BLOG: Facebook: Use It To Build Or Destroy

Bryan Dubois
Jul 4, 2010

 

Regina Lewis makes an interesting discovery about the difference between the Republican Party's reputation on civil rights and the actual facts of the matter: 

I've got a theory on this:  There are two different types of civil rights activists.  One is driven by a sincere compassion for other people no matter the race, creed, color.  The other is driven by self loathing and guilt.  The self-loathers are usually disingenuous and are only pretending to be tolerant.  The fact that they pervert the civil rights movement and confuse everyone about their intentions, they end up being worse than outright racists. 

~~~

...which is a good guiding principle on what you should say online:  If you wouldn't say it in person, don't say it online.

I'm a new fan of News/Talk 760 in Detroit.  One of the show personalities I'm most impressed with is Frank Beckman.  No matter how controversial the topic, he stays reasonable and challenges guests and callers to think about their positions by asking open ended questions.  (I only mention this because it was inspiring and if everybody handled social media like this, our daily interactions would be more constructive than destructive.)

A few weeks ago, Frank and few guests were talking about how people are using Facebook - because while FB has some 47 million users, some people are still unsure of how to use the power in social networking sites.  FB seems to be everywhere, but with so many options on how to use it, sometimes it's tough to create guidelines that always give a user the positive experience they're looking for.

Facebook is a multi-tool.  Some people use it to update the world about every mundane detail of their life, while others use it as a business networking tool.  You can use it for anything you want, but in the end, your posts (and any online activity for that matter - which includes SR.com) are either enhancing relationships...or destroying them. 

Comments

brutus smith

What happened to Republicans like Dwight Eisenhauer who recognized the dangers of the military industrial complex? What happened to Republicans like the ones in the Nixon Administration who recognized Global Warming is/was real? They have run with the abortion issue, dividing the country, and somehow convincing people aborting a fetus is murder, but bombing and killing innocent people for oil is OK. They feel people in the mideast are not human. Remember people, we went over there 1st. And they act like they are not racist, but started on Barack Obama even before he was elected. Which brings me back to Robert Byrd. Republicans like to parade someone from the Dem party who at one time acted and felt like they do now. They like to say see, you have one, so there, somehow trying to justify their beliefs. Doesn't work people.

Bryan Dubois

Brutus,  are fetuses human beings?

brutus smith

In my book no. Now whose life is more important, an unborn fetus or an Iraqi child? If you answer they are the same how can you support a candidate that is for the death penalty, for killing of innocent children? People believe in a woman's choice not that they want to see more abortions. Dems support a woman's choice not that they agree with abortion. But when abortion trumps all other forms of killing, and you justify this other killing with one issue, you have no moral ground to stand on.

brutus smith

And it says a lot Bryan out of all I said in my original post you picked up on only the fetus issue.

Bryan Dubois

Brutus, just sizin' ya up.

This is not a human being?

If not, what is it?

If you're not willing to concede that this baby is a human being, I'd imagine that debating you is a waste of my precious time.

hussein membrane

 the first post is almost comical in its ignorance. was it written by a child?

What a political party was called, represented, and stood for can change over the years. The republicans of the 1800's and the 2000's are quite different in their views. Lincoln would not be a republican today.

Brian, are you not bound to point out the hundreds of years regina lewis overlooks? comparing apples and oranges to make a weak point. C'mon!

your "theory" on civil rights is so preposterous I won't bother to address it other than to ask, do you get paid for this "blogging"?

 

brutus smith

Bryan, you so make my point about a single issue. And until you recognize every life is equal we can't debate. If you could point out to me in thr Constitution the section where it talks about fetuses......... oh wait you can't because it is not in there. Now if we were a theocrasy like Iran you may have a valid point. But, we are not. Answer me Bryan why is it OK to kill innocent human beings? Are you going to be the typical right to birth and the he!! with you after you are born religious fanatic? And I would for dramatc purposes post a blown apart Iraqi 7 year old on here, but I guess I'm not as immature as you.

Bryan Dubois

It's never acceptable to kill an innocent human being.  Why would you think that we'd disagree on this?

hussein membrane

 Does this guy actually blog for the Register? Does he actually get paid to do this? To pointlessly provoke readers with Sarah Palin-level discourse? 

brutus smith

I answered your question Bryan, why won't you answer mine? Does abortion trump all  other forms of killing?

Bryan Dubois

Trump?  Not exactly sure what you mean by that.  I would describe abortion as the most morally reprehensible activity allowed by law in the United States.

