Why do so many of you buy into the left/right paradigm?

[eflatminor]

Do you find it fun? Ya know, being on one team while tattering whoever is on the other team? Surely you do not think that there is any tangible difference between the American let and the American right...why instead not just look for issues and details you agree with personally rather than look for your opinions spoon fed to you? Help me understand this.

"I think it might be important to point out that this country is a one-party country. Half of that party is called Republican and half is called Democrat. It doesn’t make any difference. All the really good ideas belong to the Libertarians."

-Hugh Downs

World Peace and Ending Hunger are good ideas as well.

Libertarian will never be anything more than 'ideas.'

You and I have communicated enough that I'd bet you agree with a bunch of those Libertarian ideas.

Platform | Libertarian Party

 

[SniperFire]

"I think it might be important to point out that this country is a one-party country. Half of that party is called Republican and half is called Democrat. It doesn’t make any difference. All the really good ideas belong to the Libertarians."

-Hugh Downs

World Peace and Ending Hunger are good ideas as well.

Libertarian will never be anything more than 'ideas.'

You and I have communicated enough that I'd bet you agree with a bunch of those Libertarian ideas.

Platform | Libertarian Party

Sure.

Everybody agrees with about half of it.

 

[uscitizen]

Do you find it fun? Ya know, being on one team while tattering whoever is on the other team? Surely you do not think that there is any tangible difference between the American let and the American right...why instead not just look for issues and details you agree with personally rather than look for your opinions spoon fed to you? Help me understand this.

Most people prefer to be led.

 

[eflatminor]

World Peace and Ending Hunger are good ideas as well.

Libertarian will never be anything more than 'ideas.'

You and I have communicated enough that I'd bet you agree with a bunch of those Libertarian ideas.

Platform | Libertarian Party

Sure.

Everybody agrees with about half of it.

I'm guessing you didn't actually look at the party's platform. That's fine, but if you'd care to take the time, I really would like to see which of the specifically stated principals you're against.

 

[SniperFire]

You and I have communicated enough that I'd bet you agree with a bunch of those Libertarian ideas.

Platform | Libertarian Party

Sure.

Everybody agrees with about half of it.

I'm guessing you didn't actually look at the party's platform. That's fine, but if you'd care to take the time, I really would like to see which of the specifically stated principals you're against.

You really think I haven't studied Libertarian?

LOL


Libertarians simply don't get human nature and you are oblivious to world history.

 

[Liberty]

Sure.

Everybody agrees with about half of it.

I'm guessing you didn't actually look at the party's platform. That's fine, but if you'd care to take the time, I really would like to see which of the specifically stated principals you're against.

You really think I haven't studied Libertarian?

LOL


Libertarians simply don't get human nature and you are oblivious to world history.

Maybe we are naive, but at least we believe in something positive.

 

[SniperFire]

I'm guessing you didn't actually look at the party's platform. That's fine, but if you'd care to take the time, I really would like to see which of the specifically stated principals you're against.

You really think I haven't studied Libertarian?

LOL


Libertarians simply don't get human nature and you are oblivious to world history.

Maybe we are naive, but at least we believe in something positive.

Libertarian isn't a form of government. I have proved it several times in here.

It is a 'shucks, this is the way things oughta be' wetdream.

And yes, you are quite naive.

 

[eflatminor]

Sure.

Everybody agrees with about half of it.

I'm guessing you didn't actually look at the party's platform. That's fine, but if you'd care to take the time, I really would like to see which of the specifically stated principals you're against.

You really think I haven't studied Libertarian?

Never said that. I was just hoping to hear your take on the specifics principals listed in the platform.

Libertarians simply don't get human nature and you are oblivious to world history.

Sorry to hear you say that. I've appreciated your position many times before, we've repped each other, etc. Ugliness doesn't suit you. In any case, I'm a passionate life long student of history, particularly economic history. If you don't want to discuss the platform, that's fine. All the best.

 

[MisterBeale]

First, is the strong belief that the Constitution of the United States of America is the best contract between a people and their federal government, that has ever existed in human history. Defending that contract is the primary duty of every citizen. The fact that we have allowed politicians and jurists to tear at that document, does not discredit the document, it discredits the abusers, and those who sit by and allow them to do so.

