Like I was said, I was just asking. If I asked you if you ever worked for a Senator or Congressman would you have gotten offended?
You shouldn't be so sensitive.... its not very masculine...
My senator didn't read my message either
- Thread starter MonkeyMonk
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Like I was said, I was just asking. If I asked you if you ever worked for a Senator or Congressman would you have gotten offended?
You shouldn't be so sensitive.... its not very masculine...
What exactly are you talking about? When have I advocated "changing names" of anyone on the board or anyone in the government? Calling me out on something I didn't do doesn't make any sense.
The reason I found your post suspect is obvious. There's nothing in what I wrote that would even remotely suggest that I'm a mason. If you'd asked me if I'd worked for a Senator or Congressman's office, that would have made sense based on the fact that I know a lot about how the government works. But asking me if I'm a mason? You don't see how that could be potentially offensive to me, given the fact that I've said nothing that would suggest I am?
Surf Monkey, I'm not being argumentative. I'm responding only to your first post where you explained the proceedures that you thought better and semi-defended the non-reading senators. It is a rebuttal to that post alone. Implying only that IMHO Burris's and his office staff are totally negligent.
Using the example that I did was just to give an example, rather than share my real life name. It was not ment to offend or be personal.
Using the example that I did was just to give an example, rather than share my real life name. It was not ment to offend or be personal.
Last edited:
If the term mason was considered an offensive term than, yes, I could see how you would be offended. The masons are simply a group of people.
If you randomly asked my if I was with the Knights of Columbus I would just answer the question.
You act like I randomly asked if you were a pedophile...
You were just being oversensitive. Bottom line...
Hogwash. You had an agenda when you asked that because there's absolutely no reasoning behind it. I said nothing that would suggest I'm a mason (I'm not) so the question makes no sense.
I didn't "defend the non-reading Senators." What I did was explain what I know about how the offices of Senators and Representatives handle public feedback. The fact that you don't get a personalized letter back from your representative every time you send him/her a letter or email doesn't mean that your message wasn't noticed. Part of the job of these people is to keep track of feedback and they do exactly that. It's not reasonable to expect them to respond to every letter they get, because if they did, that's all they'd ever do. There simply isn't enough time or staff for that kind of individual feedback. The important thing to understand about writing to a Senator or Congressman is that volume counts. These people are beholden to the voters. When lots of letters and calls come in about a particular topic, they take note. Furthermore, it's well established by activists of all kinds that the best way to do this is calling on the phone, not sending email. Phone calls carry more weight.
Well... regardless of how you feel... human being to human being you were a real d*ck in the way you responded...
I don't think that's open for interpretation.
When you act like a ****, it shouldn't surprise you when you get a dickish reply. At least own up to what you were doing. Trying to pretend it was innocent makes you look dishonest. The fact that you've provided no rational explanation for why you'd suspect me of being a mason just proves my point.
Perhaps, I can mediate here, in essence the masons have held high government positions and, in essence, the masons often strongly support the government and greater government control. I believe that definitionofepic was trying to assertain whether your opinions were that of an independent thinker or that of someone connected to the mason way of thinking. (Poorly worded, but I believe that both of you will understand).
It should be noted, when discussing the masons, that the Shriners' hospitals have helped millions of children... free. Thus, I, personally, do not see the question as a negative question.
And, from reading Definitionofepic's other posts understand why he would ask such a question. I believe he wanted to know whether to rebuttal your response (independent thinker) vs. not participating in a rebuttal due to an opinion that would be difficult to impossible to change (member of the masons)
It should be noted, when discussing the masons, that the Shriners' hospitals have helped millions of children... free. Thus, I, personally, do not see the question as a negative question.
And, from reading Definitionofepic's other posts understand why he would ask such a question. I believe he wanted to know whether to rebuttal your response (independent thinker) vs. not participating in a rebuttal due to an opinion that would be difficult to impossible to change (member of the masons)
Last edited:
Exactly. In other words, he was accusing me of being an ideologue. All I did was outline the best ways to contact representatives (well established by people who campaign on both the right and left) and explain why you may not get a direct reply. He essentially accused me of pressing an ideology based on that post. It was completely uncalled for and offensive.
Thanks MonkyMonk. Well said. I've read enough of Surf's posts to know that he comes from a certain school of thought. I was just wondering if the basis for his thinking may come from his affiliation with a group such as the masons.
The intention was quite innocent. Surf won't admit to the fact that he was being an a$$hole about it.
"Oh my GOD! He said you were a WHAT?!?!?! ---an IDEOLOGUE!?"
--Well those are some fighting words right there if I ever heard any.
What the hell is wrong with you?
You are being such a woman about it....
Which is to say, you've developed an incorrect opinion of me based on precious little evidence and now you're pressing it by making snotty comments with no provocation.
What's going on here is that you got called on a snipe and now you're trying to turn the tables to cover your own .... If you really want to know what I believe there are ways to ask about it that don't involve making unfounded and potentially offensive assumptions about me.
"Oh my GOD! He said you were a WHAT?!?!?! ---an IDEOLOGUE!?"
--Well those are some fighting words right there if I ever heard any.
What the hell is wrong with you?
You are being such a woman about it....
This tactic of addressing the poster and not the topic is old hat on the Web. Obfuscate all you want. The intent was clear as a bell.
We need to get back on topic. The phone call idea is a very good one and I will attempt same later today.
Anymore insults will result in infractions...so yes, please get back on topic.
Lu
Lu
For one thing, Burris was appointed by one of the most corrupt governors in the history of the union. Smearing the Democratic party based on a guy who never got a single vote and who is under siege from the party itself is pretty silly.
For another, the Republican party has effectively ruled America for the last thirty years. The office of the executive has been held by Republicans for 20 of the last 32 years. They've "been muzzled?" Please. They were voted out because their leadership was deemed to be ineffective by the general public. That's how politics in America works. One party runs the show for a while and then the other party runs it for a while. Republicans love to complain about how they're a poor, battered minority, oppressed by the big bad Democrats but nothing could be further from the truth. The Republicans have been the more powerful party in the US for nearly two generations. Moaning about how the Democrats are getting their turn now just looks spiteful.
Oh, and feel free not to tell me what constitutes a "true American."
For another, the Republican party has effectively ruled America for the last thirty years. The office of the executive has been held by Republicans for 20 of the last 32 years. They've "been muzzled?" Please. They were voted out because their leadership was deemed to be ineffective by the general public. That's how politics in America works. One party runs the show for a while and then the other party runs it for a while. Republicans love to complain about how they're a poor, battered minority, oppressed by the big bad Democrats but nothing could be further from the truth. The Republicans have been the more powerful party in the US for nearly two generations. Moaning about how the Democrats are getting their turn now just looks spiteful.
Oh, and feel free not to tell me what constitutes a "true American."
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
