The NEVERENDING Political Discussion Thread

Messages
2,903
Likes
1
Points
19
#61
The patriotism of some Americans is really quite odd.
Perry isn't so much an American patriot so much as he is a Texan patriot. That is why I could never be a "true Texan" (as would be said is some circles down here) - I love the United States more than I love this state, and my allegiance and loyalties lie with country as a whole, for better or worse.

That being said, I do (deep down) have a soft spot for this place and I definitely admire it's creed of rugged individualism (once upon a time the creed was actually played out, even... oh well).
 

Hink

OH....IO
Moderator
Messages
14,314
Likes
34
Points
34
#62
Mitt Romney and Sarah Palin on late night talk shows.... Palin attempts humor and Romney still tries to pretend that he is not seriously ready to consider if he is going to run or not. After 2010 elections he will know... really?

Politicians on late night talk shows seems odd to me. I do somewhat like it, in that it shows they have some sense of humor or wit, but at least in these cases, both came off as odd, and less attractive politically to me. Maybe it is because I think both are pretty fake people and only put on faces...
 

CJC

Cyburbian
Messages
1,689
Likes
1
Points
19
#63
^Depends on the show for me. I always look forward to politicians on the Daily Show, especially folks like Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee. I think it often results in some really good debate, and while I may not agree with most of what Paul or Huckabee have to say, I certainly respect them and am always curious to hear their views and opinions.
 

Hink

OH....IO
Moderator
Messages
14,314
Likes
34
Points
34
#66
^Depends on the show for me. I always look forward to politicians on the Daily Show, especially folks like Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee. I think it often results in some really good debate, and while I may not agree with most of what Paul or Huckabee have to say, I certainly respect them and am always curious to hear their views and opinions.
I don't really consider the Daily show or Colbert late night tv. I think of it as it's own unique section of programing I guess. Although Jon Stewart was rated the must trusted news anchor, I still don't think Comedy Central is mainstream to most people.

Leno and Letterman have to toe the line in terms of politics, Jon Stewart attacks it. Colbert goes beyond it.

I think that if Al Gore was more like 2002 Al Gore and less like 1999 Al Gore he might have won. Only after he lost did he show that he had a personality (SNL, Leno, Letterman, etc.).
 
Messages
2,903
Likes
1
Points
19
#67
This is going to seem random.

I believe that, if the ideal candidate was in each position, here's how my voting tendencies would lie:

Federal elections - libertarian-conservative
State elections - moderate-conservative, yet still okay with granting local governments pretty broad powers (not mandating things, but allowing them)
Local elections - liberal-progressive

I guess I wanted to post this so that Cyburbians would know that I'm not against liberal or progressive ideologies. I strive in my own personal life to fight for social justice for those less fortunate than I am (my religious convictions play a large role in this). And I'm a planner, so I'm fairly certain my views on the built environment are not in line with traditional libertarian-type philosophies I espouse at the national level, but I do want progressive development policies to be tempered by market capitalism, personal liberty, and pragmatism. All of this stems from an idea that progressive ideas work best when adopted locally, and that proper interpretations of Constitutional federalism require many of them to be at the state and local level and not at the federal level.

Anywho, just a short expose about my political leanings. I'm sure it'll serve no purpose, and I'm not trying to argue any points of my political philosophy.

In other news, I hate the words "nullify" and "nullification". I think they're retarded. Blast you, Texas GOP and your good ol' boy candidates constantly barking at me...
 
Messages
6,671
Likes
1
Points
26
#68
So now that HCR passed republicans in the senate are refusing to do anything for the rest of the year? Including invoking a little used senate clause to slose the senate at 2pm? Combined with increasing violence against democratic senators that the GOP seems to be encouraging - what the heck is going on? I just can't see how this is a winning strategy for them. Has a major political party ever been so childish?
 

Bubba

Cyburbian
Messages
4,328
Likes
4
Points
23
#69
...increasing violence against democratic senators that the GOP seems to be encouraging...
Is that just your opinion (that the GOP is encouraging violence against Democratic congress members), or is there anything concrete to back that up? Honest question - I'm barely paying any attention to the health care bill...seems like actual Republican Party encouragement of such stuff would be a case of shooting themselves in the foot (not that either party is immune to doing that over and over).
 
Messages
6,671
Likes
1
Points
26
#70
Is that just your opinion (that the GOP is encouraging violence against Democratic congress members), or is there anything concrete to back that up? Honest question - I'm barely paying any attention to the health care bill...seems like actual Republican Party encouragement of such stuff would be a case of shooting themselves in the foot (not that either party is immune to doing that over and over).
Well yeah - that's why I said "seems to be". They are certainly firing up the crazies- by saying things like "This is Armagedden". "This is worse than 9-11". "The democrats are a bigger threat to freedom loving Americans than Al Qaeda!". Palin says we should take them all out and put pictures of top dems with crosshairs on them on her website.

