The Messy Middle

By Liberal Anthropologist

Reports in the comments section are that several of the more “progressive” commentators in this forum have decided not to return and are engaged in some sort of discussion with themselves about what they perceive as terrible thoughts that have been posted here, I apologize for not being more precise as I don’t have time to visit that other site and see what they are talking about.

This is not the first time that TC has been boycotted by one group or another. An interesting tactic since nobody here makes any money on anything. It has historically been the statist right who decry us and refuse to come here. Those on the right who think government should enforce their vision of the world. When they get criticized here, they become offended and disappear to their echo chambers to discuss how we are RINO’s and how TC is controlled by liberals.

Then we express the conservative views we have. Expressions of support for some Republicans and a non-PC perspective on guns results in the far left to declare this blog controlled by the extreme right and endless name calling.

So what does it mean?

This is the middle. The middle is a messy place where people of many ideologies and ideas come to interact and messily express themselves and their opinions. The middle isn’t an idea or a position. It is the place where those opinions clash more or less honestly.

Everyone declares themselves to be in the middle. But that is not true. The middle only exists when we all come together and talk. The far left and far right might not like the middle, because it is a place where ideas are discussed and questioned. It is not the echo chamber they prefer.

I hope they ALL come back. I miss some of our far right and far left friends. The middle is a welcoming place that wants their ideas too. And it would be a nice Christmas present to see everyone come together and argue like a family again. :-)

Regardless, this is my last post for the year. Merry Christmas, Happy New Year, and Happy Holidays all. May 2013 bring us more tax and spending cuts, greater freedom, and peace on earth.

PS: Santa – If at all possible, I would like to see Obamacare repealed for Christmas. But if not, I’ll understand. I’ll take a Samsung Galaxy Tab 2 instead.


Comments

  • Scout says:

    It doesn’t mean anything. some people are less comfortable than others with an exchange of views. That’s all.

  • I have no problem with people not reading stuff here. Heck, I don’t read the crap they put out. Go far enough to the left or far enough to the right, and you’re in crazyland either way.

  • John Marsh says:

    I’m not aware of any boycott, and I happen to consider myself in the “middle”. But by no means do I consider the entries of LA or Lloyd to be “middling.” Missing from this blog, and cause for my frequent resolve to dismiss it as hopelessly emotional and wingnut, is regard for facts, pragmatism, and openness to presentations that might alleviate our political, social and economic distress.

    For example, TC entries
    – evoke climate change denial, despite new scientific studies to the contrary almost weekly;
    – disregard of our increasing economic division, despite regularly distressing studies showing its evidence in educational and employment statistics;
    – dismiss health cost increases and corresponding decreases in health welfare outcomes, in increasing contrast to the cost and outcome statistics of other developed countries with government-sponsored health insurance;
    – espouse theories of our immediate national deficit/debt debacle without consideration of contrary theories that the issue is far more complex. Deficit to GDP ratios might be a start.

    TC has a place, but not unless it becomes more intellectually honest and tolerant.

  • Liberal Anthropologist says:

    “I happen to consider myself in the “middle””

    See what I mean! Everyone thinks they are in the middle.

    There is no middle John. You are on the far left based on that list of thinking. But many on the far left (and right) think they are in the rational middle.

    This bugs me more than your misplacement of yourself in the political spectrum:

    “TC has a place, but not unless it becomes more intellectually honest and tolerant.”

    We are nothing if not intellectually honest. Disagreeing with you or your false assumptions of what we think does not make us intellectually dishonest. My positions (and others here) are consistent and based in rational thought. I think your selective use and misinterpretation of scientific studies is an example of being intellectually dishonest.

    And tolerant? We are completely tolerant. We just don’t agree with you. You are not censored. Nobody is censored for their opinions. So how do you become more tolerant? Do we have to agree with you to be tolerant?

  • edmundburkenator says:

    Not every issue discussed here can be put on that left/middle/ right spectrum though. Some of the “tolerance” comments are probably about the dialed up rhetoric around here (a product of the November election going good for some and bad for others).

    I do think some posters here have a “rational thought” problem. But hey, everyone thinks they are rational! Am I right LA?

    You’ve had Loudoun’s more winger R’s not post here and now you have some of the D wingers saying goodbye. Some come back, some don’t.