Second, is that individual Americans, acting in their own financial and social interests, have built an economy and a social fabric, second to none. That no government or bureaucrat is smart enough, wise enough, or honest enough to do a better job at it. And, every time they try, they screw it up, bigtime.

Third, is the knowledge that political power is like fire, helpful when well controlled, but highly dangerous when out of control. Consequently, political power must be difused as much as is possible, and held, as much as possible at the local level, where citizens are better able to contain it.

Fourth, is the absolute fact that no honest man, who is indebted to another, is as free as one who is not. When indebted to government, or dependent upon government, freedom exists only at the level that government dictates. You want the goodies, you toe the line.

Finely crafted and well thought out post, I applaud you and agree with you wholeheartedly. However, I think you missed that whole thrust of my post. It was not corruption of our body politic that I was aiming my post at. I was aiming my post toward that concept of social engineering. It is, has been, and is a continuing threat to the culture of the sovereign nature of the individual. The sovereign individual, and indeed the rights of the individual states, are what the Constitution was written for. The Constitution was written only to specifically enumerate its' duties and powers, all other rights were assumed to lay with the individual and the states.

You here a lot of talk on among some conservatives of "culture" wars. But is there more meaning to that than just taking "religion" out of the culture? Back in the fifties we had the red scare. Even before that, we had previous "red scares." Can you imagine today having a "red scare?" Unimaginable, isn't it? What were "red scares?" What they were was the implicit belief that there were powerful forces, both within the cultural and intellectual elite, trying to impose a cultural paradigm that was the antithesis to the American ideal, that being, rugged self-reliance. Through artificial means of what is known now as social engineering, ideas, mores, and attitudes have slowly been changed, manipulated, and bent to accommodate the wishes of the cultural, social, and financial elites that run world institutions. These ideas run counter to the American ideals that were originally responsible for the very founding and writing of the Constitution. What good is the Constitution if they don't make kids learn it, if people don't read it or know it, and people don't believe in it or it runs counter to their beliefs? Perhaps you are unaware, but they are actually teaching things in public schools, in elementary schools today, that are counter to the ideals that are held in the Constitution.

So now what? A large portion of Americans don't even give a shit about the Constitution. And lets face it, THAT IS ALL WE HAVE. That is what makes us American. It is what binds the two parties and the states together. Without it, we are nothing. In schools they are trying to teach kids now that America is something else, they are trying to teach that America is. . . well, I don't want to get into it, I read my fifth grader's Social Science book the other day, and IT IS PITIFUL.

Go ahead, start a thread on whether or not we are a "christian nation." You will probably have a large percentage of people here chime in saying that they firmly believe that yes, we are a christian nation. But I could find quotes from all but almost a few founders laying out why almost all the first settlers came here seeking to free themselves of religions persecution. I could find references to how Ben Franklin was in all likelihood an Atheist. How all the other most famous founders were Deists.

Or start a thread on the freedom of speech. You will honestly find members here that think the government was right in picking Brandon Raub up for typing up his fantasies of hacking up people in government he believed were responsible for 9/11. Do you know it is illegal to just SAY you are going to kill the president? I am sure there are people who would love it if it were illegal to make any anti-semtic remark at all.

Shall we start in on gun control? "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
That's pretty unambiguous to me, but a whole lot of other people will quibble about the part before the comma and make excuses to infringe upon that right. The founders were pretty clear about their intent in their personal writings though. Why will people and judges quibble on this? Because of the social engineering of our schools and institutions.

This has nothing to do with our politicians. It has nothing to do with the corporations. It is far deeper, and more sinister in some ways. Just as nobles in Europe sought to keep their families in control of the masses, the elite families that have been controlling this nation wish to remain in control.

The enemy of the United States government in the modern age is NOT other governments. And the enemy of other governments is not the United States. All governments of the world have one common enemy. Or it could more rightly be said, the ruling families of all the governments of the world have one common enemy, their own peoples. The ruling elites of China have more in common with the ruling elites of the United states than they do with their own people, and visa versa. This is why the foundations of these countries seek to make all people look at the world the same.

