I Once Spent Almost Four Years Posting on a Right-wing Forum,

[MineralMan]

Free Republic, trying to convince people that their approach was wrong and that they were wrong. I argued about creationism vs. evolution, about the absolute nature of human rights for everyone, about why atheism should be treated with as much respect as Christianity, about tolerance, and feminism, and the wrongs of homophobia, and many other issues where the right and the left differ so broadly.

In those almost four years, I wrote over 23,000 posts. I always avoided breaking any rules of the site, and so was allowed to stay there as some sort of "token liberal." I discovered later that the site kept detailed information on people like me, which I found very interesting. They had whole dossiers on some people, including myself, containing personal information and much more.

Finally, after the Democrats regained control of the House in 2006, I wrote a scathing exit post there and simply walked away. That exit post was quickly deleted and I was permanently banned from the site. I finally realized that, in all that time and after all those words, I had not changed a single mind. I had not switched a single person from being a right-winger to being even a moderate Republican. It was a total waste of my time.

After a short stay at an anti-FR forum, I stayed away from political forums for quite a while, most of the time. Finally, in 2008, in the period leading up to the election, I joined DU and got back into participating in a political forum. This time, though, I had found one that discussed issues from a perspective I actually held. No longer was I trying to convince people of something they could not be convinced of. I still have disputes with individuals here over some things, and that's just fine. It wouldn't be politics without disputes.

I try very hard to maintain a polite tone, but, to my shame, I sometimes slip into sarcasm. I don't like doing that, so I'm trying not to use that method of debate. Very few of my posts are deleted. Some of my OPs get a lot of discussion. That's what I'm here for - discussion. I'm sure there are those here who don't like me or my positions. That's fine, since there are those here whose positions I don't like, either. I'll debate with them on those positions. There would be no point to a discussion forum that didn't have debates, since no two people agree 100% with each other on every issue.

DU is a great forum. It represents what I believe, how I have voted, and the principles I work on in my political life. I'm an active political person, a DFL precinct chair in my city in Minnesota, and have been a delegate to several DFL conventions here. I campaign for Democratic candidates, and have done so all my life. Here I am, and here I will stay, participating in debates around the common ground most of us share. If you catch me being sarcastic or snarking, please call me on it. I'll almost always apologize and try to do better.

Why am I writing this OP? Because every once in a while someone posts that I was once a poster on Free Republic as a way of attacking me here. So, I thought I'd clear the air and get that information out in the open. I thought I had done that when I joined by including a very brief summary of what I'm saying here in my profile, along with a URL leading to an old DU archive post that contained my exit post from Free Republic. Apparently that didn't do the trick, so here's this post.

If you really want to read that exit post from Free Republic and the DU thread discussing it, you can find it at:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2705446

It's old, old news, though, and will probably be boring to most people.

I'm going to put this OP in my Journal, so I can refer people to it when necessary.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

1. I applaud you, my dear MineralMan!

I admire your creativity, your intelligence, and your tenacity in the face of what had to be really distasteful postings...

Thank you.

Recommended.

:patriot:

[MineralMan]

2. Yeah, well, I wasted a lot of time, and took far to long to learn

that lesson. It's sort of embarrassing that I didn't get that. It is a complete waste of time to try to change a right-winger's mind.

[raccoon]

21. I certainly give you credit for trying. nt

[MineralMan]

22. Hmm...can I borrow on that credit? I have some bills...

Thanks, but it was a cosmic waste of time.

[FarLeftFist]

106. Its kinda like alcoholism....

They have to see the light and be ready to change. It seems more like an abusive relationship though, hard to walk away from.

[hfojvt]

66. How can you be sure that you did not change some people's minds

at least on some issues? Althouygh in my experience it is quite hard to change anybody's mind, especially when they are passionate about something.

Although I was thinking of something ironic the other day. That it seems to me that DU has actually moved me to the right. Sometimes I read my old posts from 2005 and they seem bombastic to me, my attitude and rhetoric were more fierce back then.

[VioletLake]

88. It is -not- a complete waste of time

to try to change a right-winger's mind. I have done it many times.

[MedicalAdmin]

136. You have never change anothers mind. Never

Let me explain. They changed their mind . You may have assisted in some small way, but give them the credit where credit is due.

Myself, I change paradigms like clothes, but I realize for others it is very difficult. So give your fellow man credit for the road they walked and the journey they made. Be grateful for the oportunity of being present at the birth of a liberal ( or at least a moderate).

Btw - I agree with you. I have met very few people who are beyond redemption.

[VioletLake]

179. Take it up with the originator of the idiom.

Btw, you better change that paradigm before other people notice the skid mark.

[iris27]

117. I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss it as a waste of time. My mind was changed drastically

as the result of several years lurking and occasionally posting on a forum that primarily supported my initial views, but permitted a few thoughtful dissenters to hang around. (Not about politics, or at least not primarily - though closer examination of my values did lead to some political shifts.) I don't know that any of those people ever knew the depth of their impact. Always having been one of "the quiet ones", when I realized my views had changed so drastically, I just left the site without a word. Never would've occurred to me to tell them, to THANK them, for presenting the opposing POV and making me think. The http://skepticwiki.org/index.php/Allan_Glenn">most instrumental of them has since passed on, and the board has closed, so my chance to tell even those still with us is gone.

So, just saying. You might think it was a complete waste of your time, but my life was profoundly changed with the help of others like you, and they never knew it either.

[SugarShack]

183. Gee, why spend so much time on those who don't agee, instead of organizing the left?

:shrug:

[MineralMan]

190. Oh, at the same time I was doing that posting,

I was also working to get Democrats elected in California and in Minnesota after I moved here in 2004. I was a DFL convention delegate here in 2006 and 2008, and did a lot of precinct work. I can multitask. I've been working on Democratic and progressive issues actively since the mid-1960s. The Free Republic thing was merely a sideline. I sit in front of a computer all day long for my work. I'm online all of that time. Online posting is a frequent break from whatever I'm working on.

Today, for example, I'm working on the content for a new website for a commercial swimming pool builder, learning about gunite and disappearing edge pools. That's pretty boring stuff, so I break things up by posting on DU.

Thanks for asking.

[txaslftist]

201. organizing the left?

that's kind of a contradiction in terms there, sparky.

[herbm]

213. Karl Hess the guy who used to write Goldwater's speeches became a major anarchist writer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Hess

[MedicalAdmin]

234. 4 Years? How? I tried to post there once. I didn't last 4 minutes.

3 posts and then, BAM, erased and banned for life.

[FSogol]

3. Geez MM, how many of these confessional posts of yours are we going to have to read?

Is PostSecret no longer accepting submissions?

Just kidding. ;-)

Although truthfully, I never understand what your avatars are supposed to be. First it was some kind of cat's ass and now it is some unknown person as Santa. How about a post explaining those?

[MineralMan]

6. Sure. The cat is Fat Freddy's Cat from the 70s comics,

Fabulous Furry Freak Brothers. A google search will produce much information, which may be entertaining. My current avatar is Karl Marx in a Santa Hat, since it is my long-held belief that Karl Marx is an avatar of Santa Claus. There's much evidence to support that position. :rofl:

[Joe Fields]

111. I'm a fabulous furry freak brother fan from the beginning!

ANYONE who is a fan of those comics is a com-padre to me.
:toast:

[MineralMan]

138. I still have all the old comics. Maybe I'll pull them out again.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

4. So you're a Freeper?

:insertemoticon:

[MineralMan]

7. Hmph!

Get off my lawn, you rotten kids!

[Warpy]

5. I sincerely doubt you're unique here

and I suspect more than a few DUers are trying to be the voice of reason in that online lunatic asylum known as Free Republic. That shouldn't be a cause to attack you or them, although as you found out, it's a colossal waste of time.

[MineralMan]

10. Yah, I guess I'm not as smart as I think, or I wouldn't have wasted

the time. But, I'm always off trying some Don Quixote sort of thing in one area or another. It's a flaw in my character, for which I blame my parents. :rofl:

[KoKo]

100. You just need to view Michael Jackson's "Man in the Mirror" to see who you are after Free Republic!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SgtWIx2zLtk

"I'm looking at the Man in the Mirror..." Might do you good to watch this one. Good for your SOUL...

[Xithras]

8. There used to be a lot of DUers who posted on FR occasionally.

Up until 8 or 9 years ago, FR used to allow more liberal posters to join their discussions, and it was actually kind of fun debating various topics with the Freepers. I used to post there somewhat regularly, and had some hilarious Clenis debates with the pro-impeachment hotheads. Back then, FR actually had a number of intellectual conservatives who were willing to have reasonable discussions with liberals, so long as you stayed civil.

After 9/11, FR went all hawkish and swung hard to the right. The intellectual conservatives largely vanished (either converted, or fled to other boards), and were replaced with bible thumpers, racists, hawks, or ultraconservatives (the forerunners of the modern day Teabaggers). Anything that looked even remotely liberal was stomped out. FR changed from a conservative board that permitted respectful debates by "dissidents", to a conservative sounding room where anyone who wasn't in lock-step with the right-wing found themselves insta-banned.

