Why are Left & Right so hard to reconcile?

[ClosedCaption]

Because neither side do what they say they advocate. Conservatives don't fight for smaller government and liberals don't fight for genuine charity, just greater government power.

The true merger between liberal and conservative is libertarian. One can believe in small, responsible government and personal charity, which is the only effective kind, at the same time.

Heres the thing with the right. They will change reality to fit a narrative. So, Kaz says that republicans dont fight for smaller govt without equivocation but then says liberals dont fight for "GENUINE" charity.

See the trick? He doesnt say liberals dont fight for charity like he does with republicans. He has determined that liberals do fight for charity he just deems it as "not genuine". That narrative is used over and over. Liberals fight for social saftey nets and republicans dismiss it as not "REAL"?!!? So no matter whats done, they just dismiss it and claim its the same as republicans really not doing something else.

Says the man who is in the party of Slavery, the KKK, Segregation, and Robert Byrd.

Next thing that you will try and say is that some magical party switch happened .... Yet other then Thurman all the Racists STAYED DEMOCRAT.

Yes, we know the republicans were hot bitches in high school but now she's just a old hag who speaks of how hot she used to be 70 years ago. Too bad you dont have anything more recent to hang your hat on

 

[editec]

Interesting theory.

Why its almost like he's saying partisans are BLINDED to the truth, isn't it?

Now where have I heard that complaint before?

 

[Mac1958]

If you have two opposing problems which you hold for principles, how do you compromise without hypocrisy?

Avatar, compromise is not hypocrisy, that's a non sequitur. Cooperation is not capitulation. Both sides of an issue certainly want to state their case clearly and strongly, but they must also be humble enough to realize that "all or nothing" just isn't the way adults behave in a complicated modern society.

In such a society, there must be a trust, an accord, on all sides that they will ultimately give and take. Once that trust breaks down, we essentially descend into anarchy, everyone screaming, no one listening, no possibility of facilitation.

The best model for this is the Constitution. Myriad disparate opinions and approaches hammered out, give and take, no absence of passion, and they created perhaps the greatest single document ever. The whole became greater than the sum of its parts. Certainly no one in that room got everything they wanted. But such a success can only happen with reasonable cooperation.

.

there are also the concepts of 'one vote per citizen' and 'majority vote rules'.

those basic concepts of a free nation have been lost when judges with an agenda can overturn the will of the voters as they did when california voted against gay marriage twice.

liberals want a dictatorial government as long as it dictates their philosophy. Why? because they know that liberalism always loses when the facts are presented.

Clearly the energized portion of the American Left is after a pure social democracy, a far more authoritarian centralized bureaucracy, perhaps a step or two to the left of modern-day France. And we didn't just arrive at this overnight; this has been an incremental movement.

And the Right can't reverse this overnight, which is apparently what it's trying to do. It has to win elections, prove that its way of doing things is superior, and move the country in its direction (if that is, indeed, where the country wants to go) over time.

The problem is that this toxic political environment is pushing out those who can facilitate constructive movement, from both sides. We're ending up with a radicalized political system that will only violently jerk back and forth as each end proves it's not equipped to govern a large, diverse and complicated country from one far end.

I understand your point, what I don't see is how absolutism is helping either our political process or our country.

.

 

[Wildman]

Liberals are a plague on this nation so there is no reason to meet them half way. Exterminate their ideology, period.

we could go one step further and exterminate more than an ideology. ....

 

[kaz]

I saw this:




Is one side evil? Or do both have good points, which the other fails to see?

Because neither side do what they say they advocate. Conservatives don't fight for smaller government and liberals don't fight for genuine charity, just greater government power.

The true merger between liberal and conservative is libertarian. One can believe in small, responsible government and personal charity, which is the only effective kind, at the same time.

Heres the thing with the right. They will change reality to fit a narrative. So, Kaz says that republicans dont fight for smaller govt without equivocation but then says liberals dont fight for "GENUINE" charity.

See the trick? He doesnt say liberals dont fight for charity like he does with republicans. He has determined that liberals do fight for charity he just deems it as "not genuine". That narrative is used over and over. Liberals fight for social saftey nets and republicans dismiss it as not "REAL"?!!? So no matter whats done, they just dismiss it and claim its the same as republicans really not doing something else.

I could buy this argument that Republicans don't even care about what they advocate and Democrats do except you are just too stupid to do it right except for one thing. You not only don't achieve actual charity, you actually harm the people you claim you are fighting for and don't care. You make people dependent on government, kill jobs, increase wage disparity, increase poverty, prop up dictators around the world and you ... don't ... care ...

If you were merely stupid, while you may not know how to solve the problem, that you are actually harming everyone you try to help would bother you, and it doesn't. So actually while you make a good case that Republicans don't care, what you have also shown is that you only care about yourselves, it's the only explanation for your complete disregard for the harm you do to the people you are using to justify your policies.

 

[thanatos144]

If dems vote for welfare repubs will just say dems dont "really" care.

