The great divide of US politics

[Trompe le Monde 1,107]

I read that article when it was originally posted on the Guardian website - a terrible article full of cliches. If you scroll down the comments, the writer admits it was poorly researched and hastily written.

[Trompe le Monde 1,107]

From what I understand its the Democrats who are most aligned with the interests of the working class - despite the large number of cigar chomping multi-millionaires in their ranks. If anything its amazing that they don't win more often.

I think you can see some of the reasons in the rather hypocritical response to Sarah Palin by many on the left. I get why people get rankled when the people who are supposed to represent their interests "the left" sneer at their lifestyle and values.

I read an excellent book last year addressing this very issue. I wish more people in the media and campaign strategist would take heed.

http://www.amazon.com/Deer-Hunting-Jesus-D...s/dp/030733936X

[Ban Hammer 14,297]

The great divide of US politics

* Linda Grant

* September 8, 2008

A PHOTOSHOPPED picture of Sarah Palin has been doing the rounds for the past few days; it shows her in a stars-and-stripes bikini toting a rifle — patriotism, hunting and cheesecake combined in one image.

GUARDIAN

there's just one small problem with that. it's not a rifle.

no one gonna bite?

[Heracles 417]

Its more that the comment is so vague that extrapolating it to "Most" seems highly implausible (i.e. - you made it up).

Vague. There are plenty of examples in the OT section of VJ alone.

Fancy Pants, Alex+R, maviwaro, AJ, Yourself etc

Try discussing something with them or even you for that matter. Not going to happen without someone throwing a fit about something they do not agree with and attacking the other personally rather than discussing the issue or topic.

Edited September 8, 2008 by Aficionado

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

From what I understand its the Democrats who are most aligned with the interests of the working class - despite the large number of cigar chomping multi-millionaires in their ranks. If anything its amazing that they don't win more often.

I think you can see some of the reasons in the rather hypocritical response to Sarah Palin by many on the left. I get why people get rankled when the people who are supposed to represent their interests "the left" sneer at their lifestyle and values.

I read an excellent book last year addressing this very issue. I wish more people in the media and campaign strategist would take heed.

http://www.amazon.com/Deer-Hunting-Jesus-D...s/dp/030733936X

Well there are "elites" in the left just as there are on the right - but as far as actually representing people's interests goes I shake my head at why so many people vote Republican. Especially in the last election - which Bush won on "social issues".

Its not an American problem either - we have blind partisanship in the UK too, though its gone off the boil a bit since Tony Blair turned out to be such a big disappointment.

Palin does present a few problems - not least what her selection means for the Republican party. Is it really about changing Washington or are they trying to cement the extreme wing of their party? I'm a bit suspicious of it to tell the truth. I have a couple of Republican friends in Texas and they've expressed some reservations about her for that reason.

Honestly though - I don't know her well enough to say either way, but I wasn't blown away by either of McCain's or Palin's speeches at the conventions. It was almost all about traditional values and patriotism - very little about what they actually plan to do in office.

I hope that will become clearer in time for the election...

Its more that the comment is so vague that extrapolating it to "Most" seems highly implausible (i.e. - you made it up).

Vague. There are plenty of examples in the OT section of VJ alone.

Fancy Pants, Alex+R, maviwaro, AJ, Yourself etc

Try discussing something with them or even you for that matter. Not going to happen without someone throwing a fit about something they do not agree with.

Oh just shut up will you...

Stop looking for arguments for the sake of it.

[HAL 9000 96]

Its more that the comment is so vague that extrapolating it to "Most" seems highly implausible (i.e. - you made it up).

Vague. There are plenty of examples in the OT section of VJ alone.

Fancy Pants, Alex+R, maviwaro, AJ, Yourself etc

Try discussing something with them or even you for that matter. Not going to happen without someone throwing a fit about something they do not agree with and attacking the other personally rather than discussing the issue or topic.

Ummm... yeah.

[Heracles 417]

Its more that the comment is so vague that extrapolating it to "Most" seems highly implausible (i.e. - you made it up).

Vague. There are plenty of examples in the OT section of VJ alone.

Fancy Pants, Alex+R, maviwaro, AJ, Yourself etc

Try discussing something with them or even you for that matter. Not going to happen without someone throwing a fit about something they do not agree with.

Oh just shut up will you...

Stop looking for arguments for the sake of it.

You accuse me of making stuff up then try to discredit the examples you yourself asked for.

I might have gotten mad in the past but I know you are just a DH who camps out in OT looking for something to rebut or someone to argue with.

Edited September 8, 2008 by Aficionado

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Its more that the comment is so vague that extrapolating it to "Most" seems highly implausible (i.e. - you made it up).