I quit posting there when the change in tenor became unbearable. That was probably 2002 or so. I don't get how (or why) you stuck around there until 2006.

[MineralMan]

12. Well, I got there in 2002, and was one of the very few who

challenged the positions held there. It was difficult to remain on the site, and foolish, I realized too late. A waste of my time.

[sufrommich]

42. It was well before 9/11 that they started purging their sane

republicans, during the Terri Schiavo fracas most of them were either banned or left in disgust.

[Xithras]

54. The Schaivo debates were still raging when I quit posting there.

But I have to disagree. The real shift came after the 2000 election. Prior to that, RimJob took a very "hands-off" attitude towards moderation. While you could get into some fierce debates with people, and while MANY people left because they didn't like dealing with some of the reactionaries, it was actually pretty hard to get banned. If you avoided personal attacks, you were fine. I actually once saw JimRob come to the defense of another liberal poster when a number of others were calling for his banning. He said, at the time, that FR was a political discussion board, and that all opinions were welcome as long as they were civil.

The real seismic shift started happening during the 2000 election. There was a huge amount of infighting among the R's as to the best candidate to run, and many Freepers disliked Bush even after he won the primary. JimRob was intially among them, but shifted his support to Bush at the last minute and declared that he wouldn't allow the board to be used to oppose a "conservative candidate". He whipped out the ban-bat, and started knocking people off the site for even SUGGESTING that Bush wasn't Reagan-incarnate.

9/11 was when things really went to hell though. JimRob became totally unhinged, and simply started banning anyone who aired any voice that even SUGGESTED anything other than unquestioning loyalty to the administration. I saw people banned for things as trivial as questioning the efficacy of the air war against Afghanistan. Any kind of questioning or "disloyalty" was labeled as unpatriotic and became grounds for expulsion.

Once he started actively moderating, he never really stopped. His personal politics have become more conservative and reactionary over the years, and the moderation style over there reflects that. First they banned the liberals, and then the moderates and libertarians. After that, the mainstream Republicans were picked off one by one. Sean Hannity, who I almost never agree with, summed it up well when he said that FR "eats it own". As they purge those on the left edge of their political range, they're left with a population that is demographically shifting further and further to the right. This, in turn, shifts previously "moderate" freepers to the left of their political discourse, where they become the victims of the next round of banning. It's an echo chamber that is constantly pulling itself further to the extreme right edge of American politics.

[sufrommich]

55. That is a very good observation. I read Free Republic all

the time and agree with your assessment. I guess I think back to the Schaivo debacle because I enjoyed every minute of it, it was hilarious to see some sane republicans over there actually come to realize who the new base of the republican party was. But I do remember that JimRob made some remarks about Dubya's cocaine habit during the primaries.

[axollot]

70. Oh less than that - there is always a few that dip in and come talk about being banned..

some quicker than others. Some went over there just to poke a stick in the hornets nest.

On election day 2008 I remember my S.O. and I LOL about all the heads that had just exploded over at FR.

Maybe I'm an optimist, but all those years they probably changed a few minds, just those folks wouldnt or couldnt admit it through the forum and/or reached many a lurker.
There are a fair amount of Republicans just sick of the extremism. Lets hope they continue to marginalize them-selves.

Cheers
Sandy

[cynatnite]

9. This is exactly why I do not want DU to ever allow freeper types at all...

It's like arguing with your garage door. It only opens and closes. That's it. Nothing else.

[closeupready]

19. That's exactly right. There is no point with reasoning with the unreasonable.

It IS a huge waste of energy and time.

That said, as long as people are open to new arguments and ideas, I don't mind if conservative people want to respectfully engage in discussion.

[TheMadMonk]

105. Let 'em in. They might gain nothing from your argument with them.

However, if you're honest, there's still plenty to be gained from an argument with yourself that includes another's viewpoints.

[emulatorloo]

11. Thanks for putting this together. I appreciated reading it. n/t

[MineralMan]

15. Thanks. I figured doing a comprehensive post would be the

best idea.

[closeupready]

13. Never wasted my time on that board. Don't even visit. Pointless.

Nothing but garbage on that forum. But I'm glad you left there. :)

[MineralMan]

23. Well, you're clearly smarter than I was.

I wish you'd told me that in 2002.

[immoderate]

14. You seem normal to me.

:hi:

--imm

[MineralMan]

See, I have you fooled.

Normal? Oh, probably not.

[Cognitive_Resonance]

16. Do not underestimate the influence of your past posts. You never know who might have been swayed by

a dose of the truth. I've avoided Free Republic for years, but believe it or not the place (IMHO) was not as uniformly wingnut radical then as it is today.

[ieoeja]

17. Is anything "much, much worse" than a "liberal" or DUer"?

"been called a troll, a liberal, a DUer, and much, much worse. I'm none of those things."

"Much, much worse" than "liberal" or "DUer"? So, just how bad are Liberals and DUer in your mind?


:)





But here is the part I really hated reading:

"To All Freepers: Get along. Free Republic, in the four years I have been an active poster here, has fragmented more and more. It has devolved into little groups, each with no tolerance for other groups. I've mentioned some of them above. Free Republic could become a useful forum, if it was not broken up into cliques."

It reminds me of somewhere else. I just can't quite put my finger on it....

[MineralMan]

20. Well, I wasn't a DUer. I lied about being a Liberal.

The point of the exit post was to make them think. I dissembled. Sometimes that's a necessary tactic for an agent provocateur I'm afraid. Please excuse me.

You can judge me by the 20,000+ posts I've made here. Thanks.

[leftstreet]

26. So you were a troll? n/t

[MineralMan]

37. I was a troll at FR, yes, although not

in an obvious way. That got you banned. I was really an agent provocateur. That's a little harder to pull off, and sometimes required a bit of subterfuge.

[leftstreet]

45. I'm sure you were very good at it

Four years with no exposure - that's impressive

[MineralMan]

67. Just another note:

I never actively trolled at that site. I almost never started threads. I almost always replied to other posts. I think there's a difference. I don't know for sure, though. I was there to argue issues. I did that.

[A HERETIC I AM]

121. Seems as if you played the part on FR in a similar way that a well known ...

and now banned DU'er played it here.

OMC.

That's all I'll say.

Those initials can also stand for "Outboard Marine Corporation"

From what I've read of your posts, you seem to be particularly well read in certain areas. Your comments on Geology during the time of the Gulf spill were very well posed.

Well, regardless of your politics, you seem like a good enough sort.

Cheers.

:toast:


edit: left a letter and a word off.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

123. Whoa....he got banned?

I hadn't seen him in awhile. I was wondering when he was going to take the t-shirt off to reveal the other underneath and do the heel turn.

[A HERETIC I AM]

124. Yup....several months ago now. n/t

[kenfrequed]

166. Yup

I was wondering whatever happened to him as well. But I don't miss OMC one tiny bit.

[w8liftinglady]

18. i learned about DU from Free Republic...it may have been you!

hell,I have no excuse,except my ex posted on FR...and not the good way.i learned about DU in 12/04 and joined in 3/05.I am grateful to you for opening my eyes.
Peace.
beth

[Scurrilous]

24. I learned about DU on FR also.

I wandered onto that site from some crappy AOL message board, saw them complaining about DU, and decided to check this place out. :thumbsup:

[petronius]

28. Me three! I actually read both boards regularly for a while, but I gave up on FR as they

morphed farther and farther into a racist, creationist, anti-science, thuggery-praising teabagger echo room.

Sad thing is, there were some really smart people over there when I first found the place (particularly in witty commentary on news-of-the-weird type items, it always seemed like FR outshone DU) but they dropped off or were driven away one by one...

[MineralMan]

62. I didn't mention DU when I was there. So, it must have been others.

Any discussion of Democratic Underground was grounds for a banning. I thought I was doing something worthwhile there, so I neither mentioned it or joined. I joined DU in 2008.

[bluerum]

25. Four years? I guess there is something to be said for persitance -

But damn - four effing years?

You are appreciated much more at DU.

[MineralMan]

35. Thanks. That's nice to hear.

[Odin2005]

27. This is why "Compromise" doesn't work. They live in a completely alternative "reality".

[MineralMan]

61. You're right. They do live in a different place.

I learned a lot about how they think, though, in that time. I'm not sure of what use that is, though.

I will say this, however. There are some Republicans who are centrists and who can be persuaded to vote with us sometimes. We need to ask them to do that from time to time. Not many of them at that site, though, especially in recent years.

I haven't even looked at the site for a long, long time.

[AC_Mem]

113. Hi MineralMan

I enjoyed your post and I give you a hellofalot of credit for being able to stay in that energy for four long years. I couldn't do it, its like internet cancer to me.

