Yeah, impeach the SOBs!

Over at BlueOregon, where Republicans aren't allowed to post comments, there is a cry against impeachment.  I, however, strongly believe we should impeach Bush and Cheney both.  Run them both out of town on a rail.  Then, by the usual order of succession, Nancy Pelosi would become President.

Right before an election.

I can't think of a better way to ensure that Republicans retake both chambers of Congress and win the Presidency than to let America get a glimpse of life under President Pelosi with a democRat controlled Congress.

Heh.

Comments

[Pardon Me?]

Where do you get that Republicans aren't allowed to post on BlueOregon?

[Gullyborg]

From the number of people, including me, who have had our comments deleted and have then been banned from the site.

[Pardon Me?]

Have you considered the possibllity that you were rude? You're routinely rude on your own site, so it's a good bet that you're rude on other sites as well.

[Sakaki]

Actually, a lot of well reasoned thought put forth on BlueOregon got curtailed, including two posts by myself actually engaging people in debate.

Needless to say, censorship is big over there.

[Pardon Me?]

Sure, and Gully never bans people.

Tell me, how many political blogs do you know that don't ban people periodically?

I'm sure that 90% of those banned are sure that it's a total outrage, but many times those who are banned are just being rude.

Considering the juvenile behvior exhibited by Gullyborg on a regular basis, it's a good guess that's what got him banned.

As for deleting comments, if that really happened, that's only called for if the post is defamatory.

[Pardon Me?]

As for the point of your post, Borg, it's always risky to predict the future.

Both sides are convinced that the other side is soooooo grossly incompetent that if they're in power they'll so badly botch things that they never will be in power again.

And it rarely works out that way. For one thing, there are certain advantages to being in power that can be used to negate the perception of incompetence.

On top of that, both parties tend to blame bad things that happen on their watch on the previous administration (hell, G.H.W. Bush was trying to blame the recession in 1991 on Jimmy Carter, who had left office 11 years earlier).

There's a joke that goes: How do you make God laugh? Tell him your plans.

How do you make God laugh hysterically? Tell him how you're going to benefit from the other side gaining power.

[Gullyborg]

SO... you admit blogs ban people, which I guess means you accept it when told BlueOregon bans people. Isn't that special.

[Gullyborg]

And despite the continual juvenile behavior you seem to find here, you keep coming back for more.

You know the definition of insanity, don't you? Continually doing the same thing, expecting different results?

Oh well, I'm glad I can at least entertain you. The more you come back to complain, the more hits I get, which means the more I can charge for advertising.

Just like FOX.

[Pardon Me?]

So, 'Borg, do you now oppose blogs banning people? Have you pledged to stop banning people? Or do you only complain about it when it happens to you?

[Pardon Me?]

So, 'Borg, do you now oppose blogs banning people? Have you pledged to stop banning people? Or do you only complain about it when it happens to you?

[Gullyborg]

If you keep multiple-posting comments, I might ban you.

[Pardon Me?]

Pretty funny--you complain about blogs that ban people (at least as long as you're the one being banned), then turn around and threaten to ban me.

I can't help it if the software that operates your site is faulty--all I did was hit the back button, and my post showed up twice. Your site is the only one I've ever had that happen--and I notice that others seem to have the same problem.

[Gullyborg]

Funny, conservatives seem to be able to use it just fine. I guess the software is rigged against liberals, you know, like Diebold voting machines.

Oh, and I never complained about any blog banning anyone. In fact, I appreciate the ability to ban and have done so. I merely presented, for information purposes, the fact that BlueOregon bans opposing thought.

You may infer from that anything you wish - but nothing was implied.

I guess that's another typical liberal quality - seeing "facts" that aren't there.

[DarePDX]

Just to mention it.

Not only have I been banned, my IP and the IP of the coffee shop up the street from my house is problematic anytime I try to post anything as any name on BlueOregon. Even a chance at another psuedoname is blocked.

They barred me for answering a question asked by a regular liberal on their site: "name one government waste in Oregon."

The liberal was so blind in his political belief he literally believed that conservative criticism was purely made up.

I listed the top ten unnecessary expenses of the day. Decisions made in a budget crunch that actually took money directly out of the poor, schools, and underserved (the primary liberal poster children during the Kitzhaber made budget shortfalls). After that all my posts and every comment in the thread relating to me was removed. I was barred.

I tried to come back as a psuedoname but even those got barred within the following week as they determined my IPs.

BlueOregon only works if its group speak. Just like our state's government - it takes a closed room with a complicit media to keep enough people unaware for it to work. For the most part, those young liberals at Blue Oregon can't see new opinons or they might start floating rightward as they begin to add up the failure liberalism really has been for Oregon.

The real purpose of Blue Oregon is for liberals to argue about how much they agree with each other.

[Pardon Me?]

DarePDX,

I actually don't read Blue Oregon much. The behavior you've described, if accurate, is certainly counterproductive to intelligent dialogue.

But it's funny to see someone who regularly bans people who try to engage in intelligent conversation complain about other sites banning people.

Gully has also posted on several sites supporting the right of blogs to ban people. Apparently he doesn't think that right extends to blogs coming from a different political perspective.

[Gullyborg]

Again, I never said it was "wrong" to ban anyone. My blog is private property, and I consider everyone posting comments as "guests." Guests can wear out their welcome.

I've banned people for using too much profanity (after asking them not to). I've banned people for leaving too many inane off-topic comments (after asking them not to). I've banned people for comment spam. Off the top of my head, I think I've banned 3 or 4 people just for outright rudeness. It's my perogative.

BlueOregon is welcome to ban anyone they want. All I did was mention, for the information of the reader, that BlueOregon doesn't let conservative Republicans post comments.

Use that knowledge anyway you wish.

[Sakaki]

"Oh, he can't talk about BlueOregon banning people because HE bans people."

Only when they become exceptionally stupid and trollish.

Gullyborg is a fair guy who gives second chances, though you may not know it at the time. BlueOregon is not fair, they don't even give you ONE chance. But, then again, that's Kari Chisholm's way of trying to be a "media mogul".

[Pardon Me?]

Gully,

Your perception may be that BlueOregon doesn't allow conservative Republicans, just as my perception is you don't allow rigorous disagreement with your positions.

The truth is probably somewhat different--you probably allow more dissent than it seems to me, and BlueOregon probably allows more differing opinions than you can see.

I also have seen you be extremely rude on your own blog, so it's easy for me to believe that you would be rude on another blog. I've also seen you initiate the rudeness, then ban people for calling you on it.

I'm not a regular enough reader of Blue Oregon to get a sense of how it operates, but from their statement of who they are, it seems like it's not intended to be a public conversation place.

It does seem that blogs on both sides can be too quick on the trigger to ban people with differing viewpoints.

[Gullyborg]

and yet, despite it all, you keep reading...

[Boy Named Sous]

Here's a thought...

If Pardon Me? wants to prove the point, it should be pretty simple to scan through the comments over at BlueOregon and find a few... say, even 5? 10?... comments from a staunchly conservative position that have NOT been deleted or banned, and post them here, with links.

Conversely, one could provide the name of a former commenter here who was banned for simple disagreement with Gully on a position...