After pondering my response to your comments while keeping my signature line in mind, I decided to re-post an old thread of mine which was/is in my "own words and voice". Whether you care to recognize or admit it, there have been many.

I have been on this forum for some time now, so I thought I would share, for what they are worth, some of my observations and opinions.

To varying degrees, I have been angered, amused and dismayed by exchanges between liberals & conservatives. Both Mark Twain and Voltaire had quotes that speak to what I see as the situation on the OPP. Twain's was "The rule is perfect. In matters of opinion, our adversaries are insane." Voltaire's..."Weakness on both sides is, as we know, the mother of all quarrels." Think about it. I have no doubt both sides will likely deny any flaws..

Most people I have known in my life find ways to argue over 10% of what they disagree with others on, rather than dwell on the 90% in which they agree. Neither liberal nor conservative supporters are always right or wrong. I honestly believe that the vast majority of posters are patriotic Americans who want only the best for our country. The fact that there are varying opinions on how to achieve that should not detract from the fact that we are all in this together, like it or not. If there is not give and take, nothing gets resolved. I really expect to hear from those (on both sides) who feel they always give, and the other always takes.

I see both sides, too often, guilty of moral and intellectual airings of superiority. Both can also be condescending and arrogant, with some self-righteous indignation thrown in. Both are guilty of snarkiness and dismissive attitudes towards those with opposing views. In other words, I have seen the enemy, and it is us...paraphrasing Pogo. One side's behavior is no reason for reciprocation. It can only be used as an excuse.

I have been on long enough to know many posters as well as one can know another on a forum such as this. I truly believe I have 'friends' from both sides of the ideological aisle, as well as having probable 'enemies'. This is worth noting only because I have been often described online and in person as both liberal and conservative, and do not feel uncomfortable with either tag/label. I grew up in an eclectic family, and have accepted that others will not always see things my way. The people I like to call my friends do not always align with my political or religious views, nor should they. It need not be required of or by me.

There are really fine people from both camps on the OPP, and I am privileged to know quite a few of them. The so-called 'trolls', IMHO, also come from either side of the ideological spectrum. Bad manners and vulgar language, along with a need to agitate or discourage honest discourse, are what constitute a troll to me. Having been called a troll, myself, I never have quite understood what its' meaning was for others. I would like to think that my friends would remain my friends if I got to know them apart from the OPP, and my enemies might become my friends if we had a better chance to get acquainted.

BTW, do not think this is a 'kumbaya' moment for me. I can be quick to anger and sometimes, would just as soon slap the hell out of someone as get along. My volatility has lessened over the years. As a result, given the choice, I would rather get along, and will...if allowed. Also, my apologies to all the moderates on board!

Thanks you might be interested in a poll conducted in 2018 by Grinnell National Poll ( Real Americans ) 90% felt treating people equally was most important 88% taking responsibility for ones actions 81% excepting people of different backgrounds 78% excepting religious differences. They also found feelings of h**e more prevalent among men and majority under 35 they also found most of those polled claimed no religious affiliation 58% reported feelings of h**e toward a group or individual. They were very surprised at the normalization of h**e among the younger adults were as older adults were more excepting. I find polls interesting but they only poll around 1000 people and every area and district is going to be different say like California compared to Kansas or Georgia to new york each has their own priority and beliefs most loosely tied with all the US but in varying degree's so I don't put much stock in them and I try really hard not to group people together under one belief because one a** hole is a jerk have a great day

By Simon Tam

For the past several years, the phrase “True American” and “Real American” has been passed around, inferring this idea that there is a singular test as to define who is a true patriot of this country. Yet, the answer of who can pass that test is far from definitive.

When surveyed, the overwhelming majority of U.S residents say it’s about broad values like “treating people equally” (90%), accepting those of different racial background (81%), and religious freedom and tolerance (78%). But the loudest and most passionate cries came from a smaller minority - about 25% - that say a real American is someone who is born in this country and is a Christian. In their view, immigrants, including those who jump through the many hurdles of becoming a citizen, and non-Christians will never meet that criteria, no matter how loyally patriotic.