  • Linda B. says:

    Means you’re doing something right.

  • edmundburkenator says:

    I will say the sabbatical that LI is taking does hurt this sites utility in local politics.

    LI is a passionate guy and if someone is a screw up — left, right, center — LI would say so. At the very least he would dare to get the conversation started.

    I doubt if you’ll have much of that in the near future — sadly. This board, among other county boards, needs good, hard oversight.

    The guys left here are not as fearless and are mostly part of the machinery.

  • Lloyd the Idiot says:

    And you are just the douchebag, Ed, to,provide that oversight., aren’t you?

    You don’t know who I am so you have no basis for suggesting I’m part of the machinery, whatever that is supposed to be, now do you?

    Bumper crop of morons this week.

  • Liberal Anthropologist says:

    “The guys left here are not as fearless and are mostly part of the machinery.”

    Which guy? I – for one – don’t know much about it. I am so not in the machinery that I know little about what is going on locally. I am not involved in local politics., and barely ever look at the local newspaper. I know about a few issues and have met a few local politicians. LI is someone who is really into the details of local politics. But “the machinery”?

    Conspiracy theories….

  • Joe Budzinski says:

    I think I know what you mean by “machinery” EB, and I don’t think any of the bloggers here are part of that.

  • Bring Back Loudoun Insider says:

    Without Loudoun Insider this site is just another right-wing freak show.

  • Eric the half a troll says:

    “You are on the far left based on that list of thinking.”

    Good lord, don’t you get it? There is no far left and far right because there is no objective standard. The judgement is based on the and is relative to the person or persons making the judgement. Further, a persons position varies based on the specific issue. This is coming from a person who has no problem with labeling others as right wing and left wing at times. But the practice is fraught with many, many problems and inconsistencies.

    But I do like the concept of people not being middle wingers but more the middle being a place or forum that we all can visit – let us hope it sees more traffic in the new year.

  • NateDogg614 says:

    “several of the more “progressive” commentators in this forum have decided not to return and are engaged in some sort of discussion with themselves about what they perceive as terrible thoughts that have been posted here”

    I can’t help but wonder which are the “terrible thoughts” that have been posted here. If any of the progressives would like to air their greviences with the conservatives as to which thinking is “correct” and which isn’t, I’m sure we can come to a mutual “agree to disagree” understanding.

  • Barbara Munsey says:

    Nate, you must be filled with the Christmas spirit to have such hope in agreeing to disagree!

    I agree with the concept of a middle ground for discussion purposes.

    I also think those who live on their own asteroid, claim it is in fact the universe, and spend most of their waking hours trying to shame the galaxy into first noticing them, and second, submitting, have no capacity for that ability to simply disagree.

    Merry Christmas, everybody, or whatever event you celebrate.

  • edmundburkenator says:

    Wow, Lloyd. Did my comment strike too close to home? Settle down oh fearless one. Have another egg nog.

    LA, note the “intolerance” example.

  • NateDogg614 says:

    “Nate, you must be filled with the Christmas spirit to have such hope in agreeing to disagree!”

    Well, that’s what we pretty much do all the time. This is, of course, assuming that one side doesn’t FORCE the other to think what they think and believe what they believe. Thankfully, we’re not at that stage in America, and God willing we never will be.

  • NateDogg614 says:

    Of course, if this is the attitude the President has (when it comes to negotiations), no wonder we are in such a mess:

    Mr. Obama repeatedly lost patience with the speaker as negotiations faltered. In an Oval Office meeting last week, he told Mr. Boehner that if the sides didn’t reach agreement, he would use his inaugural address and his State of the Union speech to tell the country the Republicans were at fault.

    At one point, according to notes taken by a participant, Mr. Boehner told the president, “I put $800 billion [in tax revenue] on the table. What do I get for that?”

    “You get nothing,” the president said. “I get that for free.”

    If it looks, acts, talks and walks like a Chicago thug……

  • Barbara Munsey says:

    They can demand, revile, pontificate and foam till the cows come home, but never force thought.

    They can take their virtual clubs and go home to their asteroid! :D

    (which does not, to me, imply the positive tolerant action of AGREEING to DISAGREE–lolol)

  • edmundburkenator says:

    THEY!

    Finally, someone has identified those thought-forcers.

