Clear things up...

[vince]

And considering the negative stance several Fox viewers have on any form of immigration, the fact that the man that owns the station is a naturalized citizen makes the irony that much juicier.

Yeah, but he's the "right kind" of immigrant. Know what I mean??

 

[B_talltpaguy]

^Indeed, English speaking white people with money = come on in!

Dark skinned people looking for an opportunity for themselves and their family = deadbeats who should go away and die.

 

[deleted15807]

W. Bush's first term gave me no real issues - he was handling 9/11 as well as I thought possible at that time.

His second term went awfully wrong.

The Repubs spent crazy like the Democrats we always complained of.

The wars really got me though.

Well we can agree on that point. Wars are expensive affairs and can be fiscally ruinous. Combining two expensive wars and a tax cut certainly went a long way to get us where we are.

The democrats were always called ‘tax and spend’

I credit Clinton for balancing the budget. But note....after two years in office he lost those midterm elections and it made him a much more centrist and better President. I wonder if the same will be said for Obama.

Yes Clinton did and I’ll never forget the Wall Street Journal running an editorial titled ‘Give It Back’. You see the government was running a surplus and it is in their view robbery. Never mind the surplus was going to pay down the debt and never mind it’s a good idea to run a surplus in good years so you don’t go into the hole too during the inevitable bad years. And never mind everyone knew the money should have been used to shore up government finances. Give it back they screamed. And Bush did.

 

[B_talltpaguy]

Well we can agree on that point. Wars are expensive affairs and can be fiscally ruinous. Combining two expensive wars and a tax cut certainly went a long way to get us where we are.

You forgot his ~$700 billion giveaway to big pharma (Medicare Part D)... I've yet to figure out why no one was criminally charged, or at least forced to resign over that one... The White House blatantly lied to Congress about the cost, and it was well known to Congress that they had been lied to.

 

[B_VinylBoy]

vince: Yeah, but he's the "right kind" of immigrant. Know what I mean??
talltpaguy: Indeed, English speaking white people with money = come on in!

It's so good to know that among the rabid echoes of blinding ideology, some people really do get it.

 

[maxcok]

This thread is an example of the reason that myself and others barely take part in this forum.

The poster did nothing in his OP and has done very little in his brief time here to deserve the abuse thrown his way. I don't agree with much of what he says either, but jeez guys... It another thread I read a poster say the teabaggers and the Republicians do nothing but "shout down the opposition". And yet.... here we are. And please... don't come back to me with the juvenile argument that "they did a first" lol.

He's not in favor of big government and he doesn't agree with Obama. Big fucking deal. It doesn't mean his ideology isn't worthy to wipe his ass with. It doesn't make him a "nigger hanger" either.

This method of "debate" is annoying and embarrassing and became tedious months ago. It is also indicative of public discourse in the US these days. Does everyone have to behave like a talking head on Fox News?

Or it is just this medium that gives us big balls? If your neighbor said that he does like health insurance reform and he would be working to vote out Obama. would call him a nigger hanger? To his face?

Ideology has completely replaced common sense.

+1

I responded to the title of this thread...what I found it and how it is representative of politics in general. It's now turned into an ugly rant . . . It's impossible to have a positive and respectful discussion about politics.

It's not impossible...but around here, it's akin to ice-skating uphill.
You now understand why I have a sizable portion of the "regulars" of this forum (from both sides of the schism) on my ignore list.

With all due respect to you both, and I mean that sincerely, I disagree, at least in large measure. Levi's "nigger hanging" comment was uncalled for and beyond the pale. Other than that, I fail to see where any of the responses to the OP here were out of line. And yes, HazelGod, I imported your quote from another thread. It seemed more appropriate and efficient to make one response here, rather than repeating myself in that other thread. Speaking for myself, and I suspect it goes for many of the "regulars" here, I make every effort to gauge my comments relative to the poster I am responding too. For example, my responses to curiousme, a new poster in the thread where HG made his comment, well illustrate that. My responses to others are often influenced by that poster's previous history, as is the case with conntom.

