YOU are more dangerous than terrorism

[Gadawg73]

He's right. Polarization has spread to the churches, playgrounds, charities, business place and everywhere else in America.
Talking politics in church was worse than farting in church when I was young. No one did it.
Now folks are proud to stand up and church and tell others that God supports so and so.
It is a very bad influence on youth. Of course very few care about youth anymore, especially the AARP crowd. They could give a damn.

 

[Gadawg73]

Guess who John Boehner's best friend was?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

So are we just supposed to put up with the leftwing loonies who are trying to destroy this nation and fundementally change it from the way it has been known for over 230 years?

No way man.... I plan on fighting the leftwing till the day I die.

As far as I am concerned, we are being ran by a soft tyranny and I dont plan on going into the darkness quietly.

i think you just proved his point.

What point????

All I hear is dont fight it.... b/c it will just devide us if you do.....

Its kind of like a rapist sayin "dont fight me, or Ill rape you".

We on the right are just supposed to sit back and let the left destroy the nation I love?

Sorry.... aint gonna happen Babe.


The way I see it.... no conservatives are allowed to comment on this thread unless they agree with OP. Otherwise, they will just be percieved as devisive right?

Why not tell the leftwing asses to slow down with all the America busting legislations?????

It always amazes me when someone calls me divisive because I say Islam is a threat to civilization, or when I point out that people do not have a right to be offended, or any of the other "divisive" things I do.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Neither the ideologues of the far left or the far right know what is best for the country. They live in "rarefied country air." Their battles weaken the center. Eventually the center will rise and smash both extremes. Watch.

I should have expected to see you throwing your progressive ideology around in here.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Neither the ideologues of the far left or the far right know what is best for the country. They live in "rarefied country air." Their battles weaken the center. Eventually the center will rise and smash both extremes. Watch.

Here's the hoping you're right! Extremists on both side of the spectrum aren't productive for America. They're too set in their ways, and are ultra paranoid. Hopefully a sane moderate is put into office (a real moderate), and sorts all this shit out.

Not enough, it is the fringes on both sides that pollute the public debate and cloud the waters on every issue from global warming to non proliferation and gays in the military.

As long as the fringes get this much air time the public will always be confused and bewildered. And unable to sort thru the complex issues of our time.

BTW the parties themselves ARE those fringes.

Bullshit. It is the people who, like you, hold those fringes up as examples mainstream thought on either side, and the real problem, that pollute the debate, the rest of us just ignore them. The real problem is that both sides of the political spectrum are only out for themselves, and care nothing about anyone who cannot make them richer or give them more power.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Who cares what Clinton said, alright? Are you one of those rightwinged airhead assholes advocating fucking war? Well go fight the SOB and STFU!! I am showing Infantdel he has better places he can take out his frustrations, like a war he approves of. So what about you dude? Are you another coward like Bush, advocate wars but want others to fight them for you?? Hmm?

No I am just putting forward quite clearly that the Democrats are just as responsible for the said war as Republicans, unless you believe that Democrats didn't vote for the war.

not to rehash, but there is a big difference between voting to authorize war under certain circumstances and after meeting certain conditions and telling the cowboy to go and invade baghdad and overthrow saddam.

i will agree, though, that they were wusses for not telling bush to stick it because they were afraid they'd be called "weak on terrorism".

What, exactly, is that difference? Because I can point to plenty of Democrats who voted for the both, so I would love to know why they are right but the Republicans who did the same thing are wrong. By the way, I can also point to 1 person in Congress who is consistently activating we have no business in other countries internal affairs at all, and that person is not a Democrat.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The greatest threat that faces the US isn't terrorism, or Russian nukes, or socialism, or Obama, or the new oligarchs........

The greatest threat facing America is YOU!

Polarization is the most dangerous threat facing our nation today. Political polarization, social, ethnic, you name it.

A house divided can not stand.

Obviously polarizing us one against another is a tool to make us the people weak so leaders that we despise can still manage to get elected. Divide and conquer. But the net effect is that it makes our nation fragmented, promotes conflict, erodes social cohesion and erodes the very fabric that binds us together as a nation of people sharing a common national mission.

The bottom line is that as a nation we are no stronger than the bonds we share to our fellow citizens, PERIOD!

Whatever your party, preferences, self interests, ideology, etc, all of that is secondary, tertiary, ranks last.

If your first priority is anything other than finding common ground and uniting your will with your fellow citizens wills and directing that united will toward a national effort than you are far, far, far more dangerous than terrorism.

We were too strong to ever be defeated by an outside enemy. But as our unity and cohesion fragment we are becoming weak, ineffectual, act contrary to our own self interest and worse of all enable a bought and paid for leadership that betrays us continually regardless of which party holds power today.

In synopsis, the parties are the problem, if we subscribe to and support their "divided and conquered" agenda then we as a nation will fall.

United we stand, divided we fall.