hussein membrane

 "If you're not willing to concede that this baby is a human being, I'd imagine that debating you is a waste of my precious time."

Why not say, "if you don't agree with me, debating you is a waste of my time." 

 

Bryan Dubois

Hussein, I didn't say, "if you don't agree with me, debating you is a waste of my time," because that's not what I meant. 

Here's a clarification for you:  "Why bother debating ideas based on facts we cannot agree on?"   Would you agree that doing so would be a waste of our time?

brutus smith

Bryan, facts are not on your side. It's just your opinion. I'll try to simplify this the best way I know how. You wouldn't vote for a person because they believe in a woman's right to choose, but you would support someone who says they are against abortion, but support the killing of innocent lives overseas. That is where the line is drawn, and I am saying you can't support someone who thinks it is OK to kill some people not others. This is what you are doing when you support the Republican party. If you are against abortion, which is fine with me, you have to be against the taking of any life. Abortion has to stop being a non starter as far as dialogue goes.

Bryan Dubois

1.  I support political candidate's whose beliefs fall in line with mine.   (As most people do.)

2.  In some circumstances, taking the life of another person is an appropriate measure.   Would you agree?

brutus smith

Not if I was against abortion. I would be against any person taking another person's life.

brutus smith

I must say you are good at avoiding answering questions.

Bryan Dubois

Brutus, that's interesting that you wouldn't support killing any under circumstances if you didn't support abortion.  Thanks for stopping in to offer your opinion!

brutus smith

Since you won't answer my question directly like I answered yours, I'll try with this scenario. You have 2 candidates, A&B, candidate A agrees with you on every issue except she believes it's the woman's right to choose. Candidate B is against abortion, but is the opposite on your other views. Who do you choose?

Taxpayer

Hey Brutie.  How about joining the Conservatives and finding out about being responsible and EARNING a living instead of being all for SLAVERY, entitlements, welfare crowd, freeloaders club, UNIONS, being constant miserable crybabies and reparations?  I am sure you can follow the greatness of the Rev. Martin Luther King.  Oh, he doesn't count in your party of hate?  Come on!  WHO was totally against the Civil Rights Act?  Oops, your buddy Sen. Robert "Exhalted Cyclops" Byrd voted AGAINST Civil Rights.  Imagine that!  And YOU were so mournful of losing such a great liberal politician?  Was that type of absolutist and totalitarian conduct restricted in the Constitution?  No?  So it MUST be OK right?  Ha! Ha!  How about studying the reform and LEADERSHIP of Conservative Rev. Martin Luther King?  Instead of "hope and change" or "change you can believe in" how about trying, "I Have a Dream!" 

Salvatore

This debate is going nowhere. It kind of reminds of that song Anything you can do, I can do better. I can do anything better than you. No, you can't. Yes, I can. No, you can't. Yes, I can. No, you can't. Yes, I can, Yes, I can!
 

Is too! Is not! Is too! Is not! Where is that Pastor Ron at to get into this online brouhaha?

 

brutus smith

taxpayer, Miller lite or Bud Light?

Woody Hayes

Taxpayer, until you come up with something better than Bobby Jindal, Sara Pailan and John Bonner, I'll still consider your party and these people are your classmates at Tiffin State Hospital and just laugh.

brutus smith

salvatore, my point of this is that we should not let a single issue stop debate. But that's what happens when you don't agree to being anti choice. People like Bryan should be open to ways of reducing abortions. No law will stop abortions. Let me repeat, no law will stop abortions. And until we are willing to openly debate the issue without pre conditions we will be stuck in quicksand.

Bryan Dubois

[laughing]  Brutus, when you discuss things in person do you assume what others think or do you ask them first? 

Would you like to see a reduction in abortions in this country?

 

brutus smith

 Bryan, yes I would. And I don't get what you mean. Elaborate. 

Bryan Dubois

What I mean is that you've put words in my mouth about a half dozen times. 

If we're having a discussion, we've got to find common ground first.

You and I both would like to see a reduction in abortions.  We agree on that.  What we don't agree on is that a fetus is a human being.

Correct?

brutus smith

 Bryan, there is a difference between being Pro choice and Pro Abortion. Just like there is a difference between being Pro Life and Pro Birth. I don't know of anyone who wants to see more abortions do you? So if you agree then we need more sex ed and birth control.

Captain Gutz

How many of you guys have had abortions?

