RE: Special Report: Ideologically, Where Is the U.S. Moving?

RE: Special Report: Ideologically, Where Is the U.S. Moving? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

subfever -> RE: Special Report: Ideologically, Where Is the U.S. Moving? (7/8/2009 6:46:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mezrem Why are you all stuck on the RNC and the DNC? These are the people who have taken us to the point we are at now. I am seeing more and more people who are fed up with both groups. Yes, but not enough people. So keep spreading the word.

TheHeretic -> RE: Special Report: Ideologically, Where Is the U.S. Moving? (7/8/2009 7:33:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY What we need is a catalyst. Either an event, or series of events (a worsening economy) to convince more people to take a more active role, or a person who really motivates and inspires. That's true firm, but I think the first thing that has to happen is a turn in the press. The nice part is that we can just wait for it to happen organically. Liberal as they are, they are still snarky by nature, and a ratings/profit-driven herd. A friend swears that as soon as unemployment hits 10%, it starts getting ugly for President Obama in the press. The media just won't be able to resist the phrase "double-digit unemployment," and it will sell.

slvemike4u -> RE: Special Report: Ideologically, Where Is the U.S. Moving? (7/8/2009 7:37:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY What we need is a catalyst. Either an event, or series of events (a worsening economy) to convince more people to take a more active role, or a person who really motivates and inspires. That's true firm, but I think the first thing that has to happen is a turn in the press. The nice part is that we can just wait for it to happen organically. Liberal as they are, they are still snarky by nature, and a ratings/profit-driven herd. A friend swears that as soon as unemployment hits 10%, it starts getting ugly for President Obama in the press. The media just won't be able to resist the phrase "double-digit unemployment," and it will sell. It really warms the heart of this American to see the two of you root root root for dire events to befall your country....in order to advance your preferred political agenda. Snarky seems tame compared to downright maliciousness.

FirmhandKY -> RE: Special Report: Ideologically, Where Is the U.S. Moving? (7/8/2009 7:44:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY What we need is a catalyst. Either an event, or series of events (a worsening economy) to convince more people to take a more active role, or a person who really motivates and inspires. That's true firm, but I think the first thing that has to happen is a turn in the press. The nice part is that we can just wait for it to happen organically. Liberal as they are, they are still snarky by nature, and a ratings/profit-driven herd. A friend swears that as soon as unemployment hits 10%, it starts getting ugly for President Obama in the press. The media just won't be able to resist the phrase "double-digit unemployment," and it will sell. It really warms the heart of this American to see the two of you root root root for dire events to befall your country....in order to advance your preferred political agenda. Snarky seems tame compared to downright maliciousness. Mike, you'd try the patience of Job. Firm

slvemike4u -> RE: Special Report: Ideologically, Where Is the U.S. Moving? (7/8/2009 7:48:21 PM)
Well tell me Firm,how am I or anyone else supposed to interpet those statements?

FirmhandKY -> RE: Special Report: Ideologically, Where Is the U.S. Moving? (7/8/2009 7:53:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u Well tell me Firm,how am I or anyone else supposed to interpet those statements? Like an analytical discussion of the probabilities and possibilities of politics. You know ... a gentlemanly discussion about a generally ungentlemanly topic. Firm

slvemike4u -> RE: Special Report: Ideologically, Where Is the U.S. Moving? (7/8/2009 8:00:22 PM)
I agree it is possible to discuss such probabilities and possibilities as gentleman.....but please reread both yours and Rich's post....Both statements sound more like rooting for an eventuality that advances an political ideology. Listen to the line.."What we need is a catalyst"...that ones yours Now Rich's ..."The nice part is we can just wait for it to happen organically" That doesn't sound like an analytical examination of probabilities to me....that sounds like rooting for a shitty future for the multitudes.

