Gay Forums - News & Politics - Detroit: The Triumph of Progressive Public Policy - Officially enters Chapter 9 Bankruptcy

Detroit: The Triumph of Progressive Public Policy - Officially enters Chapter 9 Bankruptcy

Posted by a hidden member.
Log in to view his profile

Feb 18, 2012 8:40 AM GMT

TropicalMark said
riddler78 said
TropicalMark said
riddler78 said
TropicalMark saidAint nothing to do with 'race', its all about factual data.
Did you ever once in your life pry open those slits on both sides of your nose?
Yeah, those facts suck dont they? Was that spoon gold or platinum? or bamboo?

And

TropicalMark saidGuess zipperhead fits apparently for you eh?

Bump. Oh Tropical - you certainly are your own worst enemy.
Two can play that game eh? I got your game.. Keep deleting those posts!

Thank you for proving my point yet again
That you're playing games? Sure thing! anytime.. we arent as stupid as you think everyone here is..

You're right, I think most people can see how woefully er weak intellectually your arguments come across. But I mean I won't presume to speak for others as you so often do in an attempt for affirmation. It's actually funny. But then again, you are the bigot here which means you automatically the stupid bigot prize - congratulations

Posted by a hidden member.
Log in to view his profile

Feb 18, 2012 8:45 AM GMT

Pffft. Im laughing! Your pathetic attempt to paint me as anything other than who I am is utterly futile. Your detractors are well known, riddler.. Unfortunately for you, your arrogance/pompousness is well documented throughout these forums..

dream on little man. dream on.

Posted by a hidden member.
Log in to view his profile

Feb 18, 2012 8:52 AM GMT

riddler78 said
TropicalMark said
riddler78 said
I doubt he knows any better. I mean look at the totality of his world view.
You aint seen HALF of what my "world view" is.. dont make more of an ass than you have out of yourself punk.......

Lol - sure I have.

Oh.. btw, flesh this out.. we all want to see how much more of the world you've seen than someone almost twice your age with many times more experiences!
C'mon Mr. Iveseentheworldandnooneelsecouldpossiblyseenmorethanmeriddlerthegreat.
Let's hear it!

Posted by a hidden member.
Log in to view his profile

Feb 18, 2012 3:45 PM GMT

musclmed said
TropicalMark said
riddler78 said
TropicalMark saidGuess zipperhead fits apparently for you eh?

Lol - figures you'd fall back on race - which really isn't surprising for someone as incapable as yourself. Where are you from anyway? Mexico?
Aint nothing to do with 'race', its all about factual data.
Did you ever once in your life pry open those slits on both sides of your nose?
Yeah, those facts suck dont they? Was that spoon gold or platinum? or bamboo?

This is so racially blatant it shocks the conscience you think this is appropriate.

musclemed, what I saw is a series of ageist remarks, countered by a few racist remarks. Neither are nice to read, but as one prolific conservative poster told me on RJ, I have to expect things to get heated on these topics, and to not be a hall monitor.

-Doug

roadbikeRob

Posts: 23230

Feb 18, 2012 4:14 PM GMT

Riddler, Detroit is definitely not the most liberal city in the US. While your argument has a few valid points, totally blaming unions and social programs for Detroit's disastrous decline is foolhardy. Ethnic and racial tensions are the base for this once great city's decline. The biggest culprit was the federal government with all the so-called good it did to Detroit along with Cleveland and Buffalo first with urban renewal which destroyed a large part of these cities. Another disaster that destroyed Detroit and most other older American cities was the interstate highway system. Blasting limited access expressways through urban neighborhoods resulted in the destruction of the urban fabric, decline in property values and increasingly serious health problems caused by rapid rise of auto generated air pollution in these devastated neighborhoods. The use of restrictive convenants in most suburbs kept minority groups confined to the inner city. During the 1970s, ultra liberal federal judges drove the final nail into the coffin by ordering urban schools to desegregate through forced busing which caused more middle class families to flee urban school systems for the suburbs. Another major factor is that annexation of suburbs by central cities or any other neighboring municipality is strictly prohibited by state laws in Michigan, Ohio, and New York resulting in inelastic cities that cannot capture more valuable tax base. Every municipality is permanently fixed at their current boundaries and any change of political boundaries must be approved by public referendum in both affected municipalities. Granted labor unions and overly generous social programs have done their fair share of damage but corporate America especially Wall Street have to shoulder a large part of the blame due to their endless greed. Outsourcing of jobs has really aggravated an already serious economic crises.

