Oh…just wanted to point out…six people dead.
[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:
So at this very moment people are leaning a little more towards the right. So what? The way the public opinion shifts has been pretty dynamic that past few decades. Give it a few years and it’ll be back to the left.
And both sides use the ‘we’re the people’s party’ type mantra. It’s politics the way it’s been for a long time, get used to it.
If I had it my way, we’d have something different than the 2 party system we currently have.
[/quote]
Fake White Knight Alert. Dude you will be hard pressed to find anyone more 3rd party pro than me, glad you jumped on the ship. However that isn’t the debate. The fact is, the left is claiming a bunch of horse-shit that isn’t backed up with facts but opinions.
You will get no debate from me that a third, fourth, fifth party is needed so maybe you should back off a bit. The fact is, both the left and right are full of shit, and neither should be blaiming anything except themselves.
[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:
So at this very moment people are leaning a little more towards the right. So what?
[/quote]
Way to call me out on proof by the way, only to flip flop once I present polls, that is the weakest shit I have ever seen. Let me repharse…
Dude show me where conservatives are the majority…
(I Present polls that do exactly that), well so what they are the majority right now in america blah blah blah.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
Oh…just wanted to point out…six people dead.[/quote]
I am with you BC, it is crazy that anyone wants to place blame on anybody other than the idiot that did it. You will here no arguement from me that this dude is a horrible person who should get the death penalty for HIS actions. Only morons will try to blame the right, the left, the 2012 mayan calendar, fucking captin crunch, the loch ness monster, etc.
[quote]dk44 wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
Oh…just wanted to point out…six people dead.[/quote]
I am with you BC, it is crazy that anyone wants to place blame on anybody other than the idiot that did it. You will here no arguement from me that this dude is a horrible person who should get the death penalty for HIS actions. Only morons will try to blame the right, the left, the 2012 mayan calendar, fucking captin crunch, the loch ness monster, etc.[/quote]
Obviously it’s the damned socialist agenda of Cuba, fucking Castro. Beard shaving time? I think so, I’ll get the CIA.
Point of the entire debate…
Prove that this dude had any ties to the tea party or conservatives, or you can shut the fuck up. That is the end of it all…you can blame anything for this tradgedy, but facts won’t back you up unless you think he was just a nut.
As far as I’ve read, the only evidence that this guy was a conservative was that he had conspiracy theories about the government (he thought the government was planning to control people’s thoughts through grammar.) It’s weak evidence, but these days I’d think a guy who’s paranoid about the government would be more likely to be conservative than liberal. Then again, he could also be paranoid and non-political, which I think is more likely. There’s certainly no reason to believe he had any Tea Party affiliation.
At any rate, the fact is that radical conservatives have NOT motivated a lot of violence since this Tea Party thing got started. It’s a radical movement, but it’s peaceful. Everybody on the left keeps expecting it to turn into American fascism, but I think we’ve had time to see what it looks like, and it looks a lot like other American populist movements and protest movements. We should stop freaking out about people going to rallies, going to meetings, and communicating on the internet about their political views. Enough with saying “OMG they’re going to kill us all!!!” At some point you have to appreciate that it’s ordinary, peaceful political participation. (It wasn’t so long ago that people on the left protested, used radical rhetoric, and said nasty things about the government.)
[quote]dk44 wrote:
I shouldn’t have to do your research lazy ass, but here
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/2607611/polls_find_58_want_smaller_government.html?cat=9
now go ahead and find something to bitch about. Face it most want less gov. but I know you will post some liberal bullshit poll about wanting more gov. go for it, after all you have freedom of speech, something which most of your homeboys want taken away…[/quote]
When asked the question; “would you like more or less government?” most people will respond; “Less.” You are correct.
What you have offered, though, is hardly sufficient research. Nor will you be able to effectively prove that their is a “small ass base” of liberals in this country. For every poll or election result you offer to defend your position, an opposing one of equal legitimacy can be posted. If there is any tangible fact in this matter, it is that we are a country divided sharply along ideological lines with no consistent majority.
I’ve said it before, and it bares repeating; There are an infinite number of positions outside of the conservative and liberal spectrum. Unfortunately, we have been conditioned to place ourselves within it and to argue from that position as if it is a fight of good against evil.