I do have a question. You mentioned that you learned alot about the extreme of the right wing. Can you share some insight? I honestly cannot relate nor understand their perspective. I try to listen to talk radio to see if there is ANYTHING that they say that I can find compromise agreement with, and I have my own impression of those who believe this stuff but would be very interested in your insight.

What makes up a right wingnut? How do their minds work? At what point do you think the wires became crossed in the worst of them?

Thanks, Annette

[MineralMan]

139. What I learned is that they don't think.

In fact, thinking is frowned upon.

[bobbolink]

192. Thanks for getting to the important point! Wish the administration could hear you.

:(

[Romulox]

29. The OP on George W. Bush: "He screws up, sometimes".

The OP on "liberals": "Not everyone who disagrees with you is a liberal. Not everyone who shows up here as a new member came from DU."

In short, I don't buy the "I was an infiltrator on Free Republic" schtick. You were a Freeper who switched sides. :hi:

[MineralMan]

36. Whether you "buy" it or not is irrelevant. I'm telling you

what I was doing there. If you don't believe me, there it is.

I'm not lying.

[Blue Owl]

30. Valiant effort!

But as Kenny Rogers once said, you gotta know when to walk away, know when to run...

[Ozymanithrax]

31. I used to post at Capitol Hill Blue and other places.

I like it here, usually.

I think where you've been matters less than where you are going.

[Uben]

32. That's a shame......

....I learned not to argue with republicans 10 yrs ago. That's about as fun as lancing boils!

[Ruby the Liberal]

33. Thanks for that link.

What a great post. I hope some took it to heart.

I'm sorry it was deleted - it showed that you actually cared enough to think that out and type it up.

[mimitabby]

34. they kicked me out in 3 days

and i didn't break any rules either. I'm very impressed!

and you don't know that you didn't affect anyone..

[Radical Activist]

38. I know you've posted this before.

It's a shame that the cyber-bullies force you to keep posting it. I appreciate your effort to show more maturity than them.

[Hekate]

39. What a fascinating history. I've observed that all RWers need for forgiveness...

... from their peers is a come-to-Jesus sob story, and they're good to run for office/ stay in office/ continue fleecing their flock at megachurches. The flip side is that LWers never forgive and never forget.

I will be so glad to be proven wrong. Your POV is always interesting to me, and I think valuable for DU.

Hekate

[MineralMan]

57. That's very kind of you to say. Thanks.

[sufrommich]

40. I remember reading the creationism vs. evolution wars

over at Free Republic, they were a blast and the evolution proponents always smoked the creationist.

[Moostache]

112. That's like clubbing seals...n/t

[NNN0LHI]

41. I knew after ten minutes there I wasn't going to be able to convince them of anything

Flat earthers and heads to match.

Don

[pnwmom]

43. K & R.

[datasuspect]

44. you wasted your time

none of this shit fucking matters.

[joeybee12]

46. You Bastard!!!!

Just kidding!

:hi:

[deaniac21]

47. really interesting!

[sabrina 1]

48. I spent two years on a rightwing dominated board where liberals

or anyone to the left of Hitler, rarely survived. But they knew who I was. I would find it very difficult to pretend to be anything else. After a while they gave up trying to get rid of me, and I even managed to get their respect, for 'bravery' as they put it.

[NJmaverick]

49. Thanks for posting

[Fresh_Start]

50. How did you survive to lost 20K time?

I was banned after my one and only respectfully worded post....

[MineralMan]

58. It's hard to describe. It really is. I wasn't the only one there

doing that, though.

[shoreline]

51. Don't shoot - I know this man...

Hello, MineralMan. I'm one of your old allies back on FR - my handle here is different (I don't want to deal with an electronic drive-by), but I have been posting there for over ten years and they still haven't figured out that I'm a big old stinky liberal. At any rate, I've been reading DU for years now, but it was you post that inspired me to actually sign up and respond. I know you mostly from the Crevo wars where you represented us "Darwinistas" with intelligence, style, and patience. It still doesn't cease to amaze that folks that actually knew what they were talking about (yourself, Coyoteman, RightWingProfessor, et al) were hounded off of that forum. Anyway, I don't have much to say but "howdy", and to tell others here that might chose to criticize you over your participation at FR that they are wrong to do so and may want to do a bit of research before they do so again.

[MineralMan]

59. Wow. Thanks, whoever you were there.

Stick around here and post, please!

[sufrommich]

60. Wow, MineralMan, those evolution debates were some

of the best. I had no idea you were one of the posters schooling those creationists dolts.

[MineralMan]

63. Yeah, there were several of us who took on that crowd. At one point,

there was a big purge of evolutionists at the site. Most of them moved to another site, where I also posted for a while. However, it was still conservative, politically, so I finally wandered off. Science is a big thing for me, so battling creationists is a natural.

[Scurrilous]

107. Welcome to DU.

:thumbsup:

[anafreeka]

52. posting on right wing websites

Awesome...keep up the good fight!!

[Crunchy Frog]

53. Oh noes! It's a Freeper!!!1!

:scared:

[pgodbold]

56. Yes Yes Yes this man is right! This is the reason I turn off

progressives who appear on RW TV or Radio shows. I place on ignore any and all RW posters. I turn off any progressive Radio or TV hosts who have a RW guest on. I will not listen to it anymore. It is useless and frankly I'd rather be having a root canal. Thank you MineralMan for your OP. Hats off to you sir for the unvarnished truth.

[ClassWarrior]

64. ...and boy are my fingers tired!!

~Buh-dum-bum!~

Thank you ladies and germs! I'll be here all week. Try your waitress and tip the veal.

NGU.

[MineralMan]

79. All that typing has given me a very, very strong grip.

I've been typing almost constantly since 1974, when I quit my job and became a writer.

[ClassWarrior]

108. LOL...

Writers rock! :thumbsup:

NGU.

[customerserviceguy]

65. I remember you there

I used to lurk there a lot, and since you use the same username here as there, I can recall your insistence on trying to use logic and reason to change minds there.

I thought it was futile, and I see you now feel the same, but I always admired you for trying to do that, while I was just simply being a Peeping Tom.

[MineralMan]

74. Thank you. Logic and reason always went over their heads.

Or almost always.

[Number23]

68. Rec'd! MM, I'd ask which group you believe is worse but I don't think I can bear the answer

I've seen people on DU allude that the only reason black folks voted for and still support Obama is because he's black -- same as I've seen on FR.
I've seen people on DU say nasty, ridiculous things about people of certain faiths -- same as I've seen on FR.
I've seen people on DU criticize those who are outside of the country as though we're not "real Americans" and that our opinions don't matter -- same as I've seen on FR.
And I've seen genuine pride from some here that they don't know anything about history -- same as on FR.

Overall, there is nowhere near the open racism and ignorance as seen on FR and there is no question that DUers are overall much more informed and compassionate. But there are a few bad apples that show that the two sides aren't nearly as far apart as they could and damn well should be.

[MineralMan]

73. FR was immeasurably worse. There's really no comparison.

By the time I left, it was nothing more than a sounding chamber for the worst of the far right. I haven't been there for a long time, so I assume it's even worse now. From the few threads where FR is quoted, that sure seems to be the case.

[KoKo]

99. Ah...the GREAT SAGE comes to Share his WISDOM about his Years at "FEEPERLAND"

and we are to sit in AWE of his GREAT WISDOM! Give me a break..from your SAGE WISDOM!

[MineralMan]

137. Well, thanks for replying to my post.

[xiamiam]

154. +1

[Codeine]

198. someone has issues. nt

[BeFree]

69. Now a lot of your activism makes sense.

Always wondered where you were coming from. Thanks!

[MineralMan]

80. You're welcome.

[BeFree]

83. Yesterday

All my troubles seemed so far way.

Heh.

[jaxx]

71. What an enlightening post.

Being civil gets it done.

[Hawkeye-X]

72. You mentioned Tancredo in your farewell message to FR

Do you still believe in that, as he's running for Gov of Colorado and within "striking distance"....

Hawkeye-X

[MineralMan]

76. You know, I had to go back and look to see what I said

four years ago. Yes, I still think Tancredo has no chance whatever to become President. I don't think he's going to be Governor of Colorado, either. So, I guess I still believe in that. Still, that was four years ago, and I was talking about the stuff that was going on then and on that site.

I put Tancredo's chances of becoming President in the same class as Sarah Palin's chances. Virtually no chance at all.

[awoke_in_2003]

75. I was wondering why

your forehead was kind of flat. This :banghead: is more effective than trying to talk sense to those types.

[MineralMan]

77. LOL! You have a good point, there.

I'm trying not to do that these days.

[awoke_in_2003]

93. I stopped arguing with idiots

when I turned 35- not good for the ticker :)

[TheManInTheMac]

78. Time was when there were some intelligent freepers

on that site. Buckley/Goldwater conservative who could debate intelligently. I think RimJob ran them all off when Obama got sworn in. It's become Stormfront lite since then.

[whatchamacallit]

81. Over 23,000 posts on FR?

Curious...

