Democrats have always had the image of "The Party That Cares." This is what attracts the young and more emotional among us to become democrats. This is why I became a democrat in college.
Over the years, and certainly as I became a conservative, I learned that this image of democrats is their most powerful weapon. They use it by making everything important into a crisis that will starve, kill, cripple, retard, or disadvantage their constituency.
I grew up with political ads about old people on street corners begging for medicine, and doey eyed children with tattered cloths holding broken pencils in filthy classrooms. Every election of a democratic politician is framed to save us from some human disaster of Nazi proportions. Every democrat sponsored bill MUST pass or else the economy, school system, roads, old people, you name it will perish.
With the continuing campaign of President Obama we have a president who never stopped campaigning and never started leading. As a result he has skipped from crisis to crisis, preserving each through incompetence, all while continuing to propagate new and more important hobgoblins.
With his statements last week, designed to inflame the old, the veterans, and those who rely on government assistance, everyone was braced for the backlash of protest. Aside from the shock his statements had amoung the conservative talking heads, there was almost no perceivable reaction. In fact, over the last year there has been very little reaction to the doom scenarios of the president or his minions.
If this is true, that the modern left has suddenly grown tired of riding the train from crisis to crisis, the president has a problem. He has no experience promoting anything outside of crisis. His background as a community organizer was solely based on rallying people around negative situations to effect change.
Perhaps the people are tired and ready for simple logical solutions to end problems rather than simply emphasize them?
Quote from: Gaspar on July 19, 2011, 11:46:02 AM
Over the years, and certainly as I became a conservative, I learned that this image of democrats is their most powerful weapon. They use it by making everything important into a crisis that will starve, kill, cripple, retard, or disadvantage their constituency.
You do realize that you're not talking about a partisan issue at all, right? If you truly believe that Republicans don't fearmonger the smile out of everything at least as badly, if not worse than Democrats do, you're truly hopeless.
Quote from: nathanm on July 19, 2011, 11:50:45 AM
You do realize that you're not talking about a partisan issue at all, right? If you truly believe that Republicans don't fearmonger the smile out of everything at least as badly, if not worse than Democrats do, you're truly hopeless.
I think that with the first options of the debt crisis being to stop Social Security and military checks, the Democrats have an edge on being worse at the moment.
Quote from: Gaspar on July 19, 2011, 11:46:02 AM
Democrats have always had the image of "The Party That Cares."
I believe they do care. They just don't know how to achieve the goal of fixing a problem rather than treating a symptom.
Quote from: Red Arrow on July 19, 2011, 11:58:23 AM
I think that with the first options of the debt crisis being to stop Social Security and military checks, the Democrats have an edge on being worse at the moment.
I think playing this game is completely silly. They're clearly both major offenders here. Republicans, after all, have been claiming we're taxing our grandchildren, will be subject to hyperinflation, and will be taken over by Communists if we don't get the budget deficit under control right this second. Oh wait, I'm sorry, the last one supposedly already happened.
Quote from: nathanm on July 19, 2011, 11:50:45 AM
You do realize that you're not talking about a partisan issue at all, right? If you truly believe that Republicans don't fearmonger the smile out of everything at least as badly, if not worse than Democrats do, you're truly hopeless.
You seem to justify the failings of your party or favored political figure by pointing to the other party's or said politicians predecessor(s) failings. Why not expect or want a higher standard out of your own party?
Quote from: nathanm on July 19, 2011, 12:02:36 PM
I think playing this game is completely silly. They're clearly both major offenders here. Republicans, after all, have been claiming we're taxing our grandchildren, will be subject to hyperinflation, and will be taken over by Communists if we don't get the budget deficit under control right this second. Oh wait, I'm sorry, the last one supposedly already happened.
None of your examples have such an immediate effect as stopping paychecks. It strikes a bit more fear into people than saying your grandchildren will pay more taxes. How much is hyperinflation? I remember significant, double digit inflation during the end of the Carter Presidency. It was not all his fault but it still happened on his watch and we managed to live through it.
