American Idiocracy

[Intense]

I agree that our political differences are going to severely damage our economy and place in the world. But the differences are real. There's no way you can make them go away. Perhaps in a generation or two, they'll have resolved themselves. But for the immediate future, we're in a deadlock.

Unfortunately, the divide was turned into a chasm when Jr. and his great line "if you're not with us, you're with the terrorists". That made everyone try to say their way was the only right way.

Unfortunately, our lawmakers that we sent to Washington to represent the views of all the people of this country, have chosen instead to reduce their rhetoric to bumper stickers and tweets, instead of doing their actual jobs which includes debate and compromise.

I mean.......the views of someone in Iowa are going to be much different than those in LA or NYC, so if you want to truly represent the people, you need to compromise on things so that the whole country has a voice.

Unfortunately, the divide was turned into a chasm when Jr. and his great line "if you're not with us, you're with the terrorists". That made everyone try to say their way was the only right way.

Or, it could have been seen as a Unified Front. Thanks for Fucking that one up. Good to know who could be counted on when the chips were down.

Unfortunately, our lawmakers that we sent to Washington to represent the views of all the people of this country, have chosen instead to reduce their rhetoric to bumper stickers and tweets, instead of doing their actual jobs which includes debate and compromise.

How does one compromise Principle? What are you willing to sell out to get a deal? Who are you willing to sell out to get a deal?

I mean.......the views of someone in Iowa are going to be much different than those in LA or NYC, so if you want to truly represent the people, you need to compromise on things so that the whole country has a voice.

Consensus does not win the day. How about instead, hearing out legitimate argument, relevant argument, and go with the best you have, upon reflection, by weight and importance, rather than incorporating every ounce of Bullshit?
We have a Right to be heard and have our concerns and grievances heard. However, if those grievances and concerns are lacking, or misguided, there is no obligation to act on them.

 

[Zagg]

I would agree both parties are moving towards the fringes rather than trying to govern from the middle.

But whose fault is that?

I remember that for years, I had to listen to my liberal Democratic friends tell me that if More Republicans were just sensible, bi-partisan, country before Party centrists... you know like John McCain, why they might even consider voting for a Republican.

So Republicans did the "Oky-Doke", and nominated John McCain.

And he got 4 million less votes than Bush got 4 years earlier.

I think the problems are ones NEITHER side are willing to address. First, that Free Trade has been a complete disaster for the country and her industries. But neither party will oppose that, and people who speak out against free trade like Ross Perot or Pat Buchanan are villified as "nuts".

I also have severe doubt that our problems can be resolved democratically. I think someone is going to have to feed us some very harsh medicines to get the problems fixed.

there not Nuts for speaking out against Free Trade. They are just ignoring History. Things were not exactly wonderful back in the days of Economic Isolationism, and Massive Tariffs.

the Problem is not Free Trade, the problem is we don't actually have Free and Fair Trade. We let anyone sell anything here, but those same places. Like China. Restrict our Trade. Free Trade really only works when all parties play Fair.

In all fairness to your Dem friends, do recall that for a year McCain tried to convince everyone that he was George Bush.

 

[flacaltenn]

Compromise is what got us the 3/5ths solution to slavery.. Cost us a Civil War later on.. But it moved us forward for one lifetime at a moral cost as well.

Sitting on the 3rd party bandwagon as I am -- I WANT Pelosi/Obama to get EVERYTHING they want. First thing you'll find out is if they really want it. (Gitmo ring any bells?) LET THEM TAX the shit out of the rich for a couple years. The science part of me wants to play out the experiment and have conclusive proof. I figure 1.5 years is enough ruiness direction to win the argument.

It's MUCH better than (as Sparky said) allowing the 2 parties to exhaust all the rest of us with the whining, frat pranks, foot stomping and cookie stealing that usually goes on. With only 2 choices on the ballot -- what do you expect when the answer is "BOTH parties do it". Both parties are corrupt and incompetent. And both parties can point at each other like spoiled twins and scream that the "other one did it first"..

