This is classic...

Statements like these are exactly why the U.S. is so polarized. Being a Democrat has nothing to do with hating the troops, just like being a Republican has nothing to do with supporting pedophilia. If you read my post on the last page, you would have known what Kerry meant to say.

The world of politics looks very black and white when people only read and listen to what they want to believe as true. When in reality, it is all in shades of gray.

It seems we have transitioned from a time when the government feared the people to a time where the people fear the government. That is why it is no longer working, as Hamma pointed out.

 

I'm glad both sides don't get along. I want the goverment to be slow. If they had a knee jerk reaction to everything that happened who knows where we would be.

Government can not react on feelings, it must be slow and thought out. The only way that is going to happen is with opposing ideas. That is why the systems is the way it is.

The people don't fear the government, they don't care. They have been told the government can do no wrong. I find the government is no different than any large company that we have been told to hate and fear.

 

Yea~! Let's take the "Slow Children at Play" signs, change them to "Slow Government at Work." and place them infront of the offices .

Excellent insight~! I agree!

Yea and as you and I know....we'd get fired if we did some of the things they get away with

~PM~

 

I wish I knew the source, but a quote from a book somewhere once said; "The man that is best suited to the [job of government] is the one who does not want the job"

I believe that some of politicians are there for their constituents, but they are more of a minority than Colts fans at the Pats game this past weekend. The majority aren't there to better the world, fix problems in the government, etc. they are there to further their career.

And to do that you grab every opportune mud pie, load it, and fire.

A better question would be how do we find someone who "doesn't want the job" and get them elected, and then have enough push behind them to bring about real reform?

How about starting with Senate/House members can serve only two terms...

-qor72

 

Well said. I saw the comments using the term liberal in the pejorative, and I was going to post something like this, but you got there first, and said it much better than I would have.

The only thing I'll add is that liberal and conservative aren't mutually exclusive. If we take liberal to mean, 'favoring freedom', and conservative to mean, 'disfavoring unnecessary change', not only are the two fairly compatible, I personally think both philosophies are admirable.

 

That's well and good - and I agree with you in principle. Neither of those words,however, carry those connotations in contemporary American politics nor do I see any shift in current politics to suggest any movement counter to current trends.

Whatever you might deign to label them, there are groups within our current two party system that hold to values and objectives that are out of sync both with traditional American values as well as what would appear to be mainstream contemporary American values.

I believe that one side is in pursuit of goals that are contrary to integrity,American values, and the pursuit of national security. Others will believe the opposite. The fact is, that as sad as the division is, it does exist.

As for not all liberals being democrats and not all democrats being liberals - I agree. While I do not pretend to be as politically conscious as I perhaps could or should be, I do not hear a great many of the moderate democrats raising their voices. If they are, they are being drowned out.

Now I'm sure many here might feel the same with regards to the 'conservative right', and could perhaps supply a reasonable argument in support. I'm not trying to be argumentative here, just trying to express how I view things in a general sense.

 

Oh, certainly. The word liberal carries connotations of socialism, and the word conservative carries connotations of authoritarianism. It irritates me, and I should really just resign myself to being irritated by it.

I disagree. I think both major parties are in pursuit of goals that are contrary to integrity. Sure, the Republican Party is embroiled in more scandal now than the Democratic Party, but the Democratic Party had their share when they were in power.

I'm not sure what you mean by American values, as values can cover quite a lot of things, so please forgive/correct me if I'm off base. I usually hear the phrase "traditional American values" associated with the social authoritarian "everyone should live like I want them to live" family values movement, who want to rid our society of perceived immorality. I think people should be able to do pretty much anything they want as long as everyone involved consents, so I almost always disagree with this kind of thing. Basically, I want a political party who will leave American values to Americans. Right now, that isn't either the Democratic or Republican parties.

I also disagree with both major parties on national security. I think the best way to secure the nation would be to reorganize national defense in much the same way that the Founding Fathers envisioned -- decentralized local militias. In order to accomplish that, I think that restrictions on the Second Amendment should be eased, and perhaps firearm purchases and training should be subsidized, to speed up the arming of the militias. Beyond that, I don't think the Federal government can easily take a leadership role in this.

We may just have to agree to disagree.

The same problem exists on both sides. It's really due to how primary elections are conducted -- they ensure that the more hardline candidates have an easier time of getting nominated and backed.

 

Robert A. Heinlien once said something like =
"Women and cats will do as they please, and men and dogs should relax and get used to the idea."

~PM~

 

LOL!!! I like that one!