[Violet_Crumble]

82. Why's it curious?

I think he wasted his time there unless he was there for purely entertainment reasons, but there's nothing curious about it that I can see...

[whatchamacallit]

84. I don't know... I guess I find such a colossal waste of time, curious

I imagine you'd have to have some killer troll skills to pull off 4 years in shitforbrainsistan.

[Violet_Crumble]

85. I 'wasted' about two years at Rock For Life...

It was far smaller than FR, and populated by uber-Christian anti-choice kids who thought that burning CD's by any artist on their long list of 'pro-abort' bands was helping save an iddy-biddy baby from being aborted. I had so much fun with them and probably racked up several thousand posts before they got themselves new forum software where they could finally ban me and one or two kindred spirits who hung out there. Technically I guess what I did was trolling, but it was heaps of fun to do, so I can understand how MM hung out as long as he did on a forum where people struggle to get out a sentence that's not peppered with typos...

[girl gone mad]

86. Would you spend 4 years pretending to be a Republican..

in an effort to convince a group of obnoxious, extremist Republicans to be a little bit more moderate?

It sounds about as productive and socially redeeming as spending 4 years posting on StormFront attempting to convince the neo-Nazis not to use the "N" word so much.

[Violet_Crumble]

87. It's quite normal for people to waste time trying to change people's minds...

So I fail to see what's curious about it. Well, I can see where rather silly folk who'd try to make out that MM is some closet freeper would get it from, but attacking him based on where he used to post and where it was clear he wasn't a freeper is very lame and scores zero points on the Miss Manners School Of Social Redemption meter :)

[whatchamacallit]

95. No thanks

The democratic party has moved far enough right that I can argue with conservatives right here.

[DiverDave]

205. Thats a no shitter

I've noticed that too.

[KoKo]

104. Well...what you say is very interesting. and a point we might think about... n/t

[JTFrog]

127. Quite the opposite of anything you say in this thread. n/t

[MineralMan]

147. Yes, in 4 years.

Here on DU, I have over 20,000 posts in about two years. I'm a prolific poster. That's my explanation. It's not really that many posts per day, though, if you do the math.

[MineralMan]

203. 23,000 posts in four years comes out to an average of about 17

posts per day during that time. I can tell you that I post many more than that on DU. 17 posts is nothing to me. I type about 120 wpm, and I have no trouble composing a post even faster than that.

[derby378]

89. Another precinct chair here...

...and I also serve as an election judge.

And yes, I tried something similar on another RW board years ago. Finally got kicked off.

[MineralMan]

148. Thank you for your work. I've found it really interesting.

In 2012, I'll get to lead the caucus for my precinct, and hope to go to the MN State DFL Convention. I couldn't go this year, but was a delegate to three more local conventions. I find it exciting work.

[derby378]

233. I've been to the Texas state convention three elections in a row

Twice as a delegate, the last time as a member of the state Resolutions Committee. It's a pretty cool gig.

[MineralMan]

235. I haven't been in MN long enough to get really established in

the DFL. However, since I've been a delegate to regional conventions here more than once, I think I can manage an election as a delegate to the state convention in 2012. The DFL leadership recognizes me now, and I'm part of the larger crew. I hope so. I might have been able to do it this year, but it was far away from my home and I couldn't afford the time on that date, so I didn't run for a delegate's seat.

[derby378]

239. I completely understand

Looking back, it might have made more financial sense for me to stay home and cheer everyone at the convention via long-distance (since I am still unemployed, and money is getting really tight), but my wife and I were both elected state delegates before her death, and her ghost would have haunted me forever if I sat this one out. It was lonely at times, but I pushed for the Resolutions Committee spot, ran a gun-owners caucus, made some new friends (including a strong gun-control advocate), and got to spend a little time on the beach. Overall, I'm glad I went.

[earth mom]

90. Why am I not surprised?

:eyes:

[InvisibleTouch]

91. I once wasted several hours on the phone...

...with a high school classmate arguing against creationism and for evolution. I was a voracious reader and budding biologist, and she was a fundie raised in an uptight and forbidding church; needless to say I didn't enlighten her one iota, but I wasted several hours of my time and stressed myself out. After I finally hung up, I realized that all of my passionate and well-studied debate had been useless and stupid (stupid because it caused me unnecessary stress that wasn't worth it), and I would never make that mistake again. But it was a mistake that had to have been made, in order to learn from it.

When this girl did still call (for some reason she had latched onto me as a "fellow high school outcast," I suppose ... though I wasn't at all unhappy to be an "outcast"), and would try to broach the subject of her religious belief, I made it clear to her that I wasn't going to discuss the topic. I wasn't going to change her mind, and she wasn't going to change mine. As a result I never spoke to her at length again, nor ever again argued logic with a fundie creationist wacko.

Debating in an online forum is a little different, though. There are more people in the mix than just the person you're arguing with. There are lots and lots of lurkers, registered or not, who are reading the debate. And even if they never chime in to say so, it's very possible and even probable that you gave someone a new perspective. I've had that experience too: after a heated debate with someone who would never budge from their position (nor I from mine), I've had people e-mail me, sometimes years later, to say "You gave me a whole new view on the matter, and my outlook has never been the same."

[VioletLake]

92. For what it's worth, I have doubts about your story.

Sounds to me like you once identified as a libertarian Republican, and now you don't.

Were you on Abuzz?

[MineralMan]

140. I don't recognize the site you mentioned, so no.

[Name removed]

173. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MineralMan]

181. If you don't trust me, you don't trust me.

As for my honesty, I posted this OP to explain what I was doing there, since people keep bringing it up. Whenever someone posts something about it, I explain it again. From now on, I'm just going to link to this OP, which is in my journal.

Treacherous? No. My reason for posting on Free Republic was to try to convince people that they were wrong about many things. I listed some of the subjects on which I posted there. No treachery. It was an attempt to correct bad information and use reason and logic to change minds. I can't see how that is treachery in any way. I failed to accomplish my goals there. I wasted a lot of time. Now, I'm on DU, where I join discussions about progressive subjects and share my beliefs. You may not like all of my points. That's OK.

As for some DUers being offended, I'm afraid I can't help that. Others find themselves in agreement with me. DU is not homogeneous. It has a range of beliefs and positions that are held by its members. I can't take a position in which I do not believe, so there will be some who disagree with my positions on some subjects. That's why we have discussions here. That's the reason for the site, as near as I can determine.

I'd not heard of the site Abuzz. There are so many online forums that it's impossible to know about them all.

As far as I'm concerned, it's fine that you disagree with me. It's OK if you think I'm being dishonest. I'll let my posts here tell the story of what I think and what I do. I'm not even anonymous. I have a link to the Saint Paul DFL precinct organization of which I'm the chair. I have a link to my own website. I am exactly who I say I am, and anyone who wishes can check that out. I'm all out in the open, and this post was part of that openness.

I'm sure we'll see each other's posts here on DU, and on various subjects. I'd just ask that you read the posts for what they say, not for what you think I mean. I say what I mean. I like to think I say it clearly, so please read what I'm saying. I'll do the same for your posts. We may not always agree, and we can discuss those issues in the threads in which they occur. I promise not to call you names. I promise not to attack you in any personal way. I'd appreciate the same from you.

You've called me "dishonest" and "treacherous." I'm neither of those things. We just disagree sometimes.

[VioletLake]

191. Dishonest and treacherous is

misrepresenting yourself to earnest people (for years!). Unless you're misrepresenting yourself now... That is the problem.

"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive."

[MineralMan]

193. I'm not misrepresenting myself here.

As for the other, I didn't really misrepresent myself much at Free Republic, either. I didn't spend much time in political threads there. Most of my time was spent in threads about the subjects I mentioned in the OP. My signature line there used to be: Godless Atheist, since I used to participate in religious tolerance threads a lot. I avoided most political threads, so I wouldn't have to misrepresent myself.

See, without seeing what I posted and where, you don't really know what I did there, and it would be a cosmic waste of effort to dig out that stuff, although all those posts are probably still available.

Like DU, Free Republic had many, many different areas and many, many different topics under discussion. I chose where I posted carefully.

[VioletLake]

248. I don't believe you. nt

[lillypaddle]

215. Some of them are just disappointed

that you "fessed up" and openly confronted the issue. Kind of takes the fun away from posting nasty things about your "freeperness" on another website, and daring each other to mention it here on DU. So now you've gone & done it - whatever will they talk about now?

[CBR]

216. So true... did you know that MM is a big fat pile of steaming HS? I read it on

the interwebs...

Edit: Forgot an important adjective.

[malaise]

94. Lovely post

Rec

[madmax]

96. I 'd have to give you a medal for being able

to stand that forum for 4 years and 23k posts. Amazing. :patriot:

[Name removed]

97. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

116. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[JTFrog]

129. And I don't trust anyone who does nothing but trash a Democratic President on a Democratic site.

Go figure.

:shrug:

[mkultra]

158. same for me. If your a democrat, you will be known by your fruits

[CBR]

134. Get over yourself. nt

[MineralMan]

142. I say what I think here. That's what I say.

Again, thanks for posting in the thread.

