Please, be professional

[WilliamC]

WilliamC,

I am genuinely curious about this question. In debating people, do you ever get anyone who, after you make a valid point about a candidate or political position, actually agree with you?

I read tons of posts from tons of forums and I never see people say, "hey, you know what, I never thought of it like that, maybe you are correct. Maybe there is more research I could do on this subject".....or "that is a valid point, I will incorporate that into my argument the next time I debate someone"...or "well, that certainly is another way to look at it. I guess a solution would be somewhere in the middle of where we both stand"....

I do particularly like the Ron Paul Forums as opposed to other candidates websites becasue the people here really seem to take the time to research, and lay out well thought out arguments for debate. I see people post huge replies that obviously take a while to write and then usually what I see after that is some sort of candidate bashing (usually with quotes taken directly from the MSM) or outright denial of any point the person may have made without providing an alternative solution or research.

It seems to me that most people are simply concerned with being right, and not necessarily presenting a valid argument.

Anyones thoughts?

Just to let you know I was a Democrat before I found Ron Paul. My thinking and ideology have completely shifted because of my ability to say "hey, maybe your right about that". I have learned a LOT in the past year and I attribute that to keeping an open mind and saying that I am wrong sometimes. Now tell me..? Who comes out ahead? Someone who is right ALL of the time....or someone who greatly expands their mind because they know they are not right all of the time????

What you have to always keep in mind is that you are not just speaking to the person you are replying to.

Most people who actually post already have pretty firm ideas and seek to defend them.

However, there is a much larger audience who reads what you say but never responds.

That's why I try to stay focused on the honest truth of the message I am promoting, which is I support Ron Paul because Ron Paul has never once voted against the Constitution.

I have absolutely no doubts that I've made some impressions on the reading audience, but only rarely has one of them posted that this is so. I remember one time in a usenet debate where someone created a new account, posted one message saying how I had rocked their world with a particular argument, and that was the only post ever made from that account.

Here in this forum it is much common to see someone posting a "me to" post, commonly like "+1" or something.

So I don't mean to imply that I am right all the time, and I certainly have much more to learn about how to sell people on my ideas.

Just recently I over-reacted in a thread here where I thought someone was trying to get personal information about Ron Paul's family posted.

I was wrong and I apologized within the same thread.

So it is about expanding my mind, or learning more about myself.

"Winning" debates is just a side benefit

 

[liberteebell]

First this:

Dennis Kucinich for VP.

and your response?

Then this:

hehehe.. Good example of why some people get obnoxious replies.. No..everything is not up for being discussed here..and those pushing agendas contrary to the campaigns benefit get smacked.. Too tough to figure out why just ask and I will write and exposition on troublemakwers and how to deal with them. Cointelpro and how to spot and out them and shills and why they do what they do and how to kneecap them.


Best Regards
randy

Maybe I'm a little slow on the uptake, but I don't really know what either of you are getting at here except that Revolution9 seems to be implying that I'm some sort of shill/Cointelpro agent pushing an agenda contrary to the campaign's benefit which, I most assuredly am not. And I don't know where you got that idea or from what post I've made here that made anyone think anything other than that I support Ron Paul 110% and I've worked my a$$ off for him.

Back to my original post, I did not go into detail, but I was referring to this thread: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=120334 and the blog to which it referred where some people had made threats to the blogger. Despite what the guy did wrong (and I do think he's wrong and that the good citizens of Portsmouth should report him), he shouldn't be threatened.

This reflects poorly on Ron Paul and those of us who support him. And it's certainly not in the best interest of the campaign. Further, anyone who thinks that threats are a part of Ron Paul's philosophy needs to go back to Ron Paul 101.

I see a vast difference between discussing Dennis Kucinich for VP, which I guess is not allowed on this forum, even though I've seen at least 49,000 threads mentioning it, and outing someone's personal information and openly threatening them. That's all.

 

[jawrightbiz]

One doesn't need to agree with Ron Paul 100% to know he's the real deal and a legitimate first step towards a better world.

QFT

 

[Rhys]

I wear a suit and tie to canvass... I wear a pair of boxers and a blunt to post in this forum. I dress for the crowd I'm dealing with.

love it

 

[Revolution9]

First this:





Then this:





Maybe I'm a little slow on the uptake, but I don't really know what either of you are getting at here except that Revolution9 seems to be implying that I'm some sort of shill/Cointelpro agent pushing an agenda contrary to the campaign's benefit which, I most assuredly am not. And I don't know where you got that idea or from what post I've made here that made anyone think anything other than that I support Ron Paul 110% and I've worked my a$$ off for him.

Back to my original post, I did not go into detail, but I was referring to this thread: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=120334 and the blog to which it referred where some people had made threats to the blogger. Despite what the guy did wrong (and I do think he's wrong and that the good citizens of Portsmouth should report him), he shouldn't be threatened.

This reflects poorly on Ron Paul and those of us who support him. And it's certainly not in the best interest of the campaign. Further, anyone who thinks that threats are a part of Ron Paul's philosophy needs to go back to Ron Paul 101.

I see a vast difference between discussing Dennis Kucinich for VP, which I guess is not allowed on this forum, even though I've seen at least 49,000 threads mentioning it, and outing someone's personal information and openly threatening them. That's all.

