[OhIoCoNtRActKilLa]

It seems to me that there are generally two different types of people in this country. Those that support big government and those who do not. I have been particularly interested in reading individual's comments, posts, and responses all over the web to really see what people think.

These two types of people HATE each other. I mean, really hate each other. How is this so? How have we come to this? We are all Americans, right? How in the hell are we ever going to make progress when these two parties are constantly fighting? The idea is to have balance, right? It just doesn't make sense to me. The two sides are just so radically different that they are incapable of coming to an agreement.

I'll admit, I read FreeEnterprises posts and I am filled with rage. He is so far on the other side that I cannot understand how we both live in the same country. He is the epitome of everything that I dislike about our population. In what way can decisions be made if two parties with similar interests as are own are to come to an agreement? It's just ludicrous to think about.

I'm not making this thread to call FE out, I'm just using the situation as an example. That's fine if he wants to do things a certain way that I may disagree with, but they are SO radically different from my own, how is it reasonable that he have a say with how I live my life? And please don't just say "Move to Canada".

[Iamamartianchurch]

We don't share common culture values or heritage. Without any of these basic points of agreement or commonality, we aren't going to get very far in the political realm.

Being an American in 2012 is little more than a political agreement through social contract. Hardly leaving much to identify with our fellow countrymen.

[FreeEnterprise]

Wrong. Liberals hate others, but conservatives realize you are just propagandized.

I don't hate liberals... I try to help liberals see that their viewpoints are flawed.

But, since you only get news and information from liberal biased sources, you don't realize that half the country isn't brainwashed like you.

Want to understand. Instead of only getting your information from wildly biased liberal news organizations.

Read www.drudgereport.com

Doing that ONE thing, will help you understand.


btw, calling someone out and saying you aren't calling them out isn't logical.

[OhIoCoNtRActKilLa]

I didn't say I wasn't calling you out, I said that wasn't the point of the thread.

"Liberals hate others, but conservatives realize you are just propagandized."

el oh ****ing el.

[StellarKnight]

Originally Posted by FreeEnterprise

I don't hate liberals..

No, you just blame every conceivable problem under the sun on "liberals." You may not hate liberals, but you're certainly obsessed with them.

Originally Posted by Iamamartianchurch

We don't share common culture values or heritage.

How so?

[EvanActon]

why does the government need so much control? everything they touch turns to ****( foodstamps, usps, health insurance, e.c.t). i am sick and tired of people having the idea that everything has to be "fair and equal". bull****. there are plenty of opportunities to succeed and society as a whole is turning into a bunch of lazy worhtless excuses of exsistance but guess what? dont worry! the government will pay for you and the rest of your 12 kids so that u will vote to put them back into office for 4 more years of hell.

[drgonzo]

Originally Posted by OhIoCoNtRActKilLa

It seems to me that there are generally two different types of people in this country. Those that support big government and those who do not. I have been particularly interested in reading individual's comments, posts, and responses all over the web to really see what people think.

These two types of people HATE each other. I mean, really hate each other. How is this so? How have we come to this? We are all Americans, right? How in the hell are we ever going to make progress when these two parties are constantly fighting? The idea is to have balance, right? It just doesn't make sense to me. The two sides are just so radically different that they are incapable of coming to an agreement.

I'll admit, I read FreeEnterprises posts and I am filled with rage. He is so far on the other side that I cannot understand how we both live in the same country. He is the epitome of everything that I dislike about our population. In what way can decisions be made if two parties with similar interests as are own are to come to an agreement? It's just ludicrous to think about.

I'm not making this thread to call FE out, I'm just using the situation as an example. That's fine if he wants to do things a certain way that I may disagree with, but they are SO radically different from my own, how is it reasonable that he have a say with how I live my life? And please don't just say "Move to Canada".

"Big" government itself is a myth/meme. Government is government. The fundamental split is between those who realize America's greatness is rooted in its strong, wealthy government and those who don't have a firm grasp on reality.