  • BlackOut says:

    Nate were you in the oval office last week, or is that what you heard on FOX?

  • Barbara Munsey says:

    eb, “they” is simply a pronoun, and also used to great effect by those who like to preach about “otherizing”.

    the perils of a living language, in a balkanized world of self-crowned rulers!

    Merry Christmas eb. (unless that’s insensitive and offensive of me)

  • edmundburkenator says:

    It’s insensitive if it’s hollow and used as a rhetorical device, Barbara.

    I’ll leave it to you to reflect on how you used it. I will reflect on how I received it.

    I think reflection is probably a good note on which to end.

    I would encourage everyone to think a little more of “us” than “they” in this season and the coming New Year.

    Remember Dickens’ caution:

    “This boy is Ignorance. This girl is Want. Beware them both,
    and all of their degree, but most of all beware this boy,
    for on his brow I see that written which is Doom, unless the
    writing be erased.”

  • Eric the half a troll says:

    “…, “they” is simply a pronoun, and also used to great effect by those who like to preach about “otherizing”

    Isn’t “those” a form of “they”?

    Peace, Barb, it’s Christmas.

  • Ashburner says:

    LA – “And tolerant? We are completely tolerant. We just don’t agree with you. You are not censored.”

    Not true – I was not published for my anti-gun satirical comment last week ( I am a NRA member) about arming kids in wake of the 11 year old branishing a gun in Utah.

    Anyway, happy holidays and publish to all .

  • Barbara Munsey says:

    equally “insensitive” to attack people for wishing happiness to others by using unapproved words, but it happens eb. Merely trying to cover bases, in case you were among those who feel slighted, angered or the victim of “hate speech” when the recipient of the phrase.

    yep Eric, it is. And sometimes a pronoun is just a pronoun, like a cigar is also sometimes just that.

    Merry Christmas to you both, and all others here, and I’ll share something I learned at a Christmas gathering when someone was ranting about Catholics (I was raised Catholic, but do not attend church), how evil, greedy, rich, corrupt, and then on into a diatribe of how stupid people were to believe that was near-worthy of one of Bill Maher’s self-stroking performances, and I went to remove myself from the grouping, lest I contribute intemperate speech to such festive good cheer, and they said “no, no, I’m just SAYING” repeat with added venom. I said I was raised in the tradition, had relatives who practice and believe, and I wasn’t going to spend a Christmas get together listening to a lot of angry generalizations. They were genuinely surprised, and said, with a straight face “but…just don’t take it personally!”

    ROTFL!

    Good advice, on both sides of the aisle, yes? So…MERRY CHRISTMAS!

    (and I mean it–I hope you all have some good times, feelings, experiences, memories over the holiday, whether I know and like you or not)

  • Liberal Anthropologist says:

    Ashburner,

    No idea what happened to your comment. I see no evidence it was on here. Please post again here. I will not delete it.

    I am wondering if there is a wordpress bug. Someone else’s comment disappeared and then reappeared later.

  • Ashburner says:

    Nevermind. It was timely satire… now gone. It was about the crazy 11 year old bringing a gun to class.

    My point is I trust my teachers to teach and my first responders to keep me safe. They are the best trained.

    Again happy holidays to the left, middle and right.

  • Shiloh says:

    Some of us (me for instance) really are interested in posting only on local issues. While national issues are interesting, I for one, while having opinions on these issues, don’t feel that I have anything substantial to add to the discussion, so I leave that to others. That’s not a boycott — that’s simply a matter of interest.

    And here’s hoping everyone here had a lovely Christmas and has a prosperous, safe, and healthy New Year. (No matter what wing you’re flying with! :) )

  • JTHmishmash says:

    HA! A boycott of a blog? A place for public forum and opinion debate… That makes sense, good luck.

  • JTHmishmash says:

    Oh, and Merry Christmas folks! May God bless you all!

  • John Marsh says:

    I expect this comment may be the last on this thread, as I’ve enjoyed the absence of TC these past several days. In any event, it’s the last of mine to grace what’s become an LA and Lloyd exercise in juvenile petulance over reasoned argument. Happy New Year.