I'll stick with my original answer, do away with the party system. Should never have developed to begin with.
Quote from: custosnox on July 19, 2011, 12:31:01 PM
I'll stick with my original answer, do away with the party system. Should never have developed to begin with.
But I love to par-tay!!!
(http://www.fu-manchu.com/morbidaj/spicoli04.jpg)
Quote from: Conan71 on July 19, 2011, 12:14:00 PM
You seem to justify the failings of your party or favored political figure by pointing to the other party's or said politicians predecessor(s) failings. Why not expect or want a higher standard out of your own party?
Conan, I'm not sure you're right to jump on Nate here. The whole point of the original post was to incent Democrats to go on the defensive. Nate is the only one that bit.
I'm not certain what Gaspar is playing at here but it doesn't help...it only serves to create an even bigger divide. Personally I'm tired of the parties and their constant finger pointing, their invented political theater, their attempts to create a schism in US society and tired of all of the sound bites and foaming at the mouth "pundits" that make money in propping up our ever widening dogmas.
All they are doing is providing a decoy to prevent us from seeing how incapable they all are of doing what is right for our country in favor of pandering to their hard core political bases. "Look at this, not at that".
Quote from: Gaspar on July 19, 2011, 11:46:02 AM
Democrats have always had the image of "The Party That Cares." This is what attracts the young and more emotional among us to become democrats. This is why I became a democrat in college.
Over the years, and certainly as I became a conservative, I learned that this image of democrats is their most powerful weapon. They use it by making everything important into a crisis that will starve, kill, cripple, retard, or disadvantage their constituency.
I grew up with political ads about old people on street corners begging for medicine, and doey eyed children with tattered cloths holding broken pencils in filthy classrooms. Every election of a democratic politician is framed to save us from some human disaster of Nazi proportions. Every democrat sponsored bill MUST pass or else the economy, school system, roads, old people, you name it will perish.
With the continuing campaign of President Obama we have a president who never stopped campaigning and never started leading. As a result he has skipped from crisis to crisis, preserving each through incompetence, all while continuing to propagate new and more important hobgoblins.
With his statements last week, designed to inflame the old, the veterans, and those who rely on government assistance, everyone was braced for the backlash of protest. Aside from the shock his statements had amoung the conservative talking heads, there was almost no perceivable reaction. In fact, over the last year there has been very little reaction to the doom scenarios of the president or his minions.
If this is true, that the modern left has suddenly grown tired of riding the train from crisis to crisis, the president has a problem. He has no experience promoting anything outside of crisis. His background as a community organizer was solely based on rallying people around negative situations to effect change.
Perhaps the people are tired and ready for simple logical solutions to end problems rather than simply emphasize them?
GYOFB
My observation was more to point out that it seems like the screams of terror are less and less effective.
Perhaps if we had achieved economic recovery they would have more bite, but it seems like what comes out of the mouths of the President, Pelosi, and Reid is just anticipated noise.
In the beginning, it looked like the president was going to embrace a new direction for economic recovery. All crisis would then be avoided because power fell almost completely on the side of democrats. All of the ideas of green growth and the end of oil and the reversal of global warming and secure state jobs for everyone would be achieved.
It seems like people have woken up and realize that the vision was without a foundation. Hope & Change required details, and there were no details, just grand frameworks and broad ideas.
Quote from: carltonplace on July 19, 2011, 12:51:59 PM
Conan, I'm not sure you're right to jump on Nate here. The whole point of the original post was to incent Democrats to go on the defensive. Nate is the only one that bit.
I'm not certain what Gaspar is playing at here but it doesn't help...it only serves to create an even bigger divide. Personally I'm tired of the parties and their constant finger pointing, their invented political theater, their attempts to create a schism in US society and tired of all of the sound bites and foaming at the mouth "pundits" that make money in propping up our ever widening dogmas.
All they are doing is providing a decoy to prevent us from seeing how incapable they all are of doing what is right for our country in favor of pandering to their hard core political bases. "Look at this, not at that".