All that is a true indication of the absence of principles and political philosophy. ONLY THE WINGS today supply a sufficient amount of those things. Add a 3rd spoiled sibling in the mix -- and it becomes MUCH harder to deflect blame.

What is compromise solution to AGlobalWarming? Spend 1/2 of what the eco-left wants us to spend? So you only lose 1/2 of Manhattan if one side is wrong and lose only 1/2 of your industrial base if the other is wrong?

No --- I want to win. I don't want to compromise on the Constitution or my liberties or what I'm leaving to my grandchildren. There is no solution in compromise. The experiments should be conclusive. The political choices should be broadened to INCLUDE the wings in the debate. NEVER should be seeking to select the most "grey" candidates we can find..

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Hyperpartisanship is vastly preferable to the road obama would have us travel. The time for compromise is over. I for one, am tired of giving my freedom away to progressive politics in little increments.
90 years of compromise with progressives has gotten into this hole. Only strict Constitutional Conservatism can pull us out.

Thank you for being part of the problem.

The irony is liberals and conservatives need each other – they once complemented one another as both philosophies contributed valuable policies of good, sound governance.

Their growing dissonance only harms this Nation.

 

[Charles_Main]

I would agree both parties are moving towards the fringes rather than trying to govern from the middle.

But whose fault is that?

I remember that for years, I had to listen to my liberal Democratic friends tell me that if More Republicans were just sensible, bi-partisan, country before Party centrists... you know like John McCain, why they might even consider voting for a Republican.

So Republicans did the "Oky-Doke", and nominated John McCain.

And he got 4 million less votes than Bush got 4 years earlier.

I think the problems are ones NEITHER side are willing to address. First, that Free Trade has been a complete disaster for the country and her industries. But neither party will oppose that, and people who speak out against free trade like Ross Perot or Pat Buchanan are villified as "nuts".

I also have severe doubt that our problems can be resolved democratically. I think someone is going to have to feed us some very harsh medicines to get the problems fixed.

there not Nuts for speaking out against Free Trade. They are just ignoring History. Things were not exactly wonderful back in the days of Economic Isolationism, and Massive Tariffs.

the Problem is not Free Trade, the problem is we don't actually have Free and Fair Trade. We let anyone sell anything here, but those same places. Like China. Restrict our Trade. Free Trade really only works when all parties play Fair.

In all fairness to your Dem friends, do recall that for a year McCain tried to convince everyone that he was George Bush.

Key word, Trying. It wasn't true then, and it wasn't true when the Dems said it in 08.

 

[Cuyo]

Agree. But I want my guys to win.

 

[Cuyo]

Hyperpartisanship is vastly preferable to the road obama would have us travel. The time for compromise is over. I for one, am tired of giving my freedom away to progressive politics in little increments.
90 years of compromise with progressives has gotten into this hole. Only strict Constitutional Conservatism can pull us out.

Hey nitwit, do you ever think anything you don't say?

 

[uscitizen]

I would agree both parties are moving towards the fringes rather than trying to govern from the middle.

But whose fault is that?

I remember that for years, I had to listen to my liberal Democratic friends tell me that if More Republicans were just sensible, bi-partisan, country before Party centrists... you know like John McCain, why they might even consider voting for a Republican.

So Republicans did the "Oky-Doke", and nominated John McCain.

And he got 4 million less votes than Bush got 4 years earlier.

I think the problems are ones NEITHER side are willing to address. First, that Free Trade has been a complete disaster for the country and her industries. But neither party will oppose that, and people who speak out against free trade like Ross Perot or Pat Buchanan are villified as "nuts".

I also have severe doubt that our problems can be resolved democratically. I think someone is going to have to feed us some very harsh medicines to get the problems fixed.

And why will they not speak out against "free trade"? Because corporate interests that control them are making a bundle off of it.

 

[ABikerSailor]

I would agree both parties are moving towards the fringes rather than trying to govern from the middle.

But whose fault is that?

I remember that for years, I had to listen to my liberal Democratic friends tell me that if More Republicans were just sensible, bi-partisan, country before Party centrists... you know like John McCain, why they might even consider voting for a Republican.

