Hmm... looks like even CNN and The Denver Post are starting to agree with me. CNN is comparing inauguration day to a pilgrimage to Mecca. Who knew...

I wish Obama well in that I don't want to see and physical harm come to him and that I recognize him as the President. Politically speaking I hope that he is ineffective and defeated at every turn as he and the rest of the democrats push forward their agenda of making as many as possible dependent on the federal government.

http://www.freedomslighth...oming.html

http://www.denverpost.com...?source=bb

How can you recognize Obama as President?

He's not a natural-born citizen, is he?

I heard tell that he was a Muslim too? Shouldn't that alone disqualify him in your eyes, Richard?

Is it a SPECIAL DAY or is just another black family moving into government housing?

Interesting. . . .


We've just come through a trying and turbulent period in our Nation's history . . . we've trying days to yet to come. Myself, I'm confident the Union will survive. I am even certain that when have addressed many of the problems currently confronting us, we shall yet again thrive. We are an often peculiar People and Nation . . . a cantankerous and often contentious citizenry. And yet as history has shown we are able to rise above ourselves when circumstances so demand. It remains to be seem whether circumstances are such at the present time that we shall rise above ourselves, but I have confidence that when it is time to do so, we shall.

Myself, I think we are currently at, or very near, an ebb point in our Nation's fortunes. I understand that it took the combined efforts of many people (from all walks of life recognize) over many years to get us to this low point and that it will take much effort and time to reverse this. I don't expect miracles - it won't be all better tomorrow. But I do think we are ready to begin the recovery. I base this solely on the sense I have that people of good will (from all walks of life) recognize that it is time to rise to the occasion. We are likely to argue bitterly over the means, but I do sense that we are coming together to work towards the ends.

Dean,

I don't think it's a special day in the sense you are conveying. As we all know, there is a minority of dickheads out there who spout that kind of crap 24/7-365.

oops.

[This message has been edited by GVC (edited 1/19/2009).]

"Richard, do you really want your President to be ineffectual? Doesn't that just weaken the US even further in the eyes of the citizens and the rest of the world? My wish for Obama is that he gets good advice and follows it, that he makes decisions that are in the best interest of the nation and that he uses good judgment and intelligence. I had the same wish for Bush even though I disagreed with him politically. I didn't get my wish that time but maybe now?"

In terns of policy and reviving our economy, the less he and the democrat congress do to "fix" things the better. I am really concerned about millions of people becoming "wards of the government" rather than using their own abilities, ingenuity, and "elbow-grease" to solve their own problems, rather than looking to the government.

[This message has been edited by Richard Bonine, Jr (edited 1/19/2009).]

How can they use their "elbow-grease" if there isn't any job or place to use it with the economy in a state of crisis? I'm a young mom, who goes to work EVERYDAY and I work my butt off to pay my bills and put food on our table. I am educated and I'll soon have my associate's degree. If I didn't rely on the government in the one instance I had to, I wouldn't be independent today. I don't think democrats intentions are to have people living and sucking up tax dollars for the rest of their lives. I believe they want to provide more help to people who need it to get out of the situations they are in.

The government bought my family food for 2 months. 487 dollars a month until I found a job. Now, I recieve just financial student aid to continue my college.

If you don't want people living off the government, move to iraq or north korea.

Hmm... Racist comments on MC.com? Why, it must be MLK Day!!!

http://milescity.com/foru...fpid=40446

Smiley, why do you hate America so much?

[This message has been edited by Bridgier (edited 1/19/2009).]

I am fairly optimistic about Obama's presidency. I am pretty apprehensive about the ongoing bipartisan spending orgy though. I'm not an economist, but a bunch of politicians spending unprecedented amounts of borrowed money on...something or other that we'll find out about later...yeah, apprehensive.

"Why, it must be MLK Day!!!"

In Wyoming it is also "equality day"... whatever that means.

Wyoming was the first state to grant women the right to vote. It's probably the anniversary of that.
Ken Z

Dick Cheney is from Wyoming! Whatever that means.

Equality day if for remembering the people who aren't black, but suffered as badly or worse. Wyoming isn't teeming with black folks.

Mr. Obama - is he an orator, or a con artist??