[Beetwasher]

98. You Keep Saying It Was A Waste Of Time, I Don't Think It Seems That Way

YOU obviously learned from it and it probably helped to hone your online debate skills, at least a bit ;). So I'd say not a total waste of time. Not at all.

Not that I'd ever really want to do something like that, but it does seem you gained something from it.

[Name removed]

102. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[JerseygirlCT]

101. Well, I enjoy your posts, MineralMan

And I cannot believe the level of patience it must have taken to hang on that long there. And I'm a very patient person.

[AzNick]

103. 23,000 posts? I would not have posted 1 myself

I do not believe these people want to be swayed. They have a sports fan approach to politics.

Can't flip them around, will never happen, until something irrationally bothers them.

[happygoluckytoyou]

109. QUESTION (and honestly not sarcasm) have YOU ever changed your mind from a debate?

i'm really interested to know the when and what which changed YOUR mind... and how it affected your points-of-view

[MineralMan]

161. I have changed my mind after a discussion.

Specific threads, however, escape me. When I have changed my mind, though, I have posted that in the thread.

[Kaleva]

110. You may have swayed none, a few , or many. Rec'd.

My guess is that the people you may have swayed simply drifted away from FR without a goodbye or fanfare of any kind.

[Chulanowa]

114. I used to do the same at RightNation, much to the same effect

Even had a paid account (what can I say, I sometimes want to post more than twice a day!)

I totally ditched the bastards in 2008, just after the election results were in. I'd already given up on "winning hearts and minds" and had lapsed into my own outlook that, if a person can't laugh at themselves, they force me to do it for them.

[rhett o rick]

115. I have tried to post there but even when polite, I get booted immediately.

But I recognize that the bullies there dont want the truth. They literally cant handle the truth.

[ibegurpard]

118. how surprising

[Desertrose]

119. Just ONE RW website?

Hmmm.....

[sufrommich]

131. Read the whole thread before you cast doubt on other DUers.

:eyes:

[Desertrose]

208. Doubt ? What doubt? I just asked a question.

Made me think....

What are you implying?

[Name removed]

210. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Violet_Crumble]

229. Yeah, coz you weren't trying to imply anything. Right?

Y'know, the only thing that would make the passive aggressive tactic of masking an implication by saying 'I was only asking a question' would be if the person doing it developed a condition where they randomly capitalised random words while they were doing it. It'd not only be annoying, but visually it'd be so many different shades of lame. Thank dog you don't have Random Capitalisation Syndrome! ;)

[Codeine]

199. You must not read much the OP posts. nt

[NBachers]

120. A pat on the back for you, dude.

[lakercub]

122. I read a bunch of those old evolution threads

While I had nothing in common politically with many of those folks I did actually learn some things about evolution from Ichneumon, PatrickHenry, Narby, Coyoteman, et al. I remember reading your posts too. The science that the evolution folks put forward was fantastic and I often wondered why it took so long for them to get away. The freepers just went more and more crazy over the years.

Just know that some of the lurkers learned something.

[MineralMan]

146. Thanks. I did always have lurkers in mind, and still do.

Democratic Underground has many lurkers, too. We never know what they think, sadly.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

125. I woulda lasted 20 minutes there

I'd have fun being a complete asshole like they all are for a bit before claiming Jim Demint "foot tapped" at me in a bathroom stall and started posting stories about Andrea Makris.

[SharksBreath]

126. Republicans are Factose Intolerant, so your Facts mean nothing to them.

If they had facts they wouldn't be Republicans.

[unblock]

130. "factose intolerant"

:rofl:

[valerief]

186. +1

:ROFL:

[Fumesucker]

128. My experience posting on right wing sites was a bit different..

I found that if you were polite and stuck to facts and logic you got banned a lot more quickly than if you were a real name calling, poo flinging jerk of a libtard. Most of those sites are tolerant of liberals who reinforce their view of leftists as emotional and abusive assholes, less so of someone who uses facts and logic in a polite manner.

Current Events, Riehl World View and a couple of others were my stomping grounds for a while and I actually did turn a couple of borderline conservatives into something approaching liberal, my conversions were almost always due to arguing around Biblical interpretations, there are some good liberal arguments to be made from the words of Jesus the Christ and there are a few Christian conservatives who actually are interested in doing the correct thing according to their scriptures, those are the reachable ones if you can find the right lever to pry open the tiny chinks in their armor.

[MineralMan]

144. You're right in many ways.

Especially on using the teachings of Jesus, as recorded, in influencing people. That actually worked some of the time to get people to take another look at some things. I always identified myself as an atheist, since that's what I am, but I did use Biblical passages, particularly from Matthew, from time to time to make a point.

[mmonk]

132. Don't worry. People will try anything to discredit you if you

hold a different position than they do sometimes. When they have problems defending their position or get overheated about it, it's always attack the messenger. Some even hold grudges and would even unrecommend a dinner recipe if you post one. It's the nature of message boards I suppose.

[tavalon]

133. Well, now that I know that about you, I'll make sure to use it against you (I'm Kidding)

Honestly, there have been many places where you and I disagree, but not enough that I've ever considered consigning you to my (currently) seven member ignore list. I've seen things where you and I agree - a sublime place. And you've taught me a thing or two - an equally sublime place and reason number one for why I don't place people on ignore unless I decide after quite a bit of experience, that they have nothing to teach me and plenty to aggravate me with.

I never had any idea but I think this full disclosure with it in your journal to freely refer to is going to take the wind out of a lot of sails. Not to worry, those sails weren't likely to take people anywhere but the land where rumors trump actual discourse.

Thanks for this.

[The Uncola]

135. Thanks for the background stuff MM.

Got a forum heavily dominated by Regressives I let off steam at, myself. It's unmoderated, so throwing grenades is the rule, not the exception. A healthy release by addressing in no uncertain terms, hardcore rightie stupidity, is therapeutic for me. How you could maintain your cool over at FR, is hard to imagine, those are some very hostile people.

[jonnyblitz]

141. so you were patronizing at Free Republic as well, assuming

you could change minds to your superior way of thinking. We lesser folk are just soo privileged to have you in our midst. :D

[MineralMan]

145. Thanks for visiting the thread. I'm sorry if you find my

posts to be patronizing. That is not my intent.

[Name removed]

143. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[msanthrope]

149. You were great there and are great here.

I will never forget the crevo threads.

[MineralMan]

163. Thanks. The crevo threads were pretty amazing, until

almost everyone got banned who was on the science side.

[Odin2005]

150. Wow, what's with all the hate towards the OP?

[Major Hogwash]

151. Wow, that is really fucking odd. I can't imagine posting there for that long. You must have a lot of

patience. I learned clear back in junior high that some people will never change their minds about politics or some issues like abortion no matter how long you talk to them or show them your side of the argument.

To this day, most of the knuckle-dragging morons I went to high school with that were steadfast Republicans still claim to be Republicans.
I'm not saying that all of them were knuckle-draggers, but about 70% couldn't tell you why they were against something without quoting their leaders of the time.
They didn't do a lot of independent thinking of their own back then.

Now they are 36 years older, and they don't smirk so much since Bush was in the White House, though. Most of them realize now that he was the kind of President that we were warning them about back in high school.
Back then it was Nixon, and they could afford to smirk because he was still in the White House when we graduated.
He didn't resign until later that summer.

And of course, after high school, the entire graduating class had spread to the winds in every freaking direction by then. I wondered if anyone remembered how I railed against Nixon in my American government class when I was a senior.

Years later, I ran into 2 or 3 of my former classmates, and that's about all they could remember about me.
I didn't mind.
At least I made an impression other than just being the nerdy kid with the glasses.

20 years from now, I imagine the people that you talked to over at FR will think back on how they spent so much time defending Bush in the early part of the 21st century and they will stop one day and think of you.
They will probably come to the realization then, if not sooner, that you weren't such a bad guy.
They just didn't think you were right back then.
And they probably won't change their minds by then about anything either, but at least they were exposed to the difference.

You should become a politician and run for office.
You have what it takes to stay in the argument without blowing up or giving them the finger.
I don't know how old you are, or what your situation is, but that's what we need more of in the Democratic party - people like you that are willing to stick to your guns and talk rationally to the ones who gave up on trying to be logical a long time ago.

Being a politician is a lot like being a professional negotiator, you have to know when to compromise, when to give up trying to compromise, and realize that time is not always on your side.
Good luck in your future endeavors.

[Arkansas Granny]

152. I stumbled onto FR several years ago and actually discovered DU from there.

This was before the 2004 election and I tried to bring a more liberal (actually more moderate) viewpoint into several discussions. I posted there for over a year and I was very careful not to break their rules. I got banned anyway after mentioning here on DU that I occassionally posted at FR. I don't know how they made the connection, since I didn't use the same name on both sites, but a day after making that admission I was banned. Since that time, they have gone so far right that I can hardly stand to read it anymore. They seem to have kicked off anyone who has an opposing opinion.

