Lately I've been feeling that if one party comes up with a great idea (all parties IMO have good ideas), that the opposing side (right vs left etc), immediately takes an opposing stance to it, and typically an extreme opposite view at that? I just feel frustrated thinking that our country gets hindered frequently by people being too partisan. And I'd like to add that I feel both sides are causing the problem, not just one.
OK...let's here an idea from the Democrats instead of "anti-this' and "anti-that" Taxes? Never enough...they must be raised. Defeating islamic terrorists?...nope, let's "redeploy" (i.e., surrender) and appease these animals School Choice? Never! Government schools know best how to educate kids Social Security? More government control (= more taxes) Health Care? More government control (= more taxes) Look...the country is divided between those that believe the government is responsible for us from birth to death and people like myself that believes the government should only deal with national defense and infrastructure as its main priorities. Sure the USDA and FDA do decent things, but think about what is in your life that the government does not have their hands into?
Zane, you see how quickly it turns partisan around here even as you attempted to ask a non-partisan question? I think in our current political system, if you aren't the party in power, you are expected to be in the opposition. The roles inevitability reverse at some point and the partisan folks like the above always conveniently forget when their side played the role of the obstructionists. The Republicans did it to Clinton and now the Democrats are doing it to Bush. The Republicans in congress had it done to them by the Democratic minority for the last 12 years and before that the Democrats had it done to them for the previous 20 years by the Republican minority. The way our system of government is set up leaves the party out of power with very little choice but to play the spoiler role. The minority has literally no power in the various congressional committees, little if any ability to bring issues to the floor, and very little control over debate. With so little chance to be heard, the minority does the only thing left for them to do, they make the other party look bad, full-time.
I agree completely...its like people dont have our nations best interest in mind but the party they are chained to. Dont know...like moen says...you notice this thread immediately turns partisan. People read what they want to see, just like the 'describe the attributes of Right and Left thread' Almost everyone came into that thread either bashing one side or the other or listing what THEY are...like they didnt even bother reading the original post and question...they just saw 'left or right' and went into auto-partisan mode. You can look at it like my wife does...that partisan bickering, dead lock and knee jerk reactionary political games can be a GOOD thing as it keep either side from making much progress...look at the people we are talking about...do you really want to hand either side the reigns and say 'run with it!!'? It would be nice to see leaders (I dont like that word but representatives seems not to fit any of them) that are honest good competent public servants, people who have our nations best interest in mind and not the party line but it has been this way as long as I have been following politics...if they have a political party affiliation they have always split down party lines...I would love to see someone run that has great common sense ideas that has no allegiance to a political party but such a person will never get heard I fear because the system is controlled by those parties, without party allegiance, they just wont go very far... One example would be Ralph Nader...while I disagree with a lot of his stances on the issues, one cannot deny that he is not beholden to any business interests or political party and seems to be a rather honest straight forward man...sadly his policies simply do not appeal to enough people...worst of all, I see people simply dismissing him because he 'doesnt look presidential' or people wont vote for him because it will be 'throwing a vote away'....I would gladly throw a vote away to a person I feel is simply honest, intelligent, not a partisan, doesnt play partisan games, and has sound down to earth smart policy...I would even vote for a person whose policies dont strictly fall in line with mine if I felt he was simply not a partisan creature. I highly agree with his wish to reform the political process in this nation but I disagree with too many other aspects of his core stances.... without doubt...a partisan can cry and say 'so-and-so is stealing votes from so-and-so'!! In my opinion...no one candidate or party is entitled to my vote...there is no such thing as a third party or indy 'stealing' a vote. If that party is not doing enough to EARN votes, they should lose them...Nader or Perot are not spoilers...there is no such thing in my world. One thing I would love to see is a so called 'spoiler' who takes the majority of the votes from these two political parties to wise them up and show them that if they keep playing these stupid games with the welfare of this nation...they will get the boot. If you arent willing to take a chance with your vote and vote for the best possible candidate in the fear you are 'throwing your vote away' or you vote for the lesser of two evils that are placed in front of you by the two major big money parties simply to ensure one side doesnt get it...then I think you are playing the same political games and perpetuating the problem....If enough people 'throw their vote away', at some point...it stops being a matter of throwing a vote away and become a real political grass roots movement that threatens these ensconced parties that feel they are entitled to a vote...why is it that the biggest political news on both sides is how much money one candidate or the other has raised? It doesnt help either that in most states in the US, if you didnt vote for the person who got 51% of the votes in your state...the state simply gives the other 49% to the winner anyway...how many people are in Texas? If a one side gets 70% of the vote...the the other side got 30% of the vote..thats a lot of votes but in our system...ALL the state simply voted for the person who got 70%. I wouldnt mind seeing a system where it is one person one vote and each vote goes all the way to a national total...I mean...we are all american arent we? I am not the state I live in sorry about another long rambling post...