Both have the gift of eloquent, persuasive speech; both build up confidence in their audiences; one makes his victims believe that they can get something for nothing.

Then there's The Shrub...who lived up to his excellent speaking abilities. Does RA stand for Republican @sshole?

[This message has been edited by Bob Netherton (edited 1/19/2009).]

I was watching CNN this afternoon and it was reported that the cost of this event is to exceed $160,000,000. To make it worse, CNN also reported that the largest contibutors are bailout recipients.

Living in this county/city I truly do grow tired of being "squeezed" and things like this truly irritate me.

Read in the Star tonight the City needs a new lift/elevator. Spent $80,0000 10 years ago and over $20,000 in repairs to date. Not only do we pay for services we don't need and have employees with inflated wages, we can't even make the stuff we overspend on last ten years. Surprised public works offered to help with this, as that account has historically been pillaged for "the" department, which led to the latest increase in water rates and the like.

They always want more, wouldn't it be nice if they were just efficient with what they already had?

From Media Matters:
"Here's the misleading online report from CNNMoney.com's Catherine Clifford

The total cost of the inauguration of the 44th President of the United States will likely top $150 million by the time the galas and streamers and porta-pots are all cleaned up.

Yet another news article detailing the cost of the Obama inauguration, including security costs; costs reporters can't actually confirm. Instead the analysis is built on a projection.
Here's the real problem, though: Where's the context? Meaning, how much did previous inaugurations cost, once security expenses were factored in? The entire point of the CNNMoney article is to highlight how expensive the Obama inauguration is going to be. And readers are certainly left with the impression that the spending is historic and just out of control. But is it?

As Media Matters has been noting for days, if you add in the cost of security for Bush's 2005 inauguration, that event cost $157 million. So why does CNNMoney suggest the Obama tab is so newsworthy?

UPDATE: Great point, made by Washington Monthly reader:
Not to be nitpicky, but when you factor in inflation (via The Inflation Calculator at the Dollar Times website), $157M in 2005 dollars would be $173M in 2008 dollars. So in other words, this inauguration will actually cost less than the last one, from a certain point of view."

http://mediamatters.org/c...0901190001

We owe a debt to people like RA, Dean and others who think like them. Their statements serve to remind the rest of us -- liberals, conservatives, democrats, republicans, theists and atheists alike -- that the election of a black president is a landmark achievement but it does not mean we've arrived at our destination. As long as there are people who take pride in being ignorant and prejudiced, we as a nation continue to have a real challenge ahead of us.

"Their statements serve to remind the rest of us -- liberals, conservatives, democrats, republicans, theists and atheists alike -- that the election of a black president is a landmark achievement but it does not mean we've arrived at our destination."

I find such statements ironic. The politically correct position states that we are supposed to be blind to race, sex, religion, etc. And yet we are supposed to "celebrated" the "landmark achievement" that we have elected someone of color to lead us. It is non-sequitur to believe that the "destination" is some utopia where race etc doesn't matter, but at the same time continue to divide (and track) people into groups based on their physical, behavioral, or theologic/atheologic characteristics. The interests of these groups are often pitted against one another, which is how liberals derive their power.

If race doesn't matter, (I certainly don't think it does) why is today a "landmark achievement"?

[This message has been edited by Richard Bonine, Jr (edited 1/20/2009).]

Richard:

You have hit the proverbial 'nail upon the head'!

Hey, don't you two have a KKK meeting to go to or something?

The politically correct position states that we are supposed to be blind to race, sex, religion, etc.

Richard - I have no idea what the politically correct position is - I have never tried nor do I now aspire to be PC - whatever it is. The funny thing is, I don't think you or anyone else knows what the term means either - it's one of those funny terms that gets trotted out to smack down one's (euphamistic) enemies.

I have never wanted to be blind to anything, including each and every one of the categories you listed. I treasure differences and I acknowledge that each has something unique to contribute. The strongest metals are alloys comprised of elements with different characteristics, and the strongest societies are allies comprised of people from all backgrounds.

The Liberal position could care less about political correctness - as evidenced by countless walks, boycotts, protests, and too many assassinations. (For proof, just ask uourself how many Conservatives in the USA have been assassinated for their beliefs.)