  • LaPierre's gonads says:

    Who are the several progressive commentators who are boycotting? Sorry, but I don’t see evidence of that. It looks like as soon as somebody disagrees with the opinions posted here they are automatically labelled “progressive” and “far left,” e.g. John Marsh, so how can you complain you’re being boycotted by progressives? The complaint can’t be that nobody disagrees with you, because that’s obviously not true. So what’s the problem?

  • Linda B. says:

    LPG, it’s the folks over at Loudoun Progress. They have expressly declared a boycott. It is clear from your comment that they have been sorely missed.

  • NateDogg614 says:

    “LPG, it’s the folks over at Loudoun Progress. They have expressly declared a boycott.”

    Meh. Their loss.

  • LaPierre's gonads says:

    Linda B.,

    Who are the “folks” at Loudoun Progress and where did they say that? On this blog? I’ve only seen one comment where one person said they won’t come here any more, not several people. I haven’t read every comment here, so maybe you can point me to where the other people said it. I don’t see it over there either.

    I hope I’m wrong. I hate to think L.A. wrote a whole article because one person is boycoting Too Conservative. Maybe you need more writers, or more news.

  • LaPierre's gonads says:

    *boycotting

  • Linda B. says:

    LPG, check out

    http://www.loudounprogress.org/?p=4334

    which is a response to

    http://www.tooconservative.com/?p=14697

    There were a few folks who commented under that particular TC post that they would not be back. Honestly, I know the spirit in which that post was written and find it ridiculous. But whatever. The planet seems to be continuing its normal rotational pattern.

  • Bloomberg's sphincter says:

    gonads… you’ll find three of them here: http://www.tooconservative.com/?p=14697&cpage=1#comments:

  • Liberal Anthropologist says:

    It is in the thread about guns in the comments. There were 4 in there.

  • LaPierre's gonads says:

    Sphincter, etc,

    Thank you for the links. I counted one person saying they won’t be coming back here, and two other people saying “me too” and everybody else having a long argument about gun control. There were plenty of people on both sides of that argument insulting each other, so claiming there was some “boycott” didn’t make any sense. I looked for the supposedly several people talking about “terrible thoughts” at Loudoun Progress, but I didn’t see even those two who said “me too” commenting there, it was different people. It’s funny (because of her comments here) that one commenter that keeps popping up there is Barbara Munsey.

    Basically I don’t see what you guys have to be upset about. People come and go depending on what they’re interested in, and there have been changes at this blog. This post looks like some of the commentators at TC just have a petty beef with another blog because somebody criticized you, and who cares. Why that one?

  • Liberal Anthropologist says:

    Interesting that you see it as complaining. Perhaps I didn’t word it well. My interest is in seeing those folks come back to continue discussing. It is dialog I am interested in. I have no specific beef with LP. I have posted there. And as a libertarian, there are a few things we agree on.

    Not really upset. Just commentary on how the middle is a place filled with debate and it is difficult but necessary to keep talking.

  • jacob says:

    LA,
    For me, a statist, is a statist, is a statist. Be it someone who wants to rid the world of guns or drugs or whatever. The groups that seek to use government to curtail the liberty of others are not left or right. The terms left and right have become meaningless. Both parties are loaded with statists who are by their nature control freaks. What the control freaks are looking to controls is the only difference.

    The question is do you respect someone else’s right to do what they will so long as they do not harm or threaten another. If someone wants to own a gun for whatever reason should be able to do so without interference from the government. It is only when someone harms another with that tool that society has the prerogative to interfere.

    Same goes for drugs. Smoking a joint in the privacy on ones home or backyard is your own damn business. Same goes for tobacco. It is only when once is high and say operating a vehicle and endangering another that it becomes society’s business.

    Liberty has its risks, but history has shown that Dictatorship is a far more dangerous.

  • Elder Berry says:

    “rid the world of guns”

    Typical ad absurdem argument. Exaggerate much?

  • jacob says:

    EB, thanks for missing the point of the statement. Think much?

  • Barbara Munsey says:

    It isn’t about thinking, Jacob.

  • Ed Myers says:

    Which liberies do we protect? The freedom to smoke or the freedom to live longer and healthier in a smoke-free environment. The freedom to own guns or the freedom not to die prematurely from a gun accident. Often it comes doen to sacrificing some people for the benefit of the majority. Rarely in an suburban environment does one’s “freedom” have no impact on other people.

Leave Comment