So Republicans did the "Oky-Doke", and nominated John McCain.

And he got 4 million less votes than Bush got 4 years earlier.

I think the problems are ones NEITHER side are willing to address. First, that Free Trade has been a complete disaster for the country and her industries. But neither party will oppose that, and people who speak out against free trade like Ross Perot or Pat Buchanan are villified as "nuts".

I also have severe doubt that our problems can be resolved democratically. I think someone is going to have to feed us some very harsh medicines to get the problems fixed.

And why will they not speak out against "free trade"? Because corporate interests that control them are making a bundle off of it.

Why else do you think that the GOP is so hot to trot on privatizing Social Security and Medicaid? If it belongs to the government, they can't make a profit on it.

However.............if we did do that, privatization would not necessarily answer to their customers as much as they do their stockholders and CEO's.

Or has everyone not noticed that corporations are making RECORD profits while the rest of us suffer and are unemployed.

 

[OODA_Loop]

Compromise or the longshoremen / teamster army will pay a visit.

Youz sons of bitches

 

[ABikerSailor]

I agree that our political differences are going to severely damage our economy and place in the world. But the differences are real. There's no way you can make them go away. Perhaps in a generation or two, they'll have resolved themselves. But for the immediate future, we're in a deadlock.

Unfortunately, the divide was turned into a chasm when Jr. and his great line "if you're not with us, you're with the terrorists". That made everyone try to say their way was the only right way.

Unfortunately, our lawmakers that we sent to Washington to represent the views of all the people of this country, have chosen instead to reduce their rhetoric to bumper stickers and tweets, instead of doing their actual jobs which includes debate and compromise.

I mean.......the views of someone in Iowa are going to be much different than those in LA or NYC, so if you want to truly represent the people, you need to compromise on things so that the whole country has a voice.

Or, it could have been seen as a Unified Front. Thanks for Fucking that one up. Good to know who could be counted on when the chips were down.

Unfortunately, our lawmakers that we sent to Washington to represent the views of all the people of this country, have chosen instead to reduce their rhetoric to bumper stickers and tweets, instead of doing their actual jobs which includes debate and compromise.

How does one compromise Principle? What are you willing to sell out to get a deal? Who are you willing to sell out to get a deal?

I mean.......the views of someone in Iowa are going to be much different than those in LA or NYC, so if you want to truly represent the people, you need to compromise on things so that the whole country has a voice.

Consensus does not win the day. How about instead, hearing out legitimate argument, relevant argument, and go with the best you have, upon reflection, by weight and importance, rather than incorporating every ounce of Bullshit?
We have a Right to be heard and have our concerns and grievances heard. However, if those grievances and concerns are lacking, or misguided, there is no obligation to act on them.

Seen as a "unified front"? Yeah.....sure......tell me more about the "party of no". THEIR unified front was to say no to ANYTHING Obama puts out, even stuff they were FOR just six months ago.

Who would I "sellout"? Nobody. I'd ask that the tax rate be returned to when this nation was prosperous and everyone was working. Under Clinton.

And..........yes...........consensus DOES win the day if you live in a democracy. I hope we still do.

 

[Ernie S.]

Hyperpartisanship is vastly preferable to the road obama would have us travel. The time for compromise is over. I for one, am tired of giving my freedom away to progressive politics in little increments.
90 years of compromise with progressives has gotten into this hole. Only strict Constitutional Conservatism can pull us out.

Hey nitwit, do you ever think anything you don't say?

Sometimes I hold back an hour or so. You're an ass hole.

 

[bripat9643]

Nothing wrong with being partisan. It is in an unwillingness to compromise where problems arise.

And that's the problem with the GOP. Shit........things they were for a couple of years ago they are against now because Obama said it was a good idea.

It's not just the GOP which is the problem. Remember when President Obama first came into office and let the the Speaker of the House run with the Health Care ball? Pelosi stomped out all GOP ideas and basically said, "We own it all now so go fuck yourself".

"Partisanship", by itself, isn't the problem. Being committed to one's party ideals is a good thing. OTOH, being so focused on dominating the nation's politics that a person would rather see the nation fail or lose an election rather than compromise is friggin' insane. It's this level of partisanship which is discussed in the article and which is dragging our nation down.

