I'd rather say that liberals have a facts-bias. When I look at the nature of arguments from both sides, that tends to be the case. "Liberal" arguments are more likely to be grounded in facts. "Conservative" arguments typically appeal to more abstract ideas. And I wouldn't say one is necessarily better than the other, either. There are some issues where what's right/wrong depends less on the hard facts and more on one's philosophical outlook.
Ah, right. I forgot - the better solution is to focus on the content-less posts and ignore the actual one with facts that was refuting it. That way, you get to get off topic and say "see, look at the liberals that don't post facts!". And at the end of the day, you get to forget that the initial argument was factually incorrect.
Wow you give me entirely to much credit. I was just pointing out that people were not just posting counter facts.
With all due respect to both of you, I simply don't get these posts. You whine about "a lot of liberals on this site," but do nothing about it but whine. If you think there are "too many" liberal members posting in D&D, then why don't you post here yourself? Help provide some balance? Heaven knows there is a dearth of conservative members posting in this forum, with a few outstanding exceptions. Yet folks like you pop in, from time to time, with exactly this kind of comment, and then go running off to the GARM and/or Hangout. I'm sorry, but I find it rather bizarre behavior.
Perhaps because they just said they dislike the "poo flinging" and "providing balance" would mean they would have to "fling poo" which involves touching poo which generally isn't cool.
You don't need to sling poo to provide balance. Poo flingers are only interested in flinging poo at fellow poo flingers. I'd love to read more quality conservative posts here. People may disagree, strongly, but there's no reason why debate/discussion can't proceed in a respectful manner.
I know man. With a name like Hussein, he is a proven terrorist. This board wants to believe the media that he ain't a muslim terrorist. Spoiler just kidding
And my counterpoint would be that anyone posting anything conservative gets attacked. Obviously you disagree, but this is what have been shown.
Maybe, but why make that argument in a thread in which the "anything conservative" is also completely false?
because this is where the argument started. If you want to make another thread inviting the initial complainers in feel free to do so.
Wrong. There are many con posts that don't get attacked. The ones that do are either not grounded in reality or legitimate points of contention. Here's an example of both... several con posters say we should stay in Iraq until we achieve victory... but they cannot define victory, cannot speculate when it might occur, celebrate a reduction in deaths as if that is a sign of progress, and continue to confuse tactics and strategy when discussing the war. Simply "wanting" victory is not enough to overcome the reality of our situation.
OK great but I am not wrong. I just differ with your opinion. Some of the people on here just do not understand how liberal they are so when they say "oh yeah and he is 'conservative' " they are just wrong. I am an Obama voter and people are accusing me of being a baby eater around here.
Cweb: It's a tad unfair to get mad at folks who are tired as hell with ling ling's stupid posts. If you don't like the fact that people are sick of them, to the point of not being terribly interested in proving the arguments contained therein false (which, as can be seen in every ling ling thread, is not AT ALL hard to do) - tell those same people whining in this thread about "liberal bias" to post some REAL SUBSTANTIATIVE ARGUMENTS. R2K nailed it - if you stop posting bull****, perhaps people would not be so mad about the bull****. But that's just me.
It goes both ways. Frankly, the usual conservative culprits around here are far more insulting IMO. I know I'm tired of being called a "traitor" simply because I disagree with our current foreign policy. I guess I'd rather be called all sorts of things besides that. Although baby-eater may be a tad extreme...
Possibly more insulting but when you multiply "less insulting" by 20 and all attacking you at once the outcome is obvious.
See, this is my point. It's not open to interpretation. It's not a matter of opinion. You made an inclusive statement that is demonstrably false. You are wrong. There are con posts on here that do not get attacked. That is a fact. And for the record, nowhere did I make a comment about your political beliefs. Most of us Liberals will argue with anyone... see the posts between Major, Sam and I on the bailout for proof. I love 'em, but I think they were wrong about the bailout.
