![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 23 to 47 of 67. Go back in thread:
Posted by zeugma on March 28, 2006, at 18:55:45
In reply to I am sorry, posted by zeugma on March 28, 2006, at 18:47:52
whether about politics or not, my dry mouth perhaps.
-z
Posted by teejay on March 28, 2006, at 19:03:50
In reply to Sorry., posted by Dinah on March 28, 2006, at 18:04:30
> That bit of self talk really should have remained in my mind.
NO NO NO!!!! That is the whole idea of politics, its ALL about the freedom to express oneself, thats totally why it doesnt work on this site, because Bob won't allow posters to express themselves, or makes them feel uncomfortable if they do so. Its my opinion that Bobs philosphy is actually detrimental to the healing of the individual. I come here and I'm so scared of upsetting someone else that it actually dents MY self confidence and self image! I mean, wheres the logic in that?
Let me give you an example (its pertinent to the US posters but those of us in the UK are much more relaxed about the issue) abortion. Now the pro life brigade will of course tell YOU that abortion is murder. Now the way I see Bobs civility rules, that would be tantamount to accusing someone of murder and would fall foul of his civility rules. See what I'm getting at here?
In my case I'm big AGAINST the war in iraq.....I firmly believe and always have done (and think the evidence has more than emerged to back up my case) that both the US and UK leaders conspired to mislead the public about WMD (funny how you never hear of those now isnt it ???). I believe they needlessly killed tens of thousands of iraqis PURELY because they wanted a battlefied on which to fight al-queda. Of course that may well fall foul of Bobs civility rules too as it might upset or offend someone who thinks G W Bush or Tony B liar (its a UK joke) are some kind of heros.
Rather than have to worry when I post about subjects I feel VERY passionate about, I'd rather not bother at all.
I'm gobsmacked at the response to my original post though with not ONE single person supporting Bobs stance on the issue...........but Bob doesnt believe in democracy when it goes against his way of thinking. IMO anyway.
See you one alter guys n gals :-)
Best wishes and hope you are all feeling well
TJ
Posted by wildcard11 on March 28, 2006, at 19:12:55
In reply to Re: Sorry., posted by teejay on March 28, 2006, at 19:03:50
PBC or block in advance..lol I TOTALLY agree w/ you!!!
Posted by Dinah on March 28, 2006, at 19:48:10
In reply to Re: Sorry., posted by teejay on March 28, 2006, at 19:03:50
I don't find it necessary to say so all the time, but I do.
Posted by teejay on March 28, 2006, at 19:52:20
In reply to I support his stance., posted by Dinah on March 28, 2006, at 19:48:10
> I don't find it necessary to say so all the time, but I do.
Did you not say this earlier in this thread?
"I think I'm going to walk away from this board too. Spittin in the wind. I just keep spittin in the wind."
Not quite sure how you reconcile these two seemingly contradictory statements?
TJ
Posted by Dinah on March 28, 2006, at 19:57:06
In reply to Re: I support his stance., posted by teejay on March 28, 2006, at 19:52:20
Because I do support his stance. And as a poster I feel like I'm just spitting in the wind to try to find points of mutual agreement, different ways of looking at possible motivations, etc.
As the administrator of this site, Dr. Bob has a bit more influence.
Posted by Declan on March 28, 2006, at 19:59:52
In reply to I support his stance., posted by Dinah on March 28, 2006, at 19:48:10
IRL I can have civil discussions involving political disagreements a little more easily than here. This is because here there are not so many cues, and nuance is not so easily communicated. And IRL the disagreements I have with people where I live are small compared to here. That makes the disagreements here raw and overdetermined. And where I live almost everyone thinks the same about most of these things (that's why people live where they do).
But people in other parts think differently. For example I had a discussion with an Australian about our attitude to asylum seekers. He was saying 'Sink their boats in the water.' So I said 'Why not shoot them on the beaches? That would send a message.' All that proves (I suppose) is that political discussions IRL can be a bit raw too.
Declan
Posted by teejay on March 28, 2006, at 20:06:39
In reply to Re: I support his stance. » teejay, posted by Dinah on March 28, 2006, at 19:57:06
I too admire his stance reagarding protecting vulnerable people on the other boards, but people venturing into the realm of politics must surely be aware of what they are entering IMO.