I think you are right to an extent that I shouldn't have jumped on him with both feet. You definitely hit the nail on the head about the smokescreen or decoy as you said. I'm of the belief that the GOP and Dems are dysfunctional twins each providing cover for the other as they systemically plunder the treasury at the pleasure of those who put them in power.
Back to your point of Nate's post though, I'm merely trying to point out that there seems to be a certain mentality across the electorate that says: "
We can justify this behavior because
they do it."
That's tantamount to abdicating our ability to force change out of our leaders when we don't really approve of their actions but we become a willing accomplice because we say: "That's just the way it is, I'm going to have to live with it."
It also goes along with the lines of figuring government is so big we simply can't do anything about it except borrow more money and/or raise taxes to pay for the monster that's been created. It's a cop-out.
Quote from: Gaspar on July 19, 2011, 01:00:58 PM
My observation was more to point out that it seems like the screams of terror are less and less effective.
Perhaps if we had achieved economic recovery they would have more bite, but it seems like what comes out of the mouths of the President, Pelosi, and Reid is just anticipated noise.
In the beginning, it looked like the president was going to embrace a new direction for economic recovery. All crisis would then be avoided because power fell almost completely on the side of democrats. All of the ideas of green growth and the end of oil and the reversal of global warming and secure state jobs for everyone would be achieved.
It seems like people have woken up and realize that the vision was without a foundation. Hope & Change required details, and there were no details, just grand frameworks and broad ideas.
Your observation is just regurgitation of current republican political posturing. I'm up to date on the sound bites, thanks.
Quote from: Conan71 on July 19, 2011, 01:06:10 PM
I think you are right to an extent that I shouldn't have jumped on him with both feet. You definitely hit the nail on the head about the smokescreen or decoy as you said. I'm of the belief that the GOP and Dems are dysfunctional twins each providing cover for the other as they systemically plunder the treasury at the pleasure of those who put them in power.
Back to your point of Nate's post though, I'm merely trying to point out that there seems to be a certain mentality across the electorate that says: "We can justify this behavior because they do it."
That's tantamount to abdicating our ability to force change out of our leaders when we don't really approve of their actions but we become a willing accomplice because we say: "That's just the way it is, I'm going to have to live with it."
It also goes along with the lines of figuring government is so big we simply can't do anything about it except borrow more money and/or raise taxes to pay for the monster that's been created. It's a cop-out.
Yep, instead of working together to find real sollutions to real problems lets just play as dirty as possible and then point fingers and yell "He started it". It's asinine, adolescent and played out.
Quote from: carltonplace on July 19, 2011, 01:12:30 PM
Your observation is just regurgitation of current republican political posturing. I'm up to date on the sound bites, thanks.
Just like I've said; our own little Glenn Beck right here on TNF...
Quote from: carltonplace on July 19, 2011, 01:12:30 PM
Your observation is just regurgitation of current republican political posturing. I'm up to date on the sound bites, thanks.
What sound bites? I think most of the Republican talking heads were flaberghasted by the president's statement about not paying SS and veteran's checks.
The only people who seemed to be unconcerned were the actual public. That surprised me and I think it surprised the media too. They tried to make such a big deal of his comments. Republicans were foaming and talk-radio was on fire, but no one seemed to care.
There were no veterans marching on the capital steps. No AARP petitions. It just hit like a puff of hot air.
Three years is a long time to live under crisis (4 if you count the campaign). It seems that the people just don't have the adrenalin left to meet outrage with outrage.
Quote from: Gaspar on July 19, 2011, 01:28:07 PM
What sound bites? I think most of the Republican talking heads were flaberghasted by the president's statement about not paying SS and veteran's checks.
The only people who seemed to be unconcerned were the actual public. That surprised me and I think it surprised the media too. They tried to make such a big deal of his comments. Republicans were foaming and talk-radio was on fire, but no one seemed to care.
There were no veterans marching on the capital steps. No AARP petitions. It just hit like a puff of hot air.