Captain Gutz

How many of you guys have had abortions?

brutus smith

 Correct.

Bryan Dubois

Brutus, do you think the question, "When does human life begin?" is a question that can be answered with common sense?

brutus smith

 Do you believe the people in the middle east are human and we shouldn't be killing them for their oil?

Bryan Dubois

No, I don't think anyone should be killed in order to harvest natural resources.  What does that have to do with the moral travesty of abortion?

brutus smith

 And Bryan, if I appear to be putting words in your mouth it's because you haven't answered any of my questions. 

wayneonwayne

I see that the name on the blog has changed but nothing else.  I had hope when I read the first entry.  Is this really the best that the SR can get even when they pay the blogger?

Pete

After reading some of the comments on this website, too bad they don't have retroactive abortion!

Bryan Dubois

Pete,  you may not agree with me on this, but I don't think they're trolls.  They're deadly serious.  This thread seems to be a good representation of the level of discourse in the area.  Complete with unfair blanket statements, unprovoked insults (your comment included, heh heh) unfairly representing another's argument.  Attacking one's own strawman.  It's ridiculous.  I'm compiling a list of how unfairly these people debate....stay tuned...

brutus smith

 Bryan, I'm not trying ro make a "strawman" argument or trying to have an unfair debate, but when you won't directly answer a question, I try to frame it somehow so you will. So, let's start over, would you not vote for someone based  solely on their belief in pro-choice? 

Bryan Dubois

Describe the position this nameless person is running for, please.  Male, female?  Background?  Describe his/her political beliefs for me, please?   Voting is kind of a complex issue.  You can't just call people "A" and "B" describe their position on one issue and then ask who a person would vote for.

You made a strawman argument right here:

You put words in my mouth - and then argued against something I didn't say.  That's called, "creating a strawman."  You created an unstated viewpoint and then attacked it.

brutus smith

 Bryan, again you refuse to answer, we are done.

Bryan Dubois

Eh, Brutus?

May I recap?

You asked this question:

I then answered it here:   (I underlined the answer to your question in red if you have trouble identifying it.)

So I guess I'm relieved that we're "done" because the discussion was a little like pulling teeth.

Can I count on you not to leave any more comments on my blog?   :)

brutus smith

 

Jul 06, 2010
09:06 AM

brutus smith says

 Bryan, I'm not trying ro make a "strawman" argument or trying to have an unfair debate, but when you won't directly answer a question, I try to frame it somehow so you will. So, let's start over, would you not vote for someone based  solely on their belief in pro-choice?

Help me out bryan, where did you answer it? Are you afraid to?

 

brutus smith

C'mon Bryan, sole issue, answer it.

Bryan Dubois

huh?  [confused]

I cannot make a decision whether or not to vote for someone based solely on their position on abortion.

Not sure if I can answer that question any more clearly than that.

I thought we were "done?"  :)

brutus smith

Got it. So abortion is not a single issue item with you. That's all you had to say, easy wasn't it?

Bryan Dubois

Okay Brutus, my turn:

Do you believe that the United States kills people for their oil?

brutus smith

 Read Rufus Sanders column. I agree with him. And also I will answer a simple yes.

Bryan Dubois

Allright.  I've read it.

Would you say that your belief is based on facts?

Chung Lee

Chung Lee think this is the problem:  People with out education credentials think they are being "educated" at Beck University and now believe they are scholars.  Now that Mr. Dubois has given his position on abortion would he care to discuss his position on domestic violence.  Sounds like Mr. Dubois could be a wife beater? 

 

Concerning: Dubois, Bryan
D.B.A./A.K.A.:
Filed: 01/11/2005
Arr. Agency: SSPD Case #: CRB0500134
Docket Entry: Click
Charge: DOM VIOLENCE
Case Type: Criminal

Bryan Dubois

Chung Lee no use valid reason.   :(   Mr. Dubois think domestic violence wrong under all circumstances.  Good thing  issue cleared up and charge dismissed. 

Chung Lee

Chung Lee find this sort of posting rather offensive and insulting to those who do understand history.  Interesting Mr. Dubois did not mention that the "Democrats" in the 1860's and 1870's were southerners and are now the southern politicians from the states that are now mostly Republican. 