FirmhandKY -> RE: Special Report: Ideologically, Where Is the U.S. Moving? (7/9/2009 12:02:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u I agree it is possible to discuss such probabilities and possibilities as gentleman.....but please reread both yours and Rich's post....Both statements sound more like rooting for an eventuality that advances an political ideology. Listen to the line.."What we need is a catalyst"...that ones yours Now Rich's ..."The nice part is we can just wait for it to happen organically" That doesn't sound like an analytical examination of probabilities to me....that sounds like rooting for a shitty future for the multitudes. Mike, I'm not an agent provocateur, or even a political active individual beyond these forums. At this stage in my life, I tend to be more intellectually focused, than I am energetic and hot to change the world. That doesn't mean that I believe that our current system is static, or perfect. Things will change, one way or another, eventually. Some changes I'd even welcome, even some which might cause some discomfort or pain, because the simple fact is that that is how the world works. That doesn't mean I wish anyone pain, or trouble. I just expect it as the reality of the world. I do believe that the current two party system in the US has exhausted itself in the furtherance of a "more perfect union". Competition is the American way, and can lead to a Darwinian development of a better system in the area of political parties. It's happened before. Know any Whigs? The two-party system isn't part of the Constitution. It is political culture that has used the laws and regulations to close the path to political representation to many Americans, and I think busting up the monopoly would lead to good things for America in the long run, even at the cost of some short term pain. As far as the particular sentence and words of mine that you quoted as "bothersome": "What we need is a catalyst", I don't believe you are taking it in the manner I was expressing it. I was discussing the possibilities of the rise of a third party. I could have said "What is required", rather than the words I did, but the effect is the same, and more personal the way that I said it. And I make no apologies of hoping for it either. I see nothing wrong with "an eventuality that advances an political ideology" if that ideology leads to a better union. So ... take offense if you will, but it's not going to change how I speak, or what I say, nor do I believe that I am doing anything other than adhering to the finest intellectual and moral principles of my nation. Firm

slvemike4u -> RE: Special Report: Ideologically, Where Is the U.S. Moving? (7/9/2009 7:54:44 AM)
Fair enough Firm.....

FirmhandKY -> RE: Special Report: Ideologically, Where Is the U.S. Moving? (7/9/2009 8:26:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY What we need is a catalyst. Either an event, or series of events (a worsening economy) to convince more people to take a more active role, or a person who really motivates and inspires. That's true firm, but I think the first thing that has to happen is a turn in the press. The nice part is that we can just wait for it to happen organically. Liberal as they are, they are still snarky by nature, and a ratings/profit-driven herd. A friend swears that as soon as unemployment hits 10%, it starts getting ugly for President Obama in the press. The media just won't be able to resist the phrase "double-digit unemployment," and it will sell. A change in the press would certainly be helpful to the process, Rich, but I don't necessarily think it would be a requirement. Currently, journalists compare slightly favorably to used car salesmens (22% vs 14%) for creditability in the public mind, and a majority of people do not believe that the media is very trustworthy overall: quote: (Lack of) confidence in newspapers (some to none): 74% (Lack of) confidence in TV news: (some to none): 76% A different poll (a Harris poll) last year pretty much agrees: quote: The Harris results reflect the findings of a Harvard University study conducted last year, which found “nearly two-thirds of Americans do not trust campaign coverage by the news media.” A few other recent surveys offer some explanation for the public’s distrust: – Two thirds of Americans - 67% - believe traditional journalism is out of touch with what Americans want from their news. I actually think that a charismatic leader, even if pilloried by the media would stand a chance. It would be ugly (in the vein of the Palin attacks), but even Palin has a lot more support than the media - or some posters on these boards - would want us to believe. I think that the very people who don't trust the media are - for the most part - the people who are or have dropped out of the political system (in disgust) and could be energized to take part again in the right circumstances, regardless of what the media says. Firm

rulemylife -> RE: Special Report: Ideologically, Where Is the U.S. Moving? (7/9/2009 9:11:03 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CallaFirestormBW quote: Which way do Americans want to be led? I don't want to be led ANY damned way. I want the government to follow MY lead!!! DC That's actually an excellent point. Somewhere along the line we lost sight that the President and Congress are supposed to be representatives of the people. I get pissed off anytime I hear them being referred to as our "leaders", though that has become commonplace.

slvemike4u -> RE: Special Report: Ideologically, Where Is the U.S. Moving? (7/9/2009 9:12:10 AM)
While a less apathetic populace would seem to be in everyones interest.....I find it curious that some on the right are convinced the majority of these newly inspired participants would be of conservative stripe. Sounds familiar in a sense,as if I have heard this song before......oh yeah,Nixon's(or was it Agnew who first spoke of it)famous "silent majority" claim.