With the exception of some minor statements the other day from Steele and Boner, I haven't seen any republicans denounce the rhetoric and violence that's been happening. Tom Periello's brothers house was just vandalized. Democratic lawmakers have had offices vandalized. And republicans are out there whipping these groups up.

That's probably all subjective. But I guess my main point was about the senate republicans refusing now to allow any further senate business to happen - supposedly until the end of the term (according to old man McCain). They shut down the senate all day today. How is that going to help them politically? It seems like they are aligning themselves with the crazies. Perhapos they are making a political calculation that there's alot of crazies out there?
 

mgk920

Cyburbian
Messages
4,202
Likes
3
Points
24
#71
No mainstream political party will EVER advocate anything like what is written about a couple of post above. Yes, I do wish ill towards most of the 'D's - in their next upcoming election. I *don't* want them destroyed, I want them defeated. I will be vigorously campaigning against USSenator Russ Feingold and USHouse Rep. Steve Kagen this fall in my strong desire, among other things, that even if the recently-passed 'health' bill isn't or can't be repealed, that it can be substantially modified to remove its worst aspects and to at least try to make it into a decent, sustainable law.

Unlike many on the left, I do not blindly and constantly go name-calling and making ad-hominum attacks, nor go out purposely misspelling names of people nor organizations in my writings (I personally do not say things 'PMSNBC', 'Osama Obama', etc, and I challenge all of the liberals in Cyburbialand to do likewise.). I like working and winning in the arena of public opinion, where I firmly believe that I am ultimately on the winning side.

Right now, the press corps is out trolling for ANYTHING that will make the conservatives look bad while ignoring (or at last trying to ignore) anything that could possibly blemish the left and especially our current administration - and I can see right through them.

Mike
 
Messages
6,671
Likes
1
Points
26
#72
No mainstream political party will EVER advocate anything like what is written about a couple of post above.
I guess the GOP isn't a mainstream political party anymore then? I would agree with you on that front.

Unlike many on the left, I do not blindly and constantly go name-calling and making ad-hominum attacks, nor go out purposely misspelling names of people nor organizations in my writings (I personally do not say things 'PMSNBC', 'Osama Obama', etc, and I challenge all of the liberals in Cyburbialand to do likewise.). I like working and winning in the arena of public opinion, where I firmly believe that I am ultimately on the winning side.
Agreed. Other than some poor taste usage of Obama's middle name or your determination to call him either "the messiah" or "the nameless one" I guess.

But just because some liberal type people on here do it doesn't mean the left does it. Take a peek over at any remotely right wing forum lately and see what kind of ad-hominem attacks are being used. Don't pretend like its just the left that does it.
 

Hink

OH....IO
Moderator
Messages
14,314
Likes
34
Points
34
#73
The scary thing to me is that we are getting to a point, where logic no longer rings true. I think that we are going to keep on this path until a Tea Partier does something just crazy enough to either: A.) Hurt another human, or B.) Get themselves imprisoned for trying to do something crazy illegal.

I think that the reason we argue that either party is worse is because when they aren't in power they attack in different ways. G.W. Bush was made to look like a fool. The D's pushed that he was stupid and was linked to oil. They had peace protests, and their rhetoric was about how much he wasn't able to handle the position, and how he was a war president. They put him down in terms of intellegence and ability. The D's do not fear monger, they misinform, put down, and degrade.

The R's do not play by the same rules. When they aren't in power they rally the troops to be active. Pushing muslim background, not a U.S. citizen, and for only black causes. They used Hussain, not because it was his middle name but because he invoked fear. They called him the messiah because they thought people were worshiping him - and that he was "appointed". They use the words socialist, communist, and other words that invoke memories of Stalin and the third Reich. The R's fear monger. They misinform and they incite fear.

The major difference is that when the D's are putting down a president and highlighting only certain aspects of his presidency it brings their base together to make fun of his stupidity and hate of his policies. When the R's are making people fear a president it brings out the worst in a misinformed base.

My problem with what the R's are doing now, is not so much in the fact that they are playing politics, but in that they are creating a scared society. They are making it seem as if we are all going to die. "Death Panels" - or otherwise known as reasonable discussions about death. The "Apocalypse" - or otherwise known as the day after a large piece of legislation that we didn't agree with passed.

