Trump Presidency

[Bogtrotter07]

As it relates to the current state of our politics, Bogs, you might have an argument if the American Left hadn't fully embraced neoliberal economics (not to mention interventionist foreign policy) after getting shellacked by Reagan in the 80s. So there's no real alternative on offer anymore.

This was my entire point in the intervening post.

You have no right to claim that I don't have a point! None.

I have made it clear that I am actually a thinking man (though maybe not very smart) and therefore am an independent. So I can talk up the good, or criticize the bad in any one group, party, administration, etc.

So I am not going to take one bit of responsibility for what any idiot has done. Except myself.

I never said that there was a whole lot there on the Democratic side. Although, I am pretty glad Barack Obama won twice, otherwise I think we would have hit GDII.

As far as bringing neoliberalism into our conversation, I am confused :

A political theory of the late 1900s holding that personal liberty is maximized by limiting government interference in the operation of free markets.

neoliberalism (ˌniːəʊˈlɪbərəˌlɪzəm; -ˈlɪbrəˌlɪzəm)
n
1. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) a modern politico-economic theory favouring free trade, privatization, minimal government intervention in business, reduced public expenditure on social services, etc
2. (Economics) a modern politico-economic theory favoring free trade, privatization, minimal government intervention in business, reduced public expenditure on social services, etc

I thought that my position was crystal clear on this.

• I rarely see privatization as anything but an attempt to steal from the people; rarely can private industry do public service as well as a properly run government servide
• Henry Ford was nearly crucified in some circles for paying five dollars a day for his workforce, but he knew that would put more money in his (and sooner or later other) workers pockets, and that meant more sales for his company. The analogy being 2 out of 5 jobs today are related to some level of government.
• Who wants to parse the difference between government employment and welfare?
• Even the Pope (who I greatly respect) believes the playing field need a referee to keep it or things level.
• Neoliberalism has been the mantra of both parties since Reagan, it is just about who you want to fuck over and profit from most.
• Neoliberalism is the late 20th century popular ideology that has no more validity that any other ideology that has come or gone. We are all too sophisticated to believe we will have any luck finding one size that actually fits all.
• Fuck Neoliberalism

And I am glad you didn't mention interventionist foreign policy, because the only difference between the scope flavor of either party is the predominant skin color of the countries with which we intervene. We good?

 

[Buster Bluth]

How is he a hypocrite?? His post doesn't call out one side or anything.

I didn't mention bipartisanship. I said it would be nice if both sides would govern and do what's right for the country instead of spending all their time & energy attacking each other. I realize the difference is subtle, but not hard to grasp.

No you're right. That's not being hypocritical.

But it's not being a hypocrite to show you that the GOP has done just that for the last eight years. They've obstructed more effectively than any opposition party in recent memory.

 

[Circa]

No you're right. That's not being hypocritical.

But it's not being a hypocrite to show you that the GOP has done just that for the last eight years. They've obstructed more effectively than any opposition party in recent memory.

are you a member of the right-wing conspiracy program? No Joke. Once you became sound and seemed ND Fan worthy you've done nothing but post politically. Not attacking ya... Just curious to the mental aberration I've experienced.

 

[connor_in]

No you're right. That's not being hypocritical.

But it's not being a hypocrite to show you that the GOP has done just that for the last eight years. They've obstructed more effectively than any opposition party in recent memory.

are you a member of the right-wing conspiracy program? No Joke. Once you became sound and seemed ND Fan worthy you've done nothing but post politically. Not attacking ya... Just curious to the mental aberration I've experienced.

No no no he is absolutely right...the last 8 years is recent

of course many people can remember back much further than that

 

[BleedBlueGold]

This is what I was talking about last night. It was in regards to the vote on importing pharmaceuticals to help with costs. It actually had some bi-partisan support. However, it also got voted down by some Dems....shocker...Cory Booker (who has very close ties to big pharma). And here's my problem with Robert Reich's post....he didn't mention a single thing about this and blamed the vote entirely on the Republicans. (Only today, via Twitter, I see he's changed his tune and is calling out Booker.)

https://theintercept.com/2017/01/12...asure-to-import-cheaper-medicine-from-canada/

13 Rs voted to help bring down costs of meds via importation. 13 Ds voted against it. I haven't seen any of this in the reporting on MSM. Another fail by them.

