Originally Posted by Ineffable
I'm in, but as I said, my personal style tends to put people off, so I'll pass along what gets approved here. That being said, whoever does this better know how to write and have correct grammar because I am a Nazi on that Sh1t. No pressure.
I can relate to the contention that I manage to put people off. My primary problem is that I tend to spend a lot of time and resources doing research. Documents change or are deleted. This has the tendency to prevent me from backing up every aspect of that research. In the end equation,it doesn't matter who agrees or disagrees with my findings, or the findings of others. It all boils down to the facts of any given situation speaking for themselves.
I have a serious problem extending patience and accord to those types who are too lazy to undertake their own research program and adhere to a position based upon simple conjecture. The "Prove it" card is an old and moot point. I mean, think about it. The old adage, "If it looks like a duck, sounds like a duck, walks like a duck...then it must be a duck", holds true in any political venue. Disregarding those facts, or even simply discarding them out of hand based simply upon something akin to laziness and slothfulness is inexcusable.
If you choose not to agree and demand forthright proof because a situation doesn't agree with your own desires, then be prepared to offer substantial proof in regards to your standpoint. I have spent a large portion of my life attempting to pound home the blatant and clear cut facts of our political situation to no avail. You simply cannot reason with stupidity. Nor can you change the mind of a foolish individual who suffers from 'Head In Cement Syndrome'.
I have compiled a mental picture of a progressive movement unfolding before our very eyes.The progress is slow, to say the least, yet it does exhibit a stolid and unerring forward motion. My pet-peve sits at the feet of those who adhere to the dangerous philosophy of "It can't happen here, not in the United States". To which I reply, in light of the facts standing solid,upon what do you base your view point? Historical reference? Hardly, for history will show you that the aspects of the situation we find ourselves embroiled in are leading to something very different from that which you attempt to portray. In fact,adhering to that sort of program will soon find you treading very dangerous waters indeed.
I am tired. Worn down from a life-long battle to pass along hard earned knowledge to an unwilling crowd. People are starting to 'Wake Up',as the new adage goes. The problem is, what are they waking up to? More importantly, what stage are they in at the inception of this Awakening? The Enemy has advanced their program way beyond the concepts associated with entry level approaches in dealing with them from our position. The cause and effect has moved to advanced levels. Thinking that you can rise up out of a deep sleep and respond to a highly advanced initiative with those aforementioned entry-level techniques and ideologies, is a sure fire way of getting your butt seriously kicked and handed to you.
The point is, you have to catch up quickly and determine a solid approach. Doing otherwise is like fielding a Boy Scout Troop against a Platoon of battle hardened Rangers.
I would be glad to join. Even though I am all but worn smooth out. I will contribute what I can. I'm a poor boy from the woods. I make ends meet, with some left over to pursue a out of control gun habit.
I will NOT argue moot points that simple facts can convey adequate positive proof of. In fact,I will not argue at all, period. I will offer what I have when I have it. I will provide evidence when available. Otherwise, do or make what you will of what I offer. Agree or disagree, I don't really care one way or the other. I say these things not out of a sense of obligation to prove any point, but to simply establish my stance on the issues at hand.