What, pray tell, are you disagreeing with me on? All you have done is attempt to badger me.
You have yet to make a valid point. This is why I say you're being hostile. All you're doing is making personal jabs or silly suggestions like dropping a friend entirely. What does that do for anyone? How does this make sense?
You're avoiding the issue, which is that people (ALL PEOPLE) in general are sadly mislead and irrational about politics.
In your attempts, all you have really done is proved my point. Thanks.
Yet again you "read everything" that I write and then you invent things I never wrote at all.
"like dropping a friend entirely." Where did I say that? O that's right I didn't say it. I never once suggested unfriending someone. In fact I even explained it as "What's wrong with just rolling your eyes and moving on to the next post if you dislike what he says?"
And if anything you continue to prove my point.
You go on about "facts" and how it's not wrong to point out facts.
yet then you start making assumptions and cannot bear being called out on them. as if it's any different than you calling out others on being wrong?
At this point I think I've already made the point I wanted to make.
That it's not only your friend or others who get irrational when it comes to politics of disagreements. On one hand you claimed facts as your justification. However when faced with questions on why you couldn't just ignore his posts, and being questioned if you would treat others the same way, your reactions were ... quite interesting. Considering you went on to start commenting on things I never actually said, I think it is perhaps a good time to consider that you yourself may be just as irrational as those you find fault with. Perhaps not over the same subjects, but that doesn't mean there's nothing that drives you to similar behavior.
No, you really didn't. This is what you started off with:
"1) It's his Facebook. If you don't like what he says... well why do you read it?"
To which I completely rationally and logically explained as :
"He's a friend and it's his public posts, they are in my news feed. I don't want to block him, as he's a friend. I don't want to hide his posts because he does post normal things that I DO want to read. There's no politics filter, unfortunately. You either get all posts or none."
Then, you continue with accusations in your same initial post:
"I know you want to trash your friend for this phrase but, that also means you have to trash the obama-supporters who go around claiming that they'll get free money or free phones..."
You KNOW I want to trash my friend?? Excuse me, but trashing my friend was not considered or desired, nor was that what I did.
That also means I have to do the same to Obama supporters? I agree, when did I say I didn't agree with that? This is exactly the WHOLE POINT of my post!! When did I say I ONLY corrected non-Obama supporters?
Seems it's not ME who is making all of the assumptions.
Same post:
"You can't just get mad at conservatives or republicans for things .... that liberals and democrats are also encouraging and spreading."
You're assuming again. You also didn't read the OP carefully enough, since this was pretty much stated within that it's ALL types of people.
2nd post:
"1) "friend and public posts" =/= mean "required to read and reply to prove him wrong"
I addressed this, rationally.
"What's wrong with just rolling your eyes and moving on to the next post if you dislike what he says?"
If you read the OP, I clearly stated this was the only time I had ever replied to a political post.
"Note once again, I didn't even mention MY politics and you're leaning towards thinking I'm a Democrat/Obama supporter."
I 'assumed' this because of how you were responding continually, with general disbelief or skepticism that I'd 'correct' Obama supporters too. And stating "You can't just get mad at conservatives or republicans for things .... that liberals and democrats are also encouraging and spreading." If you had read and understood the OP, you'd have known I WAS talking about everyone being irrational, not 'just' them, or 'only' those guys.
Once again, refer to the OP. I said "PEOPLE". I said nothing along the lines that Republicans are the only ones who do this, or anything of the sort. I didn't specifically include or exclude ANYONE. The only specifics I said about political parties was when I identified my friend as Republican simply because it's part of the initial story. It's just how I chose to start the story out since it was a real personal event that happened TO me and what brought the story on. Otherwise, there's NOTHING in my story that is pro- or anti- anything.
"Disagreeing with you and pointing out why is "hostile". That's not very rational really..."
Disagreeing with me HOW? I STILL don't know what you disagree with. What the hell was your initial disagreement?
I said 'hostile' because you're trying to tell me to ignore my friend entirely or trying to tell me how to run my social life when that's not even the issue. You're being relentless about it. You're also being relentless about insisting I equally correct everyone, as if I DON'T or wouldn't already do that. What gave you the impression I don't or wouldn't? You came out swinging, and assuming. Not me. You didn't even read the OP before responding, which is obvious.
Why are people so irrational about politics??
↑ View this comment's parent
← View full post
What, pray tell, are you disagreeing with me on? All you have done is attempt to badger me.
You have yet to make a valid point. This is why I say you're being hostile. All you're doing is making personal jabs or silly suggestions like dropping a friend entirely. What does that do for anyone? How does this make sense?