 

[Irish#1]

look for a candidate with a real fucking plan, and an attitude to fix things.

While he may not have shared many details of his plan(s), Trump certainly has demonstrated an attitude to want to fix things.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

While he may not have shared many details of his plan(s), Trump certainly has demonstrated an attitude to want to fix things.

You asked what is bothering me.

Since you mentioned it.

I have a desire to be a French fashion model. So what. I even have a plan. But it ain't happenin' any time soon! No matter what I tell you.

As far as details of any plan Trump has or hasn't, I can't see how anyone as intelligent as you doesn't see it for what it is. Trumps only plans have nothing to do with fixing things for all Americans. His words, not mine.

He has never in his life done what he said. Never followed through beyond his own self interest.

And in this campaign he said exactly what enough people wanted to hear. Sometimes that meant saying conflicting things about the same issue.

And with everything he has done to this moment, he has shown that he has no interest in following through with his promises :

• Every one of his proposed appointees is more of the same special interests that he vowed to eliminate from Washington as part of his drain the swamp battle cry. And it includes quite a few who have showed a tone deaf ear to issues of equality in America.
• He still hasn't released his taxes, or complied with a whole lot of laws that require him to disclose his foreign holdings.
• He instead has delighted in pointing out how he has used his position, and specifically state calls, to advance his personal business interests.
• His ambiguous plans to put some or all of his kids in charge of his businesses is complete crap, he knows what he has and what his company is planning, this is unconscionable.
• He says he never did the hooker thing, but doesn't address the real issue, illegal and treasonous communication with the Russians.
• He is the master of propagating fake news, and he decries it, so that makes him just like the most evil we have faced, leaders of the KKK who would deny their real agenda by day, but support cloaked violence by night.

Beyond this :

So when you say demonstrated an attitude to fix things I have to agree : Donald Trump has exactly the same attitude to fix things Green, Roper, and Eldon Edwards had. The same attitude to fix things that Adolph Hitler had. We all forget that the KKK really straightened thing out socially in the South for a good while, and that Hitler took a crushed Germany from the Weimar Republic, and turned it into one of the most sophisticated and advanced countries on earth. Hitler fixed a lot of problems, one in particular.

They all had a plan.

 

[connor_in]

Major change in Cuban refugee policy

1) why?
2) why now?
3) will this help D's pick up FL in the next election or no?
4) I assume this means President Obama is to be called racist now?
5) Will DJT reverse next week when he is sworn in?

 

[Bogtrotter07]

Major change in Cuban refugee policy

1) why?
2) why now?
3) will this help D's pick up FL in the next election or no?
4) I assume this means President Obama is to be called racist now?
5) Will DJT reverse next week when he is sworn in?

You understand the change that Obama made? Right?

Because we now have more normalized relations with Cuba, and emigration from Cuba needs to follow the same rules as any other country. Right?

 

[NorthDakota]

Lololol...I really struggle to wrap my head around people comparing Donald Trump to f'ing Hitler...

 

[woolybug25]

Lololol...I really struggle to wrap my head around people comparing Donald Trump to f'ing Hitler...

You struggle to wrap your head around most things.

 

[drayer54]

Lololol...I really struggle to wrap my head around people comparing Donald Trump to f'ing Hitler...

Urban Dictionary: Godwin's Law

 

[drayer54]

You understand the change that Obama made? Right?

Because we now have more normalized relations with Cuba, and emigration from Cuba needs to follow the same rules as any other country. Right?

If liberals have taught me anything in the last year, it is that anything that slows the flow of brown people into the country is racist and at least 3 types of ist, obe, or obic.