Posted by a hidden member.
Log in to view his profile

Feb 20, 2012 5:00 PM GMT

roadbikeRob saidRiddler, Detroit is definitely not the most liberal city in the US. While your argument has a few valid points, totally blaming unions and social programs for Detroit's disastrous decline is foolhardy. Ethnic and racial tensions are the base for this once great city's decline. The biggest culprit was the federal government with all the so-called good it did to Detroit along with Cleveland and Buffalo first with urban renewal which destroyed a large part of these cities. Another disaster that destroyed Detroit and most other older American cities was the interstate highway system. Blasting limited access expressways through urban neighborhoods resulted in the destruction of the urban fabric, decline in property values and increasingly serious health problems caused by rapid rise of auto generated air pollution in these devastated neighborhoods. The use of restrictive convenants in most suburbs kept minority groups confined to the inner city. During the 1970s, ultra liberal federal judges drove the final nail into the coffin by ordering urban schools to desegregate through forced busing which caused more middle class families to flee urban school systems for the suburbs. Another major factor is that annexation of suburbs by central cities or any other neighboring municipality is strictly prohibited by state laws in Michigan, Ohio, and New York resulting in inelastic cities that cannot capture more valuable tax base. Every municipality is permanently fixed at their current boundaries and any change of political boundaries must be approved by public referendum in both affected municipalities. Granted labor unions and overly generous social programs have done their fair share of damage but corporate America especially Wall Street have to shoulder a large part of the blame due to their endless greed. Outsourcing of jobs has really aggravated an already serious economic crises.

Detroit is not the only city though that has dealt with ethnic and racial tensions. re: restrictive covenants - is pretty symptomatic of bad local governance and consistent with a philosophy of control and philosophical belief that they can make choices better than their constituents. This isn't certainly isn't just about unions and overgenerous social programs but as the article notes, this is about "a city where all the major economic planks of the statist or 'progressive' platform have been enacted".

On the issue of endless greed - businesses, do what is in their best interests - greed itself isn't the problem, problems arise when they attempt to work with local governments to consolidate their gains. Regulations almost always benefit the incumbents and prevent or deter new competition - it is competition and choice and private property law that have held businesses accountable the best.

Posted by a hidden member.
Log in to view his profile

Feb 20, 2012 5:02 PM GMT

meninlove saidmusclemed, what I saw is a series of ageist remarks, countered by a few racist remarks. Neither are nice to read, but as one prolific conservative poster told me on RJ, I have to expect things to get heated on these topics, and to not be a hall monitor.

-Doug

You are rather selective in your reading and criticisms. No one expects anyone to be a hall monitor but in the face of such ridiculous bigoted remarks, your silence is indicative of your consent.

Posted by a hidden member.
Log in to view his profile

Feb 20, 2012 5:47 PM GMT

riddler78 said
meninlove saidmusclemed, what I saw is a series of ageist remarks, countered by a few racist remarks. Neither are nice to read, but as one prolific conservative poster told me on RJ, I have to expect things to get heated on these topics, and to not be a hall monitor.

-Doug

You are rather selective in your reading and criticisms. No one expects anyone to be a hall monitor but in the face of such ridiculous bigoted remarks, your silence is indicative of your consent.

Bullshit, where were all your conservative RJ pals?

Oh right, I forgot about their mantra: calling someone racist is being racist, but only if you're calling a conservative a racist. You've watched them attack Christian73 and a couple of others when they call out racism and said nothing, so, using your logic, your silence is indicative of your consent.

