Why is it so hard to see...(our political system to blame)

[BrownsKidd]

I'm not sure where to start.  But what I see influences what I know.  What I see is a society being split down the middle.  We are forced to be either left or right.  There is no middle ground.  
Our two political party system is wreaking havoc on our society.  Want evidence... this board, FB, Twitter, Instagram, and other social media outlets.  
If you believe that our country's success or demise sits at the feet of either the Democrats or the Republicans, I think you're part of the problem. 

The idea that you can be fiscally conservative and socially liberal is foreign, and for some even taboo.  That's where I am.  I want small government, fair & simplified taxes, I believe in the constitution as it was designed and written, personal freedom of choice, and the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness.  But I also believe in individual freedoms that allows all human and civil rights to be extended to all people regardless of sex, race, orientation.  If two men or women want to marry each other.  Okay... who cares, let them.  It doesn't hurt me in any way.  I could go on and on, but I fit in the middle.  Yet, we have no middle choice.  I'm probably more libertarian than either the Dems or the GOP, but do we hear that voice?  I would also wager that most probably sit in the middle on a lot of issues.  But, 4 years later, here we are.  And 4 years after this we will argue over some other bullshit.

The solution is that our political party system needs overhauled.  That's only gonna happen if as a people, we make it happen.  Unfortunately most would rather argue over masks, BLM, and other shit that appears to only divide us even further.  
 

[MLD Woody]

You can be in the middle, 100%. Those people are just not the people yelling about things on the internet. 

But yeah our political system is broken. Two parties only. Corruption. Hugely influenced by money. Etc. 

[JAFBF]

There is only one Party - the Uni-Party, and it's pro big Government and anti "We The People".

 

The Democrats are currently showing the World they are essentially Socialist/Communist (basically the same thing).

 

Look at their history in regards to Slave Rights, Womens Rights, Civil Rights, and so on - it's all been on the wrong side of the will of the People.

 

For countless years they've "promised" to help the Working People, but really all they've been doing is lining their pockets and shipping jobs overseas.

 

Republicans aren't innocent either, they've gone along, or just plain refused to contest these actions.

 

 

The current goal, and I acknowledge it sounds biased (it is what it is), is too wipe out the Democrat Party.

Not the initial goal/understanding of things were going to go, but they've shown what they're about it - and it's anti - America.

 

That's not the final solution, just the first part.

Once the D's are gone, it's time to remove all the RINO's - and there are more than you know.

 

A new Party is in the Wings waiting to be formed (supposedly after the Election), and then this new Party and the remnants of the R's and possibly some D's will be the opposition Party.

 

There is likely more too this than this quick summary, but this is the basics of the current goals I am aware of.

 

[calfoxwc]

On 9/10/2020 at 8:32 AM, BrownsKidd said:

I'm not sure where to start.  But what I see influences what I know.  What I see is a society being split down the middle.  We are forced to be either left or right.  There is no middle ground.  

*******************************

    I took some time to think about this - we are split down the middle, but Real America IS the middle. Our Constitution/Bill of Rights IS the MIDDLE.

*******************************
Our two political party system is wreaking havoc on our society.  Want evidence... this board, FB, Twitter, Instagram, and other social media outlets.  
If you believe that our country's success or demise sits at the feet of either the Democrats or the Republicans, I think you're part of the problem. 

********************************

     Not true. Our two party system has worked fine for well over a couple hundred years. When one party takes America in the wrong direction - Real America elects the other party to put America back on track. The division is fostered by only one party - the leftist democrat socialist anarchist fascist anti-Constitution/Bill of Rights, anti-Life, anti-America. It didn't use to be that way. Then again, I remember JFK. Hubert Humphrey, Bobby Kennedy. McGovern was there, but he got shot down like a rabid leftist duck. The republicans are very much the same. The Republications didn't leave America. The "democrats" did. Hence the out of control marxist-leninist corruption and desperation for power via helter-skelter.

*********************************

The idea that you can be fiscally conservative and socially liberal is foreign, and for some even taboo.  That's where I am.  I want small government, fair & simplified taxes, I believe in the constitution as it was designed and written, personal freedom of choice, and the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness.  But I also believe in individual freedoms that allows all human and civil rights to be extended to all people regardless of sex, race, orientation.

**************************************

     I call baloney. I know it's a term, but conservatism doesn't lend itself to liberalism. It's ok for you to be that - but by omission, you leave out the part where are NOT conservative, so, I guess you are a hybrid politically. I don't see how you vote for any party, because you stand on one side of the fence and on the other side, too. Can't elect two presidents- only one. What you describe, to me, is liberal emotionalism. What about the right of born/unborn children to LIFE, LIBERTY and their PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS? Equal rights for all, yep. Leaving the born/unborn children to be murdered violates that sentiment.

