The Sarah Palin e-mails

Weren't there about a thousand e-mails pulled?

 

No politics

 

No, she did that herself. The press did her no favors. Besides, that is beside the point...we are talking about the scrutiny she received compared to the derilection of duty when it came to vetting Obama. Bringing up Ayers and that kind of thing does not matter because the media had its hand forced in the situations where it actually had to look into Obama's past...and instead of looking into it the media actually went into damage control mode to protect him. This is silly to even talk about...everyone knows this happened. There is no argument.

 

From Moderator Big Ragu on another thread:
Can we put the tired "no politics" meme to rest, please? It was old the first 80 or 100 times, you and Azrael and others (not singling out, just you are the two I saw on this thread when I scrolled through) weighed in with it. It adds zero, and actually is as toxic as what you are complaining about.

It is extremely difficult to moderate this board. At a certain point we put the kibosh on ALL politics, because people were out of hand. It has always been made clear -- by Moddy usually, speaking for us, and we DO discuss this internally -- that with time, we'd like to see if people can act like adults on here. On election night, for example, we encouraged an election thread to see if the board could handle it, and it went well. It's been obvious to a lot of people who have commented on the board, that we are feeling our way around politics as best as we can as a moderating crew. We try to indulge and give everyone the benefit of the doubt. When things get out of hand, we act and make the best decisions we can. If things get way out of hand, perhaps we will get rid of the people who made it get out of hand, and/or, ban all politics again.

But the lame "no politics" post is just as toxic as the shouting matches. It also is challenging the moderating on here, and honestly, guys we are not perfect, but we are trying the best we can to let threads happen organically and not interfere unless it is really necessary. If you have a problem with us, just keep it to yourself, because we are doing the best we can. And if you have a problem with threads you deem political, there is a simple solution. Don't click and post on the thread.

Is this difficult to understand?

 

You can always tell an argument lacks credence when it gives no factual information and claims that there is no argument.

 

It's really continued throughout Obama term. He is rarely called on the discrepancies of his vaunted campaign promises to what he has done while in office.

Important to add that the fact that he did not follow through on many of his promises makes me willing to vote for Obama this time around.

 

right...no factual information. Nothing to see here, keep moving along. Intellectual dishonesty is fun.

 

Key point Ragu makes is "letting threads grow organically" . Some of the best threads ever at SJ have been the ones with unintended consequences.

 

Have you presented anything other than your opinion? You lecturing about intellectual dishonesty is one of the funniest things I've ever seen.

 

Agree.


"The debate’s over. The people who dispute the international consensus on global warming are in the same category now with the people who think the moon landing was staged on a movie lot in Arizona.”

-- Al Gore


http://bit.ly/l3uBKk

 

If that is one of the funniest things you have ever seen you really should get out more. If you look at what the media did to Joe the Plumber and that situation as an "opinion" you should get a nice, big dictionary and look up some words. Too funny. So are you saying, I want to get you on the record, that the mainstream media properly vetted Obama? Every negative Obama story during the campaign originated with a conservative source.

 

Except that man-made climate change has science and factual information on its side. Carlton has nothing but his opinion on his side.