[mreilly]

153. MineralMan, you just described why I don't argue politics

Your description of arguing with right-wingers and not changing a single mind is exactly what I experienced. I used to do the same and spent far too much of my time debating; providing facts; utilizing what I felt was reason and logic. Didn't change a thing. Now when I encounter right-wingers online the only interaction I have with them is to ridicule and insult them, then move along without bothering to respond to their hotheaded little regurgitated talk-radio rants.

The simple fact is these people WANT to believe what they're spouting. They WANT to believe Obama has raised their taxes despite proof to the contrary. They WANT to believe the Democrats have increased the deficit despite proof to the contrary. They WANT to believe Obama is really not a US citizen; that he's a socialist; that he has "disrespected the office of the President" and so forth. They have their set of so-called "facts" (read: opinions handed to them by right-wing puppetmasters) and that's all they need. I've seen it first hand in real life; you try to point out the actual truth and they just get defensive and start complaining about how you're attacking them, being mean, etc. They're being persecuted by anyone who tries to straighten out the lies they've been told, essentially. It's impossible to get through to them. Anyone who doesn't see things their way is part of the big conspiracy. That's what you see with a cult, too.

I came across an online article about George W. Bush the other day and how he proudly insisted he "kept the country safe." The sheer lunacy of such a comment, when 9/11 happened on his watch and the evidence showed that he and his staff didn't take warnings beforehand seriously, was astounding. Even worse were the comments on this article - the site must have been for a newspaper in a red state - so much gushing, fawning praise for W. from the loyal readers, all of whom were completely delusional in their worship of him as well as the recycled infantile tantrums they spewed against Obama. These people can never, ever be reasoned with - they must merely be stopped in any legal way possible from wrecking the country or our collective futures. We had eight years of Republicans trashing the economy and they lapped it up and were frantically baaa'ing for more like the sheep they are. I'm quite sure many of the posters on that board had personally suffered some of the devastating effects of the Republican economy, but no - it's all Barney Frank's fault, they've been told. And that is all they need to keep their noses firmly planted in the backside of the Republican party, which shits all over them and has them loving every minute of it. More tax cuts for the wealthy! Less regulation to keep them safe! More jobs going overseas while Republicans pocket the salaries of the fired American workers! More big government involvement in our lives by harassing immigrants, women and non-religious as meanwhile these idiots whine and scream about big government! My definition of an insane person is someone too crazy to see or understand reality, and therefore BY DEFINITION these people are beyond hope.

I have relatives who are loyal right-wingers (one of which is a friend on Facebook who regularly posts nonsense articles full of fabricated or unsubstantiated claims against Obama - one such example claimed a letter to the editor blubbering about Obama was actual "fact") - I just ignore their views. I could easily wade in and decimate them, cutting a wide swath of truth across the blazing field of lies in which they dwell - but it would merely result in further animosity. No, it doesn't mean I let them spew their crap while I just take it; I merely consider it inconsequential much the same as any preschooler pretending to play house. It's not important to me if they want to believe in a bunch of fantasies and fairy tales. If they became confrontational against me I would calmly shoot down each of their claims, but unless or until they attempt to engage me whatever BS they want to subscribe to is their business.

Right-wingers are beyond saving. And most of them aren't worth the effort even if it were possible. Containment is the only hope, but after next Tuesday I fear the entire country is going to be locked down for years or go in reverse - less science, less focus on education, more demonization of anyone who dares to find themselves jobless; a frantic effort to undo ANY progress made since 2008. Republicans have proven that no matter how bad it gets they won't stop believing their crap and blaming everyone else for their failures.

[WilliamPitt]

155. My FR account is still live

Last time I checked...which was about six years ago.

So. Yeah. :)

[ChairmanAgnostic]

156. there's no fact based cure for Teh Stoopid.

Facts only anger them. Contrary facts are things to be ignored. Really contrary facts cause them to scream NAZI SOCIALIST COMMUNIST SCUM.

When you add a perverted approach to a profit-based, anti-gay, anti environment, christian belief system, then it gets even worse.

[mkultra]

157. seems like you create a lot of strife here

are you getting out in front of this issue?

[Dr.Phool]

160. Bingo!

[MineralMan]

164. Do I? That's not my intention. I post what I believe. If that

irritates people, I will still post what I believe. If people take offense from what I post, I'll always discuss it with them. If they still take offense, then there's not a lot I can do about that.

I'm a pragmatic liberal. That, in itself, is often a cause for offense being taken. I'm a staunch supporter of Democrats. That, too, often seems to lead to people taking offense. That, I can't do anything about. I will continue right on with those things.

[HughMoran]

165. What are you talking about?

This comes across as an unprovoked attack - is that what you intended?

[mkultra]

167. are you attacking me?

[HughMoran]

168. lol

@ silly.

[Name removed]

177. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[sufrommich]

195. Speak for yourself. "Strife" is a matter of personal taste.

[sufrommich]

196. dupe.

[Codeine]

200. Strife? MineralMan is a fantastic poster.

:shrug: What - specifically - is your beef here?

[Desertrose]

209. Of course he is a fantastic & prolific poster on all the sites he posts to.....

even on ALL the conservative ones.

edit typo

[MineralMan]

226. DU is the only public political forum I am posting on. This thread

was about the past, OK?

[Codeine]

236. You have some evidence he posts on others?

I'd love to see it. Otherwise I'm sure your post would be considered a PA.

[jeff47]

159. Even if you changed no minds, it still wasn't a waste of time

We really don't understand our own political views until they are challenged. In defending them, we learn far more about ourselves and the positions we really hold. So even if nobody who read your posts changed their views at all, you explored and filled out your own views.

This is why I'm really not concerned about disagreements here on DU. It's through debate that we figure out where our own personal views are. Web sites with no debate aren't nearly as useful for the participants. Sure it may feel comfortable to have everyone parroting the same talking point, but that doesn't advance the politics.

[femrap]

162. but, but, but....

I rather like sarcasm. I'm a member of the National Sarcasm Society....like we need your support.

:evilgrin: :rofl:

[MineralMan]

174. Yeah, I tried to join the National Sarcasm Society, but the letter

I got from them said, "Like we care about you joining us...feh."

[Hell Hath No Fury]

169. Sorry, but you don't last at FR --

for four years and tens of thousands of posts if you're not feeling some of what they are pushing.

I personally don't trust you.

[MineralMan]

170. That's your decision. If you don't trust me, there's not a lot

I can do about that. However, I'm telling the truth. That's about the best I can do to convince you. If that doesn't work, I'll just have to go on with what I'm doing in spite of it.

Posting for four years on that site was a challenge, and one that sometimes required dissembling, but one I though was worthwhile at the time. I was wrong. I guess I'm a slow learner.

Thanks for posting.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

175. Um hm.

If you say so.

[MineralMan]

176. I do say so. What else am I to do?

How you feel about what I say is out of my control. Sorry, but :shrug:

[obxhead]

171. To Rabid Bush Supporters: George W. Bush is not a deity.

To Rabid Bush Supporters: George W. Bush is not a deity. He screws up, sometimes. A slavish dedication to a single politician is not productive.


I wish a lot of DU posters would realize this exact same statement for Obama.

[MineralMan]

172. A slavish dedication to any politician is a mistake.

So is a slavish opposition to the same politician. Both are errors that expect politicians to act in the way we expect or want them to.

For me, looking at the entire activity of any politician is important, along with the environment in which that politician has to operate.

Doing that is the reason I'm still a firm supporter of President Obama. On individual issues, I don't always agree with him, but overall, I believe he is trying to make the very best of a very difficult situation. I don't know what more I can ask of a President, frankly. Given the initial situation he found when he came into office and the deep divisions between the parties, it's a tough environment.

The thing is that when I listen to what he says he wants to happen, I see the same reasons to support him now that I did before he was elected. The results in his first two years are not what I had hoped for, to be sure, but that's not entirely in his control. A President cannot make law. He can only promote laws. The Congress has to give him bills to sign.

I also sometimes don't understand the reasons he goes about things in particular ways. But, then, I'm not there, and I don't know everything that is under consideration in his decision.

So far, there has never been a President with whom I've agreed 100%. I doubt there ever will be.

[obxhead]

182. Well said.

I've enjoyed many of your posts as well and feel DU is a better community with you as part of it. Don't let anyone chase you away with their poor assumptions that turn into flame material.

Keep up the good work.
obx

:hi:

[MineralMan]

184. Thanks. I'll be here.

[sabrina 1]

231. I haven't noticed any slavish opposition to President Obama here

so it really doesn't compare to the way Freepers were devoted to to Bush, or simply obsessed with Clinton. Iow, there is simply NO comparison, and I used to observe the freepers regularly, especially coming up to the 2004 and 2006 elections. It was a pretty scary place back then.

I have a few questions, if you don't mind and if you do, just ignore them.

