Al Gore is everywhere you look these days since the release of his book The Assault on Reason. And as with every other time that Gore has been in the public eye, the right-wingers come out to attack him. We can expect many more posts like the one I deleted this morning from a user named "ihatealgore."

In the past, my stated policy has been that, in an effort to protect freedom of speech, posts that merely stated a different point of view but that were not offensive would be allowed to stand and be responded to, as long as an honest debate of the facts ensued. I believe it's better to counter the inaccuracies and lies with the facts and truth than it is to simply delete any trace of the opposing point of view. However, the line is drawn when a post is clearly meant to be offensive, disruptive, or a parroting of right-wing lies.

Please don't respond to posts that fall into the second category (those that are offensive and meant only to discredit and smear Al Gore and his beliefs). They'll be deleted by one of the moderators or myself. As Janet says at AGO, Please don't feed the trolls. Responding to these types of posts only encourages them to come back and post more lies and filth. Ignore them, and we'll make them go away. It's only fun for them if they see that they've gotten us riled up. If an offensive post/topic remains on the board too long without someone deleting it, please report the post and send an e-mail to one of the moderators or myself.

Hold onto your hats. It's only going to get more interesting from here on in! :clap:

That one must have been awful with a user name like that. I guess some people just don't read the rules where it says no bashing of AL GORE or his family. In fact it's rule number 1.

Thanks Earthmother!

I commend your decision. Freedom of speech only means they cannot be arrested for expressing their views - not that we have to provide them a place to do it.

Which was my point all along. Allowing a platform for lies only cheapens and degrades the debate.

James, if I were to say that I view this all a bit differently now, would you bite my head off? I stand by my original thinking, but I also can see where there's justification for deleting some posts (as I did before, and tried to explain).

No I'm glad to see that you are coming to your senses.

But let me ask you this was Imus' firing by CBS and MSNBC a squelching of his free speech as Bill Maher contends?

I would like to see the forum rules applied, especially numero uno:

1. Do not bash or speak harsh of Gore or his family
We love the Gore family here. Any lies, disrespect, or accusations directed to the Gore family will result in an immediate ban!

If the rules are not applied as written then change the rules. Otherwise we will spend precious time debating stuff that is beyond debate. That's the opposition's plan to sidetrack us and we are playing right into their trap if we don't apply the rules fairly and evenly.

It's not a matter of "coming to my senses," James, and as long as you couch it in those terms, you and I won't be able to bridge the abyss.

As for Imus . . . you know that I've never supported people being able to post things that are offensive or lying with the intent of, well, lying. There's no way to answer the question about Imus in a short paragraph because it has many complexities to it. For one, as I understand it, Imus's contract actually said he was supposed to be controversial, etc. (I forget the exact language). One could argue (as I imagine his lawyers will), that he was merely fulfilling his contractual obligations. I personally was glad to see Imus go, but then I strongly dislike the man and don't approve of his exploitative and sensational ways. Does he have the right to say what he said? I suppose that legally he does. Does CBS have the right to fire him for what he said? Probably, as it's a private organization and they make their own rules. Could Imus stand on a street corner and call people "nappy-haired hoes"? Yeah. No one would have the right to arrest him unless it was for disturbing the peace or something like that. Could someone sue him for slander? They could certainly try. The whole issue of censorship isn't black and white, and I can't debate it with you on those terms, which is what got us into trouble in the first place.

Look, I don't like seeing right-wing lies spread around anymore than the next guy. And I especially don't like it when those lies are directed at Al Gore. I've made personal judgments on this website regarding when I think a person is respectfully raising issues that are worthy of debate and when they've crossed the line into just posting filth for the sake of spreading their lies. I don't see the issue as black and white. I haven't changed my stand on that at all. As I said, I'd rather see people debate an issue so we can get the truth out than squash all viewpoints we don't agree with. But if a person who uses the user name "ihatealgore" posts the lies that they did, the person is obviously a Gore hater and is only here to be disrespectful and stir up trouble. Such a person I have no trouble banning and deleting their posts.

I sincerely hope you and I don't get back into this argument publicly. I welcome your input here, and as you know, I'm a person who does consider what someone else has said and am capable of changing my mind about things when what the person is saying makes sense. You and I have been down that road before. But there are things I won't tolerate, here or elsewhere, whether it's regarding me or someone else. If you and I can go back to talking in a civil way, I'm happy to do that. But if things start to become unpleasant again, that debate won't take place on a public forum.

So if your intention is for me to admit that I was wrong, that's not going to happen, because I don't believe I was wrong. I've fine-tuned my thinking, and I still say it's a very complex issue and isn't black and white. You're completely entitled to your viewpoint, as long as I'm entitled to mine.

TY oh great Earthmother. :bow:

Bill Maher contends that Imus' firing is a matter of free speech. It is not. Imus has the right of free speech but he does not have the right to a TV/Radio talk show (and to be paid millions for it). To have that platform is a privilege not a right.

As dcbii correctly states, "Freedom of speech only means they cannot be arrested for expressing their views - not that we have to provide them a place to do it." Again to have this platform is a privilege not a right.

One of the reasons that Gore wrote "The Assault on Reason" was because of the difficulty of getting the issue of Global warming taken seriously. Now Global warming is not a matter of opinion. It is a matter of scientific fact.

There are 261 peer reviewed studies that confirm that Global warming is real and that it is caused by humans. There is not one peer reviewed study that disputes that fact. However, the mass media in this country have confused objectivity with neutrality. Each side of every arguement is not equal. In the case of Global warming only one side is backed by facts. But by viture of even allowing the debate legitimizes the other side despite it having no factual support.

And I said in my post that I thought CBS had the right to fire Imus.

I second that.

And I also said in my original discussions with you that you had the right and ability to delete the post in question. I gather you encountered some difficulty with that but you never made me aware of that until things between us had gone to the point of hopelessness. I told you that all you needed to do was tell me you couldn't delete the post, but you never did. I swear to you that I didn't alter your ability to delete posts--not until you were removed as a moderator, which came much later, of your own choosing.

I get the feeling that you're still trying to get blood out of me with this. I wish you would stop. My position has been consistent and, I believe, fair. I acknowledged that I do see things a bit differently now, but it seems as if you're trying to get something more out of me. If you want to post here, that's fine. But I would very much like to drop this discussion for once and for all.