repented of...

quote:

---

August 29, 2003

Minnesota Democratic Party Confined to the Buffer

(Washingmachine, D&C -- reporting by Mineappleous Tribute, Ink)

In a move reminiscent of the Bill and Hilary Convention a decade ago the Democratic National Party today set in motion a system that insures that the rest of the country can largely ignore Minnesota. During that ill fated convention of ten years ago the unusual representation on the Minnesota delegation of Pro-Life advocates was successfully derailed and their voices silenced from influencing national politics. That was the beginning of polarization in the Democratic Party nationally; and also an early indication of the predominant polarization and radicalizing of each party with an emptying of the traditional "middle."

Party workers site convenience as a precipitating factor. Having to listen to those of different views is a pain; and it is irritating to see "middlers suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous dissent." It is much more effective to the goals that "everyone should have to let it appear that we all agree. That way it is easier, quicker, and less costly to condemn those who disagree without position." Pollsters also indicate that the other position "appears more polarized from a polarized position." Statistical radicalization "...resists decay best in an environment where middle options are few. And the mob-behavior of radicals gathers momentum and inertia quicker when there is no distracting middle ground; and even no other option given time, space, or notice." David Blocker, DNP of the DNC said today.

Exactly what was done today is not yet public, but the effect is that while Minnesota voters can express any idea, preference, need, or opinion that they wish, the DNP of the DNC will simply not report it in national statistics. That way issues that affect Minnesota can be "harbored" from influencing national politics, Blocker said. "Harboring" is expected to be quite popular. It will make it appear that nobody except the party mainliners have any appreciable background motivating their positions. No Minnesota spokespeople will receive air time unless their protests can be easily mistaken for variants on the national platforms. That way they can be safely patronized. National figures can then feel the momentum of their own voice and look to their future comments. "Wall to wall" broadcasting, across all channels should make even any stray centrist voice seem like a stray, and local stations can simply respond to statistical models to remove such programing by the time of the next news cycle.

Justification for the new national policy is that the Minnesota positions are not representative of the majority of the DNP/DNC in the first place. And the Minnesota DFL has a history of voicing its thoughts and concerns no matter what the slim prospects of winning. (DNP/DNC still don't want to talk about the Humphrey Presidential campaign. And don't even mention Harold Stassen who ran for President several times nationally. The national party thinks that it has the "problem of the North" finally solved once and for all.)

Minnesotians can freely post what ever placards they want in their own front yards. But any national activity they want to participate in has to be registered from either Wisconsin, Iowa, or one of the Dakotas. (At press time it had not yet been determined whether one or both of the Dakota's would be "harbored" too.)

Will their be any complaints heard from Minnesota? Well, not "heard."

What's ahead? The DNP/DNC will appear younger, more driven by conviction and fashion, less historically circumspect, quicker at arriving at its new life-long convictions, and ironically, more tolerant. (Actual tolerance takes to long and is too painful. Neo-tolorance is much more dynamic political capital -- once known as plantation politics.) But in national forums a token Minnesotian (perhaps really someone from Nebraska--to be safe--will be featured to give the illusion of universal suffrage. A bit of debate will seem to emerge just before going to commercial.)

From now on nationally faithful viewers won't have to scroll through the channels to find what to agree with. And "they won't be troubled by stubling upon statistically insignificant positions. Nor will ideas not framed by national patters of debate need to be confonted. Viewing and participating will be easier and more pleasant." National-Ad-forum (a policy decision body) released today.

"The Democratic Party will soon speak with one voice." Blocker beamed.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by GregBoyd

ps. i've blocked everyone but myself on this board because i only like to hear myself... its less frustrating that way

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Electra

PoW [to Tom]: ONLY post to you when I truely believe that I've thought something through.

Electra: PoW, I want to believe you. But here are a few things that make it difficult for me to believe that you only post after thinking something through:

1) Relevance: I often can’t see how your posts respond to the topic of a particular thread or a particular post. When I don’t see the relevance, I must admit, I don’t take it as seriously. I confess this is a weakness on my part, but it is as much a function of finitude (limited time, energy, and ability) as it is fallibility.

2) Volume: The sheer volume of your posts also biases me against believing you. Perhaps I am projecting my own limitations onto you, but it is also difficult for me to fathom how someone could post so many thousands of times and seriously think through even a faction of them.

3) Quotes: When you post long quotes, it doesn’t seem like you think through your responses enough to put them in your own words. If you expect others to read all your posts, please show some respect for their time and their expressed interests.