***************************************

If two men or women want to marry each other.  Okay... who cares, let them.  It doesn't hurt me in any way.  I could go on and on, but I fit in the middle.  Yet, we have no middle choice.  I'm probably more libertarian than either the Dems or the GOP, but do we hear that voice?  I would also wager that most probably sit in the middle on a lot of issues.  But, 4 years later, here we are.  And 4 years after this we will argue over some other bullshit.

*******************************************

     We always did argue. That's life - we argue, and most of America - Real America decides to adjust America's course or not. ISSUES REQUIRE DISCUSSING/TRADING OF VIEWPOINTS ON BOTH SIDES. Look at the presidents we've had, so much of the time it flips from dem to rep, from rep to dem. That is Real America keeping on course, lest the Good Ship America hits disaster and sinks.

But right now - the left DEMANDS to win elections or they will destroy America in their mass fits of rage and marxist-leninist arrogance and hate.

********************************************

The solution is that our political party system needs overhauled.  That's only gonna happen if as a people, we make it happen.  Unfortunately most would rather argue over masks, BLM, and other shit that appears to only divide us even further.  

********************************************

     Nope. Really wrong. Only one party has been taken over by anti-American radical marxist-leninist revolutionary helter-skelter. Hate grows in ignorance. The idea that God must be taken out of our courts, out of our schools, out of everwhere even out of the pews... has left America floundering - that is the "socially liberal" marxist-leninist side of it all that is causing it.

     "needs to be overhauled" ... that is baloney, too. The republican party, not perfect by any means, is still very, very much a Real American political party. The party that USED to be the democratic party has raised hell because they lost the last election.  America didn't fall into violent and corrupt vindictive crisis when Obamao/Biden were elected twice. No, sorry, it's the left that is causing the problem.

     The idea that everything must be "overhauled" is marxist-leninist theory. You HAVE TO HAVE TWO CHOICES of direction - turn a bit one way or the other to keep on course. Right now, it's turn republican or be sunk into the ocean. Some choice, eh?

You talk about rights and freedoms. What about the freedom of religion? The left demands churches violate their beliefs. The left demand that Christian churches and all of Real America allow the government ordered and Biblical definition be twisted into perversion. If a woman or a man wants to marry a camel? a bridge? (happened in England). What about the rights of Christians to have Real Marriage? oh, THEY lose their rights to be free. They must be enslaved to twisted leftism. Churches MUST provide abortion insurance? CHURCHES MUST PERVERT THE DEFINITION OF REAL MARRIAGE?

WHERE ARE THEIR RIGHTS?

The left twisted "Separation of Church and State" into a politically left-wing expedient disaster.

     Furthermore, on the subject - A lot of folks supported civil unions, which would have given gays the same rights. I did. But no, leftism means getting the power to get more power and the control that gets them more power. Controlling everything. So, they said the hell with the Christian since forever definition of REAL MARRIAGE. Christians, like Jews, have no rights when hate takes over. And the left hates. and the left LIES. obaMao commie insisted he believed in Real Marriage -between a man and a woman. he lied. He and Biden said they would be the most transparent - LIE. They said they'd close gitmo. Lie. They said they respected our 2nd Amendment - LIE. Obamao said he would be post-racial and bring us all together. REALLY ASININE GIGANTIC DELIBERATE LIE. He fostered racial division, division over wealth of individuals, division over the basic institutions of FAMILY and CHURCH and MARRIAGE.

I find it contradictory to put it nicely - that you say you want smaller government, but you are socially liberal. Socially liberal programs have exploded our national debt into oblivion. LBJ's "great society" backfired badly - left so many families permanently dependent on government assistance from one generation to the next. The dems started throwing out principle to lower themselves into buying off segments of America society with government programs that only served to keep them dependent.

   You talk about RIGHTS, what about OUR RIGHT to have two biological genders? That is pc correct hate speech to say it? Come on - Real America is seeing that for being what it IS - an attempt to subordinate Real America to any demand and every control by the left.

   Even to the point - btw - of decimating the family structure. Fathers and mothers didn't marry, or they couldn't get that government assistance. Daughters were told to get pregnant so the checks could still be coming in. And on and on it went.

Eight years of the first black president, and it took Pres Trump to profoundly help black colleges. Think about that. It took Pres Trump and Pence, to lower unemployment of blacks, women, hispanics, etc to ALL TIME LOWS.