About half of self-identified “strong Republicans” and about a quarter of “strong Democrats” hold this nativist sentiment. Of course, these ideas aren’t new - conceptions of who an American is has shifted with policy and cultural acceptance for hundreds of years: in 1857 Chief Justice Roger Taney wrote in Dred Scott that African-Americans were not “acknowledged as part of the people;” Native Americans weren’t given full citizenship and v****g rights until 1948 - almost 80 years after birthright citizenship was established; the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 banned Chinese immigrants from becoming citizens. For most of our history, female immigrants could not become citizens apart from their husband. Of course, those who espouse nativist/white nationalist views would be quick to point out the difference between a “citizen” and a “true American.”

That’s where the real problem is.

The debate around being a “real American” has nothing to do with being a citizen, extensive knowledge of U.S history, or loyalty to the Constitution and f**g. It has more to do with belonging - and whether or not nativists want that person to be a fully engaged member of society. Religion and birth has nothing to do with it.

After all, the United States was primarily founded by immigrants and non-Christians. Thomas Paine famously declared “I do not believe in…any church;” President Jefferson denied that Jesus was “a member of the Godhead;” Benjamin Franklin criticized the church for making “orthodoxy more regarded than virtue.” Even the loyal church-going John Adams wrote “the United States is not, in any sense, a Christian nation.” The Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confederation, and the United States Constitution, all avoid mentions of Christ and Christianity. In fact, Article VI of the Constitution says “no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.” The idea of America being a Christian nation didn’t arise until years later, when politics and religion were fused together as a pathway for power.

Power, both codified in our policies and systems as well as in cultural norms is what people are really seeking. If certain groups feel that their power or influence is waning, a purity test is their feeble attempt at redefining who is in and who is out. From the Spanish Inquisition to McCarthyism, the internment of the Japanese to w***e s*********t rallies, the underlying value is the same: it’s about loyalty to a group aspiring to seize power, not to a country or its ideas. It doesn’t matter what the majority of people think or what its sacred documents say about the issue, it is about redefining belonging.

The irony is that it is at once the most un-American idea (in terms of declared, founding values) and possibly one of the most consistently American practices possible (in terms of history and racial bigotry). In reality, there’s nothing true nor American about being a “true American” at all. It is simply an idea - and idea that adapts to fit one’s convenience, otherize its enemies, and inflates ideas of self-righteousness. Ideas don’t bleed or feel pain, but the people who they harm do.

By Simon Tam

For the past several years, the phrase “True American” and “Real American” has been passed around, inferring this idea that there is a singular test as to define who is a true patriot of this country. Yet, the answer of who can pass that test is far from definitive.

When surveyed, the overwhelming majority of U.S residents say it’s about broad values like “treating people equally” (90%), accepting those of different racial background (81%), and religious freedom and tolerance (78%). But the loudest and most passionate cries came from a smaller minority - about 25% - that say a real American is someone who is born in this country and is a Christian. In their view, immigrants, including those who jump through the many hurdles of becoming a citizen, and non-Christians will never meet that criteria, no matter how loyally patriotic.

About half of self-identified “strong Republicans” and about a quarter of “strong Democrats” hold this nativist sentiment. Of course, these ideas aren’t new - conceptions of who an American is has shifted with policy and cultural acceptance for hundreds of years: in 1857 Chief Justice Roger Taney wrote in Dred Scott that African-Americans were not “acknowledged as part of the people;” Native Americans weren’t given full citizenship and v****g rights until 1948 - almost 80 years after birthright citizenship was established; the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 banned Chinese immigrants from becoming citizens. For most of our history, female immigrants could not become citizens apart from their husband. Of course, those who espouse nativist/white nationalist views would be quick to point out the difference between a “citizen” and a “true American.”

That’s where the real problem is.

The debate around being a “real American” has nothing to do with being a citizen, extensive knowledge of U.S history, or loyalty to the Constitution and f**g. It has more to do with belonging - and whether or not nativists want that person to be a fully engaged member of society. Religion and birth has nothing to do with it.

After all, the United States was primarily founded by immigrants and non-Christians. Thomas Paine famously declared “I do not believe in…any church;” President Jefferson denied that Jesus was “a member of the Godhead;” Benjamin Franklin criticized the church for making “orthodoxy more regarded than virtue.” Even the loyal church-going John Adams wrote “the United States is not, in any sense, a Christian nation.” The Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confederation, and the United States Constitution, all avoid mentions of Christ and Christianity. In fact, Article VI of the Constitution says “no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.” The idea of America being a Christian nation didn’t arise until years later, when politics and religion were fused together as a pathway for power.

