My results:
#1 Conservative
#2 Neoconservative
#3 Centrist
#4 Third Way
#5 Libertarian
#6 Paleoconservative
#7 Paleo-libertarian
#8 Liberal
#9 Left-libertarian
#10 Radical

Gee, these are almost identical to the results I got here, before September 11, 2001 ("here" btw, is where we ought to be dicussing this topic), :smile:

p.s. No doubt, I'm an authoritarian hell raiser. :lol:

[ This Message was edited by: Marc Lamb on 2002-07-13 13:51 ]

Marc:

New Conservatives ascribe to the John Winthrop ideal--championed by Ronald Reagan as well-- of America as a "city upon a hill". This ideal has no basis in any notion of ruling "the world as a global empire" at all. None. Zip, zero, nadda!

It has everything to do with: a) A belief that American self interest in the world must be defended, and b) A belief that if all nations of the world were to imitate our form of Constitutionally limited government, their people, their nation and indeed the world would be a better place.

To quote the alleged founder of your religion, which is useful sometimes, a tree is known by its fruits. The fruits of neoconservatives differ markedly from those of the Puritans.

The problem with a call to defend "American self-interest" is that the meaning of this term is not self-evident. Whose interests? Those of which Americans? Addressing the specific problems we face today, does it mean the desire of American corporations to acquire cheap raw materials and labor, and so increase their profit margins? Or does it mean the desire of American workers to have decent, well-paying jobs, and Americans in general to be reasonably safe from attacks by foreign terrorists feeding on the outrage of their people against what our government does in service to those corporations? These two sets of "interests" are mutually exclusive, though both might be called American.

As for the second clause, I submit that the neocons provide it only lip-service. Their actions tend to support foreign governments that are very different from our own, brutal tyrannies that beat their people into providing American corporations with cheap raw materials and cheap labor.

I have my disagreements with Mr. Winthrop, too, but his positions were a far cry from these, and he would have sharply disapproved of these.

I applaude Mr. Rush for pointing this out. Again, it's just more deception, lies and ridiculous propaganda emanating from the master himself, Stonewall Goebbels.

Thanks, but you might want to hold the applause. My disagreement with Stonewall here is a technical matter of semantics. I believe he's using the word "fascist" incorrectly, to describe any government that is a danger to freedom.

I don't think that's right. Leon Trotsky was a danger to freedom, but he was not a fascist. George W. Bush is also a danger to freedom, but he is not a fascist, either. Nor is he, like Trotsky, a communist; he is a corporatist. But still a danger to freedom.

Where it really matters, Stonewall and I are in agreement here.

"The problem with a call to defend "American self-interest" is that the meaning of this term is not self-evident. Whose interests? Those of which Americans?"

Doesn't really matter, in the big picture that is, because the issue is self-correcting vis elections (the voice of the people),

As far as the Fascist v "danger" thing goes, I thought Clinton posed a real danger to America with his attitude toward foreign policy (wagging the dog and such). But thats beside the point. Goebbels called Bush a fascist and he isn't. Period.

Marc:

Doesn't really matter, in the big picture that is, because the issue is self-correcting vis elections (the voice of the people)

Well, that's true, provided of course that the government is actually responding to the voters and not to corporate donors. Lately it hasn't been, but the outrage is rising to the point where this will change.

So you're right that it's ultimately self-correcting, as was the Soviet Union, but still it DOES matter -- because the fact that the government panders to corporate interests instead of the public interest is the problem that needs "correcting" in the first place.

As far as the Fascist v "danger" thing goes, I thought Clinton posed a real danger to America

Somehow I just knew you were going to mention Mr. Clinton. I just knew it.

If you've been reading this thread, you know that both Stonewall and I have a rather low opinion of the "New Democrats" like Clinton. If you're saying that he, like Bush, was part of the problem, then I agree. If you're implying that, he being part of the problem, Bush cannot be -- that doesn't follow.

[Stonewall] called Bush a fascist and he isn't. Period.