Thus, Obama is a racist.

 

[NorthDakota]

You struggle to wrap your head around most things.

No disagreement there.

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

Lololol...I really struggle to wrap my head around people comparing Donald Trump to f'ing Hitler...

I'm thoroughly enjoying the meltdown of the Left. I'm convinced GoIrish41 checked himself into therapy.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

Lololol...I really struggle to wrap my head around people comparing Donald Trump to f'ing Hitler...

Beyond your struggle, it is truly self invited.

(Does anyone get the pun.)

One of the personal things Donald Trump has always acknowledged publicly is that he has had only one book on his nightstand ever, My New Order. (A book of Adolph Hitler's speeches he put together for publication.)

As far as your struggles, to be separated from My Struggle, (Mein Kampf,) get it?

To help you with getting your head wrapped around such things let me tell you a brief story.

My first ex-wife's grandpa and grandma died and her father got a whole lot of personal effects, and since he didn't like his step father much, he just passed them on to my ex-wife. She sent a few things over to me to get an idea of what they may be valued. One item was a book, Mein Kampf. Apparently it was given by the head of the American Bund Party Fritz Kuhn, with a signed note on the inside of the cover to her step-grandpa. Several autographs adorned the title page including Rudolf Hess and Heinz Spanknöbel. I was shocked and amazed!

But the more research I did the more I realized how appealing Hitler was to American and British citizens. Most were and are barbarians in Christian clothing, and most enjoyed finding a different racial or ethnic group handily selected to blame all of their problems. It was so bad in the US before the second world war that a the government began a huge anti-bunt, anti-Nazi propaganda effort spearheaded by Americans of German descent like Babe Ruth and Dorthy Thompson.

Thompson is an interesting study in light of all the talk about media. She worked as a journalist in Europe and interviews Adolph Hitler before his rise to absolute power. She wrote a book "I Saw Hitler" as a warning to the evil Hitler represented and the dangers of him winning power. She wrote this about Hitler :

"He is formless, almost faceless, a man whose countenance is a caricature, a man whose framework seems cartilaginous, without bones. He is inconsequent and voluble, ill poised and insecure. He is the very prototype of the little man."

And as history records :

Later, when the full force of Nazism had crashed over Europe, Thompson was asked to defend her "Little Man" remarks; it seemed she had underestimated Hitler. The National Socialists considered both the book and her articles offensive and in August 1934, Thompson was expelled from Germany. She was the first journalist to be kicked out.

So I hope I have helped you wrap your head around a few things :

• Hitler and Trump started off with exceedingly strong popular support, financed by the wealthy, and translated that into a populist movement intended to appeal to that base human instinct.
• Neither seemed to hold any kind of moral ambiguity as far as popular opinion, yet neither ever operated in an ethical or aboveboard fashion.
• In their early days, both would change their positions on any issues as public sentiment dictated, so much so that at times they seemed to have no specific political identity.
• Both couldn't tell the truth from a lie, so both sprinkled lies liberally into their speeches and writing.
• When called on their lies by actual journalists, they both whined that they were being unfairly treated and that 'the source of lies,' and 'false stories' intended to sully their reputations.
• Both claimed that all journalism (these sources) is part of a vast international conspiracy to keep them from fulfilling their promises to the people.
• Both attempted early and often to silence the media, in ways that were considered reckless, and irresponsible, but condoned as their power grew, with Hitler going as far as shutting down legitimate media and replacing it with his own propaganda machine; time will tell with Donald Trump will attempt to crack down on the media with his authority as President, as he has claimed he will.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

If liberals have taught me anything in the last year, it is that anything that slows the flow of brown people into the country is racist and at least 3 types of ist, obe, or obic.

Thus, Obama is a racist.

Remember my reference to barbarians in Christian clothing? Do you even attempt to 'wear Christian clothing,' or are you good letting your true nature show?

 

[Bishop2b5]

Lololol...I really struggle to wrap my head around people comparing Donald Trump to f'ing Hitler...