The only conservative that called out racism is muslmed.

Posted by a hidden member.
Log in to view his profile

Feb 20, 2012 6:35 PM GMT

meninlove said
riddler78 said
meninlove saidmusclemed, what I saw is a series of ageist remarks, countered by a few racist remarks. Neither are nice to read, but as one prolific conservative poster told me on RJ, I have to expect things to get heated on these topics, and to not be a hall monitor.

-Doug

You are rather selective in your reading and criticisms. No one expects anyone to be a hall monitor but in the face of such ridiculous bigoted remarks, your silence is indicative of your consent.

Bullshit, where were all your conservative RJ pals?

Oh right, I forgot about their mantra: calling someone racist is being racist, but only if you're calling a conservative a racist. You've watched them attack Christian73 and a couple of others when they call out racism and said nothing, so, using your logic, your silence is indicative of your consent.

The only conservative that called out racism is muslmed.

I probably read and participate in maybe 1/10 threads. I expect that my "other pals" seem to not have commented at all - but there are threads that you have commented on and participated in and said nothing - but perhaps it's the height of normalcy for you. Feel free to direct my attention to them in the future as I do not read every post nor do I suspect others do either - though I note that there has been less participation over the weekend as well from many frequent posters - which brings us back to you. When presented with the opportunity to comment, you choose to do nothing.

Sorry, I'm afraid for you, the shoe fits.

Posted by a hidden member.
Log in to view his profile

Feb 20, 2012 6:59 PM GMT

And I'll repeat:

Oh right, I forgot about their mantra: calling someone racist is being racist, but only if you're calling a conservative a racist.

Your conservative buddies bash Christian for pointing out racism, and calling him a racist for doing so. Why would you think I would want to be wide open to that kind of attack?

Go on, bluster about some more.

You want to imply I'm racist. Your smear tactics are lame.

Incidentally, when one of your buddies went on rants about how business should be able to discriminate openly and be racist with both employment and customers, I was right in there countering it. Your silence must have meant approval.
Shoe, meet foot.

musclmed

Posts: 3591

Feb 20, 2012 8:15 PM GMT

meninlove said

And I'll repeat:

Oh right, I forgot about their mantra: calling someone racist is being racist, but only if you're calling a conservative a racist.

Your conservative buddies bash Christian for pointing out racism, and calling him a racist for doing so. Why would you think I would want to be wide open to that kind of attack?

Go on, bluster about some more.

You want to imply I'm racist. Your smear tactics are lame.

Incidentally, when one of your buddies went on rants about how business should be able to discriminate openly and be racist with both employment and customers, I was right in there countering it. Your silence must have meant approval.
Shoe, meet foot.

Talking about what others would do or have done does not diminish what was done.

Specifically a individual RJ member was called out personally and racial slurs made against that person . Then making specific threads with the persons name in it.

Maybe everyone can try having a discussion without referencing individuals.

Referencing "buddies" is interesting and goes to a way of thinking and viewing the world that is bound to cause conflict.

Silence does not mean approval. No one should hold others accountable for not chiming in on a thread.

Posted by a hidden member.
Log in to view his profile

Feb 20, 2012 8:33 PM GMT

musclmed said, "Silence does not mean approval. No one should hold others accountable for not chiming in on a thread."

Bingo. Tell that to riddler, instead of addressing me. I was using his 'silence means approval' right back at him.

What I find interesting now is that you are in fact only quoting me instead of going back to where riddler first accused me of silence being approval and quoting him instead.

This bears out what I said earlier about conservatives on this little forum not critiquing conservatives on this forum.

Posted by a hidden member.
Log in to view his profile

Feb 20, 2012 8:41 PM GMT

Here musclmed, I'll do it for you.

Riddler began with, " You are rather selective in your reading and criticisms. No one expects anyone to be a hall monitor but in the face of such ridiculous bigoted remarks, your silence is indicative of your consent."

musclemed said, "Silence does not mean approval. No one should hold others accountable for not chiming in on a thread."

