(07-10-2023, 03:18 PM)NYC4jags Wrote:

(07-10-2023, 02:55 PM)mikesez Wrote: I appreciate your reply and your apology.
But I really don't understand why you took such umbrage at my generalization. 
You don't mind being identified with the left,
You said reform priority #1 is getting corporate money out of politics
I said all lefties feel that way,
So what is the problem?
If you weren't a lefty, or if you didn't care about corporate money in politics, I could see why my statement would upset you. No one likes to be mischaracterized. But I was just reflecting your own positions back to you.  Why is that not OK?
Why do you let actual violent extremism pass with no comment, and then drop bombs on my stuff?

To the bolded:

That is an inaccurate version of the posts in question. 

I made zero attempt to prioritize anything about campaign reform at all. I made a statement. You're adding your own interpretation of priority. 
You took a thread about election results being validated into the waters of corruption and campaign/primary reform, which is fine, but when those words come out, it is my inclination to mention big money driving campaigns.  
I wasn't saying finance reform is the ONLY fix, I wasn't saying this is the #1 priority. That's all coming from you. 

Then - you went on to proffer this little chestnut:
Anyone remotely left leaning thinks everything is because big bad corporations give money to candidates.

Huh?? 
No. 
That's a broad sweeping generalization of millions upon millions of people who have a wide array of nuanced opinions about that topic. 
If you want to acknowledge the comment is ill advised and inaccurate - I'd take you more seriously. 

I certainly never asserted that  - and I'm sure there are many other left leaning folk out there who would not characterize corporate money to candidates as the main cause of "everything." Whatever the [BLEEP] that means. 

Now - to put a bow on this - because I'm not going to keep digressing  - I'll tie this clearly in to the topic at hand. 

Millions and millions of corporate and private dollars are being spent on campaign ads by PACs and Super PACs to promote candidates  - and the ads are using increasingly alarming disinformation.
 Where we draw the line on this stuff is one facet of controlling the dangerous rhetoric I was attempting to spotlight in this thread, and one of the reasons I still want campaign finance reform even though you think you prioritize it differently than I do.

Oh, and did you just say I let violent extremism pass without comment?? 
I started a [BLEEP] thread about it!

On violent extremism:
You made a thread about it at least 2 years too late. 
After insulting those who have already been posting about it
All while refusing to use your mod powers to warn and steer these discussions
You're as useless as a gelded stud.

On the priority you assign to campaign finance reform:
You obviously assign it a higher priority than term limits, single subject rules, ranked choice voting, or any of the other many reforms that other posters were bringing up.  It's the only one you wanted to talk about.  Don't piss on me and tell me it's raining.  Yes, I used the word "everything".  It's hyperbole, man.  Deal with it.

---