It's just the standard, go-to response from the Left for any politician they dislike. Doesn't matter if there's any actual similarity. If you disagree with them they'll call you a hate-filled bigot, racist, misogynist, Nazi, etc.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

I'm thoroughly enjoying the meltdown of the Left. I'm convinced GoIrish41 checked himself into therapy.

I didn't realize he had to deal with your posts that often.

What you may want to remember, while in the midst of your smarmy self-adulation, is the meltdown is occurring at distinct points far away from the left, or liberal elements.

The house's first move, to gut Ethics legislation, made a big impression on a whole lot of people!

And watch healthcare stocks continue to plunge with the uncertainty of today's political environment!

My thesis is and has been that the left and the right are dependent upon each other, as opposed to either with the middle.

Only someone on the (far) right would see the triumph of this moment. They forget they need the middle to get anything done. They are far more dependent on the middle than even the left, because the left invariably is nicer to the core of the middle.

So have some fun. You deserve it. Keep insulting people and acting like a poor winner. It's all good, man!

 

[drayer54]

Remember my reference to barbarians in Christian clothing? Do you even attempt to 'wear Christian clothing,' or are you good letting your true nature show?

I think your ability to asses people's nature is reflected in your radical and incomprehensible comparisons to Hitler. I think Hillary is a freedom-hating corrupt bitch with self interest in mind above all. That said, she's not Hitler. Hitler is Hitler.

I think the liberals are way too excited about Trump. You got a GOP president, yes. But you got a Republican who is the closest thing to a democrat that the GOP has presented in decades. He has funded democrats, voted for them, and is in circles with them. Do you think Ted Cruz has done any of that?

This is a reflection of the liberal bubble and the hysteria created at the detriment of our country. I understand some of the fear related to climate issues or from the bank haters, but this is just insanity.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

It's just the standard, go-to response from the Left for any politician they dislike. Doesn't matter if there's any actual similarity. If you disagree with them they'll call you a hate-filled bigot, racist, misogynist, Nazi, etc.

I only rarely call the people I really think, hate-filled bigot, racist, etc. I mean they would have to really lay it out there!

I don't think I ever have called you a name. Isn't that so?

And I do think I have offered you opportunity to explain yourself, before I misconstrued anything you said. And surely, you don't find me labeling you, fitting you into a group of my construct, to generalize and marginalize you and your points - right?

In fact, I am not a leftist, and I haven't called anyone a Nazi lately, although I do have my suspicions about a few's fascist tendencies I see as of late.

I have the right to point out the incredible similarity between Donald Trump the politician and statesman and Adolf Hitler, politician and statesman. Which I have, without others belittling me for it.

And I don't point it out motivated by hatred or contempt. I'll be honest. I do it out of fear. I heard things in this campaign that I never heard. Not even in '68 when there was outright violence in the street!

My problem isn't with intelligent posters on this site like you that I may disagree with on a few issues, it isn't even with the crazies.

It is with the fact that every indication is the whole mechanism is broken; that everyone has sold out for their own self interest. And that we are about to put a deficient candidate in the office of President of the United States.

So when some numb-nuts try to minimize my expressions, driven by honest fear about some petty issue about loosing an election, or some over simplified basic political disagreement, that has nothing to do with my perspective or points posted, just so they think they can understand things, I really wonder if we can fix things before another catastrophe befalls us.

That is the bottom line. Can we come together and fix things, or will we continue to criticize those that attempt to speak honestly, so no voice of reason rises, and things get back on track.

 

[kmoose]

I didn't realize he had to deal with your posts that often.

What you may want to remember, while in the midst of your smarmy self-adulation, is the meltdown is occurring at distinct points far away from the left, or liberal elements.

The house's first move, to gut Ethics legislation, made a big impression on a whole lot of people!

And watch healthcare stocks continue to plunge with the uncertainty of today's political environment!

My thesis is and has been that the left and the right are dependent upon each other, as opposed to either with the middle.