No, we can't put a period after that. It must be appended that, although Bush is not a fascist, he's something just as bad. He is not what the word "fascist" actually means. But he certainly is what Stonewall meant by the word.

[ This Message was edited by: Brian Rush on 2002-07-13 14:07 ]

So being pro-business (big or little) makes one a fascist? Or is that legal enity called "corporation" the stumbling block on this fascist thing. If one is for corporations, one is fascist by your def.

That's not my definition, Marc, it's Stonewalls. I already said I disagree with it.

A belief that the government ought to serve corporate interests is corporatism, not fascism. But it's every bit as much a danger to freedom, and an offense to what government is supposed to be for ("to secure these rights"), as fascism.

Sorry about that. Bush was being a corporatist when he signed that steel tariff bill and the farm bill, that's for sure! And both pissed me off royally. :smile:

My feeling, though, was that Bush was really playing a little Keynesian thing with the economy.

[ This Message was edited by: Marc Lamb on 2002-07-13 14:30 ]

On 2002-07-12 22:19, Heliotrope wrote:

How many kids do you have and how old are they? You don't talk about them much.

He DID talk about the time his toddler said "Tower fall", didn't he?

On 2002-07-13 13:53, Brian Rush wrote:

My disagreement with Stonewall here is a technical matter of semantics. I believe he's using the word "fascist" incorrectly, to describe any government that is a danger to freedom.

I don't think that's right. Leon Trotsky was a danger to freedom, but he was not a fascist. George W. Bush is also a danger to freedom, but he is not a fascist, either. Nor is he, like Trotsky, a communist; he is a corporatist. But still a danger to freedom.

No, I would never describe just any government which is dangerous to freedom as fascist. A communist government is a danger to freedom but it clearly is not fascist. I was specifically describing three corporatist factions which dominate our politics and assessing the degree to which each exhibits fascist tendencies such that Alex and R. Gregory might distinguish these factions from each other.

Let me restate it with a graphic. And recall that I see corporatism as a range which runs between mercantilism and fascism at its poles. The corporatist range runs vertically in the example below:

FASCISM
...
...
Neo-Conservatives
...
Third Way/New Democrats
...
Bush-Rockefeller types
...
...
MERCANTILISM

Obviously, a second dimension can be added since New Democrats are a tad to the left of neo-cons and Bush types are a tad to the right of neo-cons, but it is easier to deal with a line here. I see Bush types as more mercantilist than fascist, New Democrat/Third Wayers as splitting the middle, and neo-cons as more fascist than mercantilist. You might actually consider New Democrats as more mercantilist than Bush types, I do not know.

http://www.bartcop.com/yer_freedom.jpg

Hmm. I suppose if you're classifying the goons who want to bomb all Muslim creation back to the Stone Age as "neo-cons" then they do seem more fascist than Bush. I'm not at all sure I'd place the DLC closer to the fascist end than Bush, though; they seem quite mercantilist to me.

As for their being to the left of Mr. Bush, that's marginally true with respect to economics (read: they're slightly less blatant), but sharply true on social issues. As I said, the Democrats cater to a different secondary constituency than the Republicans. It's hard to tell much difference with respect to economic policy, but the differences on social issues can be profound, even with DLC members.

I'm hoping that will change shortly, and that the Democrats will remember they're supposed to be the nation's dadgum liberal party, opposed to corporatism. I'll tell you, they tick me off more than the Goppers do sometimes.

On 2002-07-13 14:44, Brian Rush wrote:

Hmm. I suppose if you're classifying the goons who want to bomb all Muslim creation back to the Stone Age as "neo-cons" then they do seem more fascist than Bush.

Exactly. And those are the same goons who set up A.V.O.T. to intimidate all dissenting voices. That sort of activity is too "forward," too blatant, too tacky, and too gauche for genteel old money types like the Bush crowd, so there is a definite difference. However the Bush types are more than happy to see someone else (the neo-cons) do it for them.

I'm not at all sure I'd place the DLC closer to the fascist end than Bush, though; they seem quite mercantilist to me.

