Why Is the Republican Field So Extreme? (Read 1977 times)

    Jeff said "parties"

     ... but then spent a lot of time detailing how the "right looks to forment" the "cynical attitude".

    2014 Goals:

    #1: Do what I can do. <DOING>

    #2: 365 Hours training

     

    Scout7


    CPT Curmudgeon

      Regardless, I don't think that any runners here know the answers to this incredibly challenging dilemma we're faced with in our generation.

       

      I do.

       

      Scout for Overlord.

        So the left does none of this stuff?

         

        The left (at least in its political party form) is equal and opposite to the right. We (it) have a Pollyanna attitude about ability of existing forms of government and the ability of politicians to address social problems. We are also less likely to see the public as impatient and stupid. We think that they know what they want, and we still believe in the basic effectiveness of the federal government. (Actually, I think that Obama is better than most on the left in this respect, and I think you see in his health care plan a sensitivity to the idea that addressing health care will take both gov. and non-gov. forms of intervention.)

         

        I was just struck by the way in which you cast the problem of politics, you were basically following a standard conservative party line about the ineffectiveness of politicians and the stupidity of the public. 


        Prince of Fatness

          Jeff said "parties"

           

          Yes, he started that way, but in towards the end there was some of "the right is doing this" and "the right is doing that".

           

          Look, some Obama supporters have argued that we should not necessarily judge him by how things are now.  He has us on the right course.  That argument has merit in that it is at least considering how things will be in the long term.  We can debate whether this is true, but at least then we will be debating about a long term solution.

           

          And I agree that the right is just throwing out this big government boogeyman argument without offering much in the way of a solution.  I'm not the right wing guy that you think that I am.

          Semi-retired.

             ... but then spent a lot of time detailing how the "right looks to forment" the "cynical attitude".

             

            Yes, the right does look to foment (not "forment") this attitude--for better or for worse. Most people I know on the right are very cynical about government and the intelligence of the public.


            Prince of Fatness

              I was just struck by the way in which you cast the problem of politics, you were basically following a standard conservative party line about the ineffectiveness of politicians and the stupidity of the public. 

               

              Impatient <> Stupid.  I never said that the public was stupid.  Ineffectiveness of politicians, well OK.  Believe it or not I try to work on that part.

              Semi-retired.

                I'm not going to post on this thread posing as "neutral" and attempt to draw attention to problems on "both sides" when I have strong views one way and have thrown my lot in with one side. I am not trying to add fuel to any fires. I am just calling it as I see it. 

                  Impatient <> Stupid.  I never said that the public was stupid.  Ineffectiveness of politicians, well OK.  Believe it or not I try to work on that part.

                   

                  Okay, you said that the public is impatient and wants instant gratification. Anyone who is impatient and wants instant gratification out of the political process is being stupid. (My word; I will own it.) I think that most people in the public are willing to wait for solutions that work.


                  Fat butt on couch

                     I just saw that the pattern of your responses over the last page or so has been to deflect criticism of your own party by claiming that the other party is basically just the same. I don't agree with that assessment.

                     

                    Dude, I don't HAVE a party.  They both piss me off.  Just like somebody assigning intent to my actions that was not there.  I don't give a hoot what party someone belongs to if I like what they have to offer, believe they mean it, and believe they will make a real attempt to get it done.  I've never pulled a party lever in my life and rarely turn in a ballot that reflects a party line.

                     

                    Your post is good evidence of why parties piss me off.  You're more consumed with defending the Democrats and slamming the Republicans than looking at the issues and what needs to be done....parties over substance.

                     

                    I'm not trying to attack you here, I'm just very, very tired of the same old party-on-party bickering.  It doesn't address the issues, it plays into the hands of the idiots who have gotten us to our current dysfunctional state, and it accomplishes nothing for us.  Canonizing Obama and blaming Republicans for everything gets us nowhere, as does the inverse of that.  One has to be completely blind to what has been happening in this country to think the blame is one-sided.

                     

                    There is nothing I would like more than for some superbly electable independent or well-executed third party to come along and shake the current political structure to its core.

                    "If you want to be a bad a$s, then do what a bad a$s does.  There's your pep talk for today.  Go Run." -- Slo_Hand

                     


                    Prince of Fatness

                      Okay, you said that the public is impatient and wants instant gratification. Anyone who is impatient and wants instant gratification out of the political process is being stupid. (My word; I will own it.) I think that most people in the public are willing to wait for solutions that work.

                       

                      Fair enough.  Our opinions differ some here, but OK.  Regarding your last sentence, I hope so but I am not sure.

                       

                      And just to be clear, I lean right of center but maybe not as far as you think.  Probably more so on the fiscal end of things, and I tend to talk about those more so that may lead folks to see me as more right that I really am.

                      Semi-retired.

                      Scout7


                      CPT Curmudgeon

                        Calling people names is part of the problem, isn't it?