Posted by a hidden member.
Log in to view his profile

Feb 20, 2012 9:31 PM GMT

meninlove said

And I'll repeat:

Oh right, I forgot about their mantra: calling someone racist is being racist, but only if you're calling a conservative a racist.

Your conservative buddies bash Christian for pointing out racism, and calling him a racist for doing so. Why would you think I would want to be wide open to that kind of attack?

Go on, bluster about some more.

You want to imply I'm racist. Your smear tactics are lame.

Incidentally, when one of your buddies went on rants about how business should be able to discriminate openly and be racist with both employment and customers, I was right in there countering it. Your silence must have meant approval.
Shoe, meet foot.

Link please. Further on that specific note - I think it's the right of businesses to serve whoever it is they want - but they should also be willing to expect the blowback from their customers. To suggest that they should be allowed to but not forced to serve others isn't "not" calling people on it, it's letting people make fools of themselves just as I have resisted calls to have bigots like Upper_Cdn and TropicalMark be terminated or censored.

You believe in the heavy hand of censorship and forcing tolerance - I believe in the more subtle but more effective method of ridicule. You however seem disinterested in even calling people on their racism when they are liberals.

musclmed

Posts: 3591

Feb 20, 2012 9:36 PM GMT

meninlove said Here musclmed, I'll do it for you.

Riddler began with, " You are rather selective in your reading and criticisms. No one expects anyone to be a hall monitor but in the face of such ridiculous bigoted remarks, your silence is indicative of your consent."

musclemed said, "Silence does not mean approval. No one should hold others accountable for not chiming in on a thread."

Basically i throw it to the forum rules. Comebacks count, so no one has a right or an excuse for such behavior.

Maybe its the way you think?
I do not need to rationalize each and everyone's behavior.

It really doesn't matter. When you talk about someone individually you run the risk of offending them in some way.

Some members for some reason feel the need to opine and talk about others as individuals, completely off topic. I am sure if the few that did do this stopped, more people would feel free to post on here.

I am struggling to get your point. Maybe its the limitation of written posts.
What are you saying? Let it go? because others have done things before?

Posted by a hidden member.
Log in to view his profile

Feb 20, 2012 9:50 PM GMT

riddler78 said

Link please. Further on that specific note - I think it's the right of businesses to serve whoever it is they want - but they should also be willing to expect the blowback from their customers. To suggest that they should be allowed to but not forced to serve others isn't "not" calling people on it, it's letting people make fools of themselves just as I have resisted calls to have bigots like Upper_Cdn and TropicalMark be terminated or censored.

You believe in the heavy hand of censorship and forcing tolerance - I believe in the more subtle but more effective method of ridicule. You however seem disinterested in even calling people on their racism when they are liberals.

You might want to delete this post.. it reeks of falsehoods.

Posted by a hidden member.
Log in to view his profile

Feb 20, 2012 9:57 PM GMT

TropicalMark said
riddler78 said

Link please. Further on that specific note - I think it's the right of businesses to serve whoever it is they want - but they should also be willing to expect the blowback from their customers. To suggest that they should be allowed to but not forced to serve others isn't "not" calling people on it, it's letting people make fools of themselves just as I have resisted calls to have bigots like Upper_Cdn and TropicalMark be terminated or censored.

You believe in the heavy hand of censorship and forcing tolerance - I believe in the more subtle but more effective method of ridicule. You however seem disinterested in even calling people on their racism when they are liberals.
You might want to delete this post.. it reeks of falsehoods.

So says the bigot.

Posted by a hidden member.
Log in to view his profile

Feb 20, 2012 9:59 PM GMT

riddler78 said
TropicalMark said
riddler78 said

Link please. Further on that specific note - I think it's the right of businesses to serve whoever it is they want - but they should also be willing to expect the blowback from their customers. To suggest that they should be allowed to but not forced to serve others isn't "not" calling people on it, it's letting people make fools of themselves just as I have resisted calls to have bigots like Upper_Cdn and TropicalMark be terminated or censored.