Three years is a long time to live under crisis (4 if you count the campaign). It seems that the people just don't have the adrenalin left to meet outrage with outrage.
Not many people take him seriously anymore they know he is full of smile....
Quote from: Breadburner on July 19, 2011, 02:52:53 PM
Not many people take him seriously anymore they know he is full of smile....
That in itself is sad.
Quote from: Gaspar on July 19, 2011, 02:58:46 PM
That in itself is sad.
You can only cry wolf so many times......
Quote from: Gaspar on July 19, 2011, 01:28:07 PM
What sound bites? I think most of the Republican talking heads were flaberghasted by the president's statement about not paying SS and veteran's checks.
The only people who seemed to be unconcerned were the actual public. That surprised me and I think it surprised the media too. They tried to make such a big deal of his comments. Republicans were foaming and talk-radio was on fire, but no one seemed to care.
There were no veterans marching on the capital steps. No AARP petitions. It just hit like a puff of hot air.
Three years is a long time to live under crisis (4 if you count the campaign). It seems that the people just don't have the adrenalin left to meet outrage with outrage.
The AARLP has started the perp walk with commercials warning Washington not to mess with retirement and health benefits already paid for. Saw one last night.
Quote from: Breadburner on July 19, 2011, 03:00:00 PM
You can only cry wolf so many times......
Not in Obama's world. It's his policy. ;D
He needs to stop acting as a community organizer and be prepared to make some decisions not based on the manipulation of the emotions of others. I think that's what hurts him in negotiations with Republicans. They have a hard time taking him seriously.
I have a good friend who is like this. If you ask him about anything you can't get a straight answer. Every response must be constructed.
The president has lived so long in this manner that it may be impossible for him to adopt a simple position on anything. I think this may be why he likes to offer broad frameworks and avoid details. Details require that you settle on a position, and when you settle, you become vulnerable to that stance. Well. . .you can only play that game so long. Eventually he will have to take a leadership role.
Quote from: Gaspar on July 19, 2011, 03:20:46 PM
He needs to stop acting as a community organizer and be prepared to make some decisions not based on the manipulation of the emotions of others. I think that's what hurts him in negotiations with Republicans. They have a hard time taking him seriously.
I have a good friend who is like this. If you ask him about anything you can't get a straight answer. Every response must be constructed.
The president has lived so long in this manner that it may be impossible for him to adopt a simple position on anything. I think this may be why he likes to offer broad frameworks and avoid details. Details require that you settle on a position, and when you settle, you become vulnerable to that stance. Well. . .you can only play that game so long. Eventually he will have to take a leadership role.
Yeah, but he's such a great speaker.
I think he would have been an excellent evening news anchor. He wouldn't have to construct opinions, wouldn't have to make any tough decisions, hell he wouldn't even have to show any sort of value system, just read the teleprompter.
Quote from: Gaspar on July 19, 2011, 03:20:46 PM
I have a good friend who is like this. If you ask him about anything you can't get a straight answer. Every response must be constructed.
Heard any interviews with Cliff Sterns or Grover Nordquist lately? Neither one of these guys will give a straight answer to a straight question.
That's politics: Be as evasive as possible and repeat the same mantras over and over again ever more loudly. If that fails blame the other side.
Quote from: carltonplace on July 19, 2011, 03:54:38 PM
Heard any interviews with Cliff Sterns or Grover Nordquist lately? Neither one of these guys will give a straight answer to a straight question.
That's politics: Be as evasive as possible and repeat the same mantras over and over again ever more loudly. If that fails blame the other side.
I love how Norquist is against ethanol subsidies (or tax breaks) because they equate to a tax increase. Is anyone still taking him serious these days? I mean other than his therapist?
Quote from: Conan71 on July 19, 2011, 12:14:00 PM
You seem to justify the failings of your party or favored political figure by pointing to the other party's or said politicians predecessor(s) failings. Why not expect or want a higher standard out of your own party?