   Obamao/Biden? exploded government employment and size to cover up for their stupid CYA "new normal" "those jobs never coming back".

But Pres Trump is bringing them back. How bad is it? EVEN BIDEN ADMITS THAT PRES TRUMP'S NEW TRADE DEAL IS BETTER THAN NAFTA.

   The leftist dems broke every single promise they made. Pres Trump and Pence have kept theirs, and are still working to keep others, EVEN WITH the corrupt resistance of the dems and the deep state.
 

 

[Westside Steve]

I don't think it has much to do with any system. I think it all boils down to Human Nature. I said this before and I don't even remember where I heard it but it's been said that only human beings and rats will fight with each other for no reason. It's Human Nature. What people love more than anything is power. Like the song says Everybody Wants to Rule the World. What group of people Italians Power by convincing a larger subgroup but he or she will fight for something they want. Look at this board look at the Congress look at the United States in general. Nearly every argument every policy every action is because group a dislikes Group B. And you can be as angry as you want about that how things have changed but they haven't. It's been this way in this place we call America since different tribes kill each other then Europeans killed the tribes then the Europeans started killing each other. (and before that the same thing has happened since the Neanderthals  and cro-magnons  competed for supremacy) It's easy to hate somebody over skin color or language, that's obvious, sooner or later people who speak the same language share the same genetic background and the same religion will start killing each other for smaller and smaller reasons. We don't just disagree with the other guy we hate the other guy, the other guy is evil regardless of what the other guy says.

Finally some may disagree with me but I could give a shit about the Constitution. As long as the Constitution can be significantly changed by the whim of 9 political appointees, which is less the politburo, there are no rules.

WSS

(Just for the heck of it ask yourself why Cleveland Browns fans hate Pittsburgh Steelers fans. If you were a visitor from another planet tell me the big differences between the two cities and teams and think of how you would explain to your leaders back on your planet why one is good and one is evil)

[calfoxwc]

oh, boy. I disagree hugely. Except on one point - according to Maslow's Hierachy of Needs...

people have basic needs - one of them is security... belonging to a group. There are obviously all kinds of groups.

Human beings tend to flock to them per their own interests. Like sports....

   But our Constitution/Bill of RIGHTS is a profoundly BRILLIANT guarantee of our Freedom. No other country on the planet has it.

Sure, haters try to get around it, but if we didn't have a Constitution/Bill of Rights, we wouldn't be a free America. We would be a hell hole and the rest of the world would too.

   The Constitution can be amended, sure. But our rights can NOT be taken away - that defies the existence of the Constitution/Bill of Rights. It can be, and has been amended to clarify a right, extend a right...but cannot take away rights.

   It's sad to me, that anyone would take our Constitution/Bill of Rights - our Freedom for granted. So many millions of people around the world have died, been murdered, because they didn't have Freedom. Didn't have a Constitution/Bill of Rights like ours.

   World History, especially American History  = teaches the lesson well - there are always those who demand to control everybody else, they identify via hate. KKK, BLM, nazis, the list is long around the world.

   In OUR AMERICA - hate takes a backseat to our Constitution/Bill of Rights. Except so many now weren't taught history, weren't taught about our Constitution/Bill of Rights;. it's their own human viewpoint, emotions, greed and weaknesses that they revere. They see themselves as a "god" so they despise Christians - Christianity's existence is a major threat to their feelings. Losing an election violates their FEELINGS. They are crushed because their feelings are their only means to feel like "gods". Reality violates their feelings, they lose their identity, their fake "godness".

   That is why they don't believe in anything else. Our Flag, Anthem, America, GOD.. - are greater than their feelings. They live for how they feel, nothing else should interfere with their superiority. Like the nazis hated the Jews. nazis feelings were superior. same with the KKK. BLM. Their feelings are their fake "god". Nothing else matters.

  and the democratic party has engaged them, patronized them, encouraged them and defended them on what they think is their only change at winning the next crucial election.

  A most crucial example is abortion - the murder of born/unborn children. The left FEELS that unwanted pregnancy makes them have unhappy feelings, so murder it is. Their feelings are their identity, their fake "god". The left FEELS that they were going to win the last election, were ENTITLED to win. and their hate rages on because they lost.

Organized crime FEELS like they are owed the benefits of wealth and complete power - so any crime is ok with them. The fight against organized crime was very violent. The left is now violent and HATES.

HATE is a mental/twisted emotional narcotic. Like the manson family. they loved to hate - their feelings led them to believe  violent crimes were happy times. Profoundly sick. Right now, that narcotic has taken over the democratic party.