That is what I thought. They are close enough. It is distinctly the neo-cons which are out in front, leading in the fascist direction, and I think we can agree on that.

As for their being to the left of Mr. Bush, that's marginally true with respect to economics (read: they're slightly less blatant), but sharply true on social issues.

Agreed. I said only by a "tad."

http://www.bartcop.com/yer_freedom.jpg

On 2002-07-13 13:22, Stonewall Patton wrote:

On 2002-07-13 13:03, Jesse Manoogian wrote:

#1 Libertarian
#2 Left-libertarian
#3 Radical
#4 Paleo-libertarian
#5 Paleoconservative
#6 Conservative
#7 Neoconservative
#8 Centrist
#9 Third Way
#10 Liberal

Pretty cool, Jesse. You are riding that Libertarian Right and Left line so closely that it is difficult to tell which is your primary quadrant. But there is consistency at the bottom of your list. You clean out the Authoritarian Left quadrant as a bloc dead last (and clean out the Authoritarian Right quadrant as a bloc immediately prior). So you have a clear suggestion that your weakest quadrant is the Authoritarian Left. That suggests that your primary is the opposite of the Authoritarian Left which is the Libertarian Right. You are Libertarian Right with a Libertarian Left meld.

I am going to have to start keeping a tally on a document. But I think we are well over 90% with Libertarian Left as either primary or meld. That really ought to be the key to this place.

hmm... Libertarian = #1, Radical = #2, and Left-libertarian = #3; all are either libertarian or left-libertarian; it seems like you're more left-libertarian than anything else, but I'm wondering how you got liberal in dead last! Maybe the test isn't *completely* accurate :razz: ...

[ This Message was edited by: Agent 24601984 on 2002-07-13 15:52 ]

Is the test accurate?

Pretty loaded questions, if you ask me.
Example:
15. Do you support taxpayer funded vouchers to help parents send their children to the public or private school of their choice?

Wouldn't a more neutral question read:
15. Do you support a method that would allow parents to send their children to the school of their choice?

[ This Message was edited by: Marc Lamb on 2002-07-13 16:25 ]

On 2002-07-13 16:23, Marc Lamb wrote:

Is the test accurate?

Pretty loaded questions, if you ask me.
Example:
15. Do you support taxpayer funded vouchers to help parents send their children to the public or private school of their choice?

Wouldn't a more neutral question read:
15. Do you support a method that would allow parents to send their children to the school of their choice?

[ This Message was edited by: Marc Lamb on 2002-07-13 16:25 ]

For reasons already debated (that I'm too lazy to go into here), I doubt that vouchers are truly a method that "allow parents to send their children to the school of their choice" - I agree with you that the questions can be pretty loaded but the only loaded words I saw in the original were "taxpayer funded"

If you are attempting to identify a political type...why would you want the questions neutral?

My point, precisely. :smile:

Stonewall and Kiff thanks for the invite.
I have to warn you all that this may be the longest post ever posted.
Marc Lamb, I sent you a private message last night, did you get it?

And in the interest of staying on topic, like you care at this point,
YOU are proof positive we are still in a 3T. ( more on that later.)
Along with a detailed explanation of why I am leaving.

First off, this is not what I had expected at all .
When I came in I thought that I would find a community of people
who were maybe a little ahead of the game. With a heads up on what
the future holds for us. I assumed, silly me, that you would be willing
to admit, that whatever your deeply held beliefs were you would be
willing to let go of some of them in the interest of finding some common
ground. I am more than aware my opinions are my own. But, I also
know through common sense that the way I want the 4T and thus the next
1T to evolve, will never manifest it?s self in the way I want.
But, It won?t manifest it?s self singularly the way YOU (any of you)
want it to either.

I thought that that was fairly evident. I guess not.

Well, that?s what I thought I would find.