Liberals believe in recognizing and honoring people's natural differences. We also are not afraid to point out prejudice and injustice, which often hides behind stereotypes and attempts to isolate, denigrate and obfuscate Liberal ideals with silly terms like Political Correctness.

I hope you'll think twice before resorting to such elementary name calling again. It is something we can expect from the ignorant amont us - and like I said above, I value their contribution because they show us just how far we still have to go. But you, Richard - as well as Kyle, Rick, Levi and others who represent the conservative side of things here so well -- well, you're far, far above that kind of childishness - aren't you?

So please leave the job of representing the Ignorant point-of-view to others like RA, Jim Brady and Dean. After all, I think you'll agree that they're doing a great job of it on their own.

[This message has been edited by Steve Craddock (edited 1/20/2009).]

If race doesn't matter, (I certainly don't think it does) why is today a "landmark achievement"?

---------------

Richard:

See "Uncovering Black History in Montana" thread for your answer.

I agree with Steve. I would hate to to live in a world where race, sex, religion, etc didn't matter. It does matter, just not in the ways bigots think it does. The color of one's skin should not affect one's right to partake of all human rights and privileges. In an ideal world it shouldn't affect one's job, education status or chance of being stopped by the police. But unfortunately, neither the US nor humanity in general has achieved this yet. That is why this is a landmark event in US history.

This world is made up of myriad cultures and peoples. It is a fantastic conglomeration of differences which should be celebrated and honored.

Lay off people! They're white men...the most tragically put-upon, abused, used, down-trodden people in the world! And they also hate when people act like victims. Especially non-white people.

Steve:

It truly amazes me that you seem to welcome dialogue; however, when one voices a seemingly opposing viewpoint from yours - you choose to brand that individual as "ignorant".

Some viewpoints are ignorant.

I don't know who you are RA, but in the lifetime of Mr. Bonine's father (and sometimes within the lifetime of Mr. Bonine and myself), it has been considered acceptable by a large segment of the American population for:

* Black people to be excluded after sundown in many American cities http://en.wikipedia.org/w...ndown_town

* Killed in an extrajudicial manner http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynching (Which yes, was a source of internal dissent within the democratic party. I'll let you figure out for yourself where the pro-lynching dixiecrats ended up)

* Forced to accept separate facilities for such things as drinking fountains and bathrooms - why? Because they've got cooties?

Etc, etc.

Some people's concept of "political correctness" is about on par with their concept of "global warming", at best an unintended caricature of reality, at worst, willfully ignorant.

A black man was elected president today. 54 years ago, a black youth was beaten and shot to death for whistling at a white woman. 80 years ago it was not uncommon for postcards made from photographs taken at a lynching - a strange black fruit surrounded by a sea of shining white faces.

In fact, here you go:



From the fine article: http://en.wikipedia.org/w...Washington

"The boy was beaten and dragged to the suspension bridge spanning the Brazos River. Thousands roared, "Burn him!" Bonfire preparations were already under way in the public square, where Washington was beaten with shovels and bricks. Fifteen thousand men, women, and children packed the square. They climbed up poles and onto the tops of cars, hung from windows, and sat on each other's shoulders. Children were lifted by their parents into the air. Washington was castrated, and his ears were cut off. A tree supported the iron chain that lifted him above the fire of boxes and sticks. Wailing, the boy attempted to climb the skillet-hot chain. For this the men cut off his fingers. The executioners repeatedly lowered the boy into the flames and hoisted him out again. With each repetition, a mighty shout was raised."

Sounds like a good time was had by all. Well, except for Mr. Washington. And nobody was ever prosecuted.

If you can't understand why today is something historic, then you just might be ignorant.

[This message has been edited by Bridgier (edited 1/20/2009).]

RA,

You seem to want to define me in Black and White terms (no pun intended). Your accusation is that when ONE voice opposes me, I brand that individual as ignorant. I think you're wrong and I believe the facts back me up on this.

A well stated thought makes me examine my own thinking, and I appreciate that - in fact, I love it. The dialogues often get heated and sometimes escalate into arguments - but I never consider them ignorant and sometimes, as a result of our exchanges, my thoughts on an issue change or, more commonly, evolve.