  

[Kvoethe]

 

[Neo]

If you ask me, and this is the reason I hate politics, is they always have to debate, and debate, and debate, and the whole while the world is falling apart around their ears. And by the time they are done arguing among one another, it is too late. If these damn politicians could learn to get along with one another, maybe the world would be a better place.

[Gorka]

48 minutes ago, Neo said:

If you ask me, and this is the reason I hate politics, is they always have to debate, and debate, and debate, and the whole while the world is falling apart around their ears. And by the time they are done arguing among one another, it is too late. If these damn politicians could learn to get along with one another, maybe the world would be a better place.

 This is dumb blonde clueless.

Is that what you think has been going on in politics? "Debating"?

[BrownsKidd]

On 9/11/2020 at 12:21 AM, calfoxwc said:

 

Cal, thanks for taking the time to reply.  I appreciate the time and effort. I agree with you on some points and others, we can agree to disagree.  But that's okay, that's the freedom we have in this country, I hope....

I'll focus on one part of your response for now...

"I call baloney. I know it's a term, but conservatism doesn't lend itself to liberalism. It's ok for you to be that - but by omission, you leave out the part where are NOT conservative, so, I guess you are a hybrid politically. I don't see how you vote for any party, because you stand on one side of the fence and on the other side, too. Can't elect two presidents- only one. What you describe, to me, is liberal emotionalism. What about the right of born/unborn children to LIFE, LIBERTY and their PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS? Equal rights for all, yep. Leaving the born/unborn children to be murdered violates that sentiment.

You seem to understand that one can be politically in the middle, but then asks how one can then vote for anyone?  Isn't that exactly the problem I'm trying to relate but you call baloney?  On the other side of coin, I'm sure there are those that are more socially conservative but are more fiscally and federally liberal.  Perhaps I'm wrong, but your views on political parties appear to be very static, wooden, with no room for the middle ground which I allude to.  You seem to come from a left = Marxism and moral depravity where Right = Christianity/Conservatism/Moral Compass. Am I wrong?

Liberal emotionalism: Would you please define that for me.  Until then, I can't comment on it.

 

 

 

[calfoxwc]

1 hour ago, BrownsKidd said:

Cal, thanks for taking the time to reply.  I appreciate the time and effort. I agree with you on some points and others, we can agree to disagree.  But that's okay, that's the freedom we have in this country, I hope....

I'll focus on one part of your response for now...

"I call baloney. I know it's a term, but conservatism doesn't lend itself to liberalism. It's ok for you to be that - but by omission, you leave out the part where are NOT conservative, so, I guess you are a hybrid politically. I don't see how you vote for any party, because you stand on one side of the fence and on the other side, too. Can't elect two presidents- only one. What you describe, to me, is liberal emotionalism. What about the right of born/unborn children to LIFE, LIBERTY and their PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS? Equal rights for all, yep. Leaving the born/unborn children to be murdered violates that sentiment.

You seem to understand that one can be politically in the middle, but then asks how one can then vote for anyone?  Isn't that exactly the problem I'm trying to relate but you call baloney?  On the other side of coin, I'm sure there are those that are more socially conservative but are more fiscally and federally liberal.  Perhaps I'm wrong, but your views on political parties appear to be very static, wooden, with no room for the middle ground which I allude to.  You seem to come from a left = Marxism and moral depravity where Right = Christianity/Conservatism/Moral Compass. Am I wrong?

Liberal emotionalism: Would you please define that for me.  Until then, I can't comment on it.

well, sorry, I was on a roll there - I didn't mean you were full of baloney - I mean I don't understand the idea that "fiscal conservative" means much. I didn't USED to think liberalism meant marxism, but I certainly do now.

BLM co-founder describes herself as 'trained Marxist'

https://nypost.com/2020/06/25/blm-co-founder...

Jun 25, 2020 · Black Lives Matter co-founder Patrisse Cullors said in a newly surfaced video from 2015 that she and her fellow organizers are “trained Marxists” – making clear their movement’s ideological...

‘We are trained Marxists’: Black Lives Matter co-founder ...

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/jun/25/...

Jun 25, 2020 · A 2015 video in which Black Lives Matter co-founder Patrisse Cullors describes herself and co-founder Alicia Garza as “trained Marxists” is making an appearance in a GOP campaign ad.

To a point, no, you aren't wrong. It isn't that I generalized completely - but upon observation, it just appears that way to me as time goes on.

   Back in the day, JFK, Hubert Humphrey - were genuine Real Americans. But the dems are no longer. That is the crux of the problem.