What I did find is a typical chat room where people are more interested
in putting forth their arguments and ideals than listening to others ideas.
Where the goal, like any other typical chat room, is one up manship at
it?s finest. Who has the biggest vocabulary, who has the biggest dick,
who has the fastest hands. But, more importantly and MOST importantly
who has the best argument and who can with clairity put that argument
forward. Alternative views are hated and conversely loved for the same reasons.
You hate what the other has to say, yet, you love it because it?s a challenge
to show your skills at the game of debate. Admittedly there is some, but, not a
whole lot of interest in the content.

For all of the bickering name calling and stupid stuff said here, this is why
we are still in the 3T. This whole forum sounds exactly like Congress.

I think we all agree that at this point Congress sucks hardcore on their
ability to get things ?real? things accomplished. That is why I am taking my
leave. I can?t think of any thing more depressing than spending my time
watching C-SPAN. Unless it?s watching C-SPAN the 4T. It?s not that
any of you are necessarily depressing, it?s my own disappointment in
what my expectations for this forum would be.

This forum may be fun and great for most of you, which I am sure it is,
but, for me to argue for the sake of argument is not a sport. It gets wearisome
real fast.

And the funny thing is it?s still questioned weather or not I am even a real person.
I think that trips me out more than anything. Yes, I assure you I am quite real.
I suppose one of the reasons you question my validity is because although I am
an X?r , the people I identify with more than any other group are the Silents.

A little background maybe. I am 34 born in 1968 to a man who was 35, born
in 1932, to a man who was
50, born in 1885. Since you understand generations maybe you see what an anomaly
this is. I grew up extremely protected from the culture of 1968 ie: Vietnam, the hippies
etc. But, alternately I was barefoot and ran free most of the day in the hills.
( all the while living in So. Ca. ) I grew into my teens as a typical X?r
alienated, a punk, used drugs, blah blah. On my own at 18. But, really on my
own, I never had a roommate to take advantage of. By 24 I had 2 children, the
first I adopted out and the 2nd I kept. I was also widowed at 24. By a
abusive binge drug addict, user of , crack, cocaine, heroine, alcohol, and
Valum. I still drink wine, on occasions, about 1 bottle a month. Just in case you
think I?ve swung 180 and now refuse all forms of ?intoxicants? as a knee jerk
reaction. A year and ? later I was remarried to the most gracious loving and
wonderful man alive. With a totally rad job to boot, he?s a sea captain , whose
home every night.. We now have a total of 3 kids, and I love my life.
We just celebrated our 8 year anniversary.

When I was younger I was a bleeding heart liberal. I was also depressed and
alienated. I wasn?t ever really happy with me, or the way things were.
Now, I am very happy, and content and I like myself, I love my kids, my husband
and I have a great marriage that is envied by some. So if you ask me to
?Consider the Liberal point of view? been there, done that, I don?t like living
that way. I prefer being Happy. :grin:

I suppose now, more than ever you doubt I am real. Don?t you?
I know at this point you do. Although for the life of me I honestly cannot
figure out WHY.

I have a some parting words to each of you, and since you love to see your
name in print, this is the part of the post you?ll enjoy the most.

But, before I do, If there really is a 4T, a real one. I may be back to
see what you are talking about , until then, there?s no use. I have a son to teach
how to ride a bike, a daughter who needs to learn to swim. A carpet that needs
vacuuming, laundry that needs washing?. And real live friends who actually
have the SAME political view as I do. Believe it or Not!!

Stonewall, are you married? If you are does your wife behave, act and look
exactly the same as she did the day you were married? Do you? Are you
both as hot for each other as you were? NO? Why? Oh, I see you?ve learned the
art of something called ?compromise?. Why is politics any different?
Bush, you feel sold you out, and now your anger over your perceived injustice
blinds you to any good he might actually accomplish. If you think you aren?t
angry, your posts betray you, instead of coming off well spoken you often look like
a hothead.

Eric, forget it, man. The summer of love is over. No matter how much you
believe in your heart, if we all just fucked and smoked weed with each other
the world would be beautiful. The reality is ?grass? no longer costs 5 bucks a ?lid?.
And every other girl you poke has herpes.Too bad, your not young anymore.