Many people (Rick, Kyle, Levi, Brian A. Reed, Mule Train, and even the oft maligned Richard Bonine Jr. and Rick Kuchynka) have posted opinions on mc.com that conflict with my beliefs. The difference is, those people state their arguments or positions in intelligent ways, so I end up respecting their POVs and often admiring them as people.

There are only a handful of people whose comments I have labeled ignorant, idiotic or bigoted. I stand by each one. For instance, your anti-rhetorical query at the beginning of this thread was, in my opinion, ridiculously off-base, to wit:
"Mr. Obama - is he an orator, or a con artist??"
I might have overlooked that little line as a harmless quip, but then you went on to say things that, taken as a whole, sounded ... well ... ignorant. So I called it as I saw it.

I've done the same with a handful - but only a handful - of other mc.commies. You all have ONE thing in common: you post similarly idiotic comments and try to sell them off as "thoughts" or "conversation starters." They're neither. Ignorance absent curiousity is a conversation stopper, plain and simple.

You are right to question the way in which I apply the terms "ignorant" and "bigoted" and such. I don't know you, Jim Brady, Dean, Montana Kid or Ike. For all I know, each one of you may be a wonderful person who just happened to post an ignorant, idiotic or bigoted comment once *(or twice) in your life that I was unfortunate enough to come across. If that is the case, I apologize for wrongly typecasting you. I will try to focus on your statements and comments - not on you as a person - in the future. But if I see a multitude of ignorant comments posted time and again by the same individual, I don't see how it could be considered unfair to draw a logical conclusion about that person's character.

So, don't expect me to retire the words ignorant, bigoted, etc. from my vocabulary. If you or anyone else want to use those words or others against me - that's fair game (within the limits established by the webmaster, of course). All I ask is that you be able to back up your accusations.

Of course, it would lead to a much more civil and productive discussion if everyone would eliminate things that raise the spectre of "ignorance" or "bigotry" from the conversation in the first place... is that asking too much?

Wow Bridgier - THAT is what it really was all about. But that isn't the only thing the struggle has been about. There were so many subtler forms of discrimination that were not lethal, but crippling in many ways.

My first first-hand experience with prejudice occured at my grandmother's house. I was 15, and I had a new friend who had just moved to town - and yep, he was Black. One hot July afternoon we went over to my grandmother's to swim in the pool in her beautiful back yard. She had some other guests over, which was not uncommon. After saying hello, my friend and I jumped into the pool with the other kids.

Suddenly the parents of those other kids were late for some meeting or other, and they quickly called their kids out of the pool and left. While nothing was said about a "colored kid" being in the pool, there was nothing subtle in their actions and they left little doubt about the cause of their exit. My friend - a very bright teenager trying to fit into a new town - was horrified, angry and depressed, and he wanted to leave, too. My grandmother didn't miss a beat. She went up to him and said, "Young man, I met your father the other day. He's a fine man (he was a dentist), and I would be crushed if you didn't stay and have dinner with us."

Guess who stayed for dinner, and guess who was NEVER invited to return.

By the way, my grandparents were conservative Republicans through and through (in fact, my grandmother was convinced that Nixon was innocent until the day she died - and probably after!) We didn't see eye-to-eye on a lot of things (the VietNam war, Cadillacs vs. Datsuns, the ERA and the EPA, for instance). But in matters like bigotry, honesty and fairness, they taught me well. I consider them two of my greatest heroes. So, for those of you "out there" who accuse me of calling everyone who doesn't agree with me "ignorant" - well, you've got a little more to learn.

[This message has been edited by Steve Craddock (edited 1/20/2009).]

Steve -

In reviewing my original posting - which merely raised the question of whether Mr. Obama was an orator or a con artist. I gave absolutely no reference to race, religion, or creed!

The question I posed was NOT the first time that the issue of whether Mr. Obama is a con artist has been raised. Please refer to Mr. Ralph Nadar's comments reported on October 28, 2008 in "The Oregonian": "Obama doesn't represent real change. This guy is the biggest con artist in our generation by far." And to the comments of Adolph Reed, Jr. in "The Progressive" on May 4, 2008: Obama: a vacuous opportunist, a good performer, a con artist with an empty rhetoric of hope and change. http://www.democraticwing...003308.php

Have you not seen or read these comments? If you have not, might that be construed as `ignorance' on your part?