Vague. There are plenty of examples in the OT section of VJ alone.

Fancy Pants, Alex+R, maviwaro, AJ, Yourself etc

Try discussing something with them or even you for that matter. Not going to happen without someone throwing a fit about something they do not agree with.

Oh just shut up will you...

Stop looking for arguments for the sake of it.

You accuse me of making stuff up then try to discredit the examples you yourself asked for.

I might have gotten mad in the past but I know you are just a DH who camps out in OT looking for something to rebut or someone to argue with.

I didn't see any examples - just a laundry list of complaints and finger-pointing.

[Heracles 417]

I didn't see any examples - just a laundry list of complaints and finger-pointing.

I am not going to waste my time searching for their various childish rants and raves that have been posted time and time again.

There are people who you can agree to disagree with. Then there are others, as described, earlier who will kick and scream like a spoiled child when someone does not agree with them. Anyone who has been to OT in the past few years knows who these babies are.

Edited September 8, 2008 by Aficionado

[HAL 9000 96]

Yeah don't waste time you don't have.

[Heracles 417]

Yeah don't waste time you don't have.

..

Edited September 8, 2008 by Aficionado

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I didn't see any examples - just a laundry list of complaints and finger-pointing.

I am not going to waste my time searching for their various childish rants and raves that have been posted time and time again.

There are people who you can agree to disagree with. Then there are others, as described, earlier who will kick and scream like a spoiled child when someone does not agree with them. Anyone who has been to OT in the past few years knows who these babies are.

Don't waste your time, fair enough. Please feel free to continue making all the accusations you want.

[IAMX 3,055]

I didn't see any examples - just a laundry list of complaints and finger-pointing.

I am not going to waste my time searching for their various childish rants and raves that have been posted time and time again.

There are people who you can agree to disagree with. Then there are others, as described, earlier who will kick and scream like a spoiled child when someone does not agree with them. Anyone who has been to OT in the past few years knows who these babies are.

Don't waste your time, fair enough. Please feel free to continue making all the accusations you want.

When the argument grows stale, one must resort to personal attacks. It's the only way to justify a continuously stupid rationale.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I didn't see any examples - just a laundry list of complaints and finger-pointing.

I am not going to waste my time searching for their various childish rants and raves that have been posted time and time again.

There are people who you can agree to disagree with. Then there are others, as described, earlier who will kick and scream like a spoiled child when someone does not agree with them. Anyone who has been to OT in the past few years knows who these babies are.

Don't waste your time, fair enough. Please feel free to continue making all the accusations you want.

When the argument grows stale, one must resort to personal attacks. It's the only way to justify a continuously stupid rationale.

Seriously this is an old topic with Aficionado/Boo-Yah.

He has said some seriously questionable stuff on this subject.

[SterlingGirl 1]

See, this article sort of divides America, figuratively, into two categories - which is fallacious, because BOTH parties are wrong, as both are so hard-wired to believe that whatever policies they particularly endorse are those that should be made law, or nudged into the Constitution. Neither side is really intelligent enough to realize that our Constitution was fine the way it was - it laid out a very general, yet easy-to-understand, framework of our rights. Not because of what was IN it, so much, as what was NOT in it. Nothing in it ever said a woman terminating a pregnancy was either immoral or illegal. Nothing in it ever said it was ethical or right to own slaves (therefore, the amendments repealing slavery weren't even necessary - it was never Constitutional to own slaves in the first place). An amendment granting suffrage to women wasn't even necessary, as there was nothing in the Constitution restricting it in the first place; the only people doing that were idiot Americans at that point in time.

There was never ANY need to alter or amend the Constitution, and it opens too big of a can of worms to ever do so, because while you HAVE good-intentioned people who alter it for "good" reasons (if unnecessary ones), you'll have yahoos like Bush believing he's also entitled to alter it for whatever reason HE wants.

Generally, most people are too dumb to comprehend freedom. It's like they can't really grasp what it truly means. It means YOU are responsible for your destiny. YOU are responsible for whether you work or play, prosper or fail, live or die. And it also means YOU cannot tell other people what to do towards the same ends. Your rights end when another's begin. Whether you're dealing with corporations or environmental issues, or social ones, the same principles apply. It's so simple that, honestly, the only people who really get it? Are politically in the minority.

How dumb DOES a population have to be to completely ignore the school of thought that allows people to disagree on any issue, and yet pursue that ideology on an independent basis? (Meaning, they can choose not to partake in things like abortion or prostitution, they simply can't tell others not to). How dumb does a population have to be to utterly ignore the thinking that AUTHORED the Constitution in the first place?