I’m not 100% convinced of where the false dichotomy of our political discourse originates from. However, I am certain that the current rhetorical environment is largely the product of the right-wing punditry that has experienced enormous financial gains in relation to the escalation of their absurdity.
The data is pretty cut-and-dried here, folks. Self-described conservatives are the single largest political group, closely followed by moderates and distantly trailed by liberals.
Liberals succeed in politics by winning over moderates and by using extra-majoritarian means (like court decisions) – the actual liberal base is rather small. “Small-ass,” in fact.
Is the liberal/conservative dichotomy a sensible one in terms of political philosophies? No, I don’t think it necessarily is. Is it useful for tracking political decisions? Yes – we are a two-party system, and people in one party tend to have one set of views, and people in the other party have a different set of views, and there’s empirically not a lot of overlap between them. (The parties are even more polarized when you look at politicians’ voting than when you look at citizens’ opinions.)
[quote]swoleupinya wrote:
[quote]AccipiterQ wrote:
for anyone blaming Palin, the left, the right, whatever…You are being ludicrous. Nearly everyone is trying to gain political leverage. A NINE YEAR OLD GIRL WAS MURDERED. I get the feeling she wasn’t a registered Democrat or Republican.
Does Sarah Palin rile up people that like guns? Yup. Is she responsible for this tragedy? Nope. How about people on both sides learn a lesson and STOP the partisan bullcrap.
Stop regurgitating the horse shit that the shooter was a Marxist. Lefty liberals see Mein Kampf as a conservative hard liner book so how is it this moron’s favorite book if he’s a liberal? Or why was he spouting liberal horse shit for years if he was a conservative? Maybe you people need some sort of paradigm shift before you go mouthing off on an issue.
This is not a time for finger pointing or placing blame. Because there are 100s of things wrong with America. Some are the fault of government, some are the fault of business, some are the fault of left, and some are the fault of the right. The reason this crap happens is that everyone wants to blame everything on the other guy. We behave as unaccountable self-righteous teenagers and then we wonder why a dystopian mental case shoots people. You wanna solve this problem and make this mean something? Look int he damn mirror, stop watching your political news and reading your political websites for a month and have a simple discussion with people who don’t think like you. Otherwise you’re just part of a continuing problem.
America is a country that has NO political majority. 37% are registered Democrats (half of which are progressives. 34% are Republicans, half of them tea partiers. That’s less than 40% of the electorate who argue one side or the other very fervently.
And God bless you all for the love for this country. But 60% or more of this country doesn’t think Obama is the problem, they don’t think Rush or Beck are the problem, they think WE are the problem.
A month ago a rally 3 times the size of any tea party or progressive rally occurred in DC. It was run by Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert and was attended by 200,000 people who want the partisanship and bickering to stop. And it’s obvious that most of us haven’t listened.
The divide between us all is so tiny. We’re made to believe it’s wider so candidates can distinguish themselves from the competition, but it’s all overblown salesmanship, not fact.
So get a grip. The rest of the country and most of the world is tired of the sensationalist horse shit. �¯�»�¿[/quote]
A compelling sentiment… one that I really wanted to share with Stewart and Colbert.
The problem is that in their presentation of it, they place equal blame on both sides of the aisle. The truth is that the right has been infinitely more prone to violent rhetoric at the mainstream margins of their party. I’ll say it again: there is no voice on the left that compares to Beck, Palin, Limabugh, etc…
I appreciate the desire to accept some blame in the passing of the olive branch. It’s admirable, but there is not equal blame. [/quote]
You are proving more and more blind to the truth.
I am sorry for you
[quote]AlisaV wrote:
The data is pretty cut-and-dried here, folks. Self-described conservatives are the single largest political group, closely followed by moderates and distantly trailed by liberals.
Liberals succeed in politics by winning over moderates and by using extra-majoritarian means (like court decisions) – the actual liberal base is rather small. “Small-ass,” in fact.