                         

                        This conversation is degenerating into the standard dialogue of finger-pointing and demagoguery.  "Right" and "Left" get thrown about as pejoratives, and then we devolve into claiming to speak for an entire population.

                         

                        Knock it off, you chuckleheads.

                         

                        The quickest and simplest solution to all of this horseshit is one that no one is going to endorse.  I joke about it, but it's true.  A dictatorship gets shit done.  It may not be the things you want done, but man, stuff happens, like now.

                         

                        People keep talking about how the US government is supposed to introduce all these changes and take a long-term view.  Wrong.  If it were supposed to take a long-term view, we wouldn't have elections every two years.  Our government is designed to be as ineffectual as possible. 

                         

                        Deal with it.

                         

                        As for all the rest of this "debate"...  All of it boils down to what each of us believes, our own personal philosophies on life, citizenship, and happiness.  Most of the people out there have never really taken time to sit down and think about what they believe, and why they believe it.  Why should government be involved, or why shouldn't it?  What is the role of government in daily life?  What is the role of the citizen?

                         

                        Considering these types of questions have been debated since government was created, I'm fairly certain that there is no one right answer; there's simply what works now.


                        Fat butt on couch

                           

                          I was just struck by the way in which you cast the problem of politics, you were basically following a standard conservative party line about the ineffectiveness of politicians and the stupidity of the public. 

                           

                           

                          I think that you can have good, well-intentioned, intelligent people who have different upbringings, experiences, and influences in their lives that lead them to very different ideological leanings.  Therefore, while they may view the world differently they can have a rational conversation/debate as peers and perhaps come to reasonable agreements on how to proceed in a way that both can live with.  You can disagree while having mutual respect for one another as persons who happen to have differing opinions.

                           

                          When you demonize those who are not on you side in the way you do, not only do you poison the well of dialogue, but you guarantee that you will never be able to work with those people.  Not only do you disagree with their ideology, you believe more deeply than that that they are inferior persons.  You've created such a parody of those persons that constructive discourse is no longer possible.  You do not approach them as well-intentioned peers with differing opinions.

                          "If you want to be a bad a$s, then do what a bad a$s does.  There's your pep talk for today.  Go Run." -- Slo_Hand

                           

                            Dude, I don't HAVE a party.  They both piss me off.  Just like somebody assigning intent to my actions that was not there.  I don't give a hoot what party someone belongs to if I like what they have to offer, believe they mean it, and believe they will make a real attempt to get it done.  I've never pulled a party lever in my life and rarely turn in a ballot that reflects a party line.

                             

                            Your post is good evidence of why parties piss me off.  You're more consumed with defending the Democrats and slamming the Republicans than looking at the issues and what needs to be done....parties over substance.

                             

                            I'm not trying to attack you here, I'm just very, very tired of the same old party-on-party bickering.  It doesn't address the issues, it plays into the hands of the idiots who have gotten us to our current dysfunctional state, and it accomplishes nothing for us.  Canonizing Obama and blaming Republicans for everything gets us nowhere, as does the inverse of that.  One has to be completely blind to what has been happening in this country to think the blame is one-sided.

                             

                            There is nothing I would like more than for some superbly electable independent or well-executed third party to come along and shake the current political structure to its core.

                             

                            I hear you.

                             

                            I guess I just thought that, for example, you equating Farrakhan with Rush (really?) instead of, say, criticizing Rush for being a propagandist was a direct example of doing what you accuse me of in this post.

                             

                            Really, I am interested in advocating my point of view here, talking some politics... I know that part of the game is to show how each side is biased and wrong, and it does get a little tiresome, but I'm playing the same game here as you. Just trying to articulate my opinions in a public space where others disagree. 

                             

                            I should put a disclaimer at the end of every post: "I could be wrong," because hey, I could be wrong.


                            HobbyJogger & HobbyRacer

                              Yes, the right does look to foment (not "forment") this attitude--for better or for worse. Most people I know on the right are very cynical about government and the intelligence of the public.

                               

                              (Bold added)

                               

                              Are they really? Can't imagine why.

                              It's a 5k. It hurt like hell...then I tried to pick it up. The end.


                              Fat butt on couch

                                I hear you.

                                 

                                I guess I just thought that, for example, you equating Farrakhan with Rush (really?) instead of, say, criticizing Rush for being a propagandist was a direct example of doing what you accuse me of in this post.

                                 

                                 

                                I was pointing out that one extreme personality that some in a party align with, does not validate that all of that person's actions represent those supporting the party.

                                 

                                I believe I called Rush a crackpot or something similar....is that not strong enough language?  I'm willing to use stronger.  I was in no way defending Rush, as I said, he's a complete crackpot.

                                "If you want to be a bad a$s, then do what a bad a$s does.  There's your pep talk for today.  Go Run." -- Slo_Hand