We need to find a way to tone down the fear, bring civil discourse back to our country. If yelling over someone at a town hall makes you an American, than we are in a bad place. Respect, honor, and integrity are what make this country great. We need to find a way back to where we can agree to disagree, we can compromise, and we can understand that BOTH sides play these stupid games - it is politics.
 

mgk920

Cyburbian
Messages
4,202
Likes
3
Points
24
#74
Remember that the USA's system was set up at the very beginning to be divided, with many checks and balances from different branches with the intent that they be hostile towards each other. Two hostile-towards-each-other branches of Congress, hostile to/from the executive branch and hostile to/from the judicial branch - and then there are all of those pesky semi-sovereign states. The very WORST thing would be for all of them to be in agreement - because then we *WILL* have tyranny.

Donnybrook arguments are the USA's system AT ITS BEST and the level of discord we are seeing now is not at all unusual and is in fact quite MILD when compared with the 230+ years of USA history. For example, recall that Alexander Hamilton (the guy on the $10 note) died in a shooting dual with a political rival (Aaron Burr).

:-c

Mike
 

btrage

Cyburbian
Messages
6,422
Likes
0
Points
25
#75
Remember that the USA's system was set up at the very beginning to be divided, with many checks and balances from different branches with the intent that they be hostile towards each other. Two hostile-towards-each-other branches of Congress, hostile to/from the executive branch and hostile to/from the judicial branch - and then there are all of those pesky semi-sovereign states. The very WORST thing would be for all of them to be in agreement - because then we *WILL* have tyranny.

Donnybrook arguments are the USA's system AT ITS BEST and the level of discord we are seeing now is not at all unusual and is in fact quite MILD when compared with the 230+ years of USA history. For example, recall that Alexander Hamilton (the guy on the $10 note) died in a shooting dual with a political rival (Aaron Burr).

:-c

Mike
I agree completely. But don't you think that the multi-media society we live in today brings a certain amount of misinformation into the donnybrooks that are occurring? The misinformed outliers of both political parties use the media to flame the donnybrooks. So while I agree that the system was set up to encourage "division", society today is very different from when Burr took out Hamilton. The general public's ability to access (mis)information demands that we are more responsible about how we portray ourselves and others.
 
Messages
1,730
Likes
0
Points
18
#76
The scary thing to me is that we are getting to a point, where logic no longer rings true. I think that we are going to keep on this path until a Tea Partier does something just crazy enough to either: A.) Hurt another human, or B.) Get themselves imprisoned for trying to do something crazy illegal.

I think that the reason we argue that either party is worse is because when they aren't in power they attack in different ways. G.W. Bush was made to look like a fool. The D's pushed that he was stupid and was linked to oil. They had peace protests, and their rhetoric was about how much he wasn't able to handle the position, and how he was a war president. They put him down in terms of intellegence and ability. The D's do not fear monger, they misinform, put down, and degrade.

The R's do not play by the same rules. When they aren't in power they rally the troops to be active. Pushing muslim background, not a U.S. citizen, and for only black causes. They used Hussain, not because it was his middle name but because he invoked fear. They called him the messiah because they thought people were worshiping him - and that he was "appointed". They use the words socialist, communist, and other words that invoke memories of Stalin and the third Reich. The R's fear monger. They misinform and they incite fear.

The major difference is that when the D's are putting down a president and highlighting only certain aspects of his presidency it brings their base together to make fun of his stupidity and hate of his policies. When the R's are making people fear a president it brings out the worst in a misinformed base.

My problem with what the R's are doing now, is not so much in the fact that they are playing politics, but in that they are creating a scared society. They are making it seem as if we are all going to die. "Death Panels" - or otherwise known as reasonable discussions about death. The "Apocalypse" - or otherwise known as the day after a large piece of legislation that we didn't agree with passed.

We need to find a way to tone down the fear, bring civil discourse back to our country. If yelling over someone at a town hall makes you an American, than we are in a bad place. Respect, honor, and integrity are what make this country great. We need to find a way back to where we can agree to disagree, we can compromise, and we can understand that BOTH sides play these stupid games - it is politics.
We are beginning to see this happen in the aftermath of the healthcare bill. The rhetoric of some on the right has pushed people to make threats to several House Democrats. According to an article I read on CNN at least 10 House Democrats have received threats; a brother of a House member from Virginia had a gas line cut after a local Tea Party website posted the address, thinking it was the House member's house, asking readers to drop by the address "to express thanks" for the healthcare bill, Democratic party offices in Rochester, NY and Wichita, KS have had windows broken by bricks.