Is the liberal/conservative dichotomy a sensible one in terms of political philosophies? No, I don’t think it necessarily is. Is it useful for tracking political decisions? Yes – we are a two-party system, and people in one party tend to have one set of views, and people in the other party have a different set of views, and there’s empirically not a lot of overlap between them. (The parties are even more polarized when you look at politicians’ voting than when you look at citizens’ opinions.)[/quote]
Small correction, liberals succeed in politics by masquerading as moderates. There is not one politician who has a sincere eye on running for higher office who has ever bragged about being a liberal, not over the past 30 or so years at least. One more point on this topic - Had the mainstream liberal media done their jobs Obama would not be President right now. However, they are so very liberal they wanted one of their own to be President. Obama is the most liberal Chief-Executive that we’ve ever had. And how is that working out for us? Ha.
The USA is center right and always has been.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Small correction, liberals succeed in politics by masquerading as moderates. There is not one politician who has a sincere eye on running for higher office who has ever bragged about being a liberal, not over the past 30 or so years at least. One more point on this topic - Had the mainstream liberal media done their jobs Obama would not be President right now. However, they are so very liberal they wanted one of their own to be President. Obama is the most liberal Chief-Executive that we’ve ever had. And how is that working out for us? Ha.
The USA is center right and always has been.
[/quote]
That’s just semantics: conservatives have better PR guys, and have effectively associated the term liberal with a number of negative traits: weak on crime, weak on national security, tax-and-spend, exe. Things that don’t have to do with liberalism, so they start calling themselves progressives, “New Dems”, whatever. That’s just a word game.
Everyone pays the the “center” in a national (and even most state-wide) general elections. Notice how last presidential election all the sudden the McCain stopped talking about boarder fences as soon as the general election began?
I think you underestimate how “liberal” the US is (in economic terms). Most Americans say they want smaller government, at the same time, most Americans throw a hissy-fit if you talk cutting social security, Medicare, Medicaid, or defense spending (you know, actually reduce the size and scope of government in a meaningful way). Most Americans also buy into Keynesian economic theory, which is why at local, state and national levels, almost every bond ever put before a voting population passes: most people believe that government spending stimulates the economy, and a pretty substantial minority really do believe that government should function as a job-creating entity, especially when the economy is isn’t doing well: screw the deficit, borrow money to fund public works projects and get people back to work.
Now those are not my positions, but as the economy continues to suck, they are becoming more mainstream. But you can’t continue to believe the bullshit about this country being a “center-right” nation: whatever that means.
We’re socially pretty liberal, and most people want the government out of their lives: until they need help, or depend on Medicare and Social Security. I’d say on the grand political spectrum that makes us pretty centrist.
It has been reported today that this guy:
- Did not watch TV
- Did not listen to talk radio
- Did not vote in November
All of these arguments connecting “speech” to the act are totally baseless.
[quote]Spartiates wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Small correction, liberals succeed in politics by masquerading as moderates. There is not one politician who has a sincere eye on running for higher office who has ever bragged about being a liberal, not over the past 30 or so years at least. One more point on this topic - Had the mainstream liberal media done their jobs Obama would not be President right now. However, they are so very liberal they wanted one of their own to be President. Obama is the most liberal Chief-Executive that we’ve ever had. And how is that working out for us? Ha.
The USA is center right and always has been.
[/quote]
That’s just semantics: conservatives have better PR guys, and have effectively associated the term liberal with a number of negative traits: weak on crime, weak on national security, tax-and-spend, exe. Things that don’t have to do with liberalism, so they start calling themselves progressives, “New Dems”, whatever. That’s just a word game.
Everyone pays the the “center” in a national (and even most state-wide) general elections. Notice how last presidential election all the sudden the McCain stopped talking about boarder fences as soon as the general election began?
I think you underestimate how “liberal” the US is (in economic terms). Most Americans say they want smaller government, at the same time, most Americans throw a hissy-fit if you talk cutting social security, Medicare, Medicaid, or defense spending (you know, actually reduce the size and scope of government in a meaningful way). Most Americans also buy into Keynesian economic theory, which is why at local, state and national levels, almost every bond ever put before a voting population passes: most people believe that government spending stimulates the economy, and a pretty substantial minority really do believe that government should function as a job-creating entity, especially when the economy is isn’t doing well: screw the deficit, borrow money to fund public works projects and get people back to work.