These are not matters of simple disagreement. There are posters here such as conntom, stratedude, KTF40, Trinity and others who habitually and repeatedly post the same uninformed, frequently absurd statements, empty platitudes and mindless talking points - spoonfed propaganda from right-wing media - over and over in thread after thread regardless of the topic. Talking points that at their source are factually incorrect and devoid of any basis in reality. As they refuse to link anything to back up their assertions (with the exception of Trinity, for whatever those sources are worth) it becomes incumbent on us to post links to independent sources disproving their statements. Even when we do, they refuse to accept or even acknowledge it. Instead, they reject clear evidence to the contrary and continue in the same line. It becomes very annoying and tiresome after awhile, and it is as disruptive to serious discussion as any other bad behavior. Left to their own devices they will completely dominate the 'discussion' with this repetitive drivel. Even if I try to ignore them, which I do more often than not, someone else is bound to engage them and the whole thread goes to shit.

But aren't all opinions equally valid? I would say no. Not when they are devoid of original thought, rooted in unexamined ideology and flagrantly flawed reasoning - and especially when they are blanket statements presented as fact. They become even less valid through mindless repetition - after they have been disproven again and again. Typically when challenged, these posters will ignore the challenge to their position, deflect, distract, dissemble and continue to spout more inane pronouncements. Their position is "it's true because I think it (because [Hannity, Beck etc.] told me so)". When the challenges become too overwhelming and obvious to ignore, they typically abandon that thread and pop up in another to start the whole process over again from scratch They don't respond to reason, they are incapable of engaging in honest debate, so I ask you, what's a frustrated political junkie to do?

Speaking for myself, I have no interest in wasting my time and mental energy going back to political kindergarten again and again, digging up links, trying to argue against such inane pointless premises over and over, when there are educated and enlightened adults with whom I could be having a meaningful exchange of ideas or even learn something from - adults like you, HazelGod and Vince, among others. It is for this reason more than the rancor that I avoid participating in many threads. Often I just read to educate myself and broaden my point of view, and I have no particular intention of posting. Inevitably though, one of these mindless neocons starts spouting off and throws the whole thing off track. I sometimes find myself jumping in at that point to try to move the discussion back to something relevant, with admittedly mixed success.

A few, notably conntom, are very good at appearing good natured and reasonable in the face of opposition, because they've figured out this shields them from being shot down so quickly or so thoroughly. They are good at appearing like innocent victims, as CT does here, and making their challengers look like jerks. It's a lawyerly (JAG) technique, it's passive/aggressive, and it may be the thing he does best. I'll bet he uses it to great advantage in the courtroom. This thread is nothing more than him saying, "I really am a nice guy, and if you aren't nice to me I'm going to take my marbles and go home". Forgive me if I don't fall for it. Just because he puts a 'who, me?' smiley face of innocence on his statements does not make them any more palatable, nor does it make him any less disingenuous. It may make him more insidious. The fact that he started two new upbeat threads to distract and deflect from unanswered challenges to his very provocative statements in another thread, at the same time sending me a PM to protest his innocence and attempt to mollify me - rather than being a man and reponding in the thread - should not be overlooked either.

It will probably come as a surprise to many that I am by nature a very laid-back congenial guy. However, I have a low tolerance for bullies and blowhards, in whatever guise they appear. Incidentally, I did not shy away from taking one of the most visible libs here to task for an over-the-line attack on one of the most visible neocons either. If my responses or those of others seem a bit heavy handed at times, I think it's helpful to understand the history. It's also helpful to understand that there are certain posters, beyond those mentioned here, who don't seem to respond to anything else but a good hard knock. I haven't been here that long, three or four months in the political forum, but it seems to me that rather than going downhill, the tenor and tone has actually improved in that time. There are a number of notorious right-wing trolls who used to show up in every thread but now rarely make an appearance. If they do, their comments seem better tempered. I think that is directly attributable to the actions of posters who will not hesitate to shoot them down in no uncertain terms. Should it be this way? I would prefer not, but that's they way it is.