Please enlighten myself - and any other `ignorant' souls what is 'ignorant' about using the definitions of two words, "orator" and "con artist" when asking a question?

Please refer to the following: Orator: An eloquent and skilled public speaker.(www.Answers.com) If you further research the "skills of oratory", you will note that gaining the audience's confidence is foremost.

Con Artist:
confidence man: a swindler who exploits the confidence of his victim
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
Noun 1. con artist - a swindler who exploits the confidence of his victim
http://www.thefreediction...con+artist


You are correct, you do not know me - I cannot speak for the others that you name. You have indeed wrongly typecast me as `ignorant - idiotic - or bigoted'.

RA, in response to Richards screed on Race & Political Correctness:

Richard:

You have hit the proverbial 'nail upon the head'!

Hmm...

Very historic day


Period

But....

Now the work begins.

This account and others from Texas (earlier Jasper, TX) sicken me. The Brazos River is the boundary between Waller County (where I work) and Washington County (through which I travel every day from one of my homes in Burleson County).

Every day when I cross the Brazos River I will be reminded of the lynching pictured in this discussion thread.

Yet I am also reminded of such wonderful progress as I drive through the Prairie View, TX., area, home to one of America's most successful traditional black universities, Prairie View A&M, and part of the school district where I work. The elementary school there has been recognized or exemplary every year for the past five years. I am proud of my employer for ensuring all kids get the best education available.

We are now facing enormous challenges with English language learners and trying our best to help them too.

RA, I'll post your entire comment here for clarity's sake:

Mr. Obama - is he an orator, or a con artist??

Both have the gift of eloquent, persuasive speech; both build up confidence in their audiences; one makes his victims believe that they can get something for nothing.

It was the inclusion of the word "victims" probably more than anything else that led me to conclude that you were (A) attempting to assert, quite cleverly, that Mr. Obama is a con-man of criminal proportions and/or (B) implying that the majority of American voters were nothing more than dupes/victims.

Despite the double question marks, I saw nothing in the post that seemed to genuinely invite further comment or thought, or that seemed intended to promote a valid point-of-view. It appeared to be the oratorical equivalent of a hand grenade intended to obliterate rather than stimulate discussion - in short, to promote ignorance.

Unfortunately I'm still not sure what the intent of your post was, so I don't know what else to say, and that troubles me because you have been very civil in expressing your displeasure at my response to your post. I will certainly try to give you the benefit of the doubt if something appears askew when I read your future posts. But it would help me (and probably other readers) if you would try to be clearer about your motivation and point-of-view in your future posts. Otherwise I fear it will be easy to conclude that you are just wanting to provoke a fight instead of inviting discussion.

As for your more recent post, the experts you cite as the source of what you originally posted are not people I particulary admire - so that could be why your post struck me so negatively. In 1984 I was honored (and I do mean thrilled!) to be one of a few graduate students at UT selected to guide and chauffer Ralph Nader around Austin prior to his speaking engagement. That gave me a unique and lengthy opportunity to observe Mr. Nader behind the scenes. At the start of the day I greatly admired Mr. Nader, but my opinion was shattered by night's end -- and this was long before Mr. Nader developed political aspirations. I think Mr. Nader's comment about Mr. Obama being a "con-man" says a lot more about his own enormous ego, petty jealousy and deep disappointment at not being the People's Choice for President than it says about Mr. Obama.

[This message has been edited by Steve Craddock (edited 1/21/2009).]

Steve:

I usually only only glance thru your numerous ignorant, idiotic, and bigoted posts. Choosing to ignore them and to consider the scource and intent.

Someone has brought it to my attention that you have named and labeled me as such. Not surprising coming from the "king" of the keyboard and the most prolific inane poster ever on MC.com.

Sometime ago we were engaged in a conversation and in your "girly-boy" way begged me to stop. Do you wish to continue with this or just forget it?? Ike

Don't kick the baby!

I am not sure that I entirely trust out new President. But, I am praying for him. I am praying that God will move on President Obama, and that he will prove my fears and mistrust to be wrong, and misplaced.

I don't have to like him, I have to honor him. He Is The President of The United States of America. As a Christian, I don't have to like him, I have to love (gr. agape) him.