Only someone on the (far) right would see the triumph of this moment. They forget they need the middle to get anything done. They are far more dependent on the middle than even the left, because the left invariably is nicer to the core of the middle.

So have some fun. You deserve it. Keep insulting people and acting like a poor winner. It's all good, man!

Pot? Meet kettle!

I like whore, but I will take opportunist, or even pragmatist in a pinch.

Remember my reference to barbarians in Christian clothing? Do you even attempt to 'wear Christian clothing,' or are you good letting your true nature show?

....

What you may want to remember, while in the midst of your smarmy self-adulation

 

[NorthDakota]

Pot? Meet kettle!

Lololol I was just thinking the same thing. When I think about posters most likely to attack people, bogs would be right up towards the top.

 

[Bluto]

From all the crony capitalists can I get a "hell yeah"? Lol

Ben Carson, Trump's Pick For Housing Agency, Wont Rule Out Grants To Trump Properties : NPR

 

[Bogtrotter07]

I think your ability to asses people's nature is reflected in your radical and incomprehensible comparisons to Hitler. I think Hillary is a freedom-hating corrupt bitch with self interest in mind above all. That said, she's not Hitler. Hitler is Hitler.

I think the liberals are way too excited about Trump. You got a GOP president, yes. But you got a Republican who is the closest thing to a democrat that the GOP has presented in decades. He has funded democrats, voted for them, and is in circles with them. Do you think Ted Cruz has done any of that?

This is a reflection of the liberal bubble and the hysteria created at the detriment of our country. I understand some of the fear related to climate issues or from the bank haters, but this is just insanity.

First, so as we may agree, I am not your liberal, although I believe in liberalism, which was the basis for the Founding Fathers authorship of everything from the Declaration of Independence to the Bill of Rights. I am for unalienable rights of all humans, not so much the agenda of that group of late 20th, early 21st century American politicians. And I do comport myself with respect toward fair and good tradition.

I do believe, humbly, that the best possibilities for situational outcomes may be missed because there are so many possible outcomes for any given situation, that good enough solutions generated by our own limited capacity are used for expedience sake, and become ingrained custom. And over the course of human history, what works 'tried and true' may begin to demonstrate diminishing value, as a result of many conditions, from technical innovation to continued human evolution.

Regardless. You really need to stop categorizing people. It tends to be a sign of someone with an inflexible world view.

If you ever listen to anything I say, you should know that I don't give a shit about anyone's Republican-ness, or Democratic-ness. Hell, I regularly tell the story about how my grandpa, the best and most Republican man I ever knew, hated, and despised Ronald Reagan for his New Deal, liberal, Democratic roots. My grandpa even took it as far as calling him a communist, correctly citing Reagan's ability to put together lists of Hollywood attendees of communist meetings, because he was there to observe them!

He predicted RR would run for president some day, although my grandpa passed well before that came to fruition. I never forgot that lesson. And my father, in his teaching me as a boy, emphasized the only distinction I recognize in politics today; it is people versus politicians!

There are two ways of grouping or categorizing things, places, or people. The first is more scientific, and more objective. It involves identifying and developing specific lists of behaviors, and actions that are verifiable, and comparing and contrasting those lists between two or more individuals. (What I have tried to do.) I am pretty clearly comparing Trump's actions to Hitler's. Please note, only an idiot would actually call Trump, 'Hitler', because Hitler is obviously dead. Everyone know he died in South America in the 50's or 60's.

The other way to accomplish groupings is to look at a few activities or traits, and make a comparison of reminiscences. It can involve name calling, weak association, and illogical leaps fueled by anger and inadequacy. Interestingly enough, (and at times everyone does it) these assessments say very little about the subject, but quite a bit about the author.

For example:

• Radical and incomprehensible = I have no interest in any changes to my fixed world order and I will respond to any challenges with anger and inflexibility.
  