You said that you met some pretty decent freepers over there (I witnessed a few also when I used to lurk there). Four years is a very, very long time on the internet. People form relationships and build up trust online especially if they spend that much time somewhere.

Did you not feel bad to know that you were deceiving them considering you say you were always a liberal? I mean the very word 'liberal' is practically unmentionable there unless it's to plan their total destruction. Even to moderate freepers it would have been a shock to learn that someone they trusted was actually a Liberal?

Also, you were there during two of the most important elections of the past decade. As a liberal, how did you tolerate the frenzied Bush/War/Torture support and the Islamophobia etc that pervades that site, without needing to feel free to say what you really felt?

As I have said, I posted on rightwing sites for the same reasons, trying to change minds, deliver facts to people who got their only news from Fox etc. But they knew I was a Democrat.

And, when you decided to leave, why did you still feel the need to go along with the Liberal/Du hatred? You must have known they would delete that post and ban you forever anyhow. Seemed like a good time to stop the pretense since as you say, the mission could not be accomplished anyhow?

I don't know if you are telling the truth or not. I will assume you are in the absence of anything that proves otherwise. But it makes me very uncomfortable to fool people, even freepers who while I despise their political views and actions, I still am very uncomfortable with deception of any kind, from them or us, to be honest. I mean we condemn them doing it after all.

It IS possible to find places where you can be honest about how are and still engage them.

When I read your post I was hoping you actually WERE a Republican, but after spending time there eventually realized you could not continue to support their politics or their support for so many crimes committed by Republicans at the time. I would have felt better about that to be honest. Just my opinion fwiw.

[MineralMan]

241. Well, I'll try to answer your questions.

Yes, I did meet some decent people at Free Republic, especially when discussing science issues and sometime religious issues. Most of them were arguing the same points I was. I didn't deceive them. I argued those issues from the platform of logic and reason. They agreed with me. Some, I actually knew from other places after I left the site.

As for my being a liberal, I was called that so often there that it was pretty much an open thing. I almost never discussed pure political subjects, except peripherally to the topics I was writing about. That was why I wasn't banned. I stayed out of pure political discussions almost all the time. I had my areas where I discussed issues. Campaigns and politicians weren't in the mix.

As for the elections, I did not participate much, if any, in discussions about election issues. I condemned starting those wars for the same reason I do here. My argument was that they were not the right battles and that we'd not succeed. Believe it or not, lots of people agreed with that point of view, although we were in the minority by a lot. I argued against anti-Islamic sentiments in the same way I argued against antisemitic, anti-Mormon, anti-wiccan and anti-Catholic sentiments, simply on the grounds that we should be tolerant of others' beliefs. Again, I was part of a small minority that made those arguments.

When I left, I was not a DUer. I had not even visited DU, so that part was truth. The liberal part was an untruth, since I wanted that exit message to remain up for a day or so before being deleted. The thread had many responses, many of which were expressions of sympathy with my positions in the exit post and about my overall writings there. The thread lasted for 24 hours, and then I was banned and the thread was deleted.

One other thing I did while at Free Republic was to alert on people who I thought were dangerous...those advocating for violence and those advocating harm to anyone. That may have been why I was allowed to stay there. I did it a lot, and the admins there really, really did not want those posts hanging around. I didn't want those particular posters to have any sort of popular forum in which to post. Many people got banned because of my alerts. That was the other thing I did on that site, and I sometimes provoked cautious dangerous people into posting a bannable post. That was the provocateur part of my presence there. The serious threat I mentioned in the exit post came from one of those. I will not discuss the action I took in that case.

I am telling the truth. I can't say anything other than that. I hope these answers at least partially satisfy you. I was there to do something. I did it. It did not work, and I could no longer do it, so I left. It is just that simple. Whether anyone believes me or not is beside the point. On DU, I will be judged by what I write here. That's one of the great things about Democratic Underground.

[sabrina 1]

250. I appreciate your response, thank you.

The online world sometimes makes more of things than they are. Personally, I like mixed forums. Party forums tend to further divide people. But, that is how things have evolved so that is where we are for now. I hope one day there will be a forum where people from all sides can participate so long as they are not abusive to each other. Heated is fine, but what is not acceptable in the real world, should not be online either.

I have no reason not to believe you. Even if I am wrong, it isn't that important really. My problem was mainly with the pretense of being one of them. I prefer openness and that is why I never posted on FR. It would have been necessary to pretend to be something I am not. But, to each their own.

Posting on right-wing boards was something many people did back then. I believe, eg, that you did receive a death threats. I received several and also threats to 'turn you in to Homeland Security' etc. At the time, it was pretty frightening.

Personally, I am tired of the divisiveness in this country. I believe for the most part it is manufactured by those who profit the most from the division. There are certainly right-wingers that I met who, I believe, were capable of harming those they did not agree with, but I made the mistake of thinking they were all like that. They aren't and I'm glad I learned that. Many of them stood up for me after I was threatened. I was shocked when they asked me to stay eg, when I was ready to leave. And even though we went right back to fighting over every issue, it did teach me not to be too quick to lump everyone together.

So, I can understand the need to try to engage people on the other side. I appreciate you answering my questions. I'm sure I will disagree with you in the future as I have already . You have explained fairly sincerely imo, and you didn't have to, why you were there. If I'm wrong, well it's no big deal in the scheme of things.

Just one more thing, As you know, I vehemently disagree with you regarding singling out people who have certain beliefs, perhaps based on their faith or for other reasons, and deciding they do not belong here and you have said you will think about that. I hope you do, considering your own past. It seems to me you would be more circumspect about who belongs anywhere and who does not, considering your own background.

Anyhow, thanks for responding. It is appreciated ~

[think]

178. I'm not a huge poster here so take this to heart if you can

Many people myself included come to forums like DU and FR to learn and keep up on the issues. Most of us rarely post as we feel the need to learn rather than inform.

You say you never changed a single mind at FR and I disagree with you 100%. I commend the time you spent there and believe minds were changed. No you will never change the loud and proud on the forums but those that come to learn do read what you post and learn.

You must have been an awesome moderate debater to last that long at FP. I made one post there which was obviously not flattering to FR and the post was deleted and I was banned for life. No cusswords were used. Just blatant facts showing a glaring problem in relation to what was being discussed there.

Seriously congratulations on your efforts. I use to go to DrudgeReport.com to see what the other side was reading. What I found was the Drudge Report used it's headlines to make it's readers angry and then the Drudge heads would go to the link and start posting the most vile crap I'd ever seen.

I started going to Drudge on a regular basis and following the links to let the Drudge invaded site know where all the hate speech was coming from. I also factually debated those that could use more than one syllable words in sentences. In the posts I also left information to my source so those reading the thread had someway to verify my facts against the utter lies and slander the Drudgies would spew.

I also spend many hours taking the knowledge I learn here and elsewhere to debate in places where politics isn't the main theme but rather an independent internet business environment. I know the people I debate with won't change the minds of the die hard right wingers posting but I refuse my work place to polluted by their lies and bullshit!

I know the lurking learners got facts from my side of the debate (I use that term loosely here.) to counter the blatant lies of the other side. What I hate the most is it is relatively easy to create a great lie where it takes hours and sometimes days to get the facts necessary to prove the lie wrong.

Anyways kudos sir!

[MineralMan]

188. Thank you very much.

You're too kind.

[dpbrown]

180. The Minnesota forum is reasonably active as well - hope to see you there

A cursory glance didn't find any of the usual Minnesota suspects in your thread. Perhaps you'll participate in the Minnesota forum as well.

[MineralMan]

187. I do participate in the Minnesota forum from time to time.

There are a number of posts from me in threads there, and a few OPs, as well. Thank you.

[Lucian]

185. Why waste time doing that?

People like them are too stupid to think on reason, so like you said, you won't be able to convert any of them.

What a waste of four years.

[MineralMan]

189. Yes, as I said.

As my late father-in-law put it (frequently): "Too soon old; too late smart."

I should have listened to him, I guess.

[Name removed]

194. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MineralMan]

197. You will believe what you believe.

I can't change that. You're incorrect, though. Thanks for posting.

[shoreline]

202. You don't know what you're talking about...

...I've been posting to FR since 1999 and I am as liberal as one would find - and they haven't figured it out yet! It sounds like your biggest problem with MineralMan is that he doesn't fit your image of what a liberal is, merely because he doesn't echo your views on every position. Reminds me of the dittoheaded teabaggers on FR who think zoning laws are a communist plot and fluoridation is a secret tool for mind control, and if you dare to disagree with that stupidity you're nothing but a troll. It doesn't work that way, the world is not black and white - if you paid attention you would find that MineralMan is thoughtful, reasonable, and decidedly liberal. Of course I just signed up yesterday, so you're thinking I'm a sock puppet or disruptor - you would be wrong. The reason I've spent so much time there and only signed up here yesterday is because it isn't even remotely entertaining to listen to people you agree with - life is pretty dull when you spend it in an echo chamber.