Kiff, I respect you above all the others. Your gentle rebuke on one of my
more hormonal days, was well founded and gave me a opportunity to
re-evaluate why I had come here in the first place. Even if I don?t agree with
you 100% it?s people like you who will lead us into and through the next
Turning.

Alex, you?re young, 15? yes? The millies need more like you. Stay the right path
and teach those around you. The future of America may very well depend on you
and people like you. Remember, gun control is a steady hand :wink:

Justin, I would possibly write you off entirely, except for the fact that you are still
in your 20?s. I think there is great hope for you. Listen to your mom.

Marc Lamb, As has been pointed out on earlier posts, the harshest words are
reserved for those whom we agree with. Sorry, brother, but, if you have
4 kids, shame on you for spending such great quantities of time on the computer.
Although, I do admire your commitment to torture yourself day after day
for what you believe. I think I?ll get out before I am sucked in all together.

Neisha and Heliotrope, As mothers, ( correct?) even though our views are
so different, I see in you a different quality than some of the others.
Perhaps this comes from a change in perspective once one becomes a mom.
Living has less to do with ?me?, and more with what?s in the best interest of
the babies. Too bad we can?t get together and do a play group.
I bet we would have a lot more in common that superficial appearance on
these forums. Although, Heliotrope doesn?t believe I am for real.
Maybe you can go the the park and just pretend I?m there.

Jenny, Jds, Croaker, Tim all the rest?..rock on??.

If anyone wants to contact me directly my email address is
ma2x@hotmail.com My name is Maxine Armstrong. It?s my junk
mail address but, I?ll check it for the next couple of days.

And if you really want to have your mind blown check out this link
http://www.lucianne.com/threads2.asp?artnum=221634
But, it?s only good for 72 hours.

"Marc Lamb, I sent you a private message last night, did you get it?"

Yeah, just now. Dang that little message notice. I never saw it.

Interesting note, may I think it over for a while before responding?

And yes, my children are nomads... :smile:

She's right, you know. Strauss and Howe probably post rarely because they have better things to do than frequent a chat room.

Good point, Tim. I know that's the first thing I would do after starting a public website forum: I'd go find something better to do. :lol:

William Strauss started the site back in 1997, with Neil Howe. Strauss made a LOT of posts for the first several years. Most of those were on the old program. Like most people with better things to do, he hasn't stayed around forever posting to the web site.

"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive,

Eric A. Meece

justmom was a strange experience. She posted mostly cliches, then wondered why some people didn't take her for real. She is happy with her personal life, which is great. I admire her for that. For those who are also interested in what's happening in the world, and who take a genuine interest in it, there are issues on which people take stands or which require more thought than she cares to devote to the subject.

I am amazed at her stereotype of me. I admire the Summer of Love for what it was. However nowhere on this site did I advocate continuous fucking or grass smoking. She obviously does not care to try to understand what people say on forums like this. It is OK to label and stereotype people as long as you don't put it in the way of what they are trying to say.

"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive,

Eric A. Meece

On 2002-07-13 17:08, justmom wrote:
Stonewall and Kiff thanks for the invite.
I have to warn you all that this may be the longest post ever posted.
Marc Lamb, I sent you a private message last night, did you get it?

And in the interest of staying on topic, like you care at this point,
YOU are proof positive we are still in a 3T. ( more on that later.)
Along with a detailed explanation of why I am leaving.

First off, this is not what I had expected at all .
When I came in I thought that I would find a community of people
who were maybe a little ahead of the game. With a heads up on what
the future holds for us. I assumed, silly me, that you would be willing
to admit, that whatever your deeply held beliefs were you would be
willing to let go of some of them in the interest of finding some common
ground. I am more than aware my opinions are my own. But, I also
know through common sense that the way I want the 4T and thus the next
1T to evolve, will never manifest it?s self in the way I want.
But, It won?t manifest it?s self singularly the way YOU (any of you)
want it to either.