   "socially liberal" is inclusive of all sorts of hair-brained ideas. Socialism, no consequences for significant crimes, 

**************************************

    I say "emotionalism" for lack of a better way to describe the illogical contradictions in liberalism.

Over the years, I see a diligent opposition to the death penalty. Then I see liberals adamantly pro-unlimited abortion, at least

most ? of them. Partial birth abortion? Letting them simply die of neglect after they are born??? But "blm" ?

but Blue Lives don't? White lives don't? The grief and sensationalism over george floyd, but cheering the shootings of two relatively new policemen?

  I don't know any of us, nor anyone, who supports discrimination. But reverse discrimination is ok with liberals?

If we have a republican president, our national debt is a gigantic hot button issue with the left. With a democrat president?

The Green New Deal would cost America about 100 trillion???

It's just that the contradictions are glaring and extreme. Makes zero sense to me - so one day a long time ago, I tried to make sense of it.

For instance - the anti-war movement against the war in Vietnam. Jerry Rubin would talk about how "you have to kill your parents to be free" and really stupid crap that had a lot of students shaking their heads and walking away.

   Back in the day, at Kent State - a year after the May 4th debacle - I was between classes and the only room in the place had to young coeds sitting on one side. Tears flowed down the one gal's cheeks , she was devasted.

The story was, they told me, busloads of protesters against the war went to D.C. to protest. It got out of hand, a bunch of them got arrested, and put in RFK stadium. Here's the link:

http://exiledonline.com/recovered-history-7000-may-day-protesters-herded-into-d-c-stadium-prison-in-1971/

The rest of the story was, she went because she was afraid her excellent brother was over there, and they were afraid he wouldn't make it back home.

  The problem was- the leaders of the rallies ? they never got arrested. They never went to the protests. They used the bus money and food money they all contributed to........for the trip back....to throw themselves a wild booze party.

  and the tears streamed down her pretty face in bitterness. She said so many of them were sincere, and they were betrayed.

  They had to wire parents and relatives to get more money to get back home.

It's the contradictions I"ve noticed over the years. I know you are sincere - though, I don't understand "smaller government" with socially liberal policies that require a giant government expansion to assert liberal policies like man made global warming nonsense, the green new deal, legalized politically correct speech enforcement (see Britain), forcing Christians to redefine Real Marriage, the attack on our 2nd Amendment....

  so, generally speaking, not referring to you, I guess ulterior motives are the explanation - personal stances based on emotions - emotions change, so do the stances. Drones were VERY BAD. Until obaMao did them, then silence.

   I appreciate your post - I just went and started venting about the left in general, and the contradictions, to me, that I don't get.

  

  

 

[Axe]

 

[calfoxwc]

Yep. I  do wonder why she ran as a democrat. But then I read up on her....- not perfect, but not totally dangerous corrupt and vicious - which is, the left. Sadly, she would bring the left with her now. She would accomplish nothing with the left's help, if she didn't play ball.

 if Tulsi was ever elected to the presidency?

Big, serious trouble for our Constitution/Bill of Rights.

 Why?

because - she says good things ...but...she is a contradiction between being for American Rights...

and leftwing causes.

I think she's a real person - but I would never vote for her. One foot on one side of the fence, and one foot on the other....

https://www.ammoland.com/2019/04/tulsi-is-terrible-but-redeemable-on-the-second-amendment/#axzz6YSfcJJEv

 

[Kvoethe]

I can agree with this wholeheartedly...Im too busy looking after my own family to worry about other people 1000 miles away or in the next town. 

[Kvoethe]

8 hours ago, calfoxwc said:

Yep. I  do wonder why she ran as a democrat. But then I read up on her....- not perfect, but not totally dangerous corrupt and vicious - which is, the left. Sadly, she would bring the left with her now. She would accomplish nothing with the left's help, if she didn't play ball.

 if Tulsi was ever elected to the presidency?

Big, serious trouble for our Constitution/Bill of Rights.

 Why?

because - she says good things ...but...she is a contradiction between being for American Rights...

and leftwing causes.

I think she's a real person - but I would never vote for her. One foot on one side of the fence, and one foot on the other....

https://www.ammoland.com/2019/04/tulsi-is-terrible-but-redeemable-on-the-second-amendment/#axzz6YSfcJJEv

 

Dems had some decent candidates...they went with someone they can control...sad.

[calfoxwc]

33 minutes ago, Kvoethe said:

Dems had some decent candidates...they went with someone they can control...sad.

if there are any legit moderate dem politicians out there - they may as well become republicans, I think. The number of dem house reps that let pelosi vote by proxy for them is concerning.