Yes DR Bob does have more influence than you or I, but with influence comes responsibility.
I wonder (just out of interest) what Bush Blair of even Clinton would make of this board?
TJ
Posted by Declan on March 28, 2006, at 20:17:48
In reply to Re: I support his stance., posted by teejay on March 28, 2006, at 20:06:39
I find it reassuring that Howard is always left out. I read the other day that if the USA decided to invade mars, the Australians would send along some backup support.
Declan
Posted by Dinah on March 28, 2006, at 20:24:01
In reply to Re: I support his stance., posted by Declan on March 28, 2006, at 19:59:52
Sounds like an ideal moment to stay civil to me. :)
I once read a Star Trek novel where Sarek was talking to Dr. McCoy, and Dr. McCoy said something that was... injudicious. Sarek replied with a polite "Excuse me, I didn't quite hear that." and Dr. McCoy realized that what he really meant was that he was going to be polite enough to pretend he didn't hear that so that Dr. McCoy would have another chance to choose his words.
In my experience, people who advocate summary execution are usually just expressing severe frustration at what seems to them to be an unsolveable problem. There aren't that many people who would actually wield that gun.
One thing I like about Babble is discovering that people outside my native habitat are nice and fun and interesting and have valuable things to contribute that I might not find in my own nesting grounds. But perhaps because of that, Dr. Bob has an even bigger challenge in maintaining a civil atmosphere, wouldn't you think?
Posted by Dinah on March 28, 2006, at 20:28:17
In reply to Re: I support his stance., posted by teejay on March 28, 2006, at 20:06:39
This isn't an island. It's part of Babble. The feelings that are hurt on Politics will likely influence interactions on other boards.
In order to keep the site as a whole a place for support and education, he needs to keep the *entire* site a place for support and education. Unless the Politics posters were *only* Politics posters, how can the overall goals of the site not apply here as well?
Posted by teejay on March 28, 2006, at 20:33:01
In reply to Re: I support his stance. » Declan, posted by Dinah on March 28, 2006, at 20:24:01
<i>But perhaps because of that, Dr. Bob has an even bigger challenge in maintaining a civil atmosphere, wouldn't you think?</i>
Hmmmm, maybe, but I still feel Dr Bob skews his feelings in favour of the recipient of a post rather than the poster.........after all are the recipients feelings REALLY more important than mine? (rhetorical question)
The big issue for me in star trek is who is more sexually appealling, Lt Yah of Seven of nine???
Time for my bed dinah (3.30 am here), but its been nice 'chatting'.
TJ
Posted by teejay on March 28, 2006, at 20:33:50
In reply to Re: I support his stance. » teejay, posted by Declan on March 28, 2006, at 20:17:48
> I find it reassuring that Howard is always left out. I read the other day that if the USA decided to invade mars, the Australians would send along some backup support.
Howard???? Never heard of him ;-)
Posted by Declan on March 28, 2006, at 20:36:17
In reply to Re: I support his stance. » teejay, posted by Dinah on March 28, 2006, at 20:28:17
Discussing the foreign policy of a democracy is a challenge, because that reflects, in some way or other, on the citizens of that country. (That's my problem here)
One thing I like here is the opportunity to get to understand politics from the inside, rather than from outside; this comes through the tone of individual posts.
Declan
Posted by 10derHeart on March 28, 2006, at 20:38:48
In reply to I support his stance., posted by Dinah on March 28, 2006, at 19:48:10
As do I.
Posted by Declan on March 28, 2006, at 20:38:58
In reply to Re: I support his stance., posted by teejay on March 28, 2006, at 20:33:01
TJ, I was wondering what you were doing up at this hour.
Declan
Posted by Dinah on March 28, 2006, at 20:40:15
In reply to Re: I support his stance., posted by Declan on March 28, 2006, at 20:36:17
Yeah, me too.
I'd like to have a chance to eavesdrop on other countries' citizens talking about their own issues. I know very little about the Australian challenges regarding asylum seekers, for example. Is it similar to our immigration issues?
And I learned a lot about the UK's healthcare issues as they relate to mental health on the other boards.