In the modern era 1960's to the present...... it is clear which party has pushed for the minority rights.  Is it just a coinicidence that most of the Republicans are against gays in the military?  If the Republicans are truly the party for the minorities.......how many blacks are Republican Senators or members of the House of Representative?  Please Mr. Dubois, enlighten us and list those members here.  You might want to check the Democrats while you are at it and let us know if they have any blacks or women in the Senate or House.  Doing a little research might help you educate yourself.

Bryan Dubois

Racism not exclusive to political party. 

Does Chung know why most military members against gays in military?

Chung Lee

Most military are against gays in the military?  Is that another one of your generalizations or do you have a citation to back that up?  Petreaus recently came out and said the policy is due for review which would suggest that there may be some change and Colin Powell said it is time for change. You do realize that gays have served in the military since the beginning right?  

Isn't it ironic that the party of freedom and personal liberties is against people serving their country because they are gay?  Chung Lee think this can only be attributed to bigotry.  Banning people from the military because of sexual orientation is okay?  What next?  Ban them for living?  Do you realize that 10% of the babies that you are so concerned about will end up gay?  Do you still want to save them?  Or would you just like to deny them their rights? 

Now to the real issue.... why not comment on Chung Lee assertion that the Democrats of the Civil War Era share many of the belief and closer aligned philosophically, economically, and socially to the Republicans of today?  Hey if you are not up to honest debate, just let Chung know that you are just interested in blather and not true debate. 

brutus smith

 

Other than right wing polls, I don't recall the military having an official  poll. And I'm sure if they took a poll of the military they would do away with basic training too.

Chung Lee

Chung Lee would like to point out one more thing.  Some of the same excuses used to ban gays from the military were used to ban and segregate blacks such as a threat to  "unit cohesiveness".  If you don't see the similarties....... Chung Lee is not surprised considering the sophomoric development of your borrowed ideas.

Bryan Dubois

No need to insult, Chung Lee.   Times change.  Political parties change - and so do acceptance of types of people in the military.  When I served in the Marine Corps, the majority of marines in my unit held the position that they'd rather not know if one of their platoon-mates was homosexual.  It did indeed interfere with unit-cohesiveness.  I wouldn't know if that condition has changed as I left the marines in 1999.  You can treat that anecdotal evidence with the same credibility as you would your own viewpoint if you served in the military.

As far as characterizing my viewpoint as "borrowed ideas" and "sophmoric"  I'd like to point out that any viewpoint you offer, anyone can find in an issue of "The Nation" or "The Guardian."  There is nothing new under the sun!

Chung Lee

Chung Lee doesn't quite understand your last comment.  Sounds like you think that if somebody didn't serve in the military.... they shouldn't have an opinion about it?  If that is the case, lets be consistent and since you are clearly undeducated.... maybe you should not comment on all things academic and keep your opinions to yourself?  Seriously Bryan, maybe you should stay out of the academic arguments and stick to things that you know about... the military and the court system. 

Chung Lee

Lost in this argument is the fact that you believe it is okay to discriminate against gays in the military because the other soldiers wouldn't want gays serving.  Is that the benchmark that should be set?  So was it a mistake to integrate the armed forces in 1948 since a majority of soldiers were against serving with blacks?  Hardly sounds like a defensible position regardless of service status.

Bryan Dubois

If it compromises the purpose of the armed services, yes.  I defend that by saying that what's the point of having an armed service if it's not serving it's purpose effectively.

Chung, would you care to share your background so that we may apply the same standard to your opinions?   Does it bother you that I share my opinions?  If so, why?  (Might be time to have a little self reflection, popeye.)

Chung Lee

Chung Lee says thank you for admitting that you are against integrating the armed forces.  As far as your argument that allowing gays to serve makes the military less effective..... what does it say when gays have been forced from service and we are battling to a draw in Afganistan with one of the poorest countries in the world?  So allowing gays to serve openly would have led to our defeat?  The academic and logical mind would suggest that kicking out 60,000 soldiers (many of them linguist) has had a negative impact on military effectiveness. 

No it doesn't bother me that you share your opinions but it does bother Chung Lee when you present them as facts.  It also bothers Chung Lee that the Sandusky Register seems to think there is some value in what you do and the level of competence that you have over the content area.  It just goes to show that the Sandusky Register is no longer interested in true journalism or in providing actual information and insight. 

Nice of you to suggest some reflection.  Have you tried it yourself?  Have you rationalized the contempt that you have toward those that have a different sexual orientation or those who do not share your religious beliefs (but not practices).  Chung Lee is pretty sure you haven't because it is quite clear that in your simple mind youdon't need to because you are always right.