I thought that that was fairly evident. I guess not.

Well, that?s what I thought I would find.

What I did find is a typical chat room where people are more interested
in putting forth their arguments and ideals than listening to others ideas.
Where the goal, like any other typical chat room, is one up manship at
it?s finest. Who has the biggest vocabulary, who has the biggest dick,
who has the fastest hands. But, more importantly and MOST importantly
who has the best argument and who can with clairity put that argument
forward. Alternative views are hated and conversely loved for the same reasons.
You hate what the other has to say, yet, you love it because it?s a challenge
to show your skills at the game of debate. Admittedly there is some, but, not a
whole lot of interest in the content.

For all of the bickering name calling and stupid stuff said here, this is why
we are still in the 3T. This whole forum sounds exactly like Congress.

I think we all agree that at this point Congress sucks hardcore on their
ability to get things ?real? things accomplished. That is why I am taking my
leave. I can?t think of any thing more depressing than spending my time
watching C-SPAN. Unless it?s watching C-SPAN the 4T. It?s not that
any of you are necessarily depressing, it?s my own disappointment in
what my expectations for this forum would be.

This forum may be fun and great for most of you, which I am sure it is,
but, for me to argue for the sake of argument is not a sport. It gets wearisome
real fast.

And the funny thing is it?s still questioned weather or not I am even a real person.
I think that trips me out more than anything. Yes, I assure you I am quite real.
I suppose one of the reasons you question my validity is because although I am
an X?r , the people I identify with more than any other group are the Silents.

A little background maybe. I am 34 born in 1968 to a man who was 35, born
in 1932, to a man who was
50, born in 1885. Since you understand generations maybe you see what an anomaly
this is. I grew up extremely protected from the culture of 1968 ie: Vietnam, the hippies
etc. But, alternately I was barefoot and ran free most of the day in the hills.
( all the while living in So. Ca. ) I grew into my teens as a typical X?r
alienated, a punk, used drugs, blah blah. On my own at 18. But, really on my
own, I never had a roommate to take advantage of. By 24 I had 2 children, the
first I adopted out and the 2nd I kept. I was also widowed at 24. By a
abusive binge drug addict, user of , crack, cocaine, heroine, alcohol, and
Valum. I still drink wine, on occasions, about 1 bottle a month. Just in case you
think I?ve swung 180 and now refuse all forms of ?intoxicants? as a knee jerk
reaction. A year and ? later I was remarried to the most gracious loving and
wonderful man alive. With a totally rad job to boot, he?s a sea captain , whose
home every night.. We now have a total of 3 kids, and I love my life.
We just celebrated our 8 year anniversary.

When I was younger I was a bleeding heart liberal. I was also depressed and
alienated. I wasn?t ever really happy with me, or the way things were.
Now, I am very happy, and content and I like myself, I love my kids, my husband
and I have a great marriage that is envied by some. So if you ask me to
?Consider the Liberal point of view? been there, done that, I don?t like living
that way. I prefer being Happy. :grin:

I suppose now, more than ever you doubt I am real. Don?t you?
I know at this point you do. Although for the life of me I honestly cannot
figure out WHY.

I have a some parting words to each of you, and since you love to see your
name in print, this is the part of the post you?ll enjoy the most.

But, before I do, If there really is a 4T, a real one. I may be back to
see what you are talking about , until then, there?s no use. I have a son to teach
how to ride a bike, a daughter who needs to learn to swim. A carpet that needs
vacuuming, laundry that needs washing?. And real live friends who actually
have the SAME political view as I do. Believe it or Not!!

Stonewall, are you married? If you are does your wife behave, act and look
exactly the same as she did the day you were married? Do you? Are you
both as hot for each other as you were? NO? Why? Oh, I see you?ve learned the
art of something called ?compromise?. Why is politics any different?
Bush, you feel sold you out, and now your anger over your perceived injustice
blinds you to any good he might actually accomplish. If you think you aren?t
angry, your posts betray you, instead of coming off well spoken you often look like
a hothead.