Think about it before you post some asinine retort that means nothing.

~regarding Patrick Henry of "Give me Liberty or give me Death" fame.

United we stand, divided we fall - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The only thing that will unify America is the Constitutioin. When Its destroy, don't expect US to follow the ones that destoried it. There is no unity as far as I am concerned when it goes outside of the Constitution.

Dingleberry, it is the Teabaggers and that ilk that have been suggesting changing basic portions of the Constitution.

How?

 

[JakeStarkey]

It always amazes me when someone calls me divisive because I say Islam is a threat to civilization, or when I point out that people do not have a right to be offended, or any of the other "divisive" things I do.

I would say your attitude is a threat to civilization, but . . . it's not. It is simply wrong in its assumptions.

 

[Revere]

He's right. Polarization has spread to the churches, playgrounds, charities, business place and everywhere else in America.
Talking politics in church was worse than farting in church when I was young. No one did it.
Now folks are proud to stand up and church and tell others that God supports so and so.
It is a very bad influence on youth. Of course very few care about youth anymore, especially the AARP crowd. They could give a damn.

Freedom is dissent, and vice versa.

 

[loosecannon]

The only thing that will unify America is the Constitutioin. When Its destroy, don't expect US to follow the ones that destoried it. There is no unity as far as I am concerned when it goes outside of the Constitution.

I don't buy it. Americans were perhaps most united before the constitution was drafted. A nation is more than it's founding documents no matter how special.

A nationstate is a group of people in a geographical region who consider themselves to be a "people". IOW the people themselves recognize unity that connects themselves together in solidarity. It isn't enough to have laws that define, or boundaries that define the nation, it has to be something that the people themselves deeply believe, so much so it in their minds that bond distinguishes them from other people.

Oxford Dictionary of Politics:
nation-state
Top
Home > Library > History, Politics & Society > Political Dictionary

Literally, a sovereign entity dominated by a single nation. A mythical and intellectual construct with a highly persuasive and powerful political force. It is the primary unit in the study of international relations. Yet although it has a specific meaning it is also a highly abused political term, especially when too readily applied to the ‘real’ world. Its meaning is found in the coincidence of its two parent terms, ‘state’ and ‘nation’. ‘State’ refers to the political organization that displays sovereignty both within geographic borders and in relation to other sovereign entities. A world of nation-states implies an international system of pure sovereign entities, relating to each other legally as equals. ‘Nation’ refers rather to the population within, sharing a common culture, language, and ethnicity with a strong historical continuity. This manifests itself in most members in a sentiment of collective, communal identity. When the two concepts, ‘nation’ and ‘state’ are combined, this creates an enormously compelling mixture of legitimacy and efficiency for governing elites.

Unfortunately, there does not exist, has never existed, a nation-state in the perfect sense. Nevertheless, it has commanded a strong following, as governments have endeavoured to attain the legitimacy and political stability it brings. It was used most effectively in the nation-building of the nineteenth century, and has been the target more recently of many Third World governments hoping to build nations in support of their states as part of their socio-economic development. A common strategy of elites in building a sense of internal cohesiveness is in creating strong enemy images from outside or within the society. It is often this feature that causes dynamic instability for nation-states in the world system.

The later part of the twentieth century witnessed a decline in the power of the ‘nation-states’, as other bodies gained power in international relations, bodies such as large multinational corporations, international organizations, and other collectivities. The rise of supranationalism, most clearly in the European Union, could well make the simple model of single-level sovereignty implied by the nation-state even more irrelevant. So could the problem of extranational minorities (such as Germans outside Germany, and Hungarians outside Hungary). For comparison, see also nationalism.

Read more: nation-state: Definition from Answers.com

The reason why this distinction is important is because globalization is threatening the very construct of nation states and therefore there is a kind of purpose behind efforts to shred the fabric that actually binds nation state's peoples to one another.

Rallying around the flag or the constitution, the motherland, homeland etc isn't the issue, the issue is that we rally around something that we all share in common. If we do we are a nation state, if we don't we aren't a nation state, and no document or symbol can change that.

 

[Revere]

The only thing that will unify America is the Constitutioin. When Its destroy, don't expect US to follow the ones that destoried it. There is no unity as far as I am concerned when it goes outside of the Constitution.

I don't buy it. Americans were perhaps most united before the constitution was drafted. A nation is more than it's founding documents no matter how special.

Bullshit. Loyalists and Patriots were both in the minority, and everyone else was somewhere in the middle.

Without the founding documents, the nation ceases to exist.

 

[loosecannon]

In NO - WAY is this nation devided in "half".... you just wish it were.

which explains why Gore and Bush faced off in a dead heat in 2000, why Obama and even the archaic McCain were only separated by a few % in 2008, and why Kerry almost beat GWB in 2004.

Yeah, I see your point, you don't have one.

