hippiechick wrote: 
This is correct, and Beaker has castigated me for trying to publicly analyze his posts to get to his why's and motivations. I was wrong then and it's wrong now. That being said, if someone pushes your buttons to such a degree that you're reading racism/sexism/etc into his/her posts where none exists, it's a good idea to step back and not let it produce such a response in you. I wish Beaker's style weren't so provocative but it's finely-tuned at being just that: a provocation. It's up to the target to not be provoked, sometimes.

We've crossed swords, sure. We've also shared some of our life (travel, pets, music music music) outside of this forum and I look forward to the day we can have a pint and watch some live music.

 meower wrote: 
I was being sarcastic, don't ya know

 hippiechick wrote: 

ha!

 samiyam wrote: 
This is gossip. If you like participating in gossip, then fine. 

Why don't we start a new thread: "What do you think of ________ (fill in the blank) 

I'll be gone for 2 weeks starting tomorrow, so you can talk about me then. 

 hippiechick wrote: 

i totally agree.  Let's please not start a "what do you think of...." thread...

 hippiechick wrote: 
Then people would be going behind his back.  Which would be worse?  Besides, the fact is that Beaker has a legitimate right to voice his opinions whether they hurt other's feelings or not as long as he's not profane or attacks others in inappropriate manner.  Winston Churchill once said the only thing worse than being talked about was not being talked about.  Sometimes we all have to roll with the punches.  But there's a difference between being honest and being unkindly honest. 

 samiyam wrote: 
I think that this is an improper conversation. Put yourself in the other place, what if the conversation was "What do you think about (jerzy, Samiyam, meower, ))" 

We are not discussing a public figure, we are talking about a fellow RPeep and whether or not you like him or not, this should be a discussion in private, not in a public forum.  

 owld_skipper wrote: 
As a good man and fellow countryman... he could do no less.   

Beaker has his moments...  There's humanity there that I like.

 JrzyTmata wrote: 
OK... let's amp it down a bit.  He was just being kind in a very overly educated way.

Perhaps a more direct answer without the sarcastic quip could be achieved, though.

May I make an answer as long as my oar is in the water?  I am notorious so I'm commenting with the understanding that I am the last person to judge any one's behavior, but I don't remember Beeker ever being racist or anything like that, but there have been times when he's posted things (I cannot remember specifically) and I've kinda gasped and said to myself, "I don't want to speak to him right now."  That being said, I like Beaker's being here because he stirs the hidden stuff up from the bottom where it was festering.

 romeotuma wrote: 
this is uncalled for.
someone asked a serious question. do you think you can answer seriously?

 pjcle wrote: 
i'm with lazy8 and winter, etc.

i'm a big beaker fan. maybe one of few. but they all said it right. make up your own mind. and no, he's no racist nor is a sexist.

 islander wrote: 
So you're the guy that keeps getting in all my surveillance pictures!

 winter wrote: 
Does that mean I should stop stalking all of those people you friended on facebook? 

BTW, I consider myself smart, witty and an excellent judge of character. But I may be wrong on any and all points.

 pjcle wrote: 
I don't agree with his politics, but that's neither here nor there. A racist? A misogynist? Hates the poor, the sick, or the handicapped? I've never seen anything that even suggested any of that from him. 

In any case, I'd make up my own mind. Being "smart and witty" doesn't necessarily make you a good judge of character, and I'm not sure it's good policy to decide whether you like someone or not based on whether others do. :) 

 smokinsean wrote: 
Thanks, I needed that!

 islander wrote: 

The nature of modern political style problem solving seems to cause people to lose sight of the objectivity required to make real and
lasting progress because of the staunch and often media/ether driven adherence to ideology and attempts to prop up public perception to the detriment of real change based on common sense...IMO

After all, what party is responsible for electing President Obama? None...the Independents are responsible...and how has this segment of the electorate been addressed in this first year of his administration? Not significantly, as addresses the general distrust with Washington DC style politics that has been building for 40 plus years . Again, IMO.

 Lazy8 wrote: 
Well said.

I would add that while his politics probably matter more than it should, his style and its consequences have more to do with the lack of defenders. As with most posters, I disagree with some of his stances, but agree with many as well. But I find his bombastic presentation and his willingness to cling ruthlessly to inate minutia boring. I am also bothered by the way he attacks those who question him on a personal and subtly threatening  manner. His previous habit of deleting posts always bugged me too, he had an explanation for it but it always seemed awkward.

It's too bad, because I do think he can bring value to the discussion. Unfortunately, he has alienated even those who wish to here his opposing view.  I think RP could use a healthy dose of opposing views (and I think that does exist to some extent). I wish everyone (myself included) didn't react by viewing peoples posts through the filter of what party they are believed to originate from. Politics is not a lost cause here or anywhere else. I actually think the fights can help if they are within reason. It shows people have passion, and makes me want to understand why. But as with all things, there are limits that need to be observed. What RP and the rest of the world could use is a bit of compassion, and a willingness to possibly be wrong. Or barring that an acceptance that two divergent views may both be correct.

That's my 2¢, canI have some change? 

 pjcle wrote: 
Not into the "gotcha" stuff. (there may be a couple of exceptions, but I am in recovery now ).  Just correcting what I recall from living vs. history books.  I truly am interested on how history is being written about things I have lived through.  I want to see how events are remembered from the many different points of view other than my own. 

Keep posting, we need a deep gene pool here. 

 arsenault wrote: 

I've been coming to RP for about gosh, 4 years or something.  I just am sporadic.  I listen more than I post.