There is this concept called 'tilting at windmills.' I have better uses of my mental energy than taking on nearly every media outlet and every public figure, all of whom use fear to sell whatever it is they're peddling. Churches, government, business, everyone.
Nobody should do it, but everyone does. (and why not, it has been working for more than 200 years now!) I was disputing the entire idea of Gaspar's idiotic post by pointing that out. In this case, as in many others, politics is just a reflection of society at large. Blaming Obama for using the language nearly every one of us speaks in every day is like blaming a fish for being wet. Stupid fish, being all wet and slimy.
Quote from: nathanm on July 20, 2011, 01:01:09 AM
There is this concept called 'tilting at windmills.' I have better uses of my mental energy than taking on nearly every media outlet and every public figure, all of whom use fear to sell whatever it is they're peddling. Churches, government, business, everyone.
Nobody should do it, but everyone does. (and why not, it has been working for more than 200 years now!) I was disputing the entire idea of Gaspar's idiotic post by pointing that out. In this case, as in many others, politics is just a reflection of society at large. Blaming Obama for using the language nearly every one of us speaks in every day is like blaming a fish for being wet. Stupid fish, being all wet and slimy.
I believe we need to hold leaders to a higher standard, especially when they know they are exaggerating or outright lying so they can appeal to their power base.
Quote from: Conan71 on July 20, 2011, 08:30:49 AM
when they know they are exaggerating or outright lying so they can appeal to their power base.
That's what's happening essentially all of the time. (There are rare exceptions, but they're...rare)
Quote from: nathanm on July 20, 2011, 08:36:12 AM
That's what's happening essentially all of the time. (There are rare exceptions, but they're...rare)
Do you find that acceptable? I sure don't.
Quote from: Conan71 on July 20, 2011, 08:43:56 AM
Do you find that acceptable? I sure don't.
My question though now is why is it all of a sudden a big deal when it wasn't 10 years prior to this. I know you're pretty neutral when it comes to making common ground for the good of the people as opposed to special interests (yes, I know likely a pipe dream, but one can hope) but I see more and more moderate Republicans these days calling for this, but their voice is essentially being drowned out by the pols on the special interest take and those worried about pissing off the extreme right hand side of their base by stepping outside of that ideology.
What I would gather from the conversation on this board is that, in principal, most of us on this board are relatively close on what we think needs to be done. The differences seem to arise when we consider whether the leadership of this country is helping to achieve these common goals or is not.
There are tough decisions that need to be made. Decisions that require specifics and leadership. Decisions that are going to require citizens to shoulder more on a personal level and receive less from a governmental level. Decisions that will result in additional hardships and pain and yet are necassary to avoid even more pain for more people in the future. It isn't an environment where partisanship can provide solutions. Math knows no politics.
The theater we are witnessing in Washington is growing old. I cannot stand to watch representatives of either side discuss their stance as it seems both sides are playing to a fringe that I cannot support.
Quote from: bokworker on July 20, 2011, 08:51:07 AM
I cannot stand to watch representatives of either side discuss their stance as it seems both sides are playing to a fringe that I cannot support.
"fringe" is a nice way of putting that. I agree.
Quote from: Hoss on July 20, 2011, 08:47:40 AM
My question though now is why is it all of a sudden a big deal when it wasn't 10 years prior to this. I know you're pretty neutral when it comes to making common ground for the good of the people as opposed to special interests (yes, I know likely a pipe dream, but one can hope) but I see more and more moderate Republicans these days calling for this, but their voice is essentially being drowned out by the pols on the special interest take and those worried about pissing off the extreme right hand side of their base by stepping outside of that ideology.
If you are referring to Afghanistan and Iraq, I can speak to that. If it's something else, please clarify.
10 years ago, well coming up on anyhow, we witnessed something we'd never seen before on American soil. Did President Bush react appropriately at the time? I think he did as good a job as anyone could given the set of circumstances. As far as the need to invade Iraq, that's an old debate, but we know the cause was, in fact, bolstered by a belief that there were still WMD in Iraq which could be funneled to Al Qaeda. We had no less than former President Clinton wagging his finger on Larry King Live assuring people there was no doubt there were un-accounted for WMD in Iraq the day he left office. This was a man who was privy to the same level of intel that President Bush was. There was a lot of unknown about what was or was not fomenting in the terrorist world in the Middle East at the time.