Posted by Dinah on March 28, 2006, at 20:43:05
In reply to Re: I support his stance., posted by teejay on March 28, 2006, at 20:33:01
I'm afraid I'm strictly Original Star Trekker. :)
I've enjoyed it as well.
Posted by teejay on March 28, 2006, at 20:45:39
In reply to Staying up late » teejay, posted by Declan on March 28, 2006, at 20:38:58
> TJ, I was wondering what you were doing up at this hour.
> DeclanTalking to you! LOL
Not anymore though as my bed is calling me.
Another time declan, and I enjoy chatting to some people on psycho babble and count you as one of them.
Live long and prosper as some fellah on star trek might say ;-)
TJ
Posted by verne on March 28, 2006, at 20:52:43
In reply to Re: Sorry., posted by teejay on March 28, 2006, at 19:03:50
I, too, am against war. But when the war is between terrorists and a free Iraq, I'll choose to help the Iraqis.
Thank God for the USA and President Bush, and for the courage, to free Iraq. We liberated France in WWII and now we liberate Iraq.
God Bless America!
Posted by Declan on March 28, 2006, at 21:01:14
In reply to Re: I support his stance. » Declan, posted by Dinah on March 28, 2006, at 20:40:15
From what I know the USA is much more confident in accepting immigrants than Australia has been. The size and dryness of the landmass here, the fewer numbers of people, the unease about colonisation (and the right to be here), and racial anxieties (becoming less important over time, perhaps) have made this a sensitive point for Australia.
It has been the subject of bitter political division since Howard won the election before last by (in many people's minds) manipulating the unauthorized arrival of the Tampa into an election winning issue viz 'we decide who comes here, and when', and generally abandoning a consensus of generosity.
There was a vessel called in our Parliament SIEVX, and it sunk with the loss of 300 or so lives. Questions were raised in Parliament about whether Australian security people in Indonesia sabotaged the boat in order to discourage illegal immigration. (The latte drinking chattering classes grind their teeth.)
I've seen a National Geographic with grandmothers patrolling the Mexican border by night.
Declan
Posted by teejay on March 28, 2006, at 21:06:16
In reply to Re: Sorry., posted by verne on March 28, 2006, at 20:52:43
> I, too, am against war. But when the war is between terrorists and a free Iraq, I'll choose to help the Iraqis.
>
> Thank God for the USA and President Bush, and for the courage, to free Iraq. We liberated France in WWII and now we liberate Iraq.
>
> God Bless America!Yes but verne the whole aim wasnt to free Iraq was it? The idea was to protect us from saddam and his weapons of mass destruction......an aim which has been conveniently forgotten since we found nothing!
Also its been conveniently forgotten that one way or another both the US and UK governements (not to mention a few other european governments) actively supported saddam whilst he was 'kicking *ss' over in iran.
Seems to me that history shows both the UK and US as being the biggest EVER state sponsors of terrorism. Sad but true!
Really is time for my bed now.
TJ
Posted by verne on March 28, 2006, at 21:12:04
In reply to Re: Sorry., posted by teejay on March 28, 2006, at 21:06:16
Sure we are all against the reasons for this war. I'm not voting republican next time around if you get my drift. But we are there, the Iraqi's are there, and now it's a fight for their survival.
What's the solution? Leave Iraq to Al-Queda and the terrorists?
Imagine if we did nothing in 1939?
Verne
Posted by Declan on March 28, 2006, at 21:18:11
In reply to Re: Sorry., posted by verne on March 28, 2006, at 21:12:04
IMO
If the USA wants to save the situation it must have the will to flood Iraq with troops (McCain?). Otherwise it's a choice between theocracy and civil war. It's hard to imagine a decent outcome now; the moment of opportunity has been missed. The pity of it is that those wanting a lawbased western style government are likey to be the main losers.
Declan
Posted by wildcard11 on March 28, 2006, at 21:33:36
In reply to Re: Sorry., posted by verne on March 28, 2006, at 20:52:43
***Thank God for the USA ~ YES!!!! i'm w/ ya 100%
@$$ and President Bush ~ gotta disagree w/ ya on that one...now i am leaving and stopping notifications of this..lol i just cannot muster anything civil to say re: GWB
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Politics | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.