Bryan Dubois

Chung, for the record, the link to this blog is under "opinion."   You were aware of that weren't you?

Chung Lee

Opinions should be based on facts.  You have opinions based on your preconceived notions of what you think.  You still haven't addressed the issue of the Old Democrats are now the Southern Republicans.  Seriously, you really think the Southern Democrats of the 1860's have more in common than the Democrats of today?  Doesn't it strike you as quite srtange that stateslike  Mississippi , Alabama, South Carolina, Georgia were all Democrat then and Republican now?  The liberal elites(Democrats) of today where the Republicans of the 1860's.  Are you capable of honest debate?  You might have to dust off some history books and do some real research to find the truth.  In the future, how about doing a little research before you show your ignorance......... oh I am sorry I meant state your opinion.

Read your comments because you present them as fact and not your opinion.  I guess you do express your opinion by making your piece " facts optional" though.

Bryan Dubois

Chung, my opinions are based on my experiences.  There's no need to get all worked up about this.  Political parties change over time.  If this blog - or anything you read - angers you like this, I'd suggest not reading it anymore.  Life is too short to get angry over somebody sharing their opinion.   ....Of course that's just my opinion. 

Chung Lee

No I am not worked up about this.  The way I see it is that you make comments that you can't back up and you are willing to replace the facts with your experiences.  I don't know how that makes Chung Lee look bad but it is pretty clear how that makes you look.  I am still waiting for you to explain your thesis that the Republicans are the real supporters of civil rights.  If you can't that is fine, but you would think that if you were so certain of your opinion that you would not have any difficulty explaining it.  Just out of curiosity, what exactly are you trying to achieve by making statements that you can't defend?  

As for your comments about people knowing the difference between facts and opinion....... why are so many wingnuts and teabaggers convinced that Obama is a Muslim not born in this country?  It is my opinion that many of your ilk and limited education do have difficulty distinguishing between the two.  Looks like another one of you opinions has been proven wrong and most likely not the last one.   

Bryan Dubois

"Wingnuts" and "teabaggers."  That's the mark of a "tolerant" person.  Chung, thanks for stopping in.

Chung Lee

Bryan you still can't address the issue?   Clearly a sign of tool!

Bryan Dubois

No, I just don't see a point to it.  More constructive things to do - but I do think it's worth my time to point out that this site is meant for constructive dialogue.  Did you notice how OICU81 (on a different thread) asked legitimate questions and was polite - and he got a detailed response?

You should treat the internet like that...pretend that you're standing next to the person you're talking to at a party.  If you act unhinged, that look in their eye - you know - when they politely smile and pretend to agree with whatever craziness you're saying about how you hate Glen Beck.  And before you know it they're saying, "hey, excuse me for just a second, I'm gonna go grab another beer..."   You watch as they beeline toward the fridge and then avoid you the rest of the night? 

That's kinda what's happening here...

Can ya take a hint?

Chung Lee

Bryan just admit you can't answer the question.  I do not hate you for it (those are your words not mine but probably very fitting to describe your attitude toward the current administration).  I am just pointing out that you got the talking point but do not understand the history behind it.  If that is "hateful", I think you are badly mistaken.  If you would have went to journalism school, you would realize that though it is your right to have an opinion, there is a degree of responsibility and professionalism that should be shown when doing so and when called out...... you should be able to defend your words.

Constructive dialogue?  You have to look at your comments and tell me what exactly you have said that was constructive?  You have more important things to do than man up to your words?  I think we have a word for that and you should know what it is.

Chung Lee

The Sandusky Register really needs to evaluate their purpose and mission because quite frankly Mr. Dubois offers nothing of value to the dialogue.  Seriously, what is next?  Are they going to offer Pastor Ron a platform to spew his nonsense or make him the local reporter on religion?  Clearly not a stretch considering what Mr. Dubois brings to the table.

brutus smith

Chung, you are talking way over bryan's head when you talk about basing opinions on facts. He thinks whatever comes into his head trumps actual history.

trump 1 (trŭmp)

noun

Games
a. A suit in card games that outranks all other suits for the duration of a hand. Often used in the plural. b. A card of such a suit. c. A trump card. A key resource to be used at an opportune moment. To play a trump, or to take a trick with a trump; to ruff. To get the better of, or finesse, a competitor. To supersede
Chung Lee

Brutus I have to admit I was wrong about one thing....... I called Mr. Dubois a tool.  I will man up and admit I am wrong because a tool can do something useful and clearly Mr. Dubois and his recycled talking points are not.

