Advance

By Too Conservative

I hope everyone had a great Thanksgiving!

I’ll be at the Advance next week and hope to catch up with many of y’all. I stupidly booked late and don’t have a room at the Homestead… If you have an extra room or know anyone who does please let me know! My email is vincent@harrismediallc.com

Have a great weekend


Comments

  • Loudoun Insider says:

    I still can’t believe that they still call this “The Advance”.

  • Mary Gail Swenson says:

    Why? What’s it to you?

  • Loudoun Insider says:

    That’s my personal opinion, of course they won’t care what I have to say about it, and that’s just fine as well.

  • Independent Voter says:

    What’s the Advance? And where did the name come from? Advance Australia Fair??

  • Mary Gail Swenson says:

    The name was chosen years ago, and the purpose behind it is to “always advance, never retreat”. I think it’s a great name and there is nothing to criticize it except by LI, who is in the habit of criticizing almost everything Republican. It’s really, really getting old. But I do know you don’t care, LI. So don’t bother answering. See my remarks under Turkey of the Year.

  • Loudoun Insider says:

    Yes you’re right, MGS, I only criticize things that are Republican. Dear Lord.

  • Mary Gail Swenson says:

    Not what I said, LI. I said you’re in the habit of criticizing almost everything Republican. Not that you don’t criticize a lot of other stuff. Re-read what I said.

  • Loudoun Insider says:

    I do not criticize almost everything Republican. If Republicans were as fiscaly conservative as they say they are, and as moral and ethical and Godly as they say they are, then I wouldn’t have much to complain about with Republicans. Unfortunately most of them are huge hypocrites, hence the criticism.

  • Fred says:

    So why would a non-Republican like LI feel the need to police how fiscally and socially conservative the real Republicans are?

  • Loudoun Insider says:

    I’m a fiscal conservative before I am a Republican, Fred. That’s what sets me apart from most in the LCRC, who are nothing more than party line cheerleaders for whoever wears the R label, no matter how un-conservative they are.

  • Loudoun Insider says:

    Oh man, you should see some of the emails going around, it looks like the LI obsessed idiots are going to try to make trouble for Vincent at The Advance for daring to allow free speech.

  • LI's BPD says:

    MGS, LI complains about *everything*, constantly and compulsively – s/he must be great fun at parties.

    No need to feel singled out.

  • Looks like it’s primarily one, drunk LI obsessed idiot.

  • BlackOut says:

    Lloyd, that description fits more than just one. Hedging your bets?

  • Loudoun Insider says:

    I complain about stupid shit and assholes who deserve to be complained about. And I put out for public debate complaints that most people complain about in private. Party hacks don’t need to think for themselves, their minds are made up for them.

  • Impressions says:

    LI’s observations about hypocrisy and pre-determined notions are accurate. Just wondering; Is it easier to converse/argue online than in person?

  • Barbara Munsey says:

    I think the anonymity and immediacy of online discussion/argument/criticism etc is often too easy: while it does make it easier for some people to handle ideas that they might not in person, under their own name, in the social stratifications they inhabit, it also makes it easier to behave badly with little to no consequence, because of the veil of the screen name. In person, or under one’s real name, you HAVE to own what you say and do, are bound by what you have publicly committed to in the form of a group, job, appointment, responsibility, etc.

    I think online is liberating, from both inhibition AND responsibility, in some cases. I guess it then becomes a question of how much value to assign to what is discussed, aired, “revealed”.

    While there are beneifts to virtual world, how much of it transfers to the real world, depending on the reasons for the anonymity, and how much freedom the user is really using it to exercise?

  • edmundburkenator says:

    “I think online is liberating, from both inhibition AND responsibility…”

    Ideas matter.

    If you have no ideas, people tune you out, whether they know your name or not.

    Responsibility is owned by everyone. Reader and writer.

  • Barbara Munsey says:

    Yes they do, eb. And if they are going to be taken beyond simply reading X’s comments, then they have to have some accountability beyond their mere existence as pixels of print.

    As I said, how much weight does one attach?

    You sometimes seem to attach a great deal to yourself, but no one has any valid measuring stick to see how much of it is justified in the real world. You, much like many if not most others, post primarily opinion with little to none in the department of substantiating fact.

    However, you are pretty polite, and near uniformly well-spoken, so I read you.

    That doesn’t mean I attach a lot of significance to your opinions.

    And that’s fine–I doubt you care much what I think, or think of you.

  • edmundburkenator says:

    Barbara, I read recently some comment from you where you mentioned someone’s contribution ratio. It seems this person donated too much to Ds (or not enough to Rs) to be taken seriously.

    This is the kind of statement that sidetracks the discussion and attempts to discount an idea with something unrelated to the point being argued.

    You want a resume. You want a real world measuring stick.

    It’s really surprising to me that you want these justifications instead of taking on the IDEA instead of the PERSON who is putting forward an idea.

    The difference between us is I do care what you think. I’m interested in your ideas — with anyone with a well thought out idea.

    I don’t care, nor am I curious, about your station in life. Only your arguments and your ideas. I don’t need your past or present in a misguided effort to put you on some kind of significance scale.

  • Barbara Munsey says:

    eb, the contribution ratio I noted is significant to me because the individual posts loud, long and often, under a variety of names, on what Republicans should be doing, based on their own superior and staunch Republicanness.

    It gives me a bit of a scale in which to weigh their pronouncements.

    For instance, I also am inclined to read opinions posted on legal matters by attorneys with a bit of greater attention.

    Someone calling themselves “hot tamale” and making grand statements about government, election law, the state of inheritance law in France or many other interesting subjects may very well BE a learned professional in the know. Or not.

    I prefer a measuring stick with which to rate how much to invest in exploring their ideas.

    Nowhere did I ask that YOU find it significant.

  • edmundburkenator says:

    “And if they are going to be taken beyond simply reading X’s comments, then they have to have some accountability beyond their mere existence as pixels of print.”

    Yes. I mistook this statement for the grand “we should” instead of meaning just “you”.

  • Bahahhahahaaaaaa/
    When you get the “shit and assholes” out of this loser…you’ve got game. My hat’s off to the person who got him that good.

  • Loudoun Insider says:

    Once again, this loser calling me a loser is outright hilarious.

Leave Comment