Now those are not my positions, but as the economy continues to suck, they are becoming more mainstream. But you can’t continue to believe the bullshit about this country being a “center-right” nation: whatever that means.
We’re socially pretty liberal, and most people want the government out of their lives: until they need help, or depend on Medicare and Social Security. I’d say on the grand political spectrum that makes us pretty centrist.[/quote]
See now i would disagree, I would say most of the people I know;
- want smaller gov’t and know exactly what it means, we can do with out those programs, adn believe the military should be back here to defend us if needed.
- I would say about 90% of the people I talk to see Keynesian as a farce and realize government spending does nothing for the economy.
- What you are talking is mainstream progressive and spin, in talking to actual people who create jobs, are working, are productive what you speak is not the case. Maybe among those collecting unemployment, welfare, using medical assistance or medicare.
It is the progressive media that makes you think this is the case, you know that slant that supposedly doesn’t exist. but when you get out and really talk to people you see this isn’t the case.
But of course someone living on somebody else’s dime will agree with your sentiments, well at least some of them.
[quote]apbt55 wrote:
See now i would disagree, I would say most of the people I know;
[/quote]
Sure, all but the most committed socialists in the US say that too.
[quote]apbt55 wrote:
- want smaller gov’t and know exactly what it means, we can do with out those programs, adn believe the military should be back here to defend us if needed.
[/quote]
That’s where you’re outside the mainstream: if it were politically viable to eliminate social security, medicare and medicaid, they’d be gone. People love this shit. Old people who vote Republican as well as “well-fare parents” who vote for democrats.
[quote]apbt55 wrote:
- I would say about 90% of the people I talk to see Keynesian as a farce and realize government spending does nothing for the economy.[/quote]
If they really believe that, then again, they’re outside the mainstream. My guess is that most of them just believe that spending they don’t like doesn’t help the economy, but are fine with us borrowing money for tax cuts, which is the exact same thing, with the exact same theory behind it. For whatever reason the left gets stuck with Kaynes, but Kenysian economic advocated government spending both through tax-cuts and public works.
[quote]apbt55 wrote:
- What you are talking is mainstream progressive and spin, in talking to actual people who create jobs, are working, are productive what you speak is not the case. Maybe among those collecting unemployment, welfare, using medical assistance or medicare. [/quote]
Again, I don’t think so. This is part of the problem with our modern media: you can fully immerse yourself in your ideological clones, and believe you’re speaking for the silent majority. Most Americans sported the Obama/Polosi healthcare “reform”, and still do: the last numbers I say were around 60%, and that number will probably grow, because historically, that always happens: people quickly get dependent on new government programs.
[quote]apbt55 wrote:
It is the progressive media that makes you think this is the case, you know that slant that supposedly doesn’t exist. but when you get out and really talk to people you see this isn’t the case.
But of course someone living on somebody else’s dime will agree with your sentiments, well at least some of them.
[/quote]
You forget that almost half of Americans, at the end of the day, effectively pay no income tax. And they like it that way.
Those aren’t my sentiments, those are my observations.
Libertarianism seems to be gaining traction amongst people my age who are socially more liberal/libertarian and want a smaller, less invasive, more sustainable government. But that’s not the mainstream.
I’d also suggest that part of why it’s so difficult to identify the mainstream is because the talking-heads have become so polarized, and the language so obtuse. The “conservatives” would like to claim as many people as they can as their own, where they’re neo-conservative imperialists, moral majority types, or libertarians: all of whom have vastly different ideas about the appropriate size and scope of government.
You get some idiot on the left like Ed Shultz claiming he’s speaking for the “working man”, where he’s basically a socialist: the government can spend us out of this, advocate, and someone on the right like Beck, and identify them as speaking for one side or the other (and they believe that’s what they’re doing), and the folks on the other side of the political spectrum look miles away form you.
[quote]Rockscar wrote:
It has been reported today that this guy:
- Did not watch TV
- Did not listen to talk radio
- Did not vote in November
All of these arguments connecting “speech” to the act are totally baseless.[/quote]
Surely there must be someone else to blame! Merely holding a man accountable for his actions: how archaic.
