It's not petty at all. It's quite natural to look down upon people who, next to you, are comparative rookies in the game of life, yet tend to mouth off like they have all the answers. Just wait until YOU'RE 40, and see if you don't do the same. And I'd counter that if you can't control your temper and debate your point civilly, then maybe this is not the place for YOU. You are right about one thing, though...I've let myself go off topic w/ this. Therefore, I'll comment no more on your attitude on this thread.
Point well taken. But I still can't help but feel like things are taken too personally by some. Rarely do I dish out 'attitude' to someone who approaches me civilly. You've gotta earn it. You'd be hard pressed to find an instance where that wasn't the case. But to dismiss something someone says solely on those grounds indicates that the elder has no business engaging in what is well-known to be a heated debate. Just curious, but does 'have all the answers' entail changing my position because some people older than me said I should? Still grabbing at straws here, man. No I don't and I never said that Red55 did. When you make blanket insults like the one about Nader in this thread, yes, I will be a smartass and somewhat hostile in my retort. I don't mean to make it sounds like solicitation is justification, but that tends to be the natural order of things.
Of course. I'm quite sure that's what your officers told you. But they didn't tell me. So I've had to investigate the matter myself and draw my own conclusions.
It is...but only if you allow it to escalate to that point. You yourself said on this thread that some folks take things way too personally. Fine, that's very true. So why should you be offended by what Martin says about Nader? He wasn't taking a personal shot at you.
I have been criticised here for my age, my manner of speech, and my politics. None of that buys anybody respect. In fact, respect can't be bought at all--it must always be earned. If I have earned any respect here, it is because: 1. I treat people the way I expect to be treated. 2. I tell people what I think. I don't tell people what they think. 3. I don't get caught up in pissing matches. They bore me and often turn into personal attacks which degrade the quality of discussion.
Naaa, only that I'm incapable of drawing my conclusions on what your officers told you. And perhaps a subtile implication that offficers have a tendency to tell troops only what they want them to know. :grin: :grin: :grin:
I don't know about that. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, because people do bring it up about you. But I'm pretty sure that I'm the youngest person that post on FSA and I've never had my age brought up by anyone. That makes me think that it's what you say that brings your age into the conversation, not your age itself. For instance, when people feel like a person half their age is taking shots at them.
Actually, I don't think Nader is that bad of a guy. He has some good ideas (shocked yet, that an evangelical conservative thinks Nader has some good ideas?) He was a great consumer advocate, did a lot of good (got the Corvair off the road), he has some good ideas about the environment that have become laws over time, and some of his ideas about economics actually have some merit; I think sometimes corporations do become too powerful and need to be monitored. Where he and the Green Party lose me: the rest of their rigidly anti-business, anti-development economic platform, their campaign and electoral reform ideas that make McCain-Feingold look tame by comparison, and their total wack-job national security/foreign policy platform. I'm much more in tune with the Libertarian Party on those issues, particularly social conservative Christian Libertarians. As for impeachment, uh, yeah, whatever man.
