The Hypatian Shore

There's no question about it; highly intelligent people support Obama. Those in fear of their shadow will vote McCain.

Let's hope the former out numbers the later on election day.  

The hatred and terribleness that has followed this election has just gotten worse on this blogging site.  Censorship of comments that don't reflect what the author wants them to is wrong.  Labeling them as attacks when they are not are also wrong.  Let the readers decide what is an attack.  It is defeating the whole purpose of the blog.  It is wrong for the community and our country.  

The righties are now censoring comments and lying about them being attacks.  This seems to be typical of righties.  Sound familiar?  I know sound like Amy calling people lefties full of hate.  Well, the righties are censoring.  Let the reader decide what the comments mean -- that's the point of blogging.  No vulgarities, nothing but being on the other side of their views.

Let's not forget a non-scientist Nobel prize winner who also endorses Sen. Obama, former VP Al Gore.

@disgusted: Well, one thing about "censoring comments." We bloggers have the full power to publish what comments we think are appropriate. There is no freedom of speech on forums of this nature as these places are not public places. If this was a government run board, then there may be some problems of speech issues. The righties at LCL miss this part and will accuse us of being censors when we decide to not publish comments. Personally, I have only ever once unpublished a comment by someone because it was so offensive to my readers, not to me. (9/11)

But if they want to call us hypocrites and liars, I think its only fair to return the favor as you have done.

That's true.  Jim and Amy screen comments.  You and I do not.  I think that fact alone speaks volumes.

At any rate, back to your post.  It essentially proves something I've asserted all along:  If you take your emotions out of it, and look intelligently at the facts, Obama is the better choice.  

Something that is frustrating to many conservatives is that these "thinkers" are above the smearing and the lies spread from their side.  They've removed the rhetoric and can see the underlying foundation of each candidate.

Jim and Amy are not being truthful in their censorship.  They are able to attack those who comment on their blogs but can choose not to post comments that are against their beliefs and call them attacks.  It doesn't matter what these comments say -- attack or no attack, we'll never know.  I know for Jim, I questioned his implication of Christians not voting for Obama and he said I was attacking him and did not post my comment.  He is trying to make his blog look credible when it is not.

@disgusted: Jim's got a persecution complex - but when you self identify yourself as conservative nowadays playing the victim card when your shown wrong an issue is a short cut to avoid engaging in the issue. He can personally attack you with all sorts of things, but if you play the same game he'll throw his hands up and then throw a pity party for himself.

Perhaps it's best we allow these victims of themselves to wallow in their own self-delusions for awhile. Amy, Jim, and Ed are like Lake Country's own special David Irvings, Robert Faurisson, and Ernst Zundels. Discussion with them has always proven to be unsuccessful.

Remember liberals are anti-Americans in their eyes and they have no qualms waging descruction against us at all costs.

I encourage all the liberals out their in the Lake Country Area to begin a blog here at Lake Country Publications if you can. Let's open the tent up. We need more diversity in thought, not less.      

MC - I don't know, I'd be more comfartble with a nuclear physisit who got a C+ that I could drink a beer with if he was supporting Mccain.

I thought Al Gore was the "father of the internet"?  

Seriously though, I have never called liberals anti-American or that I need to destroy them at all costs.  Also, I don't censor my comments.  I do monitor them and have to approve them first.  I think that is just being responsible.  So far some comments have bordered on bad taste, but nothing that has required me to delete.  Althought there have been 3 or 4 instances when peoples comments show up twice at the same time.  I have deleted the copy comment believing this is some sort of error.

Finally, while your comparisons are not even a good analogy, they are in poor taste, but that is expected of you.  If it is your expectations that you are going to change peoples strong opinions because of your equally strong opinions, you will be frustrated your entire life.

@Ed: I don't think I've ever implicated you as a conservative who engages in the rheortic of "anti-Americans. If I have, then I'll retract it. But if I recall, you have never been in that camp like BillyJ, tstone, Amy Hemmer, and Jim Hayett. But you are in the camp that has the same paranoia about the media being liberal and that conservative do not get a fair representation in the media.

Also, please which analogies are in "poor taste" and only "expected of me" and why do I sense an insult behind that Ed?  Please explain. Thanks.

I am not trying to reach conservatives who have already decided against Obama (whether they vote for McCain or 3rd party remains to be seen).

Ed, there is about 14% of the electorate that is undecided out there. If the opinions of other conservatives who've endorsed Obama mean anything to that undecided voter and if science is a priority to someone, then I hope these endorsements carry sway.