|
|
Post by 78aztec82 on Jun 18, 2011 19:36:16 GMT -8
Wow, pretty bold statement. I guess you don't know many conservatives. I guess the implication you make is that I don't like many of my own friends, family or wife's family, or don't care about any of their welfare or to have them here. Bold. Ignorant, sorry to say, but bold. Funny, it is actually the exact opposite, I find many real liberals are spiteful about people like me, accusing us of being racist, uncaring, etc, well, as you just described. Funny, my family and in-laws, as do many of my liberal friends are pretty interested in what I have to say, how I say it, and that I actually make sense. I don't have time for so-called 'friends' that are willing to judge me harshly because of my political leanings. Some people can actually respect others views and not cast stones. One's personal political philosophy has no real bearing on ones true character, what you are actually describing, IMO, which is my point. Conservatives have different views, but they have a right to them. I was put off during the Iraq build up (particularly) when the implication was that those who disagreed with the invasion (usually liberals) were somehow not patriots. You know what I think of you. I said so quite recently as I remember. Understand but when you make blanket statements about 'folk like me' it tends to hit home. We all want the best for our country and our fellow Americans. We see it differently, it doesn't make anyone bad. Just because pundits say things about 'the other side' doesn't mean it speaks for us. I was part of the assault into Iraq so I didn't get any of that but all we were asking for was once committed, that we'd have support and the rug not pulled out from under us while out there. Unlike when I was young when I witnessed the complete tragedy of Vietnam and the veterans' treatment, I've never felt we were abandoned. Frankly, we've enjoyed a lot of support throughout, liberal and conservative alike, save for a few folks I dismiss. Why? Because they put aside the politics and are looking at it through their personal character. I think most out here appreciate that and respect that. |
|
|
|
Post by inevitec on Jun 19, 2011 7:21:16 GMT -8
Conservatives have different views, but they have a right to them. I was put off during the Iraq build up (particularly) when the implication was that those who disagreed with the invasion (usually liberals) were somehow not patriots. You know what I think of you. I said so quite recently as I remember. Understand but when you make blanket statements about 'folk like me' it tends to hit home. We all want the best for our country and our fellow Americans. We see it differently, it doesn't make anyone bad. Just because pundits say things about 'the other side' doesn't mean it speaks for us. I was part of the assault into Iraq so I didn't get any of that but all we were asking for was once committed, that we'd have support and the rug not pulled out from under us while out there. Unlike when I was young when I witnessed the complete tragedy of Vietnam and the veterans' treatment, I've never felt we were abandoned. Frankly, we've enjoyed a lot of support throughout, liberal and conservative alike, save for a few folks I dismiss. Why? Because they put aside the politics and are looking at it through their personal character. I think most out here appreciate that and respect that. I do not think Conservatives want liberals around. The vitriol they use is breath taking. Many liberals use the term progressive, because conservatives have trashed the word liberal. I use the term liberal to describe myself, because I do not shive a git. If conservatives really cared about how the pundits referred to liberals, they would stop listening to them. If they really were concerned about those things, they would not vote for representatives who say that their supporters should be "armed and dangerous". Their support of the Limbaughs, Bachmanns etc. means that conservatives tacitly approve of their attitudes. If you support haters, you get tarred with their brush -Sorry. Still,I find you more open minded than most conservatives I know and more reasonable. There are a couple of conservatives who post here whose stridency causes me to wonder about their health. But, I will agree that like anyone else, I should take conservatives one at a time. (I live in a Republican precinct. I currently have no interaction with the Republicans who live here.) As to the war. . .I thought the premise was illogical and contrived (And just now I heard Robert Gates agree with me, as regarding Iraq) . But my father was a thirty year sailor and I worked for DOD for twenty years. I may feel some ambivalence about the military (particularly about the way they failed to support families when I was a kid), but you will not find anyone who supports the military more than I. I have always respected your service highly. |
|
|
|
Post by Yoda on Jun 19, 2011 9:11:28 GMT -8
