Slarti's brilliant post and 'Dog's question support my "dismissive" observation. I just use a lot less words. 'Cuz I am not getting paid, so no 'splainin'.

Actually, going through June bug's post and trying to write a response, it seems to me that she mostly just doesn't like me because I'm a conservative. There doesn't seem to be any useful response I can make to that, so I'll just leave things as is.

jmw - I think the biggest problem is what we saw as a very dismissive attitude."

I also had an interview with Reality Check, and we had one caller call in who asked me why people were demanding that Obama release his birth certificate, and I told him why I thought that was. The answer wasn't good enough. He kept pressing me for a different answer. Sorry, but I gave you my honest opinion already. That's the only answer I have. If you want a different answer, you'll have to ask someone else. The answer he really seemed to be fishing for was,"Obama's being asked for his papers because he's black, and all the people demanding Obama's papers are just a bunch of racist Tea Partiers." Sorry, but I know conservatives very well. A lot of people I knew had questions about Obama's birth certificate. And while I'm sure there may be a few racists on the birther bandwagon, I happen to think that "you're all racists" theory is not that much more in touch with reality than a lot of the birther stuff.

Well, I could tell that the person who asked the question (and who kept wanting an answer that he wasn't going to get) basically had to hold himself back from attacking with both barrels. So while I had some very good and even enjoyable conversation with others, such as the person who commented it was good to talk to a reality-based conservative (and I don't want to lose sight of the many more good conversations), I couldn't say the reception was universally positive.

'Nuff said.

I had thought that I might try and dialogue with you folks here, but I don't particularly see that I'm really that welcome, or that my efforts on behalf of the truth are that appreciated by folks at this forum. That being the case, I'll take my ideas and input elsewhere.

I wasn't concerned about anything other than being treated as one would normally treat another human being.

I couldn't say the reception was universally positive.

I had thought that I might try and dialogue with you folks here, but I don't particularly see that I'm really that welcome, or that my efforts on behalf of the truth are that appreciated by folks at this forum. That being the case, I'll take my ideas and input elsewhere.

Now jmw, where do you expect to get "universally positive" in this world? The only time I get "universally positive" is when I ask my cats, "Who wants some lunch?"

I wasn't concerned about anything other than being treated as one would normally treat another human being. As far as name-calling goes, I'm not the one who's called anybody names.

What names has anyone called you? The list can start here:

I saw one:

Not sure where it falls on the meanness scale.

Looking back through this thread, I'd say that most folks have probably been more civil than my perception today. So I'm going to give this another shot.

I really didn't come here to find a new place to be criticized, though. So if you'd rather criticize than discuss, I don't know that I'll be taking part.

Most of what I reacted to was charges of being dismissive -- when I honestly really don't have any idea what that was all about -- and then June bug's reply, which I take to be impolite, to what was really a very polite response on my part.

In any event, I'm going to go ahead and respond to June bug's earlier post.

I would note before I do, though, that it doesn't look like I'm the only person who identified that post as being a bit of an attack.

I’ve suddenly been flooded with a whole series of personal attacks by people who don’t like the results of my 3-month investigation.
Welcome to our world.

First let me comment that I am personally kind of ashamed to have to answer these attacks — ashamed not for myself, but for the fact that people who seem to be mostly conservative are making such attacks on anybody.
Does “anybody” include our President?

Of course it does. "Anybody" includes anybody. I don't support baseless attacks on anyone.

I do not feel that such non-fact-based, personal public attacks express conservative values.
Had you criticized such attacks against others in the past?

Yes. Why do you ask? Have you? If not, then what business is it of yours?

Would you defend me? It doesn't look like it from here. You began your post with a sarcastic, "Welcome to our world," then continued by ask questions that sound as if I'm on trial.

Have you ever defended conservatives? Did you defend President Bush? If you didn't, then what right do you have to expect the same from me?

To me, being a conservative means, among other things: traditional values of honesty, truth, and kindness whenever possible to other people. And they include not judging until I know the facts.

Actually, I started my investigation tending to believe that Barack Obama was probably born somewhere other than the United States.
What led you to that belief?

Things that I had heard and read up to that point. What led you to your beliefs?

How did that square with not judging until you know the facts?
Everyone forms opinions based on what they know. Have you thoroughly investigated everything you've formed a belief about? Why do you expect that I should have?


As a result of 3 months of testing the fraud theories and thinking long and hard about the evidence, I now tend to believe he was born in Honolulu, just as the Hawaii Department of Health has been telling us.
What led you to that belief?

3 months of testing the fraud theories and thinking long and hard about the evidence.

What additional evidence would it take for you to believe, rather than tend to believe?
I'm a skeptic about everything, including things I've already come to a conclusion on. I "tend to believe" much more often than I "believe." I consider that a strength.


That still doesn’t make him a decent President — but at least it reassures me that our American system hasn’t failed us quite as badly as a lot of people seem to think it has.
Your findings support Barack Obama’s innocence of the charges of fraud, deceit, usurpation and worse that have been leveled against him. In other words, whatever you think of his Presidency, he appears to be a decent human being who has certainly not been treated decently.

But it's okay, because the system hasn’t failed “us” too badly. I find that attitude more than a little arrogant and lacking in the values you cite above as those of conservatives.

I never condoned treating anybody indecently, and I find your intimation that I have offensive.

Personally, I find your attitude more than a little arrogant, and your "questions" rather offensive as well. They have no ring of honest questions you'd like an answer for. They come across to me as your desire to "grill" me -- simply because you just don't like my political views.

John

I think where you lost some folks is when you said you refused to to refer to President Obama as the President until you undertook your own investigation of the Birther claims. That admission reveals a disrespect for the Constitution that many find objectionable. If you cannot understand that I overestimated you.