It's natural that this forum would be a reflection of the national political discourse, both in style and substance. Politics has always been a blood sport, and that was never truer than it is today. I think most Americans find the rancor and vitriol apalling, as do I, as I have said here on many occasions. I have also seen what happens when reasonable people try to maintan a reasonable 'debate' with an opposition that doesn't play by the same rules - an opposition that will use any trick in the book to dominate the discussion, gain political advantage and move the subject off track. It is these tactics I fault right-wing media and politicians for most. Playing too soft while the opposition spins the debate out of control is the thing I fault the Democrats and other progressives for most - and the president in particular during his first year in office. Finally standing up strongly to the opposition and moving the discussion back on track is the thing I credit the president with most.

Should everyone be a policeman? Of course not, certainly not if they're not comfortable in that role. However, at the end of the day we all benefit from those willing to do the dirty work and take a strong stand against any kind of dishonesty, abuse or tyranny, whether it is here or in the wider world. You both have much of value to contribute here, and speaking for myself at least, your presence is always appreciated. Standing on the sidelines and criticizing the tenor of the debate strikes me as a little, oh I don't know, judgemental? superior? condescending?? If you don't like the direction the forum has taken, then I would encourage you and other disgruntled posters to be engaged and help move it in another direction.

 

[deleted15807]

You forgot his ~$700 billion giveaway to big pharma (Medicare Part D)... I've yet to figure out why no one was criminally charged, or at least forced to resign over that one... The White House blatantly lied to Congress about the cost, and it was well known to Congress that they had been lied to.

There are so many crimes from the Bush years that apperently will go unpunished it's just breathtaking. Every time I see Karl Rove on FoxFauxFixed news I wonder why this man isn't in jail? How can this be America when you can apparently get away with firing US attorney's for political advantage. Why isn't Alberto Gonzales in jail too?

With all due respect to you both, and I mean that sincerely, I disagree, at least in large measure. Levi's "nigger hanging" comment was uncalled for and beyond the pale. Other than that, I fail to see where any of the responses to the OP here were out of line. And yes, HazelGod, I imported your quote from another thread. It seemed more appropriate and efficient to make one response here, rather than repeating myself in that other thread. Speaking for myself, and I suspect it goes for many of the "regulars" here, I make every effort to gauge my comments relative to the poster I am responding too. For example, my responses to curiousme, a new poster in the thread where HG made his comment, well illustrate that. My responses to others are often influenced by that poster's previous history, as is the case with conntom.

These are not matters of simple disagreement. There are posters here such as conntom, stratedude, KTF40, Trinity and others who habitually and repeatedly post the same uninformed, frequently absurd statements, empty platitudes and mindless talking points - spoonfed propaganda from right-wing media - over and over in thread after thread regardless of the topic. Talking points that at their source are factually incorrect and devoid of any basis in reality. As they refuse to link anything to back up their assertions (with the exception of Trinity, for whatever those sources are worth) it becomes incumbent on us to post links to independent sources disproving their statements. Even when we do, they refuse to accept or even acknowledge it. Instead, they reject clear evidence to the contrary and continue in the same line. It becomes very annoying and tiresome after awhile, and it is as disruptive to serious discussion as any other bad behavior. Left to their own devices they will completely dominate the 'discussion' with this repetitive drivel. Even if I try to ignore them, which I do more often than not, someone else is bound to engage them and the whole thread goes to shit.

But aren't all opinions equally valid? I would say no. Not when they are devoid of original thought, rooted in unexamined ideology and flagrantly flawed reasoning - and especially when they are blanket statements presented as fact. They become even less valid through mindless repetition - after they have been disproven again and again. Typically when challenged, these posters will ignore the challenge to their position, deflect, distract, dissemble and continue to spout more inane pronouncements. Their position is "it's true because I think it (because [Hannity, Beck etc.] told me so)". When the challenges become too overwhelming and obvious to ignore, they typically abandon that thread and pop up in another to start the whole process over again from scratch They don't respond to reason, they are incapable of engaging in honest debate, so I ask you, what's a frustrated political junkie to do?