I would list these foundations, but I have posted a similar post on another forum, and it crashed that site for a day, censored the discussion before the site came back up before peoples posts throughout the forums went missing, so I left that site. FOUNDATIONS ARE POWERFUL. Don't underestimate them. I don't wish to see the same thing happen here. You're smart, you'll figure it out.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUYCBfmIcHM&list=PLFB2200A85E897D0D&index=13&feature=plpp_video]Norman Dodd On Tax Exempt Foundations - YouTube[/ame]

United States House Select Committee to Investigate Tax-Exempt Foundations and Comparable Organizations - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A famous general once said that you go to war with the army that you have, and not the one you wish you had. Politics is no different, you work with the political structure that exists, and not the one that you wish existed. My politics are based on some very long lived principles, and I vote according to those principles.

Neither major political party meets all of my standards, but the Republican party comes far closer than the Democrat party. I can either play the game with the politics that exist, or I can sneak off into the corner and throw a snit.

Personally? At heart I'm a minarchist, I believe in co-operative control of local communities. But for the young conservatives of this site, I really wonder how many have even heard of the John Birch Society and Lyndon LaRouche as the corporate controlled media has done such a good job spinning it's tale. I see by visiting their site, they have published an article showing the GOP finally decided to reject Agenda 21. Too little too late I am afraid.

To understand the scope of such an agenda, consider that the UN considers carbon dioxide — a gas exhaled by human beings and required by plants — to be a “pollutant” in need of regulation. As the GOP resolution noted, the global body has also repeatedly referred to national sovereignty and private land ownership as social injustices. And that is why activists are up in arms — it has nothing to do with bike lanes.

GOP Platform Rejects UN Agenda 21 as Threat to Sovereignty
They should have done that while they were still in power. Too late now. Nit Wits. This agenda is entrenched in every city and state in the nation and mortgages for non urban properties are now much more expensive than urban ones. Thanks GOP. Idiots.

The point is, even the Democrats wouldn't have gotten people to go along with Agenda 21 at the city and state level if people still gave a damn about America and the Constitution. But they don't, they have been. . . GLOBALIZED I am afraid. And that was the goal of these foundations from the very start.

 

[OKTexas]

First, is the strong belief that the Constitution of the United States of America is the best contract between a people and their federal government, that has ever existed in human history. Defending that contract is the primary duty of every citizen. The fact that we have allowed politicians and jurists to tear at that document, does not discredit the document, it discredits the abusers, and those who sit by and allow them to do so.

Second, is that individual Americans, acting in their own financial and social interests, have built an economy and a social fabric, second to none. That no government or bureaucrat is smart enough, wise enough, or honest enough to do a better job at it. And, every time they try, they screw it up, bigtime.

Third, is the knowledge that political power is like fire, helpful when well controlled, but highly dangerous when out of control. Consequently, political power must be difused as much as is possible, and held, as much as possible at the local level, where citizens are better able to contain it.

Fourth, is the absolute fact that no honest man, who is indebted to another, is as free as one who is not. When indebted to government, or dependent upon government, freedom exists only at the level that government dictates. You want the goodies, you toe the line.

Finely crafted and well thought out post, I applaud you and agree with you wholeheartedly. However, I think you missed that whole thrust of my post. It was not corruption of our body politic that I was aiming my post at. I was aiming my post toward that concept of social engineering. It is, has been, and is a continuing threat to the culture of the sovereign nature of the individual. The sovereign individual, and indeed the rights of the individual states, are what the Constitution was written for. The Constitution was written only to specifically enumerate its' duties and powers, all other rights were assumed to lay with the individual and the states.

