How Many Members Would Prefer Homogeneity?

being a studied smartass is sometimes part of the dscourteousness that many people dont like. Maybe Finn is merely sounding off about this.
I find I can disagree with many of the other aisle(or even the {yack} religious) and nither feels particularly "violated"

Im sure you felt great at "scoring" a bon mot over Chumly when Chumly really said nothing particularly provocative.

Goin fiishin, nothing here worth reading this AM

If you think that Bon mot was good, you shoulda seen the one that got away.

This magic spot on the hill behind the shack looses its connection often and all my best deathless prose gets lost in cyberspace.

Good luck fish'n or break a leg, whatever is appropriate...

Of course the Constitution disagrees with you when you don't side with the courts if you disagree with their rulings.

That's ridiculous. No it doesn't.

I'm blaming policy and the politicians who have implemented them without giving enough thought. Of course the murderer is to blame as well as any group that may be inciting viol nice as a response.

If someone blamed, in part, US policy and politicians for 9/11, I would not be offended, as long as they didn't exonerate the murderers or argue that the US deserved the attack. I would be offended if they blamed US soldiers but that's a lousy analogy.

By people like me, I mean people who are generally conservative, and very rarely going to agree with the majority sentiment on a thread.

I am not sure what you may mean by conservative, given the notion varies wildly depending on a number of conditions. In any case you are more than welcome to embrace whatever beliefs strike your fancy (who I am to stop you?) and I've never used the thumbs up / thumbs down, ignore function, etc. with any poster.

Talking about political ideologies, I would suggest you abandon them and rely on a zesty recipe of logic, supported by science-based evidence, spiced up with a dash of humanitarianism. I would further suggest that "sentiment" (a view of or attitude toward a situation or event; an opinion) is nothing more than that without logic supported by science-based evidence.

As to humanitarianism, it could be argued that it represents a non-science-based, non-evidence based ideology, but I can live with that given the inevitable fact that I am a human being.

I am not sure that Progressive is the correct term. It might just be a euphemism for those, for different reasons, subscribe to a progressive world view. Simply put, the heartland types in the U.S. are not all Progressives, since in my opinion, they often value America and Americans, and do not see all the rest of humanity as necessarily worthy of concern. They may also not use a hyphen when identifying their respective identity. Anyway, stay in the forum for one reason - for spite. (Spite I believe is sometimes the way to show one's adversay that they have not won. That in itself is a form of your winning. They have not converted you.)

It doesn't really matter Chumly.

Think " a minority view that generally irritates you" (You in the broad sense)

All of the labels are faulty in one way or the other. I use "progressive" to broadly categorize those on the left side of the political spectrum.

Of course there are people who have views that could be located on either side of that spectrum, but with the people I call "progressive" it's exceedingly rare.

Hard to define but you know them when you see them.

OK, that would be the beautiful Mrs. Chum’s views when they depart from mine. On another note my dog has diarrhea from too many table scraps and I must attend to this pressing duty.

A few years ago there was a fire at a French nuclear fuel reprocessing facility. There were some chemical explosions in the course of the fire.

I first heard of the event when someone casually asked me if I had heard about the nuclear explosions in France.

I'm not sure how to take this.

Help me understand.

Not me, I chose heterogeneity. Opposites attract and a broader spectrum of variety.

Why not use the word bellcurve instead of "spectrum"? It allows for more nuanced analysis. Also, progressive is a catchall term that doesn't explain why you might feel persona non grata. It might have more to do with the possibility that anyone that can be labelled progressive is oftentimes alienated from anyone that does not subscribe to that identity. How "progressive" can one be if they may have an adversarial relationship with anyone that values the system that was in place when their family came to these shores?

I think of progressives as "ready to take over." A pejorative often directed at those in my demographic.