FirmhandKY -> RE: Special Report: Ideologically, Where Is the U.S. Moving? (7/9/2009 9:22:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u While a less apathetic populace would seem to be in everyones interest.....I find it curious that some on the right are convinced the majority of these newly inspired participants would be of conservative stripe. Sounds familiar in a sense,as if I have heard this song before......oh yeah,Nixon's(or was it Agnew who first spoke of it)famous "silent majority" claim. I guess it goes back to my OP in this thread, mike. Firm

slvemike4u -> RE: Special Report: Ideologically, Where Is the U.S. Moving? (7/9/2009 9:40:47 AM)
Which I read as a mixed bag....conclusions wise.While the poll purports to indicate where we are moving to ideologically...we are factually moving towards a more liberal society. It is an axiom that a bell once rung can not be unrung......rolling back liberal gains will take a hell of a bigger backlash than anything indicated in that poll. An additional question would be just how long will the Democrats hold the White House....how many seats will Pres Obama get to fill on the Court....how many his successor would get ,if the Office remains with the party. Elections have consequences and none bigger than to put your stamp on the Court.

SilverMark -> RE: Special Report: Ideologically, Where Is the U.S. Moving? (7/9/2009 11:09:30 AM)
Funny thing, in the midst of the past Presidential election a similar poll was published and reported similar numbers, one of the many times that the polls and the ballot boxes disagreed. There are a number of people that like me, are fiscally conservative yet socially liberal. I love the idea of a moderate tax structure that still favors socially beneficial programs and less war money being spent. If we would simply put a stop to the huge defense spending(just how many weapons does one country need? what good has come from either Afghanistan or Iraq?) and focused on our people issues it would be much easier to provide a socially responsible government that does not tax success to the degree that at times, becomes self defeating. I would never answer a poll saying I was a conservative but would never definitively say I was an out and out liberal but, somewhere in between, more liberal on some issues and more conservative on others.

FirmhandKY -> RE: Special Report: Ideologically, Where Is the U.S. Moving? (7/9/2009 11:12:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u Which I read as a mixed bag....conclusions wise.While the poll purports to indicate where we are moving to ideologically...we are factually moving towards a more liberal society. It is an axiom that a bell once rung can not be unrung......rolling back liberal gains will take a hell of a bigger backlash than anything indicated in that poll. An additional question would be just how long will the Democrats hold the White House....how many seats will Pres Obama get to fill on the Court....how many his successor would get ,if the Office remains with the party. Elections have consequences and none bigger than to put your stamp on the Court. All good questions and why this is a fertile topic for discussion, I think. As far as "unringing the bell" it really depends on what you mean to roll back. My main concern is the growth of the power and intrusiveness of the Federal government. Most Americans are liberal in personal issues, and issues of conscience, but conservative on most other topics - as we define conservative. Sounds right, and ok by me. Firm

FirmhandKY -> RE: Special Report: Ideologically, Where Is the U.S. Moving? (7/9/2009 11:18:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SilverMark Funny thing, in the midst of the past Presidential election a similar poll was published and reported similar numbers, one of the many times that the polls and the ballot boxes disagreed. There are a number of people that like me, are fiscally conservative yet socially liberal. I love the idea of a moderate tax structure that still favors socially beneficial programs and less war money being spent. If we would simply put a stop to the huge defense spending(just how many weapons does one country need? what good has come from either Afghanistan or Iraq?) and focused on our people issues it would be much easier to provide a socially responsible government that does not tax success to the degree that at times, becomes self defeating. I would never answer a poll saying I was a conservative but would never definitively say I was an out and out liberal but, somewhere in between, more liberal on some issues and more conservative on others. Exactly my point, Mark. I'm a firm believer in a good strong defense, but wouldn't have a problem with a lot of downsizing, if all the money didn't end up in wasteful social programs. Such a shift would mean a basic re-examination of America's place in the world, and a more inward focus than we currently have. Possible problems? You betcha. What I would not tolerate or like to see is a gutted military, with all the money going to every politicians pet program or group. Would this mean an "isolationist" America? Could be. Not what I would like to see, and the danger of the rise and pre-eminance of a nation inimical to basic American values could be a big "gotcha" in this type of sea change in American outlook - but I think there are some countervailing advantages as well. Firm