You here a lot of talk on among some conservatives of "culture" wars. But is there more meaning to that than just taking "religion" out of the culture? Back in the fifties we had the red scare. Even before that, we had previous "red scares." Can you imagine today having a "red scare?" Unimaginable, isn't it? What were "red scares?" What they were was the implicit belief that there were powerful forces, both within the cultural and intellectual elite, trying to impose a cultural paradigm that was the antithesis to the American ideal, that being, rugged self-reliance. Through artificial means of what is known now as social engineering, ideas, mores, and attitudes have slowly been changed, manipulated, and bent to accommodate the wishes of the cultural, social, and financial elites that run world institutions. These ideas run counter to the American ideals that were originally responsible for the very founding and writing of the Constitution. What good is the Constitution if they don't make kids learn it, if people don't read it or know it, and people don't believe in it or it runs counter to their beliefs? Perhaps you are unaware, but they are actually teaching things in public schools, in elementary schools today, that are counter to the ideals that are held in the Constitution.

So now what? A large portion of Americans don't even give a shit about the Constitution. And lets face it, THAT IS ALL WE HAVE. That is what makes us American. It is what binds the two parties and the states together. Without it, we are nothing. In schools they are trying to teach kids now that America is something else, they are trying to teach that America is. . . well, I don't want to get into it, I read my fifth grader's Social Science book the other day, and IT IS PITIFUL.

Go ahead, start a thread on whether or not we are a "christian nation." You will probably have a large percentage of people here chime in saying that they firmly believe that yes, we are a christian nation. But I could find quotes from all but almost a few founders laying out why almost all the first settlers came here seeking to free themselves of religions persecution. I could find references to how Ben Franklin was in all likelihood an Atheist. How all the other most famous founders were Deists.

Or start a thread on the freedom of speech. You will honestly find members here that think the government was right in picking Brandon Raub up for typing up his fantasies of hacking up people in government he believed were responsible for 9/11. Do you know it is illegal to just SAY you are going to kill the president? I am sure there are people who would love it if it were illegal to make any anti-semtic remark at all.

Shall we start in on gun control? "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
That's pretty unambiguous to me, but a whole lot of other people will quibble about the part before the comma and make excuses to infringe upon that right. The founders were pretty clear about their intent in their personal writings though. Why will people and judges quibble on this? Because of the social engineering of our schools and institutions.

This has nothing to do with our politicians. It has nothing to do with the corporations. It is far deeper, and more sinister in some ways. Just as nobles in Europe sought to keep their families in control of the masses, the elite families that have been controlling this nation wish to remain in control.

The enemy of the United States government in the modern age is NOT other governments. And the enemy of other governments is not the United States. All governments of the world have one common enemy. Or it could more rightly be said, the ruling families of all the governments of the world have one common enemy, their own peoples. The ruling elites of China have more in common with the ruling elites of the United states than they do with their own people, and visa versa. This is why the foundations of these countries seek to make all people look at the world the same.

I would list these foundations, but I have posted a similar post on another forum, and it crashed that site for a day, censored the discussion before the site came back up before peoples posts throughout the forums went missing, so I left that site. FOUNDATIONS ARE POWERFUL. Don't underestimate them. I don't wish to see the same thing happen here. You're smart, you'll figure it out.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUYCBfmIcHM&list=PLFB2200A85E897D0D&index=13&feature=plpp_video]Norman Dodd On Tax Exempt Foundations - YouTube[/ame]

United States House Select Committee to Investigate Tax-Exempt Foundations and Comparable Organizations - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A famous general once said that you go to war with the army that you have, and not the one you wish you had. Politics is no different, you work with the political structure that exists, and not the one that you wish existed. My politics are based on some very long lived principles, and I vote according to those principles.

Neither major political party meets all of my standards, but the Republican party comes far closer than the Democrat party. I can either play the game with the politics that exist, or I can sneak off into the corner and throw a snit.

Personally? At heart I'm a minarchist, I believe in co-operative control of local communities. But for the young conservatives of this site, I really wonder how many have even heard of the John Birch Society and Lyndon LaRouche as the corporate controlled media has done such a good job spinning it's tale. I see by visiting their site, they have published an article showing the GOP finally decided to reject Agenda 21. Too little too late I am afraid.

To understand the scope of such an agenda, consider that the UN considers carbon dioxide — a gas exhaled by human beings and required by plants — to be a “pollutant” in need of regulation. As the GOP resolution noted, the global body has also repeatedly referred to national sovereignty and private land ownership as social injustices. And that is why activists are up in arms — it has nothing to do with bike lanes.