I do not think Conservatives want liberals around. The vitriol they use is breath taking. Of course they want liberals around; they couldn't live without them. Who would they demonize? How would they sustain their television ratings, raise funds for their cause or sell their books, etc? The (so called) conservative movement would fall apart if there weren't any liberals. Liberals are to conservatives what the game of pool was to Professor Harold Hill. Incite the masses with a catchy little song about how much trouble we've got and how the country and our way of life are in danger. If there were no liberals, the conservatives would have to invent them. And the same goes pretty much the same for liberals (although I do think that the conservatives are really much better at it). Who could they demonize if not the rich, uncaring, selfish, greedy conservatives? It's either that or have serious policy discussions and few at either extreme are prepared to sustain an actual argument on policy. Vitriol is waaaaay easier. And it pays better too. Yoda out... . |
|
|
|
Post by inevitec on Jun 19, 2011 9:17:07 GMT -8
I do not think Conservatives want liberals around. The vitriol they use is breath taking. Of course they want liberals around; they couldn't live without them. Who would they demonize? How would they sustain their television ratings, raise funds for their cause or sell their books, etc? The (so called) conservative movement would fall apart if there weren't any liberals. Liberals are to conservatives what the game of pool was to Professor Harold Hill. Incite the masses with a catchy little song about how much trouble we've got and how the country and our way of life are in danger. If there were no liberals, the conservatives would have to invent them. And the same goes pretty much the same for liberals (although I do think that the conservatives are really much better at it). Who could they demonize if not the rich, uncaring, selfish, greedy conservatives? It's either that or have serious policy discussions and few at either extreme are prepared to sustain an actual argument on policy. Vitriol is waaaaay easier. And it pays better too. Yoda out... . ". . . have serious policy discussions and . . . prepared to sustain an actual argument on policy." The Beach Boys had a song. . . Wouldn't It Be NiceBut, you cannot stoke fear to divert from your real purpose without creating an enemy. All the great dictators have used it to great effect and many deaths. |
|
|
|
Post by 78aztec82 on Jun 19, 2011 9:31:17 GMT -8
I do not think Conservatives want liberals around. The vitriol they use is breath taking. Of course they want liberals around; they couldn't live without them. Who would they demonize? How would they sustain their television ratings, raise funds for their cause or sell their books, etc? The (so called) conservative movement would fall apart if there weren't any liberals. Liberals are to conservatives what the game of pool was to Professor Harold Hill. Incite the masses with a catchy little song about how much trouble we've got and how the country and our way of life are in danger. If there were no liberals, the conservatives would have to invent them. And the same goes pretty much the same for liberals (although I do think that the conservatives are really much better at it). Who could they demonize if not the rich, uncaring, selfish, greedy conservatives? It's either that or have serious policy discussions and few at either extreme are prepared to sustain an actual argument on policy. Vitriol is waaaaay easier. And it pays better too. Yoda out... . You reveal your true self here. First, it is a two way street. There are vitriolic idiots on both sides of the aisle and in the punditry world. Second, conservatives have core sets of beliefs that range from the libertarian wing to more fundamental, but again it isn't a linear spectrum but more of a matrix. To say that there would be no conservative movement without liberals is ridiculous. Perhaps some pundits and some politicians that cant stand on their own foundation of beliefs but again, one could say the same of an equal or larger number of liberal pols and pundits. |
|
|
|
Post by 78aztec82 on Jun 19, 2011 9:42:15 GMT -8
Understand but when you make blanket statements about 'folk like me' it tends to hit home. We all want the best for our country and our fellow Americans. We see it differently, it doesn't make anyone bad. Just because pundits say things about 'the other side' doesn't mean it speaks for us. I was part of the assault into Iraq so I didn't get any of that but all we were asking for was once committed, that we'd have support and the rug not pulled out from under us while out there. Unlike when I was young when I witnessed the complete tragedy of Vietnam and the veterans' treatment, I've never felt we were abandoned. Frankly, we've enjoyed a lot of support throughout, liberal and conservative alike, save for a few folks I dismiss. Why? Because they put aside the politics and are looking at it through their personal character. I think most out here appreciate that and respect that. I do not think Conservatives want liberals around. The vitriol they use is breath taking. Many