Bryan Dubois

Guys, no need to be hateful and make this personal.  Might be a little unhealthy to spend alot of time attacking individuals.  Also, just curious about something:  When you revisit this thread, are you clicking on the "must commented' link or are you clicking on the 'opinion' link first - and then on 'insight.'   ?

Thanks for stopping in to share your insight.

Chung Lee

Nobody being hateful but you may want to take a look at your motives and intent because it appears that you like to present detractors as "hateful".  Seems like a little "projection" (a term in psychology 101 that you would learn your freshman year of college).  When are you going to start making constructive comments?  Chung Lee would really like to see that.

brutus smith

That's what I was thinking about bryan projecting hate. Must be bottled up.

Pastor Ron

Chung Lee you need to have some faith you Christless Athiest.  Those in the right don't need the facts but can form perfect opinions based on perception, experience and guidance from the Lord Jesus Christ.  I will have to contact the Register so that I can have my own blog and so that I can share God's word and love.  Maybe with some help we might be able to overcome the Chinese Athiests and violent Muslims who do not share our belief that this nation was founded by Christians for Christians.  I pray that they will stop being so hateful.

So I would appreciate it if the Register would contact me because I along with the Lord Jesus could cover all things religious (Christian) for the paper since they already have correspondents for sports, counties and etc.  It just goes to show that the liberal elites hate religion.  I do have one question, Do I need any real credentials to do that or do I need to have any facts or do I just say what I want and then accuse others of hate?  Thank you in advance.

In the name of the Lord Jesus

Pastor Ron

hussein membrane

 Mr. Dubious,

It's not that you offer your opinion. It's that you are presumably paid to do so and then offer up the easiest of Sarah Palinesque talking points and style. Is there a liberal "battle commentator" on the SR payroll? Does Sue Daughrety feel the need to talk smack in the comments section? 

Beyond your views, we can all point to the weakness of your initial posts. Yes, bloggers comment on news articles, but the best have something original to bring: god forbid actual reportage, an outside source, or a blog post longer than the story being commented on. You seem to cut and paste form the SR add a fallacious conservative view, then change the subject in the comments. Does this up your page views?

You are not a blogger, son, you are a commenter. Try providing information in the future, at least to back up your opining.

P.S. I'm not going to respond to questions like "Where was I like Sarah Palin," or "Where were my arguments fallacious," or that sort of subject change.  

Pastor Ron

Hussein you are a great satan

Pastor Ron

Hussein you are a great satan

brutus smith

Ahhh way to go Chung, you opened Pandora's box with pastor ron. lol

nonconformist

I can't believe I am actually going to back up the author here... Uh, first he is a blogger; and he is getting paid to do so; the rest of you are COMMENTERS! And second, he stated an OPINION (judgment, view, or belief) which has never, no matter who is stating their opinion, needs to be backed up with anything other than personal experience. Third, he never claimed to be a journalist (again he is a BLOGGER) don't hate because the rest of you are not creative enough or witty enough to make money for your own opinions.

brutus smith

 Must be his wife or girlfriend.

nonconformist

LMAO! No, just another WRITER who doesn't blow off at the mouth and gets a kick out of all the ignorant COMMENTS on this site; every once in a while putting my two cents in... (notice I didn't say "bloggers").

Bryan Dubois

I always get a laugh at how people in Sandusky Ohio don't know the difference between a blogger and a commenter.  Ask anyone else on the internet and they'll tell you - but in Sandusky?  They're like 10 years behind the rest of the world.

On the SR, commenting threads on stories are referred to as "blogs."   It's funny.

brutus smith

 

 Whether it be a blog or a newspaper column, you still have the responsibility to base your opinions on facts. Whether it be facts from your own "personal experiences" or others. You are part of the problem with the dumbing down of America. Real history is just an after thought with people like yourself. If you have facts for your crazy thoughts present them. Be responsible Bryan.

nonconformist

"base your opinions on facts" Wow, that is brilliant. Look up the definition of opinion. Only in Sandusky!

brutus smith

 Ahhh non conformist, this is a blog on a newspaper's website, NEWSpaper! Not some off the wall personal website. Maybe your the one who came up with the idea for this. Stir the pot with poisonous ingredients. And who does it benefit to put out misinformation? Please "inform" us.

nonconformist

It keeps you reading and commenting though doesn't it...