You right, there are times that I am agreeing with someone either directly or in general but to a lesser degree and the post is either ignored or attacked. I am in no competition here and have no desire to own anyone but there is a me against them undercurrent here. As for me, I feel I could cast a stone here but it would be wrong to cast it directly at anyone for that would defeat the purpose of this thread. There are a few issues that I feel strongly about and have no room for compromise for various reasons and there are alot of issues that I feel are either open to compromise or are issues that are not concret but rather ones that change with the need to change based upon the times.
I have more resepct for a man (or woman) that doesn't sugarcoat their beliefs and convictions. Bill Clinton was a master at sticking his finger in the air, biting his bottom lip, and telling us, "I feel your pain". [Cue Clinton's welled up eyes] He had no convictions other than what the latest poll told him. Good, bad or otherwise, Bush II knows that islamic animals must be dealt with instead of the Clinton's approach of, "Let's reach to them" stupid mentality. Bush gets murdered by the main stream media but he knows deep down that fighting and killing these animals THERE instead of waiting for them to attack us HERE is the right thing to do. Could we fight the war better? Maybe...because I personally believe we are fighting this war "too nicely" as insurgents should be called what they really are: "Islamic terrorists" and instead of sending our troops into harm's way, I would make their hideouts a parking lot. After all, remember, islamic animals relish death over life and we would be doing both parites a huge favor. Meanwhile, democrats with no convictions come up with terms like, "redeploy", "revenue enhancements", "investments in children" instead of telling it what they ultimately believe. Rudy is another man of conviction and resolve. I remember in NY when fat Rosie (well before the View was broadcast) said, "...this man is out of control, he is taking homeless off of the streets and making them work!" You may not agree with everything he said or does, but you have to admire his convictions and steadfast. And guess what? NY is a better place for it. HE took heat for cutting taxes and guess what? Revenue into the city INCREASED as money in the hands of the private sector has been proven to be far better than some liberal socialist in a government building. Actions define a person...not his ability to cater to every poll just so he is liked by telling the audience, "I feel your pain". Told you before...I am a fiscal conservative who believes in a limited government where government's main priority is to protect and defend our Constitution and these United States. I have no problem admitting it. So why is it that liberals have a hard time admitting they want MORE government and MORE taxes. Don't sugarcoat it, just admit who you are and what you believe. Tell us you believe government should run social security and medicare as they always have in lieu of privatization. Tell us you believe in government schools in lieu of school choice. Tell us you believe that sending your kid to a failing school is better than giving the parents a CHOICE to send their kids to a better school with THEIR tax paid dollars. The first step to recovery is to just admit who you are and what you believe. Don't be gutless...admit who you are.
Am I the only one in America that has voted for both Republican Candidates and Democratic ones as well? Zane, I agree with you 100%. Government has gotten too big. I dont care if your a Republican or Democrat. I vote for who I think is going to lead this country and who I understand what they are saying. I, voted for Bush this last time. Was it because he was a Republican? NO.. it was because the Democratic party had nobody who had a clue as to what they were talking about. Kerry couldn't lead a group of cub scouts to water. This next go round I will listen to the candidates, look at their previous voting records and make my decision based on that. I do know that Hillary will not receive my vote is she is in fact the one that the Dem's pick. I am sick and tired as I think most Americans are of the constant bickering in the white house, the scandals, corruption etc. NOT just the bush administration but the Clinton Administration as well. I recently sat down with a large lobbyist group in DC. They stated that it generally takes 2 years to get a politician in their pocket. I found that interesting. Maybe all terms should be held to 2 years? enough rambling. Good thread Zane. This is America, Bush is our voted leader currently and I support whoever our current leader is. If you don't like whoever that happens to be MOVE TO A DIFFERENT COUNTRY. I said it with Reagan, I said it with Carter, Bush, Clinton and now G. Bush. They are the people WE Americans chose to lead us.
I have voted for both as well as libertarian and indy... I agree with you in one aspect that in the end...Bush is our President and I accept that, you wont see me attacking him at every corner and whining and calling for impeachment (it takes a lot for me to want to impeach an elected president). That doesnt not at all mean I have to be satisfied with the guy and I shouldn't voice it, that whatever he does I have to accept as right and good, grin and bear it simply because he is president. I certainly wont bash him but I wont just accept what he does without objection if I think its wrong...this is America...I am American...and I have the right to object and I have a right to use my vote differently come next election. One could easily say if you dont like the American tradition of voicing ones opinion and dissatisfaction regarding an elected official...MOVE TO A DIFFERENT COUNTRY....Zimbabwe is a good choice...they dont like people who show dissatisfaction or oppose the president there Certainly the 'If you dont like it...you can giiiiit out' is not very applicable...if everyone just accepted objectionable acts by a president...that wouldnt be free or democratic. But trust me...the 'Bush is the devil' types are tiresome...they are often the people, IMO, that will never be satisfied with anyone or who are so partisan they will only be satisfied if they have thier guy in there (and like Bush lovers, thier guy will do no wrong)