liberals use the term progressive, because conservatives have trashed the word liberal. I use the term liberal to describe myself, because I do not shive a git. If conservatives really cared about how the pundits referred to liberals, they would stop listening to them. If they really were concerned about those things, they would not vote for representatives who say that their supporters should be "armed and dangerous". Their support of the Limbaughs, Bachmanns etc. means that conservatives tacitly approve of their attitudes. If you support haters, you get tarred with their brush -Sorry. Still,I find you more open minded than most conservatives I know and more reasonable. There are a couple of conservatives who post here whose stridency causes me to wonder about their health. But, I will agree that like anyone else, I should take conservatives one at a time. (I live in a Republican precinct. I currently have no interaction with the Republicans who live here.) As to the war. . .I thought the premise was illogical and contrived (And just now I heard Robert Gates agree with me, as regarding Iraq) . But my father was a thirty year sailor and I worked for DOD for twenty years. I may feel some ambivalence about the military (particularly about the way they failed to support families when I was a kid), but you will not find anyone who supports the military more than I. I have always respected your service highly. For your preamble part of your response, I think I covered it in my response to Yoda. It is a two way street and both sides have their share of the vapid vitriolic simpletons. I am a bit saddened to hear that you live in a republican district but don't interact with any. I don't think one could say that I maybe 'more open minded' than others if one doesn't truly interact at the local level. I have a great deal of liberal friends. They, of course, are all wrong on their politics but I still like them...  I learn a lot from them too as they have learned from me when we venture into political discussions. I have had an interesting lifetime set of experiences, to include several years in the international humanitarian community and that surprises them but it also opens them up to interesting discussions. It is all about understanding but I have to listen first if I want them to listen to me. changing frequencies... Like I said earlier, I think the vast majority of Americans understand what supporting the troops means while they are engaged much better than in the 60s and 70s where many couldn't separate the war from the warriors, many of which were draftees and had little choice but to serve. They appreciate it and I can tell you, they feel it too. I have never seen more real manifestations of support than ever since I started the business in 1980. It is heartwarming. |
|
|
|
Post by Yoda on Jun 19, 2011 10:09:21 GMT -8
Of course they want liberals around; they couldn't live without them. Who would they demonize? How would they sustain their television ratings, raise funds for their cause or sell their books, etc? The (so called) conservative movement would fall apart if there weren't any liberals. Liberals are to conservatives what the game of pool was to Professor Harold Hill. Incite the masses with a catchy little song about how much trouble we've got and how the country and our way of life are in danger. If there were no liberals, the conservatives would have to invent them. And the same goes pretty much the same for liberals (although I do think that the conservatives are really much better at it). Who could they demonize if not the rich, uncaring, selfish, greedy conservatives? It's either that or have serious policy discussions and few at either extreme are prepared to sustain an actual argument on policy. Vitriol is waaaaay easier. And it pays better too. Yoda out... . You reveal your true self here. First, it is a two way street. There are vitriolic idiots on both sides of the aisle and in the punditry world. Second, conservatives have core sets of beliefs that range from the libertarian wing to more fundamental, but again it isn't a linear spectrum but more of a matrix. To say that there would be no conservative movement without liberals is ridiculous. Perhaps some pundits and some politicians that cant stand on their own foundation of beliefs but again, one could say the same of an equal or larger number of liberal pols and pundits. I'm not quite certain how you think you are exposing my bias here as I also said that it was a two way street. As for your second point, I don't entirely disagree with you there either. Keep in mind that the original poster was referring to that subset of conservatives that engage in "breathtaking" vitriol and my response was a somewhat flip response about what I consider to be a lunatic fringe that lacks intellectual integrity and stature. My apologies for the lack of clarity as to my target. IMHO, "breathtaking vitriol", whether from the lips of those on the left or the right, is manipulative, not informative. It adds nothing to the conversation except pointless discord. It doesn't solve