[Marr]

204. You'll notice, if you stay here long, that this place is not filled

with 'people who agree with each other'. There's a range of debate here. Nor is this the only forum I've ever frequented. I figured out in about two days that posting on right-wing extremist sites is a waste of time, however. Of course, I wasn't very good at blending in-- perhaps because we didn't agree on anything.

[polichick]

207. LOL - you've been hangin' out in Freeperland because it's a bore...

...talking with people you agree with - when there isn't a whole lot of agreement here?

[Desertrose]

211. OMG. Really?

and it took you 11 years at FR to finally come and post at DU?

I don't find it remotely interesting to listen to people I don't agree with...for 4 years let alone 11.

What in the world did you have to talk about over there if you see them all as dittoheads anyway?

[shoreline]

245. First of all...

...the people that agree with you probably don't find you remotely interesting, either; they've either heard or already imagined anything you're going to come up with, and agreeing about some perceived slight or the latest outrage grows old quickly. Secondly, there is a very old saying, "Hold your friends close; hold your enemies closer."

[girl gone mad]

230. + infinity.

[polichick]

206. We're supposed to believe that you spent 4 years trying to change minds...

...that it took you 4 years to figure out who you were dealing with?

[MineralMan]

217. No, I knew exactly who I was dealing with the entire time.

I posted in threads on specific subjects, and rarely on pure political threads. I listed some of the topics. And yes, I was trying to change people's minds, both active posters and lurkers, on those issues. That isn't really that hard to understand, I think. Science, tolerance, equal rights, revolutionary stuff, etc. I actually thought I'd be able to use reason to change people's minds. It did not work. I gave it a good long try.

I quit. Now I'm here. It is that simple. I'm not really trying to convince anyone of the truth of what I'm saying. I was there, I did what I did, and now I'm not there and I'm doing something else. It is simply information. You can take whatever meaning from it you choose. :shrug:

[CBR]

212. People have officially started going crazy on this thread. LOL. nt

[MineralMan]

221. Well, I certainly never anticipated this much interest.

I'm very surprised, but I've met some new folks in this thread, and that's great.

[CBR]

240. It is always nice to meet new people! Best wishes. nt

[asdjrocky]

214. Oh please.

Yes, you've told us, again and again and again.

[MineralMan]

219. Yes, every time someone tries to bring it up to attack me in a thread,

I've provided a brief summary. I won't be doing that hereafter. I wrote this, and will have it in my journal. From now on, when someone thinks they have discovered some horrible thing about me in my FR posting, I'll just post a link to this journal entry. That should save everyone some time. I had no idea that the OP would get as much comment or as many views as it has had. There appears to have been a lot of interest in this OP. There it is. I won't be posting about it again, just a link to this, when it comes up in some other thread.

Sorry to have taken your time. That wasn't my intention. I figured those who already knew about this would just skip over the thread. I guess not. This is the first time I've written about it at this length. Thanks for reading it.

[Ferret Annica]

218. I posted as ferret from 1997 to the middle of 2001 when I was banned from Free Republic

I still post on conservative forums, but more to sharpen my argument and debating skills then to change minds.

It is rare to change minds of your fellow interlocutors in a forum. Better to aim that sort of thing at lurkers who are there, as they are the ones without the investment of posts cementing their commitment to any particular view.

I sent you a Pmail with a link to one thread in a conservative forum I was battling the 'host' in. The host is a raving mad lunatic who hates gay, likes people who kill abortion doctors and has no use for African Americans.

His inflexibility and ignorance is easy to use to destroy his train of illogic. And I have no delusions he sees this. I just make sure anyone else reading sees this.

There is an art to posting in conservative forums. I remember you, and thanks for quoting my posts on you. I always enjoy reading your contributions, Mineral Man. P.S. The-Peoples-Forum.com is the one sane and worthwhile forum in this small community cluster of forums from that URL I included in that Pmailing to you.

[MineralMan]

220. Thanks. I'm done with wasting my time in conservative forums.

But I appreciate your thinking of me and sending me the information.

[Ferret Annica]

223. My pleasure, and that particular forum is an anomaly in that group; it's liberal

Obama is respected and liked by people there, and Robin the owner is a professional with fair use policy, and in treating people fairly.

I've left the consecrative forums in that spawning of forums for now. I am doing other things that require that energy I was using to shadow box with Conserva-Nutzies. Real time activism is my primary focus in life, and has been for a long time.

Here's to good luck, an interesting journey and good things happening to you MM. It's the constructive posting that make doing this worthwhile, and to me you exist on the side of things on line that make posting a useful activity to engage in. Cheers.

[Sugarcoated]

227. I used to do the same thing

though it was a country music board dominated by Dixie Chick haters (who I defended endlessly) and liberal haters. I suppose conserva-nutzies fits. I thought I was changing a few minds, it wasn't all conservative, but younger people who were sort of brainwashed, raised by extreme people.

[Kurovski]

222. May I ask where else you now post?

Thank you for any answer you may give.

[MineralMan]

224. Right now? Nowhere else on any public political forums.

During the boating season, I post on a boating forum, helping people get their outboards running or repaired. I have a different screen name there. During fishing season, I occasionally post on a local fishing forum. I post occasionally on a progressive political blog in Minnesota under my real name, but haven't for a couple of months. I'm busy with work and campaign activities right now, and have little time.

I do have a facebook page, but only for family and friends. I have a bloggish sort of website, that has a link in my profile, but I haven't written a new entry for it in over a month. Sometimes I post an OP of mine from here over there, as I did when the news broke about Target donating to the group that was supporting Tom Emmer. I contribute to several blogs associated with web sites I have written for small business, but without any byline. I have two blogger.com blogs that are marketing blogs for my web content and blogging businesses. I created and maintain the DFL precinct site linked in my signature line, and will be updating it after the election, since I'm the precinct chair.

That's it. At the moment, the only public political forum I'm active on is this one. I hope that answers your question.

[Kurovski]

228. Thank you.

I appreciate that.

[MineralMan]

232. No problem at all. As I said in an earlier post, I don't even

try to maintain anonymity. Anyone can see who I am in RL by simple clicking on one of the links in a message or my profile. I'm pretty boring, overall, so it's probably not worth the trouble, but it's there.

[Ferret Annica]

225. The-Peoples-Forum.com is one place, I belong to the KOS but have not posted there recently

I posted a long time at Time.com/Politics; here's the Memorial page: http://www.duhspot.net/politics.html

I've had EZboards forums of my own as part of that community's life after Time magazine killed that forum.

I also was a bane to the Free Republic as a returning bannee that made life difficult for them. I was the one that got the Fresno Human Rights Commission to send the police to check out a Hate Group having a picnic. That group was the local Fresno Free Republic group headed by Sandra Duffy who was my 'buddy' in forum giving me lots of useful information how they run that business.

I'm currently not in there doing that though; for now. And because I'm sure he'll read this; How goes John Robinson? Thanks for sharing with others how much you loathe me. I did get the message many times as was your intention to have happen.

Same to ya.

Pardon me for using this post to you to exploit the FReeper's love of tattling. Thanks for the question. I also post on the Smirping Chimp forums as well, though not much there either lately.

[Name removed]

237. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MineralMan]

242. Huh? I'm not sure what your point is.

I was never a Freeper. I posted on Free Republic. There is a difference.

[Shrader]

238. I'm new to DU

and I appreciate that there seems to be room for all voices.

[MineralMan]

243. Not all voices are welcome here. Just progressive ones,

along with Democratic and liberal ones.

[Desertrose]

249. Used to be...now not so much.

Many excellent posters have been "tombstoned" or driven away.

I was here since day one and can attest to how many really good liberals & progressives are no longer welcome here...for whatever reason.I miss their voices.

That said...welcome to DU.

[bvar22]

244. Why not?

The Democratic Party has moved so far to the Right that you should feel right at home.
Our Democratic White House now campaigns for Senators with virulently Anti-LABOR records and those who trumpet their opposition to the Public Option.
Republican Arlen Specter felt so at home that he moved, and the White House campaigned for him over a Democrat.

"We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. “Necessitous men are not free men.” People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made.

In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed.

Among these are:

*The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;

*The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

*The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

*The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

*The right of every family to a decent home;

*The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

*The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

*The right to a good education.

All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.

Americas own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for all our citizens.

For unless there is security here at home there cannot be lasting peace in the world."---FDR

THAT is what "Democrats" used to sound like.
I would go to The WALL for that kind of Democrat!

Welcome to DU.
:hi:

[Courtesy Flush]

246. They don't like to hear both sides here, either.

Once, on an election day, I said that I had voted, and no matter which party you support, everyone should participate in the process. That post was deleted by moderators for, presumably, legitimizing voting for non-Democrats.

This too is a place to associate with those with whom you agree... and no one else.

I really love DU, but let's not pretend we're a "forum" by your definition either.

A forum where no dissent is allowed is not a forum. It is just a place where people post.

I'm really not slamming this site. I just want to say, in all fairness, that this is the nature of political messageboards.

[Name removed]

247. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.