In hindsight, what has the wisdom been in wasting so much money in Iraq when we could have kept Saddam on a short leash until he finally died? Obviously we could have saved billions. You can call it a war for oil, but to this day, I don't believe we've been compensated with one barrel of oil for our efforts. I don't think this was an appropriate time to take out all our Middle Eastern vendettas. Did Bush over-state the threat emanating out of Iraq? I suspect he did, but I don't believe he overstated the danger in a mysterious and far-flung terrorist organization which didn't seem to have a problem getting new recruits. Keep in mind "Bush lied, thousands died" didn't become expedient until the 2004 election.
Did we really need to create another huge bureaucracy in the DHS and TSA? I mean what a clusterfark that has turned into.
Quote from: bokworker on July 20, 2011, 08:51:07 AM
The theater we are witnessing in Washington is growing old. I cannot stand to watch representatives of either side discuss their stance as it seems both sides are playing to a fringe that I cannot support.
Agreed 100%.
Hopefully, it's a miscalculation which will result in an even bigger shellacking of incumbents of both parties in 2012. When 60% of the country is really pretty moderate, they need to be thinking of moderate solutions considering this is a representative republic and they are supposed to be representing the will of the people.
I'm so pissed off at Boehner, McConnell, and those hugging the no new taxes at all costs crowd, I really am ready to re-register as an independent but I'm not quite ready to waive my right to vote in the primaries.
If I had to say one thing I admire about the Democrat party over the last 30-40 years as it's remained really stable and standing on it's principles though I have to say the social agenda has gradually drifted little more liberal, but that seems to be in line with society in general.
The GOP for some reason seems easily hi-jacked when it's come to the moral majority in the 1980's and the Tea Party today.
I'd love to have a sane Republican Party. Choice is good. Right now, my choices are shut up about all I don't like about the Democrats and try to keep the lunatics out or stay home. There's plenty to hate in both parties. It would be nice if our electoral system didn't make true competitive third parties effectively impossible.
Conan, I stated in a thread sometime ago about making the war in Iraq about oil. The repubs took so much grief about it that now they won't dare try to get our money back by taking some off the top. I say screw that, make it about oil! How about getting some additional revenues for our government from a source other than our own population. $5/barrell for as long as it takes to get our money back sounds fair to me...or how about a $5 discount from the spot price on every barrell of oil we buy from Iraq which will help hold down our domestic energy costs. Just something that keeps us from having a sunk cost in dollars, and lives, over there....
A $5 a barrel discount would be about $5 billion a year if we were the only consumer of Iraqi oil. Still think it's worth spending the money on an occupation force that has cost over $125 billion a year so far? Even if we somehow got the oil for free it would still be a money losing venture.
Quote from: nathanm on July 20, 2011, 11:41:42 AM
Even if we somehow got the oil for free it would still be a money losing venture.
That still wouldn't take into account what that would do for oil prices on the world markets due to slackening in demand as well as other intangible benefits like having somewhat of a friendly ally right next to Iran. It's not always about a dollar for dollar ROI.
Let's face it, our occupation forces have never left Germany, Japan, Korea, or other theaters of war completely, and likely never will. Some sort of financial remuneration for what we've spent wouldn't hurt.
Believe me Nathan, I wasn't making a statement on the "value" of the war.... but $5 billion is $5 billion..and it isnt coming from us. And hey, if we spread that out over 10 years then we are talking $50 billion.
There is no single answer to solve it all but this would be additive..no?
"Winners NEVER compromise...." Rush Limbaugh (the drug crazed leading voice in the war against Obama)
Explaining the Tea Party in terms so simple that even a Tea Partier could understand - it's The Muppets!
This might be a bit long, but it's still entertaining. And still very true, too!