Piss poor analysis and I never even thought of you till you replied. Why the self guilt trip?

There have been toooooo many posting that DK VP crap.. That is why I spoke to it., And yes.. as the official Sargeant At Arms on the forum I guarantee you there are shills, plants and paid provocateurs here, though we do our best to smack them and out them and outright ban them when patterns leave no doubt as to what their agenda is. We have even had a blackmail op run on us by the same clowns that blackmailed Perot.. Loudmouth here got the goods on them including American mafia articles and identifying their network and they could work their mischief no more..

HTH
Randy
Grassroots Whip
Sargeant At Arms

 

[Rhys]

Randy... in all fairness, if I cared more about moles, I'd guess you're one because you're always the most antagonistic, while supposedly supporting RP the most.

 

[Revolution9]

Randy... in all fairness, if I cared more about moles, I'd guess you're one because you're always the most antagonistic, while supposedly supporting RP the most.

Ma'am. If that were true the board moderators would not have named me Grassroots Whip and call for my intervention in threads where there is suspected activity. There are a great majority here who have never had an abrasive words directed at them by me. I admit to getting misfires within the purview of what I perceive that duty to be as this situation is very fluid. OTOH I am very quick with praise for those who are on the money and do not have questionable loyalties. I rarely target posters as a vendetta. I deal with ideas one by one and posts one by one. As for clowns like hemminger..well..f you have been around several months you would know why he is getting a hard time from me.

HTH
Randy

 

[Rhys]

Ma'am. If that were true the board moderators would not have named me Grassroots Whip and call for my intervention in threads where there is suspected activity. There are a great majority here who have never had an abrasive words directed at them by me. I admit to getting misfires within the purview of what I perceive that duty to be as this situation is very fluid. OTOH I am very quick with praise for those who are on the money and do not have questionable loyalties. I rarely target posters as a vendetta. I deal with ideas one by one and posts one by one. As for clowns like hemminger..well..f you have been around several months you would know why he is getting a hard time from me.

HTH
Randy

lol yeah, have at hemminger. just don't scare off the kiddies...

oh yeah... SIR! no ma'am! lol

 

[liberteebell]

Piss poor analysis and I never even thought of you till you replied. Why the self guilt trip?

There have been toooooo many posting that DK VP crap.. That is why I spoke to it., And yes.. as the official Sargeant At Arms on the forum I guarantee you there are shills, plants and paid provocateurs here, though we do our best to smack them and out them and outright ban them when patterns leave no doubt as to what their agenda is. We have even had a blackmail op run on us by the same clowns that blackmailed Perot.. Loudmouth here got the goods on them including American mafia articles and identifying their network and they could work their mischief no more..

HTH
Randy
Grassroots Whip
Sargeant At Arms

Thank you for the response. Really, no "self-guilt trip" here. I just didn't understand and I thought you were calling me a shill. It's been a rough week for me after Virginia's dismal primary, so forgive my inability to comprehend.

If you can ferret out the shills, liars, plants and agent provocateurs, more power to you, thank you and all that good stuff. I see it too and usually just ignore it. It has been a real eye-opener for me to see the lengths to which they will go to destroy someone who is "not a threat". I guess I was a little naive :o

 

[Revolution9]

lol yeah, have at hemminger. just don't scare off the kiddies...

oh yeah... SIR! no ma'am! lol

Ooops. Sorry sir. I thought about that after. I used to have an arch nemesis on usenet named Rhy who was female..but boy her mouth said ship boiler room every time she posted..

Bset Regards
Randy

 

[Revolution9]

Thank you for the response. Really, no "self-guilt trip" here. I just didn't understand and I thought you were calling me a shill. It's been a rough week for me after Virginia's dismal primary, so forgive my inability to comprehend.

If you can ferret out the shills, liars, plants and agent provocateurs, more power to you, thank you and all that good stuff. I see it too and usually just ignore it. It has been a real eye-opener for me to see the lengths to which they will go to destroy someone who is "not a threat". I guess I was a little naive :o

The benefit of these attacks are that it s opening peoples eyes to what many of us have been shoutng into the wind for years. An interesting post was put up last night with the Larry McDonald intervew. You can see with great clarity the conspiracy gambit being played by Braden who was with William Casey's propaganda unit in WW II (CIA Director under Reagan, probably a Bush inititate) which worked for Londinium. These two clowns later were involved in the tech transfers to the soviets giving them nuclear weapons capability and electronic surveillance data and circuitry.

HTH
Randy

 

[liberteebell]

The benefit of these attacks are that it s opening peoples eyes to what many of us have been shoutng into the wind for years. An interesting post was put up last night with the Larry McDonald intervew. You can see with great clarity the conspiracy gambit being played by Braden who was with William Casey's propaganda unit in WW II (CIA Director under Reagan, probably a Bush inititate) which worked for Londinium. These two clowns later were involved in the tech transfers to the soviets giving them nuclear weapons capability and electronic surveillance data and circuitry.

HTH
Randy

Heh, I've been shouting in the wind along with you for several years; I simply did not, before very recently, grasp the depth, breadth and scope of what was happening and the incestuous relationships the power elite have. Will look for the Larry McDonald interview. Thanks!