quite the method of critical thinking, right there.
Citing a comment section on anything political in attempt to prove much of anything is rather pathetic. With that method one could find comments to diminish and destroy every ideology, ethos, race, religion, etc. in the world in a matter of minutes. Quite the method of critical thinking, right there.
Re: Married? Again?
So true. It's amazing the amount of commenting people will do on a given news story. I guess they don't have anything productive to do.
So true. It's amazing the amount of commenting people will do on a given news story. I guess they don't have anything productive to do.
Re: Married? Again?
But one of our group made this point. Expecting people to temper their comments because their true identity is revealed is also an expectation that people will act rationally. And reading some comments out there, I'm not sure we can expect that from everyone, so it doesn't surprise me people will still write absurd things even over their own name.
I was debating with a couple of friends about this point. I'm a big believer in tweeting, posting, blogging, etc..., under your own name. I like to know who I'm reading, and at least for me I hope that it causes me to closely review what I'm about to throw out there.
But one of our group made this point. Expecting people to temper their comments because their true identity is revealed is also an expectation that people will act rationally. And reading some comments out there, I'm not sure we can expect that from everyone, so it doesn't surprise me people will still write absurd things even over their own name.
Re: Married? Again?
So, then, in your case, what explains your rude bullying behavior? were you sexually abused as a child and this is your way of getting revenge on the world ever after? or were you dropped on your head while very young and suffered permanent brain damage? Which one is it?
So, then, in your case, what explains your rude bullying behavior? were you sexually abused as a child and this is your way of getting revenge on the world ever after? or were you dropped on your head while very young and suffered permanent brain damage? Which one is it?
Re: Married? Again?
While I generally agree, there are two good reasons in some cases to preserve anonymity.
1) in some cases, FINRA regulations put quite severe restrictions on what registered representatives can say. If I am a bond dealer, for example, and I want to comment on city or state politics, I might be in violation of FINRA regulations if I also buy and sell bonds issued by said city or state, since my comments might be construed as trying to influence the market price of said bonds.
2) in our Town, there are some incredibly petty and vindictive people in town government who have no qualms about singling out individuals for substantial harassment over property tax exemptions, building codes, business regulations, and the like. There is one citizen in our town who quite clearly complies with state law regarding a farmstead exemption for property taxes who also is an outspoken critic of the cronyism that is too rampant in our local government. he has spent years in court trying to get the town assessor to comply with state law regarding his property taxes.
Many of our Founding Fathers (why do we never hear about Founding Mothers??) published their pamphlets anonymously for fear of retribution.
Look at what happened in California to people who exercised their free speech rights over a ballot initiative when their names were publicized.
There are some dangerous people out there who do target folks for retribution over comments made in a local paper.
While I generally agree, there are two good reasons in some cases to preserve anonymity.
1) in some cases, FINRA regulations put quite severe restrictions on what registered representatives can say. If I am a bond dealer, for example, and I want to comment on city or state politics, I might be in violation of FINRA regulations if I also buy and sell bonds issued by said city or state, since my comments might be construed as trying to influence the market price of said bonds.
2) in our Town, there are some incredibly petty and vindictive people in town government who have no qualms about singling out individuals for substantial harassment over property tax exemptions, building codes, business regulations, and the like. There is one citizen in our town who quite clearly complies with state law regarding a farmstead exemption for property taxes who also is an outspoken critic of the cronyism that is too rampant in our local government. he has spent years in court trying to get the town assessor to comply with state law regarding his property taxes.
Many of our Founding Fathers (why do we never hear about Founding Mothers??) published their pamphlets anonymously for fear of retribution.
Look at what happened in California to people who exercised their free speech rights over a ballot initiative when their names were publicized.
There are some dangerous people out there who do target folks for retribution over comments made in a local paper.
Re: Married? Again?
I'm in favor of anonymity, and even I don't find your point #1 compelling. If someone is making comments that could influence a bond market, don't we want to know where those comments are coming from? Seems like it would be much easier for him to manipulate the market if he could do it anonymously.
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: Married? Again?
Little boys, Les. That's what we boys do.
You guys are like little kids poking people with a stick to see what happens.
Little boys, Les. That's what we boys do.
ericredaxe
Veteran
Re: Married? Again?
My impression was always that Bush1 (and Regan for that matter) were quite a bit more moderate on social issues as compared to the loud voice of the social conservative part of the republican party of today.
My impression was always that Bush1 (and Regan for that matter) were quite a bit more moderate on social issues as compared to the loud voice of the social conservative part of the republican party of today.