You're avoiding the issue, which is that people (ALL PEOPLE) in general are sadly mislead and irrational about politics.
In your attempts, all you have really done is proved my point. Thanks.
--
Angel_in_a_Glass_Dress
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Yet again you "read everything" that I write and then you invent things I never wrote at all.
"like dropping a friend entirely." Where did I say that? O that's right I didn't say it. I never once suggested unfriending someone. In fact I even explained it as "What's wrong with just rolling your eyes and moving on to the next post if you dislike what he says?"
And if anything you continue to prove my point.
You go on about "facts" and how it's not wrong to point out facts.
yet then you start making assumptions and cannot bear being called out on them. as if it's any different than you calling out others on being wrong?
--
Anonymous Post Author
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
OK, forget any assumptions I made.
Get to the point of the discussion.
Again, I'm still wondering what your disagreement is over?
--
Angel_in_a_Glass_Dress
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
At this point I think I've already made the point I wanted to make.
That it's not only your friend or others who get irrational when it comes to politics of disagreements. On one hand you claimed facts as your justification. However when faced with questions on why you couldn't just ignore his posts, and being questioned if you would treat others the same way, your reactions were ... quite interesting. Considering you went on to start commenting on things I never actually said, I think it is perhaps a good time to consider that you yourself may be just as irrational as those you find fault with. Perhaps not over the same subjects, but that doesn't mean there's nothing that drives you to similar behavior.
Just a little food for thought ;-)
--
Anonymous Post Author
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
No, you really didn't. This is what you started off with:
"1) It's his Facebook. If you don't like what he says... well why do you read it?"
To which I completely rationally and logically explained as :
"He's a friend and it's his public posts, they are in my news feed. I don't want to block him, as he's a friend. I don't want to hide his posts because he does post normal things that I DO want to read. There's no politics filter, unfortunately. You either get all posts or none."
Then, you continue with accusations in your same initial post:
"I know you want to trash your friend for this phrase but, that also means you have to trash the obama-supporters who go around claiming that they'll get free money or free phones..."
You KNOW I want to trash my friend?? Excuse me, but trashing my friend was not considered or desired, nor was that what I did.
That also means I have to do the same to Obama supporters? I agree, when did I say I didn't agree with that? This is exactly the WHOLE POINT of my post!! When did I say I ONLY corrected non-Obama supporters?
Seems it's not ME who is making all of the assumptions.
Same post:
"You can't just get mad at conservatives or republicans for things .... that liberals and democrats are also encouraging and spreading."
You're assuming again. You also didn't read the OP carefully enough, since this was pretty much stated within that it's ALL types of people.
2nd post:
"1) "friend and public posts" =/= mean "required to read and reply to prove him wrong"
I addressed this, rationally.
"What's wrong with just rolling your eyes and moving on to the next post if you dislike what he says?"
If you read the OP, I clearly stated this was the only time I had ever replied to a political post.
"Note once again, I didn't even mention MY politics and you're leaning towards thinking I'm a Democrat/Obama supporter."
I 'assumed' this because of how you were responding continually, with general disbelief or skepticism that I'd 'correct' Obama supporters too. And stating "You can't just get mad at conservatives or republicans for things .... that liberals and democrats are also encouraging and spreading." If you had read and understood the OP, you'd have known I WAS talking about everyone being irrational, not 'just' them, or 'only' those guys.
Once again, refer to the OP. I said "PEOPLE". I said nothing along the lines that Republicans are the only ones who do this, or anything of the sort. I didn't specifically include or exclude ANYONE. The only specifics I said about political parties was when I identified my friend as Republican simply because it's part of the initial story. It's just how I chose to start the story out since it was a real personal event that happened TO me and what brought the story on. Otherwise, there's NOTHING in my story that is pro- or anti- anything.
"Disagreeing with you and pointing out why is "hostile". That's not very rational really..."
Disagreeing with me HOW? I STILL don't know what you disagree with. What the hell was your initial disagreement?
I said 'hostile' because you're trying to tell me to ignore my friend entirely or trying to tell me how to run my social life when that's not even the issue. You're being relentless about it. You're also being relentless about insisting I equally correct everyone, as if I DON'T or wouldn't already do that. What gave you the impression I don't or wouldn't? You came out swinging, and assuming. Not me. You didn't even read the OP before responding, which is obvious.
--
Angel_in_a_Glass_Dress
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
no you're still reading more into things than ever existed.
I never said to ignore your friend. You invented that based on my comment to "ignore it" as in ignore the post.
and hostile? ROFL. so it's "hostile" to point out when you yourself have irrational reactions?