Speaking for myself, I have no interest in wasting my time and mental energy going back to political kindergarten again and again, digging up links, trying to argue against such inane pointless premises over and over, when there are educated and enlightened adults with whom I could be having a meaningful exchange of ideas or even learn something from - adults like you, HazelGod and Vince, among others. It is for this reason more than the rancor that I avoid participating in many threads. Often I just read to educate myself and broaden my point of view, and I have no particular intention of posting. Inevitably though, one of these mindless neocons starts spouting off and throws the whole thing off track. I sometimes find myself jumping in at that point to try to move the discussion back to something relevant, with admittedly mixed success.

A few, notably conntom, are very good at appearing good natured and reasonable in the face of opposition, because they've figured out this shields them from being shot down so quickly or so thoroughly. They are good at appearing like innocent victims, as CT does here, and making their challengers look like jerks. It's a lawyerly (JAG) technique, it's passive/aggressive, and it may be the thing he does best. I'll bet he uses it to great advantage in the courtroom. This thread is nothing more than him saying, "I really am a nice guy, and if you aren't nice to me I'm going to take my marbles and go home". Forgive me if I don't fall for it. Just because he puts a 'who, me?' smiley face of innocence on his statements does not make them any more palatable, nor does it make him any less disingenuous. It may make him more insidious. The fact that he started two new upbeat threads to distract and deflect from unanswered challenges to his very provocative statements in another thread, at the same time sending me a PM to protest his innocence and attempt to mollify me - rather than being a man and reponding in the thread - should not be overlooked either.

It will probably come as a surprise to many that I am by nature a very laid-back congenial guy. However, I have a low tolerance for bullies and blowhards, in whatever guise they appear. Incidentally, I did not shy away from taking one of the most visible libs here to task for an over-the-line attack on one of the most visible neocons either. If my responses or those of others seem a bit heavy handed at times, I think it's helpful to understand the history. It's also helpful to understand that there are certain posters, beyond those mentioned here, who don't seem to respond to anything else but a good hard knock. I haven't been here that long, three or four months in the political forum, but it seems to me that rather than going downhill, the tenor and tone has actually improved in that time. There are a number of notorious right-wing trolls who used to show up in every thread but now rarely make an appearance. If they do, their comments seem better tempered. I think that is directly attributable to the actions of posters who will not hesitate to shoot them down in no uncertain terms. Should it be this way? I would prefer not, but that's they way it is.

It's natural that this forum would be a reflection of the national political discourse, both in style and substance. Politics has always been a blood sport, and that was never truer than it is today. I think most Americans find the rancor and vitriol apalling, as do I, as I have said here on many occasions. I have also seen what happens when reasonable people try to maintan a reasonable 'debate' with an opposition that doesn't play by the same rules - an opposition that will use any trick in the book to dominate the discussion, gain political advantage and move the subject off track. It is these tactics I fault right-wing media and politicians for most. Playing too soft while the opposition spins the debate out of control is the thing I fault the Democrats and other progressives for most - and the president in particular during his first year in office. Finally standing up strongly to the opposition and moving the discussion back on track is the thing I credit the president with most.

Should everyone be a policeman? Of course not, certainly not if they're not comfortable in that role. However, at the end of the day we all benefit from those willing to do the dirty work and take a strong stand against any kind of dishonesty, abuse or tyranny, whether it is here or in the wider world. You both have much of value to contribute here, and speaking for myself at least, your presence is always appreciated. Standing on the sidelines and criticizing the tenor of the debate strikes me as a little, oh I don't know, judgemental? superior? condescending?? If you don't like the direction the forum has taken, then I would encourage you and other disgruntled posters to be engaged and help move it in another direction.

+10

 

[B_talltpaguy]

wtf? No idea how I posted into this thread... lol... ignore

 

[Smooth88]

Politics as the years go by, especially with the creation of the 24 hours news cycle, the "news" channels, and the blogosphere where everyone can say anything and anything you do or say is put under a microscope, dissected, and in many cases misconstrued has become more and more divisive.

Any incompetent moron with a keyboard can say shoot off at the mouth and some peope will run with it. That's the nature of politics today. A blood sport and a war of (in this case human) attrition.

 

[1kmb1]

Based on the history of gov'ts(all of them for recorded history) well, I would have to agree with the above two ideas and I'd rather not repeat history here in America.

can you provide an example?