Partisanship isn't the problem. Democrats are the problem. The idea that all ideas have some merit is just pure horseshit. Socialism doesn't work, and it never will. the more Democrats manage to change our government and economy to conform to their idiocies, the worse off we will be.

End of story.

The claim that both sides have merit is bunk.

 

[bripat9643]

Thank you for being part of the problem.

The irony is liberals and conservatives need each other – they once complemented one another as both philosophies contributed valuable policies of good, sound governance.

Their growing dissonance only harms this Nation.

Democrats are what harm this nation. When conservatives lie down without fighting them, that harms the nation even worse.

 

[JoeB131]

there not Nuts for speaking out against Free Trade. They are just ignoring History. Things were not exactly wonderful back in the days of Economic Isolationism, and Massive Tariffs.

the Problem is not Free Trade, the problem is we don't actually have Free and Fair Trade. We let anyone sell anything here, but those same places. Like China. Restrict our Trade. Free Trade really only works when all parties play Fair.

The thing is, that the wrong lessons are drawn from history.

For instance, in 1921, the response to the Depression of 1920 was to raise tariffs and cut income taxes, and that resulted in an economic boom that lasted a decade because people found it more economical to make things here.

Yes, Smoot-Hartley gave tarrifs a bad name, but it's an unfair rap. Other countries had imposed their own Tariffs to protect their own industries well before S-H was put on the books. Also, there was a major conversion of the economy from agricultural to industrial going on at that time.

also, at that time, we were the biggest exporter of manufactured goods, so we were shooting ourselves in the foot. Today we import more than we export, so not so much.

I do agree part of the problem is that we let anyone play here, but everyone else is taking measures to protect their industries. I also think that if we are going to have health and safety and environmental rules (I think some are needed, just not as excessive or anti-growth as we have) then we should only trade with people who have the same standards.

 

[Intense]

Unfortunately, the divide was turned into a chasm when Jr. and his great line "if you're not with us, you're with the terrorists". That made everyone try to say their way was the only right way.

Unfortunately, our lawmakers that we sent to Washington to represent the views of all the people of this country, have chosen instead to reduce their rhetoric to bumper stickers and tweets, instead of doing their actual jobs which includes debate and compromise.

I mean.......the views of someone in Iowa are going to be much different than those in LA or NYC, so if you want to truly represent the people, you need to compromise on things so that the whole country has a voice.

Or, it could have been seen as a Unified Front. Thanks for Fucking that one up. Good to know who could be counted on when the chips were down.


How does one compromise Principle? What are you willing to sell out to get a deal? Who are you willing to sell out to get a deal?

I mean.......the views of someone in Iowa are going to be much different than those in LA or NYC, so if you want to truly represent the people, you need to compromise on things so that the whole country has a voice.

Consensus does not win the day. How about instead, hearing out legitimate argument, relevant argument, and go with the best you have, upon reflection, by weight and importance, rather than incorporating every ounce of Bullshit?
We have a Right to be heard and have our concerns and grievances heard. However, if those grievances and concerns are lacking, or misguided, there is no obligation to act on them.

Seen as a "unified front"? Yeah.....sure......tell me more about the "party of no". THEIR unified front was to say no to ANYTHING Obama puts out, even stuff they were FOR just six months ago.

Who would I "sellout"? Nobody. I'd ask that the tax rate be returned to when this nation was prosperous and everyone was working. Under Clinton.

And..........yes...........consensus DOES win the day if you live in a democracy. I hope we still do.

Sometimes there are multiple ways to meet a goal, yet we need to learn to commit to the path that is chosen, sometimes deviation itself is what causes failure. The point here is to choose, and make the best with what you have to work with, rather than undermine the effort. The majority generally gets to make the choice of what path, not the minority. Consensus, is Bullshit. It is a corruption, a watering down at best.
Government has grown in size and proportion since Clinton, We can't afford it. Government needs to learn to live within it's means. The Power Grab needs to come to an end.