problems but makes them more difficult to solve. It does, however, generate ratings, sell books, spark movements that are doomed to fail and make a lot of money for a lot of people. For a long time, I've referred to it as "soft core" treason. It is not an overt act of treason to be sure. Yet, in the end, it subverts confidence and pride in our country and its institutions more than all the communists put together have ever been able to do. Our focus, in my opinion, should be on properly identifying problems and working together to find solutions to them -- and that will not be possible without the effort of good people on the left and the right. But what we have right now is for-profit demagoguery, masquerading as super-patriotism. And it makes us weaker as a nation because it delays the day when we can undertake serious discussion of the problems and, ultimately, solve them. Yoda out... . |
|
|
|
Post by uwaztec on Jun 19, 2011 11:57:57 GMT -8
"for-profit demagoguery, masquerading as super-patriotism" You mean like that skank Ann Coulter... who has been to over 50 Grateful Dead shows and has boned Bill Maher? ..She hates the Left (when selling), but has a taste for it as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by Yoda on Jun 19, 2011 12:40:51 GMT -8
"for-profit demagoguery, masquerading as super-patriotism" You mean like that skank Ann Coulter... who has been to over 50 Grateful Dead shows and has boned Bill Maher? ..She hates the Left (when selling), but has a taste for it as well. I'd ask for a link so as to make you prove your claims here but for the fact that, on reflection, I would be afraid you'd give me one. And there are some things that I just don't want proof of. Or knowledge of. Or even a hint of. Damn you. I will never be able to get that visual image out of my brain. I had enough trouble sleeping at night before, and now this... Yoda out... . |
|
|
|
Post by uwaztec on Jun 19, 2011 13:04:20 GMT -8
"for-profit demagoguery, masquerading as super-patriotism" You mean like that skank Ann Coulter... who has been to over 50 Grateful Dead shows and has boned Bill Maher? ..She hates the Left (when selling), but has a taste for it as well. I'd ask for a link so as to make you prove your claims here but for the fact that, on reflection, I would be afraid you'd give me one. And there are some things that I just don't want proof of. Or knowledge of. Or even a hint of. Damn you. I will never be able to get that visual image out of my brain. I had enough trouble sleeping at night before, and now this... Yoda out... . Sorry about that.... I guess I could have brought up the "toe sucker" who used to work for Clinton. Some of these profiteers who make loads of bank off the far Right are just extremely creepy. |
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Jun 19, 2011 13:06:41 GMT -8
Yoda, you made laugh. ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by davdesid on Jun 19, 2011 13:26:44 GMT -8
>>>Our focus, in my opinion, should be on properly identifying problems and working together to find solutions to them -- and that will not be possible without the effort of good people on the left and the right. But what we have right now is for-profit demagoguery, masquerading as super-patriotism. And it makes us weaker as a nation because it delays the day when we can undertake serious discussion of the problems and, ultimately, solve them.
Yoda out...<<<
And with that piece of wisdom from the faux moderate, the next four posts devolve into vitriol about 'skanks', and 'toe suckers' with a few farts and giggles for effect.
Forget about any compromises.
|
|
|
|
Post by uwaztec on Jun 19, 2011 13:31:57 GMT -8
>>>Our focus, in my opinion, should be on properly identifying problems and working together to find solutions to them -- and that will not be possible without the effort of good people on the left and the right. But what we have right now is for-profit demagoguery, masquerading as super-patriotism. And it makes us weaker as a nation because it delays the day when we can undertake serious discussion of the problems and, ultimately, solve them. Yoda out...<<< And with that piece of wisdom from the faux moderate, the next four posts devolve into vitriol about 'skanks', and 'toe suckers' with a few farts and giggles for effect. Forget about any compromises. Are you proposing one Sid? |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Jun 20, 2011 10:45:51 GMT -8
Am I still really reading this? Some of the images that UW suggested may be grounds for some sort of legal action. Coulter strapping on some sort of implement and giving Maher a going over is way beyond creepy, but perhaps the only action Maher has ever seen.
|
|
I learn a lot from them too as they have learned from me when we venture into political discussions. I have had an interesting lifetime set of experiences, to include several years in the international humanitarian community and that surprises them but it also opens them up to interesting discussions. It is all about understanding but I have to listen first if I want them to listen to me. 