GOP Platform Rejects UN Agenda 21 as Threat to Sovereignty
They should have done that while they were still in power. Too late now. Nit Wits. This agenda is entrenched in every city and state in the nation and mortgages for non urban properties are now much more expensive than urban ones. Thanks GOP. Idiots.

The point is, even the Democrats wouldn't have gotten people to go along with Agenda 21 at the city and state level if people still gave a damn about America and the Constitution. But they don't, they have been. . . GLOBALIZED I am afraid. And that was the goal of these foundations from the very start.

Not everyone is setting back quietly where agenda 21 is concerned. I'm involved with groups working on fighting local and regional planning and smart meter/smart grid introduction. In fact I testified last month in fornt of the state public utilities commission about some of the dangers of smart meters and their threat to privacy.

 

[MisterBeale]

World Peace and Ending Hunger are good ideas as well.

Libertarian will never be anything more than 'ideas.'

That is what the Constitution of the United States of America is, Ideas. In the early days of the republic, people were educated at home, in private schools, etc. There was no mass government indoctrination. Your attitude towards the notion of those ideals were not common. Just admit it, you don't believe in the Constitution any more and you think it is just a damn piece of paper. We have only had one President of the United States that was truly a Libertarian, that was George Washington.

It is a 'shucks, this is the way things oughta be' wetdream.

And yes, you are quite naive.

I suppose the Founding Fathers were naive for believing that this is the way things ought to be and were pretty naive too, huh? Guess they should have set up a neo-liberal corporatist state from the git go since fending of the international banking cartel out of the City of London was doomed to failure, their descendants were going to fail them anyhow? Makes me wonder why they bothered to revolt so they could have sound money in the first place so their descendants could have debased currency some hundred years later just like their mother country. Pretty asinine if you ask me.
City of London - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[SniperFire]

World Peace and Ending Hunger are good ideas as well.

Libertarian will never be anything more than 'ideas.'

That is what the Constitution of the United States of America is, Ideas. In the early days of the republic, people were educated at home, in private schools, etc. There was no mass government indoctrination. Your attitude towards the notion of those ideals were not common. Just admit it, you don't believe in the Constitution any more and you think it is just a damn piece of paper. We have only had one President of the United States that was truly a Libertarian, that was George Washington.

I hate the healthcare law, but the most brilliant legal minds we have tell us it is, in fact, Constitutional.

Do you, or do you not, believe in the Constitution?

You are projecting. It is Libertarians who do not believe in the Constitution.

So kindly 1) educate yourself 2) look in the mirror and then tell me who is the one who thinks 'the Constitution is just a damn piece of paper, and then 3) go **** yourself.

 

[MisterBeale]

I hate the healthcare law, but the most brilliant legal minds we have tell us it is, in fact, Constitutional.

Do you, or do you not, believe in the Constitution?

You are projecting. It is Libertarians who do not believe in the Constitution.

So kindly 1) educate yourself 2) look in the mirror and then tell me who is the one who thinks 'the Constitution is just a damn piece of paper, and then 3) go **** yourself.

Just because these so called "most brilliant minds," meaning those trained in institutions funded and supported by those self-same foundations I just posted by my supporting links indicating non-constitution means of social engineering to change American cultural thinking, have an agenda toward changing the American landscape toward a neo-liberal, corporatist, anti-democratic means, does not mean you need to be hostile. It is not me that has shut down your thought processing or questioning, as to why they have made the ruling they have, or indeed what the implications of said ruling will be.

Do you even understand what the ruling means? I hardly think so. It is absurd and anti-American to its' core. There really was no question whether it was "Constitutional" or culturally American or not for most people. In the 1940's this nation went to war against fascism. We were against the very idea that government should institutionalize the notion that the nation state should enforce the rule of the corporation over the citizenry. Now the Chief justice rules with the dissenting liberal justices that, indeed, in that constitution, there is somehow a right for the federal government to use it's power to institute, what amounts to fascism, the power to force people to purchase goods and services from corporate entities. Don't you even realize what that means? IT MEANS ALL THE DEATHS THAT AMERICANS DIED FIGHTING FASCISM DURING WWII NOW HAVE BEEN MADE MEANINGLESS IN ONE FELL SWOOP WITH THAT ONE MISGUIDED DECISION THANKS TO THE SOCIAL ENGINEERING EFFORTS OF THE GLOBALISTS.