Eric, forget it, man. The summer of love is over. No matter how much you
believe in your heart, if we all just fucked and smoked weed with each other
the world would be beautiful. The reality is ?grass? no longer costs 5 bucks a ?lid?.
And every other girl you poke has herpes.Too bad, your not young anymore.

Kiff, I respect you above all the others. Your gentle rebuke on one of my
more hormonal days, was well founded and gave me a opportunity to
re-evaluate why I had come here in the first place. Even if I don?t agree with
you 100% it?s people like you who will lead us into and through the next
Turning.

Alex, you?re young, 15? yes? The millies need more like you. Stay the right path
and teach those around you. The future of America may very well depend on you
and people like you. Remember, gun control is a steady hand :wink:

Justin, I would possibly write you off entirely, except for the fact that you are still
in your 20?s. I think there is great hope for you. Listen to your mom.

Marc Lamb, As has been pointed out on earlier posts, the harshest words are
reserved for those whom we agree with. Sorry, brother, but, if you have
4 kids, shame on you for spending such great quantities of time on the computer.
Although, I do admire your commitment to torture yourself day after day
for what you believe. I think I?ll get out before I am sucked in all together.

Neisha and Heliotrope, As mothers, ( correct?) even though our views are
so different, I see in you a different quality than some of the others.
Perhaps this comes from a change in perspective once one becomes a mom.
Living has less to do with ?me?, and more with what?s in the best interest of
the babies. Too bad we can?t get together and do a play group.
I bet we would have a lot more in common that superficial appearance on
these forums. Although, Heliotrope doesn?t believe I am for real.
Maybe you can go the the park and just pretend I?m there.

Jenny, Jds, Croaker, Tim all the rest?..rock on??.

If anyone wants to contact me directly my email address is
ma2x@hotmail.com My name is Maxine Armstrong. It?s my junk
mail address but, I?ll check it for the next couple of days.

And if you really want to have your mind blown check out this link
http://www.lucianne.com/threads2.asp?artnum=221634
But, it?s only good for 72 hours.

Justmom, I read your post, and then I went back and read it again. First of all, I want to say that I am sorry if I implied in any way that you might not be real. I didn't actually mean you were faking an identity or that you didn't really exist...what I really meant by that "troll" comment was that you were trying to get other posters riled up by making outrageous statements. My apologies. You have explained your views and I have no right to assume that just because I may disagree with you about some things, and because you are especially frank about your views (you're a no-bullshit Xer after all, right?) that it follows that you can't possibly be a real person. That assumpton on my part just makes an ass out of u and me--but especially me. (But I do have to admit I thought you were a Boomer forgive me!)

It's too bad you feel it necessary to leave. IMHO, this board contains some of the most civilized and intelligent discussion and debate on the Internet. It sure beats Usenet! I am not sure what you were expecting. Any board that has many people with differing views is going to erupt occasionally into heated debate--or even outright arguing. It has nothing to do with the turning we're in. People are always going to disagree, even in a 4T.

As far as listening to other points of view, let me point out that disagreeing does not equal not listening. I don't think people come here just to argue with each other, but to educate themselves about other views and be able to interact with intelligent people. Sure, there are always going to be troublemakers, but that's true no matter where you go. Unfortunately it's human nature and not everyone is going to be a paragon of civilized discourse.

You do seem like a genuinely nice person, if a bit frank (but that's good), and a person who really loves your family. That's admirable. I really hope you change your mind and decide to stay on here for a while and give this board a chance. I think in time you will be pleasantly surprised.

Again, I apologize for accusing you of trolling before. Also, that was a nice thing you said to me. :smile: Thank you.

_________________
We're all created from an act of love, so why is there so much hate?

[ This Message was edited by: Heliotrope on 2002-07-13 19:19 ]

Bill, Neil, Tim, Eric and mom... I think you all make a pretty good case here. You're right, of course. We should all take a "get real" deep breath, step back and... go find something else better to do.