The press has a 100 day moratorium on writing bad things about the new President. Let us all take that 100 days, pray to God for guidance. for serenity, acceptance, and wisdom, and most of all that God move on President Obama to guide him in a direction that will prove our fears and mistrust to be wrong and misplaced.

Lee Akers

I think Ike is cranky.

You're a REAL man Ike.

Not surprising coming from the "king" of the keyboard and the most prolific inane poster ever on MC.com.

------------

Ike: I thought you would say I was the "most proflific inane poster ever."

Well, I guess I have something to aspire to.

Congrats, Steve!

I've been trying hard to win that title myself Bob, but there's only so much inanity that I can pump out in a day.

I would suggest using the word "Gulag" more often - that seems to generate copious amounts of inanity.

Well, Steve, at least he didn't wager to lick your balls in front of the Post Office. I guess thats a step forward.

Gulag is right up there Bridgier. Not sure it quite reaches Farve proportions though.

Nothing tops "Pirate of Radical Islam".

True dat.

"the MESIAH" as referred to by lwees fairhaircan

Ike, I've gone back and reviewed several of your posts and the only conclusion that I can reach is not only do I NOT owe you an apology, but I and others have been far more charitable to you than you deserve. You delight not in argument but in character assassination. The MC.com webmaster has more than once warned you to behave appropriately, and you have threatened (promised!) more than once to leave and never again post on MC.com. Yet here you are ....

With respect to our particular history, you started our quarrel by broadsiding me full-force after I stated a concern about then candidate McCain's age. In subsequent posts you accused me of having a substance abuse problem, slandered my faith, questioned my sanity, and hurled just about every other insult in the book at me - including in the post above. I started to list your insulting attacks, but after a dozen or so I decided there were just too many. Let's just say your vocabulary of schoolyard insults is - uh - impressive(?).

On the other hand, the majority of my criticisms of you have been directed at your comments and expressed opinions. When I have commented on your behavior, it has been in direct response to your outlandish attacks on me as briefly described in the preceding paragraph.

I have mentioned you twice in the recent past - once because I suspected you were making anonymous posts (which you refuted and I immediately acknowledged), and once to contradict RA's assertion that I label everyone who disagrees with me "ignorant". I did not bring your name up for the sheer fun of it, nor did I prolong the discussion of my opinion of you, nor have I attempted to cast more fuel on the flame as you did in your most recent post (above). (on a side note, the novelty of the idea of you watching SNL or SP provided some anesthesia for the deep, deep pain of being called a "girly-man").

And what's with your hypocritical outrage about mentioning you in posts? I do recall that you agreed to "honor" my demand to leave me the f*** alone (now I know what girly-man talk is). Your pledge came soon after you hid an insult in a supposed "apology" to me for commenting in a way that was particulary insensitive to the recent passing of my father. Then, less than 24 hours after making that pledge, you violated it completely by posting a comment in a different thread that insulted me, my religion and my ancestors. You couldn't keep your word for 24 hours, but I'm forbidden from ever mentioning your name again? No dice, Pal.

Well, to wrap this up (I've already spent more time on it than it deserves), I stand by my response to RA (with one exception discussed below). I don't hand out the titles "ignorant", "idiot", or "bigot" willy-nilly just because I disagree with what someone says. People have to make some astoundingly stupid statements to earn those titles. You, Sir Ike, have earned your titles well along with a new one as a result of the latest personal slur you hurled in my general direction, which was truly infantile. Congratulations.

****************
I would like to acknowledge that I thought Ike's post on the "Old Man Potter" thread was excellent - despite the source. When I saw Mr. Cheney being wheeled on to the inaugural podium, all I could think was that it would take an incredible mount of pain to make a man that proud acquiese to sitting in a wheelchair in front of all those VIPs. I'm sure his suffering was enormous, and I don't wish that on anybody - even and maybe especially Dick Cheney. I just wish Cheney would acknowledge that waterboarding is torture and torture does not produce actionable intelligence -- but that's a matter for another thread.