In the end, our primary hope of salvation is in the coming demographic shift. The youth by and large are better educated and more progressive than the generation currently in power. As long as the whole thing doesn't collapse before they take over, we should be okay in a few years.

As for how to deal with the non-reality contingent? Political marginalization is the best we can do. Rhetorical brutalization is a good tool, it's not too hard to completely intellectually pants most right-wingers.

[jamest91]

Have you guys ever read any articles from some of the leftist websites such as msnbc? My god, I become enraged just off the shear principle of how damn left they are lol.

I have always tried to read both versions of political articles (liberal and conservative) so I can try and understand both sides, but this election period I cant even bring myself to read the articles from the left as they are so out there. I guess it doesnt help all they do now is just try to insult the Republican party as much as possible instead of actually talking facts and probable outcomes.

**Also before flaming me keep in mind im a registered independent as I did not want to affiliate with 1 party in particular since I am roughly 50/50 between ideas of the 2.

[Iamamartianchurch]

Originally Posted by StellarKnight

How so?

That is what happens when you strive for a pluralistic society as we have done. After some time, society is too atomized to come to consensus with itself over issues it would normally be able to deal with.

[EvanActon]

Originally Posted by drgonzo

"Big" government itself is a myth/meme. Government is government. The fundamental split is between those who realize America's greatness is rooted in its strong, wealthy government and those who don't have a firm grasp on reality.

In the end, our primary hope of salvation is in the coming demographic shift. The youth by and large are better educated and more progressive than the generation currently in power. As long as the whole thing doesn't collapse before they take over, we should be okay in a few years.

As for how to deal with the non-reality contingent? Political marginalization is the best we can do. Rhetorical brutalization is a good tool, it's not too hard to completely intellectually pants most right-wingers.

the us government was not founded to give any welfare at all. where in the constitution does it say keep throwing money at a problem hoping it fixes itself? its a set of guidelines to live by, the church and community where meant to help the needy.

[drgonzo]

Originally Posted by jamest91

Have you guys ever read any articles from some of the leftist websites such as msnbc? My god, I become enraged just off the shear principle of how damn left they are lol.

I have always tried to read both versions of political articles (liberal and conservative) so I can try and understand both sides, but this election period I cant even bring myself to read the articles from the left as they are so out there. I guess it doesnt help all they do now is just try to insult the Republican party as much as possible instead of actually talking facts and probable outcomes.

**Also before flaming me keep in mind im a registered independent as I did not want to affiliate with 1 party in particular since I am roughly 50/50 between ideas of the 2.

How about a couple of examples so we can determine whether you are an "informed" independent or a typical dupe who doesn't know enough to know which side is better.

[drgonzo]

Originally Posted by EvanActon

the us government was not founded to give any welfare at all. where in the constitution does it say keep throwing money at a problem hoping it fixes itself? its a set of guidelines to live by, the church and community where meant to help the needy.

The Constitution both says the government is tasked with promoting welfare AND that the church has no place in government. So you literally could not be more wrong. Not that it's surprising based on your obvious political alignment.

[jamest91]

Originally Posted by drgonzo

The Constitution both says the government is tasked with promoting welfare AND that the church has no place in government. So you literally could not be more wrong. Not that it's surprising based on your obvious political alignment.

however, how can one promote welfare (doesnt say govt. must provide general welfare) in the current broken state that it is in?


Also, drgonzo, you can say one example could be all the left wing sites that pounced on the Romney 47% thing.

[OhIoCoNtRActKilLa]

You guys are already arguing about the specifics - that is not the purpose of this thread. There is a problem in this country where there are basically 2 sides that believe in 2 completely different ways of running the country. How is this a good thing?

I suppose the Federal government is too powerful and it doesn't allow the states to make enough of the decisions. Each state should be customized to the population that resides in it, with very few blanket policies that apply to all states. Then, I could decide to move to a state that caters to my desires if I so wish. Unfortunately, this is not the current case, though I believe it was the original idea.

[StellarKnight]

Originally Posted by Iamamartianchurch

That is what happens when you strive for a pluralistic society as we have done. After some time, society is too atomized to come to consensus with itself over issues it would normally be able to deal with.