[quote]Spartiates wrote:
You forget that almost half of Americans, at the end of the day, effectively pay no income tax. And they like it that way.
Those aren’t my sentiments, those are my observations.
Libertarianism seems to be gaining traction amongst people my age who are socially more liberal/libertarian and want a smaller, less invasive, more sustainable government. But that’s not the mainstream.
I’d also suggest that part of why it’s so difficult to identify the mainstream is because the talking-heads have become so polarized, and the language so obtuse. The “conservatives” would like to claim as many people as they can as their own, where they’re neo-conservative imperialists, moral majority types, or libertarians: all of whom have vastly different ideas about the appropriate size and scope of government.
You get some idiot on the left like Ed Shultz claiming he’s speaking for the “working man”, where he’s basically a socialist: the government can spend us out of this, advocate, and someone on the right like Beck, and identify them as speaking for one side or the other (and they believe that’s what they’re doing), and the folks on the other side of the political spectrum look miles away form you.[/quote]
I understand where you are coming from.
It must be that because of the industry I work in has more successful business minded people in it. Ones who understand what real freedom is and what you need to do it.
all of them would cut medicare, social security and other programs like these in a heartbeat. most of us are already paying more for less health care thanks to the health care reform act.
I work with a lot of libertarian minded people. And even though I am a christian, believe in less government intrusion. Even in the area of drugs and homosexuals. Now I do believe marriage is religious institute and has no business being handled by the government.
But this is all irrelevant. Who cares about me or my cohorts.
I don’t believe in lowering taxes because spending helps the economy, I believe in lower taxes because it is that persons property and the government should learn to spend within it’ means.
not violate someone’s rights to by votes.
Rush Limbaugh:
“What Mr. Loughner knows is that he has the full support of a major political party in this country. He’s sitting there in jail. He knows what’s going on, he knows that…the Democrat party is attempting to find anybody but him to blame. He knows if he plays his cards right, he’s just a victim. He’s the latest in a never-ending parade of victims brought about by the unfairness of America…this guy clearly understands he’s getting all the attention and he understands he’s got a political party doing everything it can, plus a local sheriff doing everything that they can to make sure he’s not convicted of murder - but something lesser.”
Fuck him
[quote]siouxperman wrote:
Rush Limbaugh:
“What Mr. Loughner knows is that he has the full support of a major political party in this country. He’s sitting there in jail. He knows what’s going on, he knows that…the Democrat party is attempting to find anybody but him to blame. He knows if he plays his cards right, he’s just a victim. He’s the latest in a never-ending parade of victims brought about by the unfairness of America…this guy clearly understands he’s getting all the attention and he understands he’s got a political party doing everything it can, plus a local sheriff doing everything that they can to make sure he’s not convicted of murder - but something lesser.”
Fuck him[/quote]
Why, because he speaks the truth about it?
Very true statement…except that his lawyer is the one who know all this. It’s evident on the new MSNBC survey, asking if Sarah Palin was to blame. 60% say yes. Look out, they are coming for our speech now, and the left condone it.
[quote]Rockscar wrote:
[quote]siouxperman wrote:
Rush Limbaugh:
“What Mr. Loughner knows is that he has the full support of a major political party in this country. He’s sitting there in jail. He knows what’s going on, he knows that…the Democrat party is attempting to find anybody but him to blame. He knows if he plays his cards right, he’s just a victim. He’s the latest in a never-ending parade of victims brought about by the unfairness of America…this guy clearly understands he’s getting all the attention and he understands he’s got a political party doing everything it can, plus a local sheriff doing everything that they can to make sure he’s not convicted of murder - but something lesser.”
Fuck him[/quote]
Why, because he speaks the truth about it?
Very true statement…except that his lawyer is the one who know all this. It’s evident on the new MSNBC survey, asking if Sarah Palin was to blame. 60% say yes. Look out, they are coming for our speech now, and the left condone it. [/quote]
I can’t even begin to comprehend why you would agree with that garbage.
edit: actually, yeah i can. it’s just rush busting a confirmation of beliefs nut all up inya face.