****************
Now, regarding that one exception I referred to above.

RA, as I reviewed the event that brought the ire of Ike down upon me so many months ago, I realized that my statement about the prospect of McCain possibly showing signs of the onset of senility was strikingly similar to your comment about Obama potentially having the qualities of con-man. As I reviewed other threads, I came across more of your postings - some of which I supported, others which I would argue against, but none that would fall into the realm of ignorance, bigotry or just plain inflammatory for the sake of saying Burn Baby Burn.

So RA, you asked for it: you got it. I apologize for clumping you with the likes of Ike. I jumped the gun, and I thank you for being so civil in defending your honor and demanding a retraction. I stand corrected and you stand correct.

[This message has been edited by Steve Craddock (edited 1/22/2009).]

Steve:

Your apology is graciously accepted.

To Whom It May Concern:

In a study of posters on Internet forums and boards the pattern revealed that each contained one or more resident posters who felt the need to comment and be included on every thread or topic, if directed at them or not. The older the board or forum, the longer and more convoluted their posts become. The often use profanity, belittle others who do not agree with them, and generally make fools of themselves. All of which is apparent to all but they.

The study concludes, posters that fit this profile are usually male, small in stature with a marked inferiority complex and low feelings of self worth. They may also ingest or are addicted to mind altering chemicals. The anonymity of the internet allows them to feel big, overly intelligent and important. Sadly, this is only their own perception.

The study suggests that a poster in this catagory is to be pitied, but not ridiculed, only recognized for what they are.

Ike:

Nice post - below is a good example of what you're referring to:

--------------------------------------------------

Subject: RE: Inauguration Day
Author: ike eichler Posted: 1/21/2009 9:36:04 AM
Steve:

I usually only only glance thru your numerous ignorant, idiotic, and bigoted posts. Choosing to ignore them and to consider the scource and intent.

Someone has brought it to my attention that you have named and labeled me as such. Not surprising coming from the "king" of the keyboard and the most prolific inane poster ever on MC.com.

Sometime ago we were engaged in a conversation and in your "girly-boy" way begged me to stop. Do you wish to continue with this or just forget it?? Ike

Good for you, Ike. The first step in solving a problem is to admit you have one.

To whom it may concern:

Studies have shown that when a post begins with the words "Studies have shown" the rest of the post is complete b*llsh*t.

David - I'm perplexed and yes, showing my own ignorance here (the horror- the horror). But, who is that man? I'm guess it has something to do with the "king of the keyboard" statement, but that's a schott in the dark - so to speak...

That is Ike Turner the infamous women beater.

It took me a little while to figure it out, Steve.

Oh, so that's Ike. I never really knew what he looked like. He was always overshadowed by much more talented people.

He was always overshadowed by much more talented people.

Ahem....Ike Turner was one of the founding fathers of what we now know as Rock and Roll. He wrote some great songs, and was a killer guitar player.

[This message has been edited by Gunnar Emilsson (edited 1/23/2009).]

I find it interesting how, as a society, we use things like this site, facebook, myspace, etc. to stay closer in touch with other people. I was reading about how facebook has become the best way for connecting and keeping up with people you normally wouldn't. What a great tool! I know that my own facebook page has found many people I have not stayed in touch with but always think about.

I also find it interesting how we (myself included) can get so riled up about something someone with a fake name said about or to us. These are people who love the ability to say bad things about people without facing the "real" consequences of having ever look the person in the eye. The "no-namer" must have amazing control over their emotions to be able to pass a "namer" on the street and not say "HEY! D*ck! Quit saying those things about me!" or "I'm the one that called you a sissy girly poo for your opinion. Let me tell you again, you are a schmuck!"

Cause, see, that's what I would do. But you all know who I am (because my name is above). So next time I am in MC, stop me and tell me I'm a sissy poo. Or, better yet, say hi and introduce yourself. I'd love to put faces with the names from here! I might even buy you a cup of coffee!

Gunnar - I didn't mean to imply that Ike lacked talent as a songwriter and gi'tar man (you don't even want to see what my body is compelled to do when it feels the beat of Nutbush City Limits or Proud Mary the way he played them). I just meant that his talents were overshadowed by others like BB King, Bo Diddley, and Anna Mae Bullock. Perhaps if he had learned as a child to play nicely with others, everything would have 'worked out fine' for him...

[This message has been edited by Steve Craddock (edited 1/23/2009).]