And you tell me to **** off and accept it with out question. How you call yourself an American is beyond me. Move to Europe. Better yet, allow my state to succeed please, don't tread on me, this Union no longer works for me. I don't care for the Fed, I want my state to issue some sound currency. You probably still believe that shit paper and unlimited QE is somehow going to do any good. . .

 

[SniperFire]

I hate the healthcare law, but the most brilliant legal minds we have tell us it is, in fact, Constitutional.

Do you, or do you not, believe in the Constitution?

You are projecting. It is Libertarians who do not believe in the Constitution.

So kindly 1) educate yourself 2) look in the mirror and then tell me who is the one who thinks 'the Constitution is just a damn piece of paper, and then 3) go **** yourself.

Just because these so called "most brilliant minds," meaning those trained in institutions funded and supported by those self-same foundations I just posted by my supporting links indicating non-constitution means of social engineering to change American cultural thinking, have an agenda toward changing the American landscape toward a neo-liberal, corporatist, anti-democratic means, does not mean you need to be hostile. It is not me that has shut down your thought processing or questioning, as to why they have made the ruling they have, or indeed what the implications of said ruling will be.

Do you even understand what the ruling means? I hardly think so. It is absurd and anti-American to its' core. There really was no question whether it was "Constitutional" or culturally American or not for most people. In the 1940's this nation went to war against fascism. We were against the very idea that government should institutionalize the notion that the nation state should enforce the rule of the corporation over the citizenry. Now the Chief justice rules with the dissenting liberal justices that, indeed, in that constitution, there is somehow a right for the federal government to use it's power to institute, what amounts to fascism, the power to force people to purchase goods and services from corporate entities. Don't you even realize what that means? IT MEANS ALL THE DEATHS THAT AMERICANS DIED FIGHTING FASCISM DURING WWII NOW HAVE BEEN MADE MEANINGLESS IN ONE FELL SWOOP WITH THAT ONE MISGUIDED DECISION THANKS TO THE SOCIAL ENGINEERING EFFORTS OF THE GLOBALISTS.

And you tell me to **** of and accept it with out question. How you call yourself an American is beyond me. Move to Europe. Better yet, allow my state to succeed please, don't tread on me, this Union no longer works for me. I don't care for the Fed, I want my state to issue some sound currency. You probably still believe that shit paper and unlimited QE is somehow going to do any good. . .

You are babbling.

Does the Supreme Court interpret the Constitution, or not?

 

[MisterBeale]

Just because these so called "most brilliant minds," meaning those trained in institutions funded and supported by those self-same foundations I just posted by my supporting links indicating non-constitution means of social engineering to change American cultural thinking, have an agenda toward changing the American landscape toward a neo-liberal, corporatist, anti-democratic means, does not mean you need to be hostile. It is not me that has shut down your thought processing or questioning, as to why they have made the ruling they have, or indeed what the implications of said ruling will be.

Do you even understand what the ruling means? I hardly think so. It is absurd and anti-American to its' core. There really was no question whether it was "Constitutional" or culturally American or not for most people. In the 1940's this nation went to war against fascism. We were against the very idea that government should institutionalize the notion that the nation state should enforce the rule of the corporation over the citizenry. Now the Chief justice rules with the dissenting liberal justices that, indeed, in that constitution, there is somehow a right for the federal government to use it's power to institute, what amounts to fascism, the power to force people to purchase goods and services from corporate entities. Don't you even realize what that means? IT MEANS ALL THE DEATHS THAT AMERICANS DIED FIGHTING FASCISM DURING WWII NOW HAVE BEEN MADE MEANINGLESS IN ONE FELL SWOOP WITH THAT ONE MISGUIDED DECISION THANKS TO THE SOCIAL ENGINEERING EFFORTS OF THE GLOBALISTS.