• Freedom hating . . corrupt bitch . . self interest above all = I hate her like other women so I will link her gender (bitch) to the worst crime in America (freedom hating) no matter how stupid it may sound (it not you), and self interest above all. Hmm, the things we like or dislike in others are what we see, the way we see them, in ourselves.
  
• The whole I think paragraph contrasting Donald Trump with Ted Cruz=Good job, you should be able to relate to my comparison, you did an excellent job rightly pointing out that Donald Trump is nothing like Ted Cruz. I so agree with this that I maintain that is part of the real danger of Trump. He never will be a conservative, so the conservatives will have no problem with exploiting him to their gain, leaving him in ruins if need be, giving them yet another target for their blame.
  
• This reflection of . . . insanity = I am going to take everything I have heard that I don't like and conveniently though unfairly bundle it as 'liberal,' run a couple of issues that tug at my heart that those 'damned liberals' have actually done a decent job with, just to show I am fair and impartial, and then categorize it with a term I am really familiar, and understand from an everyday level, and call it insane - there the ultimate insult!!

See? Professionals actually do this kind of behavioral analysis with some kind of regularity.

There is a difference between doing a point by point analysis of observable behavior, and engaging with a knee-jerk reaction in a conversation, where one's goal is to just 'prove self-righteousness.' We good?

 

[Legacy]

A couple of articles linked by Whiskey under the Liberalism and Conservatism thread. (Excerpts mine)

Two Kinds of Liberalism (from the Institute on Religion and Public Life, First Things)

Garnett offers an alternative sketch of forms of liberalism, which he describes as “fleshed out” and “hollowed out”: “The former retains a close resemblance to the ideas of the greatest liberal thinkers, who were optimistic about human nature and envisaged a society made up of free, rational individuals respecting themselves and others. The latter, by contrast, satisfies no more than the basic requirements of liberal thought. It reduces the concepts of reason and individual fulfillment to the lowest common denominator, identifying them with the pursuit of short-term material self-interest. For the hollowed-out liberal, other people are either means to an end, or obstacles which must be shunted aside. Instead of an equality of respect, this is more like equality of contempt” (8).

What is Left? What is Right? (The American Conservative)

The insiders who dominate U.S. foreign policy have a vested interest in sustaining the twaddle about an American Century. After all, it cements their hold on power. The American Century emphasizes secrecy and deference to those who are presumably “in the know.” It shields members of this self-perpetuating elite from accountability. It provides a handy cloak for megalomania and a ready excuse for error. It keeps debate over foreign policy and its implications narrow and insipid—as the Democratic critique of the Iraq War has demonstrated. It excludes the great unwashed.

American exceptionalism is a delusion. The beginning of wisdom in foreign policy lies in seeing ourselves as we really are and in acknowledging our responsibility for the mess in which we find ourselves, in Iraq and elsewhere. When it comes to extricating ourselves from that mess, the first order of business is to clean up our own act. Principled liberals and authentic conservatives will disagree on how best to do so, but that surely is a debate worth having.

 

[connor_in]

First, so as we may agree, I am not your liberal, although I believe in liberalism, which was the basis for the Founding Fathers authorship of everything from the Declaration of Independence to the Bill of Rights. I am for unalienable rights of all humans, not so much the agenda of that group of late 20th, early 21st century American politicians. And I do comport myself with respect toward fair and good tradition.

I do believe, humbly, that the best possibilities for situational outcomes may be missed because there are so many possible outcomes for any given situation, that good enough solutions generated by our own limited capacity are used for expedience sake, and become ingrained custom. And over the course of human history, what works 'tried and true' may begin to demonstrate diminishing value, as a result of many conditions, from technical innovation to continued human evolution.

Regardless. You really need to stop categorizing people. It tends to be a sign of someone with an inflexible world view.

If you ever listen to anything I say, you should know that I don't give a shit about anyone's Republican-ness, or Democratic-ness. Hell, I regularly tell the story about how my grandpa, the best and most Republican man I ever knew, hated, and despised Ronald Reagan for his New Deal, liberal, Democratic roots. My grandpa even took it as far as calling him a communist, correctly citing Reagan's ability to put together lists of Hollywood attendees of communist meetings, because he was there to observe them!