When folks begin declaring a mandate, or landslide over a 4% popular election margin you know you have an equally divided electorate.

 

[loosecannon]

I swear Im not trying to pick at you Jillian..... I honestly, just dont understand.

Of course you do not. Everything is black and white in the simplistic world of the extreme right and left. Disagreement with the ideology is evil, so the person disagreeing is evil. That POV applies to either extreme.

In the meantime, those of us that deal with the reality of the world, reach compramises that outrage both sides.

In the real world Americans generally reach compromises quite easily. Only in the realms dominated by manufactured partisanship do we face gridlock.

 

[loosecannon]

The greatest threat that faces the US isn't terrorism, or Russian nukes, or socialism, or Obama, or the new oligarchs........

The greatest threat facing America is YOU!

Polarization is the most dangerous threat facing our nation today. Political polarization, social, ethnic, you name it.

Wrong.

Polarization is a mere symptom of The Greate$t Threat.

Polarization is the end-product of The Greate$t Threat.

There are people who suggest Capitali$m is our White Knight; that Capitali$m will cure ALL our ills.....that Capitali$m defines us, as a Nation.

Those (same) people insist that a free-marketplace is the great leveler....that if we Allow The Marketplace To Regulate Itself, everything else will (automatically) fall-into-place.

I'd say The Marketplace has succeeded....and, proceeded to Regulate U.S.!!!!​

It's too bad that you don't realize that the dems are playing the exact same game as the repubs, only telling a different slate of lies to reach their ends.

 

[loosecannon]

In synopsis, the parties are the problem, if we subscribe to and support their "divided and conquered" agenda then we as a nation will fall.]

Yes, indeed.

Once the people realize they can vote themselves money from the US treasury (spread wealth/more welfare) they'll keep voting for the person who can promise them more money

According to author Durham W. Ellis, this is what historian Alexander Tyler said about the fall of the Athenian Republic: “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most money from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy ….”



.

absolutely true.

 

[loosecannon]

the problem is that the division is real.

only among the loony extremes...

if you ask most people what their goals and beliefs are, you'll find they're not as polarized as the loons try to make out.

I wish that were true, Jill.

But there's a wide enough gap and both wings of the lunatics have more than enough players to tear this nation apart.

And what's more troubling is that we live in a cesspool of propaganda that is DESIGNED to exacerbate the divide.

Hell YES, I think that that is a conspiracy, Jill.

So I guess that makes me one of those nuts, too, right?

But everything I believe is based on things that are easily noted and not at all secret.

AFter a while, when an organization continues to fail at what it does, one must at least ASK ONESELF if what they say they're all about is really their agenda.

The constant flow of media manipulation that is obviously DESIGNED to make Americans fearfil of OTHER AMERICANS cannot be an ACCIDENT.

the lst thing on earth the master want is for the American people to start holding THEM accountable for what's going on.

So they create this SHAM that divides us into thinking that the DEMS are bad or the REPS are bad but the SYSTEM isn't.

Now you're smart woman and I know that you lean toward the Ds.

But do you honestly believe that the Dems (who work hand in glove with the Repbg wheneever MONEY is on the line) are really in opposition to what's happening?

Hel;l JILL they ran the nation for decades and while they did that they were bankrupting this nation and sending jobs overseas, too.

And Obma is STILL signing FREE TRADE pacts even as we speak.

This is NOT an accident of politics, Jill.

To believe that is to believe a fairy tale.

best of thread so far

 

[Gadawg73]

The only thing that will unify America is the Constitutioin. When Its destroy, don't expect US to follow the ones that destoried it. There is no unity as far as I am concerned when it goes outside of the Constitution.

I don't buy it. Americans were perhaps most united before the constitution was drafted. A nation is more than it's founding documents no matter how special.

Bullshit. Loyalists and Patriots were both in the minority, and everyone else was somewhere in the middle.

Without the founding documents, the nation ceases to exist.

I agree, we are a nation of laws, not men and their religions.
Sadly, many right wing religous fundementalists now want to take the US Constitution, a document founded on limiting the powers of government and totally dedicated to the preservation of our inalienable rights, turn it upside down, pass additional Constitutional Amendments and tell certain groups of people what they can not do, rather than tell the government what it cannot do.

And the right wing endorses it. The Founders are rolling in their graves.

 

[Revere]

Limiting the powers of government to impinge on religious freedom, among other things.

Are you free if you can't pray at the 50 yard line before or after your high school football game?

 

[loosecannon]

The surest sign of a lack of democracy is a lack of dissent.

Dissent doesn't equal nearly violent polarization and deep hatred for your own countrymen.

To read your posts I could swear you would prefer it if half the nation just disappeared from the face of the earth.

You are no American, Revere. You are the cancer killing this once magnificent nation.

Are you with US or against US?

 

[Revere]

Hey Barry, your namesake did not champion "wedge issues" at the expense of everything else be believed in going to hell.