And you tell me to **** of and accept it with out question. How you call yourself an American is beyond me. Move to Europe. Better yet, allow my state to succeed please, don't tread on me, this Union no longer works for me. I don't care for the Fed, I want my state to issue some sound currency. You probably still believe that shit paper and unlimited QE is somehow going to do any good. . .

You are babbling.

Does the Supreme Court interpret the Constitution, or not?

Have a reading disability huh?

Dyslexia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If the people that were interpreting the Constitution were all educated in European Universities, how much credence would you give to their interpretations? It amounts to just about the same. Your level of analytical prowess to this issue is to be questioned if you aren't able to form any thoughts other than by getting information through any sources other than by T.V. or radio. Sorry.

You'll have to specifically cite the specific case of my "babbling," otherwise, you are just being intellectually lazy, deflecting and not able to comprehend the issue I am raising. Sorry if your cognitive dissonance is making you uncomfortable. The best way to deal with it is to change your political leanings, not to attack the bearer of bad news.

 

[SniperFire]

You are babbling.

Does the Supreme Court interpret the Constitution, or not?

Have a reading disability huh?

Dyslexia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If the people that were interpreting the Constitution were all educated in European Universities, how much credence would you give to their interpretations? It amounts to just about the same. Your level of analytical prowess to this issue is to be questioned if you aren't able to form any thoughts other than by getting information through any sources other than by T.V. or radio. Sorry.

You'll have to specifically cite the specific case of my "babbling," otherwise, you are just being intellectually lazy, deflecting and not able to comprehend the issue I am raising. Sorry if your cognitive dissonance is making you uncomfortable. The best way to deal with it is to change your political leanings, not to attack the bearer of bad news.

Again, you babble and duck the simple question.

You are afraid of the simple question.

You have failed.

 

[Dick Tuck]

Do you find it fun? Ya know, being on one team while tattering whoever is on the other team? Surely you do not think that there is any tangible difference between the American let and the American right...why instead not just look for issues and details you agree with personally rather than look for your opinions spoon fed to you? Help me understand this.

Real people are less polarized than those you find on political message boards. Politics is always divisive. We did have a sitting Vice President, murder a man, who was essentially unarmed, over rhetoric.

 

[Liability]

Do you find it fun? Ya know, being on one team while tattering whoever is on the other team? Surely you do not think that there is any tangible difference between the American let and the American right...why instead not just look for issues and details you agree with personally rather than look for your opinions spoon fed to you? Help me understand this.

You "ask" Why do so many of you buy into the left/right paradigm?

And I suggest that maybe it has something to do with the fact that there is a left vs right "divide."

You claim that there is no tangible difference between the American left and the American right and I say that's one of the silliest bits of utter nonsense I have seen posted here outside of twoofer bullshit, racist idiocy and everything said by TderpM.

 

[Saigon]

Do you find it fun? Ya know, being on one team while tattering whoever is on the other team? Surely you do not think that there is any tangible difference between the American let and the American right...why instead not just look for issues and details you agree with personally rather than look for your opinions spoon fed to you? Help me understand this.

The left/right thing is for children and people who have no understanding of politics.

To ue it i to look at a colour picture in black & white.

And on this board, that lack of understanding REALLY shows!

 

[dblack]

Do you find it fun? Ya know, being on one team while tattering whoever is on the other team? Surely you do not think that there is any tangible difference between the American let and the American right...why instead not just look for issues and details you agree with personally rather than look for your opinions spoon fed to you? Help me understand this.

You are repeating a tired, fallacious meme. There are significant differences between the Right and Left.

Significance is in the eye of the beholder. I think the real issue here is that the left/right axis no longer addresses issues of contention between authoritarians and libertarians. Authoritarians dominate both parties and drive us deeper and deeper into corporatist government. Choosing between a party that wants to tell us how to run our personal lives and one that wants to tell us how to run our economic lives is irrelevant to those who want neither.

Likewise, I'd suppose that people enthusiastic about a strong, central government are more or less content with whichever party wins, as they both aim in that direction.