If dems want to protect the earth concerning global warming repubs just say dems dont "really" care.

Women get less pay and dems want to change that. Repubs just say dems dont "really" care.

Then they have a formula that consists of taking any thing dems want and saying they want it for either money, power or both. How do they know? They dont, but they want to stop any and all advances based on their conspiracy theories that they will admit is rooted in nothing but assumptions.

Meanwhile the way they show support is by saying there is no problem or being indifferent to it as if that is the better option for those effected

So you are ether really gullible or a dishonest hack ,...... Which is it?

 

[thanatos144]

Heres the thing with the right. They will change reality to fit a narrative. So, Kaz says that republicans dont fight for smaller govt without equivocation but then says liberals dont fight for "GENUINE" charity.

See the trick? He doesnt say liberals dont fight for charity like he does with republicans. He has determined that liberals do fight for charity he just deems it as "not genuine". That narrative is used over and over. Liberals fight for social saftey nets and republicans dismiss it as not "REAL"?!!? So no matter whats done, they just dismiss it and claim its the same as republicans really not doing something else.

Says the man who is in the party of Slavery, the KKK, Segregation, and Robert Byrd.

Next thing that you will try and say is that some magical party switch happened .... Yet other then Thurman all the Racists STAYED DEMOCRAT.

Yes, we know the republicans were hot bitches in high school but now she's just a old hag who speaks of how hot she used to be 70 years ago. Too bad you dont have anything more recent to hang your hat on

Aww is the history lesson to much for your feeble mind?

 

[ScienceRocks]

Idiots, that have to hate each other and can't stand working together. Maybe we should tell people like Ted Cruz and Hillary to go fuck themselves? That would be a start!

Next, why not take a step towards each other?

 

[RKMBrown]

I saw this:

You can't shame conservatives by exposing their hypocrisy; they are in a cult and cults require lockstep obedience at ALL costs, including the cost of being hypocritical.

Is one side evil? Or do both have good points, which the other fails to see?


How about this as a theory of mind.

Thought you might like this as a theory to explain it:



PS:
Thank you NYcarbineer.

Total Bullshit. Paints everyone into one of two corners, the left being open the right being closed. Total Bullshit. I'm more conservative than most republicans and the statue of David does not bother me at all. Clearly the guy in the video is a libtard who sees all conservatives as having some sort of mental handicap.

Fairness was his second most important basis for morality? No large groups found in nature? WTF is he blind? Never seen a school of fish, or an ant mound, or a heard of buffalo, or a pride of lions? WTF is he talking about?

In group loyalty is a basis for morality? What? It's a basis for a-morality through cognitive dissonance, not morality.

Respect for authority is a basis for morality? WTF? Yeah and what if the authority is an authoritarian left marxist? HUH?

 

[Redfish]

Idiots, that have to hate each other and can't stand working together. Maybe we should tell people like Ted Cruz and Hillary to go fuck themselves? That would be a start!

Next, why not take a step towards each other?

Good idea, did Reid and Pelosi try that when they rammed obamacare up our asses on dems only votes?

 

[ScienceRocks]

Idiots, that have to hate each other and can't stand working together. Maybe we should tell people like Ted Cruz and Hillary to go fuck themselves? That would be a start!

Next, why not take a step towards each other?

Good idea, did Reid and Pelosi try that when they rammed obamacare up our asses on dems only votes?

Maybe republicans shouldn't be so anti-government and come up with a workable plan.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Look people we don't want the left and right to reconcile because when they do it costs us money.

The best thing for your wallet is gridlock

 

[RKMBrown]

Idiots, that have to hate each other and can't stand working together. Maybe we should tell people like Ted Cruz and Hillary to go fuck themselves? That would be a start!

Next, why not take a step towards each other?

Good idea, did Reid and Pelosi try that when they rammed obamacare up our asses on dems only votes?

Maybe republicans shouldn't be so anti-government and come up with a workable plan.

The workable plan is less government, duh. Being anti-government is merely a result of how stupid relying on this federal government for anything has been.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Because neither side do what they say they advocate. Conservatives don't fight for smaller government and liberals don't fight for genuine charity, just greater government power.

The true merger between liberal and conservative is libertarian. One can believe in small, responsible government and personal charity, which is the only effective kind, at the same time.

Heres the thing with the right. They will change reality to fit a narrative. So, Kaz says that republicans dont fight for smaller govt without equivocation but then says liberals dont fight for "GENUINE" charity.

See the trick? He doesnt say liberals dont fight for charity like he does with republicans. He has determined that liberals do fight for charity he just deems it as "not genuine". That narrative is used over and over. Liberals fight for social saftey nets and republicans dismiss it as not "REAL"?!!? So no matter whats done, they just dismiss it and claim its the same as republicans really not doing something else.

I could buy this argument that Republicans don't even care about what they advocate and Democrats do except you are just too stupid to do it right except for one thing. You not only don't achieve actual charity, you actually harm the people you claim you are fighting for and don't care. You make people dependent on government, kill jobs, increase wage disparity, increase poverty, prop up dictators around the world and you ... don't ... care ...