philosophy -> RE: Special Report: Ideologically, Where Is the U.S. Moving? (7/9/2009 11:40:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY Most Americans are liberal in personal issues, and issues of conscience, but conservative on most other topics - as we define conservative. ...well, this or a variation of it, is probably true across the industrialised world. On the one hand, it's hard not to be sympathetic to liberal issues when we see intolerance and injustice. On the other hand, someone has to pay to sort problems out and i'd rather i didn't pay the lot....hence more conservative when it comes to actual money. i think the real trend isn't towards conservatism or liberalism. It's towards hybridisation. Just because clever people sat in libraries and came up with cogent and well argued political philosophies doesn't mean that people as a whole have to be so intellectually pure. They'll take a bit of communism, stitch it on to a bit of fiscal conservatism, sprinkle in something thats either anarcho-syndicalist or libertarian (the label fell off the jar)...and voila. Instant personal political philosophy. A philosophy that none of the major parties in US politics either represent or are capable of representing.

SilverMark -> RE: Special Report: Ideologically, Where Is the U.S. Moving? (7/9/2009 12:06:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY Most Americans are liberal in personal issues, and issues of conscience, but conservative on most other topics - as we define conservative. ...well, this or a variation of it, is probably true across the industrialised world. On the one hand, it's hard not to be sympathetic to liberal issues when we see intolerance and injustice. On the other hand, someone has to pay to sort problems out and i'd rather i didn't pay the lot....hence more conservative when it comes to actual money. i think the real trend isn't towards conservatism or liberalism. It's towards hybridisation. Just because clever people sat in libraries and came up with cogent and well argued political philosophies doesn't mean that people as a whole have to be so intellectually pure. They'll take a bit of communism, stitch it on to a bit of fiscal conservatism, sprinkle in something thats either anarcho-syndicalist or libertarian (the label fell off the jar)...and voila. Instant personal political philosophy. A philosophy that none of the major parties in US politics either represent or are capable of representing. You sum it all up so well!!!!!!....

FirmhandKY -> RE: Special Report: Ideologically, Where Is the U.S. Moving? (7/9/2009 12:30:02 PM)
Interesting reading: Populism: Populism is a discourse that claims to support "the people" versus "the elites". Populism may comprise an ideology urging social and political system changes and/or a rhetorical style deployed by members of political or social movements. Generally, populism invokes an idea of democracy as being, above all, the expression of the people's will. Academic and scholarly definitions of populism vary widely and, among both journalists and scholars, the term is often employed in loose, inconsistent and undefined ways to denote appeals to ‘the people’, ‘demagogy’ and ‘catch-all’ politics or as a receptacle for new types of parties whose classification observers are unsure of. Another factor held to diminish the value of ‘populism’ in some societies is that ... , unlike labels such as ‘conservative’ or ‘socialist’, the meanings of which have been ‘chiefly dictated by their adherents’, contemporary populists rarely call themselves ‘populists’ and usually reject the term when it is applied to them by others. Some exceptions to this pattern of pejorative usage exist, notably in the United States ... One of the latest of these ... define populism as "an ideology which pits a virtuous and homogeneous people against a set of elites and dangerous ‘others’ who are together depicted as depriving (or attempting to deprive) the sovereign people of their rights, values, prosperity, identity and voice". ... Indeed, while leaders of populist movements in recent decades have claimed to be on both the left and the right of the political spectrum, many populists claim to be neither "left wing," nor "centrist" nor "right wing." Firm

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875