You believe in the heavy hand of censorship and forcing tolerance - I believe in the more subtle but more effective method of ridicule. You however seem disinterested in even calling people on their racism when they are liberals.
You might want to delete this post.. it reeks of falsehoods.

So says the bigot.

If thats what you want .. so be it. unfortunately for you, I know the truth.. And that cannot be debated..

nuff said.
Carry on with your falsehoods AKA lies.
Tootles.

Posted by a hidden member.
Log in to view his profile

Feb 20, 2012 10:01 PM GMT

TropicalMark said
riddler78 said
TropicalMark said
riddler78 said

Link please. Further on that specific note - I think it's the right of businesses to serve whoever it is they want - but they should also be willing to expect the blowback from their customers. To suggest that they should be allowed to but not forced to serve others isn't "not" calling people on it, it's letting people make fools of themselves just as I have resisted calls to have bigots like Upper_Cdn and TropicalMark be terminated or censored.

You believe in the heavy hand of censorship and forcing tolerance - I believe in the more subtle but more effective method of ridicule. You however seem disinterested in even calling people on their racism when they are liberals.
You might want to delete this post.. it reeks of falsehoods.

So says the bigot.
If thats what you want .. so be it. unfortunately for you, I know the truth.. And that cannot be debated..

nuff said.
Carry on with your falsehoods AKA lies.
Tootles.

So says the bigot. The record is pretty clear here. In fact it has been bookmarked. Sounds like you had to look up what falsehoods meant.

Stupid, bigoted, and old, what a tragic combination.

Posted by a hidden member.
Log in to view his profile

Feb 20, 2012 10:03 PM GMT

musclmed said, "I am struggling to get your point. Maybe its the limitation of written posts.
What are you saying? Let it go? because others have done things before?"

Riddler went on the aggressive saying that by not calling out TropicalMark etc I was consenting by silence. So, very simply, I used his own assessment back on him, in the same manner. He failed to see the lesson, and began making excuses.

Your post about about silence not meaning consent was fitting, and so should have been directed at the instigator, riddler, instead of me.

So I did it for you, quoting his first post declaring me consenting by silence, then replying with yours.

Posted by a hidden member.
Log in to view his profile

Feb 20, 2012 10:09 PM GMT

riddler78 said
TropicalMark said
riddler78 said
TropicalMark said
riddler78 said

Link please. Further on that specific note - I think it's the right of businesses to serve whoever it is they want - but they should also be willing to expect the blowback from their customers. To suggest that they should be allowed to but not forced to serve others isn't "not" calling people on it, it's letting people make fools of themselves just as I have resisted calls to have bigots like Upper_Cdn and TropicalMark be terminated or censored.

You believe in the heavy hand of censorship and forcing tolerance - I believe in the more subtle but more effective method of ridicule. You however seem disinterested in even calling people on their racism when they are liberals.
You might want to delete this post.. it reeks of falsehoods.

So says the bigot.
If thats what you want .. so be it. unfortunately for you, I know the truth.. And that cannot be debated..

nuff said.
Carry on with your falsehoods AKA lies.
Tootles.

So says the bigot. The record is pretty clear here. In fact it has been bookmarked. Sounds like you had to look up what falsehoods meant. Stupid, bigoted, and old, what a tragic combination.

Yup, it sure is..
You can't change that.. end of discussion.

Moving on, not playing your games any further.

Posted by a hidden member.
Log in to view his profile

Feb 22, 2012 12:15 AM GMT

meninlove said musclmed said, "I am struggling to get your point. Maybe its the limitation of written posts.
What are you saying? Let it go? because others have done things before?"

Riddler went on the aggressive saying that by not calling out TropicalMark etc I was consenting by silence. So, very simply, I used his own assessment back on him, in the same manner. He failed to see the lesson, and began making excuses.

Your post about about silence not meaning consent was fitting, and so should have been directed at the instigator, riddler, instead of me.