He predicted RR would run for president some day, although my grandpa passed well before that came to fruition. I never forgot that lesson. And my father, in his teaching me as a boy, emphasized the only distinction I recognize in politics today; it is people versus politicians!

There are two ways of grouping or categorizing things, places, or people. The first is more scientific, and more objective. It involves identifying and developing specific lists of behaviors, and actions that are verifiable, and comparing and contrasting those lists between two or more individuals. (What I have tried to do.) I am pretty clearly comparing Trump's actions to Hitler's. Please note, only an idiot would actually call Trump, 'Hitler', because Hitler is obviously dead. Everyone know he died in South America in the 50's or 60's.

The other way to accomplish groupings is to look at a few activities or traits, and make a comparison of reminiscences. It can involve name calling, weak association, and illogical leaps fueled by anger and inadequacy. Interestingly enough, (and at times everyone does it) these assessments say very little about the subject, but quite a bit about the author.

For example:

• Radical and incomprehensible = I have no interest in any changes to my fixed world order and I will respond to any challenges with anger and inflexibility.
  
• Freedom hating . . corrupt bitch . . self interest above all = I hate her like other women so I will link her gender (bitch) to the worst crime in America (freedom hating) no matter how stupid it may sound (it not you), and self interest above all. Hmm, the things we like or dislike in others are what we see, the way we see them, in ourselves.
  
• The whole I think paragraph contrasting Donald Trump with Ted Cruz=Good job, you should be able to relate to my comparison, you did an excellent job rightly pointing out that Donald Trump is nothing like Ted Cruz. I so agree with this that I maintain that is part of the real danger of Trump. He never will be a conservative, so the conservatives will have no problem with exploiting him to their gain, leaving him in ruins if need be, giving them yet another target for their blame.
  
• This reflection of . . . insanity = I am going to take everything I have heard that I don't like and conveniently though unfairly bundle it as 'liberal,' run a couple of issues that tug at my heart that those 'damned liberals' have actually done a decent job with, just to show I am fair and impartial, and then categorize it with a term I am really familiar, and understand from an everyday level, and call it insane - there the ultimate insult!!

See? Professionals actually do this kind of behavioral analysis with some kind of regularity.

There is a difference between doing a point by point analysis of observable behavior, and engaging with a knee-jerk reaction in a conversation, where one's goal is to just 'prove self-righteousness.' We good?

 

[phgreek]

Albeit, oversimplified...I think the discourse will continue to be self-righteous, angry, and emotional. I don't think it is coming back in the near future. Half the country sees the health of the nation as something to be guarded and sacrificed for in and of itself. They see the health of the Nation apart from themselves as their legacy. The other half defines the health of the nation through the lens of the experiences of individuals and groups within it, and improvement there is their legacy. It would seem there is room for both...but not at the moment.

Indeed we are too different, and we will never look at what is, or might be good for the country through the same lens...that is until we have an event that shocks and unifies us for our own survival...if not external war, it will be an internal one...just the way it is.

 

[dublinirish]

Albeit, oversimplified...I think the discourse will continue to be self-righteous, angry, and emotional. I don't think it is coming back in the near future. Half the country sees the health of the nation as something to be guarded and sacrificed for in and of itself. They see the health of the Nation apart from themselves as their legacy. The other half defines the health of the nation through the lens of the experiences of individuals and groups within it, and improvement there is their legacy. It would seem there is room for both...but not at the moment.

Indeed we are too different, and we will never look at what is, or might be good for the country through the same lens...that is until we have an event that shocks and unifies us for our own survival...if not external war, it will be an internal one...just the way it is.

time for another false flag terrorism attack perhaps?

 

[phgreek]

time for another false flag terrorism attack perhaps?

I know you are being sarcastic...but nothing surprises me anymore...well, other than the rare situation where everyone agrees on "good".