Power, both codified in our policies and systems as well as in cultural norms is what people are really seeking. If certain groups feel that their power or influence is waning, a purity test is their feeble attempt at redefining who is in and who is out. From the Spanish Inquisition to McCarthyism, the internment of the Japanese to w***e s*********t rallies, the underlying value is the same: it’s about loyalty to a group aspiring to seize power, not to a country or its ideas. It doesn’t matter what the majority of people think or what its sacred documents say about the issue, it is about redefining belonging.

The irony is that it is at once the most un-American idea (in terms of declared, founding values) and possibly one of the most consistently American practices possible (in terms of history and racial bigotry). In reality, there’s nothing true nor American about being a “true American” at all. It is simply an idea - and idea that adapts to fit one’s convenience, otherize its enemies, and inflates ideas of self-righteousness. Ideas don’t bleed or feel pain, but the people who they harm do.

By Simon Tam

For the past several years, the phrase “True American” and “Real American” has been passed around, inferring this idea that there is a singular test as to define who is a true patriot of this country. Yet, the answer of who can pass that test is far from definitive.

When surveyed, the overwhelming majority of U.S residents say it’s about broad values like “treating people equally” (90%), accepting those of different racial background (81%), and religious freedom and tolerance (78%). But the loudest and most passionate cries came from a smaller minority - about 25% - that say a real American is someone who is born in this country and is a Christian. In their view, immigrants, including those who jump through the many hurdles of becoming a citizen, and non-Christians will never meet that criteria, no matter how loyally patriotic.

About half of self-identified “strong Republicans” and about a quarter of “strong Democrats” hold this nativist sentiment. Of course, these ideas aren’t new - conceptions of who an American is has shifted with policy and cultural acceptance for hundreds of years: in 1857 Chief Justice Roger Taney wrote in Dred Scott that African-Americans were not “acknowledged as part of the people;” Native Americans weren’t given full citizenship and v****g rights until 1948 - almost 80 years after birthright citizenship was established; the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 banned Chinese immigrants from becoming citizens. For most of our history, female immigrants could not become citizens apart from their husband. Of course, those who espouse nativist/white nationalist views would be quick to point out the difference between a “citizen” and a “true American.”

That’s where the real problem is.

The debate around being a “real American” has nothing to do with being a citizen, extensive knowledge of U.S history, or loyalty to the Constitution and f**g. It has more to do with belonging - and whether or not nativists want that person to be a fully engaged member of society. Religion and birth has nothing to do with it.

After all, the United States was primarily founded by immigrants and non-Christians. Thomas Paine famously declared “I do not believe in…any church;” President Jefferson denied that Jesus was “a member of the Godhead;” Benjamin Franklin criticized the church for making “orthodoxy more regarded than virtue.” Even the loyal church-going John Adams wrote “the United States is not, in any sense, a Christian nation.” The Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confederation, and the United States Constitution, all avoid mentions of Christ and Christianity. In fact, Article VI of the Constitution says “no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.” The idea of America being a Christian nation didn’t arise until years later, when politics and religion were fused together as a pathway for power.

Power, both codified in our policies and systems as well as in cultural norms is what people are really seeking. If certain groups feel that their power or influence is waning, a purity test is their feeble attempt at redefining who is in and who is out. From the Spanish Inquisition to McCarthyism, the internment of the Japanese to w***e s*********t rallies, the underlying value is the same: it’s about loyalty to a group aspiring to seize power, not to a country or its ideas. It doesn’t matter what the majority of people think or what its sacred documents say about the issue, it is about redefining belonging.

The irony is that it is at once the most un-American idea (in terms of declared, founding values) and possibly one of the most consistently American practices possible (in terms of history and racial bigotry). In reality, there’s nothing true nor American about being a “true American” at all. It is simply an idea - and idea that adapts to fit one’s convenience, otherize its enemies, and inflates ideas of self-righteousness. Ideas don’t bleed or feel pain, but the people who they harm do.