So I did it for you, quoting his first post declaring me consenting by silence, then replying with yours.

Does being dishonest about an issue make you feel better about you being ok with Tropical's bigotry?

I'm beginning to wonder what you don't understand in the words: "silence is consent". Is it the word "silence"? "is"? or "consent"?

Let's take this slower for you since you see this differentiation as an "excuse". You refuse to call TropicalMark out on his outright bigotry and yet you suggest that forcing businesses to sell to everyone is acceptable. I suggest instead that in each case, both should be condemned and ridiculed but that freedom of speech is paramount. Where's the excuse or the inconsistency?

It would seem it is only with you.

Posted by a hidden member.
Log in to view his profile

Feb 22, 2012 12:17 AM GMT

TropicalMark saidAint nothing to do with 'race', its all about factual data.
Did you ever once in your life pry open those slits on both sides of your nose?
Yeah, those facts suck dont they? Was that spoon gold or platinum? or bamboo?

And

TropicalMark saidGuess zipperhead fits apparently for you eh?

Bump. Oh Tropical - you certainly are your own worst enemy.

Posted by a hidden member.
Log in to view his profile

Feb 22, 2012 1:44 AM GMT

riddler78 said
meninlove said musclmed said, "I am struggling to get your point. Maybe its the limitation of written posts.
What are you saying? Let it go? because others have done things before?"

Riddler went on the aggressive saying that by not calling out TropicalMark etc I was consenting by silence. So, very simply, I used his own assessment back on him, in the same manner. He failed to see the lesson, and began making excuses.

Your post about about silence not meaning consent was fitting, and so should have been directed at the instigator, riddler, instead of me.

So I did it for you, quoting his first post declaring me consenting by silence, then replying with yours.

Does being dishonest about an issue make you feel better about you being ok with Tropical's bigotry?

I'm beginning to wonder what you don't understand in the words: "silence is consent". Is it the word "silence"? "is"? or "consent"?

Let's take this slower for you since you see this differentiation as an "excuse". You refuse to call TropicalMark out on his outright bigotry and yet you suggest that forcing businesses to sell to everyone is acceptable. I suggest instead that in each case, both should be condemned and ridiculed but that freedom of speech is paramount. Where's the excuse or the inconsistency?

It would seem it is only with you.

You got called a name and you got caught in a lie, boo hoo hoo.. keep it up tike.. it really shows your 'immaturity' level......

Posted by a hidden member.
Log in to view his profile

Feb 22, 2012 3:09 AM GMT

TropicalMark said
riddler78 said
meninlove said musclmed said, "I am struggling to get your point. Maybe its the limitation of written posts.
What are you saying? Let it go? because others have done things before?"

Riddler went on the aggressive saying that by not calling out TropicalMark etc I was consenting by silence. So, very simply, I used his own assessment back on him, in the same manner. He failed to see the lesson, and began making excuses.

Your post about about silence not meaning consent was fitting, and so should have been directed at the instigator, riddler, instead of me.

So I did it for you, quoting his first post declaring me consenting by silence, then replying with yours.

Does being dishonest about an issue make you feel better about you being ok with Tropical's bigotry?

I'm beginning to wonder what you don't understand in the words: "silence is consent". Is it the word "silence"? "is"? or "consent"?

Let's take this slower for you since you see this differentiation as an "excuse". You refuse to call TropicalMark out on his outright bigotry and yet you suggest that forcing businesses to sell to everyone is acceptable. I suggest instead that in each case, both should be condemned and ridiculed but that freedom of speech is paramount. Where's the excuse or the inconsistency?

It would seem it is only with you.

You got called a name and you got caught in a lie, boo hoo hoo.. keep it up tike.. it really shows your 'immaturity' level......

Where's the lie you bigot?

Just because you're too old and stupid to figure it out, others more reasonable are more than capable and able to see how ridiculous you are.

Forums > News & Politics Forum Rules

Detroit: The Triumph of Progressive Public Policy - Officially enters Chapter 9 Bankruptcy