I am not saying that both sides have not been guilty of this extreme rhetoric in the past but the right seems to have the market cornered on fear-mongering. The R's are not doing any favors by not distancing themselves from the Tea Party groups. In fact some House Repubs. seem to be feeding into this movement with some of their rhetoric, calling this bill Armageddon, a member of Congress yelling "baby killer" or "You Lie!" It is one thing to have a member of the general public say these things, it is another for a member of Congress to. By members of Congress saying these things, they are doing nothing but fanning the flames and are on the same level as O'Reilly, Beck and Limbaugh.

Instead of trying to actually improve this bill the R's are using stall tactics and trying to force the D's in the Senate to cast unpopular votes during this reconciliation process so the R's have fodder to place in future campaign ads. As I said in the "Health Care Bill" thread, the R's never had any intention of supporting healthcare reform, no matter what the bill would have contained. It was very telling when I heard Sen. Jim DeMint and RNC Chair Steele last July, saying that if they could kill HCR, it would be Obama's Waterloo.
 

mgk920

Cyburbian
Messages
4,202
Likes
3
Points
24
#77
I agree completely. But don't you think that the multi-media society we live in today brings a certain amount of misinformation into the donnybrooks that are occurring? The misinformed outliers of both political parties use the media to flame the donnybrooks. So while I agree that the system was set up to encourage "division", society today is very different from when Burr took out Hamilton. The general public's ability to access (mis)information demands that we are more responsible about how we portray ourselves and others.
I don't have any links to examples handy, but in the late 18th century and throughout the 19th century, especially, the popular press of the day was just as nasty, 'mis-informing' and inflammatory as some of it is now and then some. I'd love to be able to spend some time digging out some of the juiciest examples just for the entertainment value.

Again, the situation of today doesn't hold a candle to some of what the USA had a century or two ago and especially in its earliest days.

As for some of the reported 'threats' and so forth, it just strikes me that a lot of that is being hyped and trumpeted up by the liberals and their compliant wing of the popular press solely to (at least try to) marginalize their opponents, make look bad and to head off a likely major wipeout in this upcoming fall's election cycle.

Mike
 
Messages
1,730
Likes
0
Points
18
#78
As for some of the reported 'threats' and so forth, it just strikes me that a lot of that is being hyped and trumpeted up by the liberals and their compliant wing of the popular press solely to (at least try to) marginalize their opponents, make look bad and to head off a likely major wipeout in this upcoming fall's election cycle.
Ah yes, hyped by the "liberal media", like this story from foxnews.com about the FBI investigating these threats on Democratic House members.
 

btrage

Cyburbian
Messages
6,422
Likes
0
Points
25
#79
I don't have any links to examples handy, but in the late 18th century and throughout the 19th century, especially, the popular press of the day was just as nasty, 'mis-informing' and inflammatory as some of it is now and then some. I'd love to be able to spend some time digging out some of the juiciest examples just for the entertainment value.

Again, the situation of today doesn't hold a candle to some of what the USA had a century or two ago and especially in its earliest days.

As for some of the reported 'threats' and so forth, it just strikes me that a lot of that is being hyped and trumpeted up by the liberals and their compliant wing of the popular press solely to (at least try to) marginalize their opponents, make look bad and to head off a likely major wipeout in this upcoming fall's election cycle.

Mike
I'm not really picking a political side in this discussion.

Just trying to point out that back 200 years ago, a very limited number of people had the ability to spread their message through the media, basically just the editors of newspapers or those who wrote editorials.

Today, just about everyone from the entire political spectrum can make comments and spread lies through the internet, which is where most people (good or bad) get their news. So it isn't just the popular press now - it's every blog, website, or anonymous crackpot who makes comments about an online newspaper article.
 

mgk920

Cyburbian
Messages
4,202
Likes
3
Points
24
#80
Ah yes, hyped by the "liberal media", like this story from foxnews.com about the FBI investigating these threats on Democratic House members.
Note that I did not say "all", I said "a lot". A very large difference. It is one thing to 'report' news and let us, the unwashed masses, decide, it is a totally different thing to 'hype' and 'trumpet' it.

I'm not really picking a political side in this discussion.

Just trying to point out that back 200 years ago, a very limited number of people had the ability to spread their message through the media, basically just the editors of newspapers or those who wrote editorials.

Today, just about everyone from the entire political spectrum can make comments and spread lies through the internet, which is where most people (good or bad) get their news. So it isn't just the popular press now - it's every blog, website, or anonymous crackpot who makes comments about an online newspaper article.
Perhaps there is a bit too much of that 'free speeching' going on here, with lots of soapboxes all over to do that 'speeching' from. 'Soapbox' speeches were pretty popular in the old days.

Looks like the USA at its best, doesn't it?

;-)

Mike
 
Top