PoW [to Tom]: Don't "block" me -- I'm NEVER mean!!!

Electra: Again, I want to believe you. But sometimes your posts do strike me as mean-spirited because of the harsh things you have said about others’ views, character, and even faith commitment.

Sorry if I am out of line here. Since you exhorted us all to continue reading all your posts, I thought you might be interested in the factors that discourage me from reading your posts. I will try to read them as charitably as I can, trusting that you are putting thought into them and that you do not intend to be mean. In turn, it would make it much easier for me to believe you if you addressed some of my concerns above regarding increased relevance, decreased volume, and taking the time to put things in your own words.

Electra

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by DLW

So Pow, is this article for real or is it a joke?

I passed it along to others thinking it was true.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by DLW

I think a good deal of the problem is that you, like the E. Orthodox Church, are just a little too anal-retentive on maintaining continuity with past-tradition, often on issues that are not essential to the Christian faith and so disagreements escalate too easily cause you hold so strongly to your beliefs and the importance of fidelity to tradition.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by DLW

I'd think you'd get more of a hearing if you didn't post as much or doctor it visually in such a manner as to manipulate the reader emotionally. I have felt as if you were screaming at me at times, even if this was a misinterpretation of your intention that was the message that was being received.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by DLW

The young adults at my church are doing something tonight but they all forgot to contact me so I could get a ride to it. That has made me down cause I do need social interaction and it is hard to find it with people my own age here in MX.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by turner

quote:

---

Originally posted by DLW

So Pow, is this article for real or is it a joke?

I passed it along to others thinking it was true.

---

COOL!!!!

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by DLW

I think a good deal of the problem is that you, like the E. Orthodox Church, are just a little too anal-retentive on maintaining continuity with past-tradition, often on issues that are not essential to the Christian faith and so disagreements escalate too easily cause you hold so strongly to your beliefs and the importance of fidelity to tradition.

---

Dave, what you could realize more fully is that what is "not essential" to you, IS TO YOU. And how are you going to understand whether it is or not to others. You compartmentalize and pigeon-holl with the best of them. Epistemologically, what you call "contuinuity" with respect to time-line is really an inner coherency that spans a wide variety of manifestations. (Irenaeus said as much in defense of Christianity and its wide range of expressions, proving its truth.)

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by DLW

I'd think you'd get more of a hearing if you didn't post as much or doctor it visually in such a manner as to manipulate the reader emotionally. I have felt as if you were screaming at me at times, even if this was a misinterpretation of your intention that was the message that was being received.

---

I do what I do. Lots of meaning is visual. That's what I do. (It is not to be taken automatically as 'shouting.') That is also the reason why I edit the visual design of some posts several times. Its what I do.

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by DLW

The young adults at my church are doing something tonight but they all forgot to contact me so I could get a ride to it. That has made me down cause I do need social interaction and it is hard to find it with people my own age here in MX.

---

I pray for you, Dave. (For the social, professional, and especially because of this multi-font/size posting jerk that keeps giving you a hard time!!! )

Thanks!

Love you, brother.

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by DLW

So Pow, is this article for real or is it a joke?

I passed it along to others thinking it was true.

---

COOL!!!!

---

quote:

---

• August 29, 2003, Minnesota Democratic Party Confined to the Buffer, (Washingmachine, D&C -- reporting by Mineappleous Tribute, Ink)
• David Blocker
• viewers won't have to scroll through the channels to find what to agree with
• Viewing and participating will be easier and more pleasant." National-Ad-forum
• "The Democratic Party will soon speak with one voice." Blocker beamed.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Electra

PoW, As I said earlier, I will do my best to interpret you as charitably as possible, but I must admit that it is difficult for me to resist taking offense at you.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Electra

I have tried to offer some reasons why people might ignore your posts. You have dismissed them all and suggested instead that people who ignore you are sinful, and/or too young to tolerate difference, and that I am patronizing and invasive.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Electra

Why did you invoke the passage in Matthew about how Christians should confront one another? Was it because you were genuinely open to receiving correction or because you wanted to indict those who have chosen to ignore you for not being Christian enough? It is clear you are going to do whatever you damn well please regardless of the concerns expressed by members of this particular community.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Electra

I won’t block you PoW, but I will struggle with reading your posts charitably for all the reasons I mentioned previously, and unfortunately, this interaction has added to the struggle rather than lessening it as I had hoped.

---