Yeah, but this idea/culmination of a pluralistic society didn't just spring up overnight, whereas the discord we're currently seeing is a relatively new phenomena. Or is it? I'm just basing this on what I can remember as a 27-year old, so I could be very wrong.

[jamest91]

Originally Posted by OhIoCoNtRActKilLa

You guys are already arguing about the specifics - that is not the purpose of this thread. There is a problem in this country where there are basically 2 sides that believe in 2 completely different ways of running the country. How is this a good thing?

I suppose the Federal government is too powerful and it doesn't allow the states to make enough of the decisions. Each state should be customized to the population that resides in it, with very few blanket policies that apply to all states. Then, I could decide to move to a state that caters to my desires if I so wish. Unfortunately, this is not the current case, though I believe it was the original idea.

The Constitution actually states that a lot of power is managed using seperation of powers within the federal government and that a lot of power is passed down to the states to govern themselves accordingly. However, there is a clause called the "Elastic Clause" that the government (both parties) have taken a huge advantage of.

[StellarKnight]

Originally Posted by jamest91

However, there is a clause called the "Elastic Clause" that the government (both parties) have taken a huge advantage of.

NPC isn't a grant of Constitutional power; it's a vehicle for exercising powers vested under the Constitution.

[EvanActon]

gonzo- tell me what admendment of the us constitution says that i need to help promote welfare. i want the number because there is not one.

ohio- you are exactly right. states have the right to make there own descisons without the input of the federal government. personally, i think the only the only thing the they need to have their fingers in is national security.

[drgonzo]

Originally Posted by jamest91

however, how can one promote welfare (doesnt say govt. must provide general welfare) in the current broken state that it is in?

What do you specifically see as broken?

Originally Posted by jamest91

Also, drgonzo, you can say one example could be all the left wing sites that pounced on the Romney 47% thing.

I don't understand what this means. Romney had a major gaffe there and it's also a crystallization of his essence that he has been fighting really hard to avoid. So the news media would be remiss to ignore that.

Originally Posted by StellarKnight

Yeah, but this idea/culmination of a pluralistic society didn't just spring up overnight, whereas the discord we're currently seeing is a relatively new phenomena. Or is it? I'm just basing this on what I can remember as a 27-year old, so I could be very wrong.

There have indeed been some historically bad precedents set by the modern republican party. Kind of started with Gingrich, impeaching the president really was a terrible thing for the country and may have been the single most damaging event in recent political history.

[chodeyg]

Originally Posted by Iamamartianchurch

We don't share common culture values or heritage. Without any of these basic points of agreement or commonality, we aren't going to get very far in the political realm.

Being an American in 2012 is little more than a political agreement through social contract. Hardly leaving much to identify with our fellow countrymen.

You voice this idea a lot but I don't think I agree with it. There isn't a lot of evidence that a mix of backgrounds is the root cause of any of our problems, especially considering we have been a nation of mixed backgrounds since before we were a nation. Americans do have an identity-we are a group of people who may not share the same ethnicity, religion, or background but we embrace the idea of "live and let live". I think this is more than enough to keep us held together.

The two major parties currently hold threats against this idea though. Democrats have a disdain for states rights, and republicans keep inventing this idea of a culture war when Christianity isnt state sponsored. Both parties are going to have to change if they want to keep the peace.

As far as politics being polarized, you should read some newspaper articles from the early 1800s. This is not the first time people lamented the end of America because of the other party, I assure you.

[Iamamartianchurch]

Originally Posted by StellarKnight

Yeah, but this idea/culmination of a pluralistic society didn't just spring up overnight, whereas the discord we're currently seeing is a relatively new phenomena. Or is it? I'm just basing this on what I can remember as a 27-year old, so I could be very wrong.

You're right, it is a process. The goal has been there for a while now, arguably.

I can't speak with any authority on levels of discord in the past. I can say that when economic conditions are good, people are more forgiving of their differences.