Like I said, in order to determine dems dont really care you have to spin it into a negative like "making people dependent" when that is more talking points than it is reality. I always say that if someone is at the bottom of a hole all they want is a helping hand.

You refuse to give a helping hand out of principal and also tell the guy reaching in the hole that he is making the person in the hole dependent. All the while you sit there and do nothing proclaiming that twittling your thumbs is a better action than actually helping

If you were merely stupid, while you may not know how to solve the problem, that you are actually harming everyone you try to help would bother you, and it doesn't. So actually while you make a good case that Republicans don't care, what you have also shown is that you only care about yourselves, it's the only explanation for your complete disregard for the harm you do to the people you are using to justify your policies.

See? This republican agrees that republicans do nothing AND determined that helping people is actually harming them and they will leave people at the bottom of the hole for their own good? When really they need an excuse to why doing is good and doing something is bad.

Any good deed thats done they just say its bad and ignoring people in need is what is really the solution.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Says the man who is in the party of Slavery, the KKK, Segregation, and Robert Byrd.

Next thing that you will try and say is that some magical party switch happened .... Yet other then Thurman all the Racists STAYED DEMOCRAT.

Yes, we know the republicans were hot bitches in high school but now she's just a old hag who speaks of how hot she used to be 70 years ago. Too bad you dont have anything more recent to hang your hat on

Aww is the history lesson to much for your feeble mind?

Yes it hurts so bad That all you got?

 

[Katzndogz]

The differences in this country go all the way down to bedrock, or below, to magma. They can never be reconciled. There really is no point on which compromise or agreement can occur. One side wants to kill babies, the other won't accept murder of infants. One side wants to impose homosexual practices on the entire population. The other side won't accept it. One side wants to prevent individuals from accumulating property through their own efforts. The other side wants to eliminate the concept of private property. One side wants to create a master race based on skin color, immune from criticism. The other side won't be silenced.

You don't fix these things with compromise. What held the nation together was a set of shared values and principles. Those are gone, never to return.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Good idea, did Reid and Pelosi try that when they rammed obamacare up our asses on dems only votes?

Maybe republicans shouldn't be so anti-government and come up with a workable plan.

The workable plan is less government, duh. Being anti-government is merely a result of how stupid relying on this federal government for anything has been.

Do you not understand that Republicans are not and will not reduce the size of govt? If you know that republicans wont do it, why do you think Dems are bad for doing the SAME THING the republicans are doing which is increasing its size.

Somehow dems are Marxist and Republicans are freedom patriots or some shit for the same things?

 

[ClosedCaption]

The differences in this country go all the way down to bedrock, or below, to magma. They can never be reconciled. There really is no point on which compromise or agreement can occur. One side wants to kill babies, the other won't accept murder of infants. One side wants to impose homosexual practices on the entire population. The other side won't accept it. One side wants to prevent individuals from accumulating property through their own efforts. The other side wants to eliminate the concept of private property. One side wants to create a master race based on skin color, immune from criticism. The other side won't be silenced.

You don't fix these things with compromise. What held the nation together was a set of shared values and principles. Those are gone, never to return.

To hang your hat on only those things is fucking sad.

Great dont kill babies, dont be gay and dont steal but that doesnt have anything to do with the political parties. There is so much more at stake than abortion and homos but you refuse to take the blinders off

 

[RKMBrown]

Maybe republicans shouldn't be so anti-government and come up with a workable plan.

The workable plan is less government, duh. Being anti-government is merely a result of how stupid relying on this federal government for anything has been.

Do you not understand that Republicans are not and will not reduce the size of govt? If you know that republicans wont do it, why do you think Dems are bad for doing the SAME THING the republicans are doing which is increasing its size.

Somehow dems are Marxist and Republicans are freedom patriots or some shit for the same things?

I'm libertarian conservative (as in not libertarian anarchist). I believe in a limited federal government tasked to the purposes they were originally tasked to do. I gave up on the republican party a long time ago. I did not vote for McCain or Romney or Obama. The only reason I voted for Bush was he was 10times better than Kerry, but really that was the last straw for me for the republican party. I knew Bush was a moderate in TX, but was surprised that he was also a warhawk and would support a bill like the unpatriot act. Not to mention the socialist expansions... medicare expansion. I was willing to live with his no child left behind bullshit. But the rest ... omfg.

 

[ClosedCaption]

The workable plan is less government, duh. Being anti-government is merely a result of how stupid relying on this federal government for anything has been.

Do you not understand that Republicans are not and will not reduce the size of govt? If you know that republicans wont do it, why do you think Dems are bad for doing the SAME THING the republicans are doing which is increasing its size.

Somehow dems are Marxist and Republicans are freedom patriots or some shit for the same things?

I'm libertarian conservative. I gave up on the republican party a long time ago.

that still doesnt explain how two parties can do the same thing and you say they are on different spectrums