Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Just curious . . .
#1
. . . when was the last time the US was this polarized?
The true purpose of democracy is not to select the best leaders — a clearly debatable obligation — but to facilitate the prompt and peaceful removal of obviously bad ones. 
Reply
#2
(01-13-2013, 11:48 AM)WarBicycle Wrote: . . . when was the last time the US was this polarized?

Not exactly sure, but its been a long, long, time. Probably not since FDR days. It doesn't seem like even then, because the GOP was being itself, just as it is now. So naturally if one side is not raising holy hell, like the Jackasses do as second nature, it tends not to be known all that much.

More people are now beginning to clamour for a new party. And I am not just talking about myself. But things are well on their way to reaching a boiling point. If Hannity, who claims to be impartial(he's an official member of the NY Conservative Party), is raising all these issues, you can bet things are escalating.

Of course Rush is constantly ridiculing the GOP, but still refuses to throw them under the bus. And believe me, there is not a more deserving party, regardless what our resident seer here would have you believe.

But the point is that even with an almost totally cowed opposition, this unrest is being fermented on an individual basis. And personally I think it should have occurred a long time ago. I just cannot count on the Stupid Party, as Pat Caddell so astutely labels them.

I'm waiting for some state, most likely Texas, to formally begin secession talks. Then watch things go to the next level.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"Falsehood flies, and truth comes limping after it" - Jonathan Swift, 1710
Reply
#3
And then there is Savage: http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2...radio.html
Sanders 2020

Reply
#4
The U.S. Civil War ... if you listen to liberals (which is very painful these days), they are increasing comparing just about every contentious partisan issue ... from the debt to gun control ... to slavery. I endured this on Friday ... believe me ... it is a new meme that you will likely be hearing often.
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard."
-- Henry Mencken
Reply
#5
I have an idea. Why don't the disaffected, such as the overwhelming majority of rank and file republicans just start a new party, and call it the New Republican Party, and start their own party tree, with leaders who will actually do what they say. And too, write the rules that make it easy to expel backsliders.

Then stand along side the old bulls, and watch the masses switch over. My guess is that the old party will be left with the elites, people like William Kristol, and other big government republicans like Junior, Senior, McDoofus and some others. It would be confusing for a little while, but not too long. The old party would wither away and be irrelevant almost immediately, before joining in with the Jackasses.

And a good chunk of independents, such as myself, would make up the loss.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"Falsehood flies, and truth comes limping after it" - Jonathan Swift, 1710
Reply
#6
Nobody's going to get 'persuaded' one way or the other John. The only thing that the plurality is convinced of right now is that they can keep expanding their welfare state without having to pay for it ... and that they can continue to give up our 'rights' without ultimately losing their own liberty. It's a very, very deep ideological chasm ... the kind that invites large scale calamity.

That said, why on earth would you think that the large structural fractures that are appearing in the GOP structure would possibly 'break' your way?? Do you really think that any of the independents that you assume would "make up the loss" voted for Obama?? By your reasoning, Gary Johnson really should have won by a landslide ... or at least placed ... vs the 1-2% of the electorate that you claim would "make up the loss". ... Savage is calling for pretty much the same thing ... but by my reckoning all that really means is that Hillary will need much less than 50% of the vote to win in 2016 ... and will still win by the largest margin of victory in modern history.
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard."
-- Henry Mencken
Reply
#7
(01-13-2013, 03:41 PM)John L Wrote: ...Why don't the disaffected, such as the overwhelming majority of rank and file republicans just start a new party, and call it the New Republican Party, and start their own party tree, with leaders who will actually do what they say

That has been the operating strategy for the last four-and-a-half years, but doing so from within the GOP. Otherwise, you are just duplicating unsuccessful third parties that vent spleens, but don't actually do anything. As I keep saying, Ron Paul went that route yet came back to the GOP to regain power and relevance.
Reply
#8
(01-19-2013, 11:42 PM)WmLambert Wrote:
(01-13-2013, 03:41 PM)John L Wrote: ...Why don't the disaffected, such as the overwhelming majority of rank and file republicans just start a new party, and call it the New Republican Party, and start their own party tree, with leaders who will actually do what they say

That has been the operating strategy for the last four-and-a-half years, but doing so from within the GOP. Otherwise, you are just duplicating unsuccessful third parties that vent spleens, but don't actually do anything. As I keep saying, Ron Paul went that route yet came back to the GOP to regain power and relevance.

I harbor no illusions that the squishy wing of my party can or will be shoved out the door anytime soon ... twisting their arms, however, is an entirely different matter. That said, my heart isn't at all broken that Richard Lugar has finally been disloged. The squishies (John's S&Gs) would point to this in loud damnation the Tea Party movement. It's a weak argument, and would it make any different anyway? I salute the successful nomination of Mourdock. IMHO, given the former senator's willingness to 'compromise', the loss of an 'R' number actually had greater value in getting the attention of the party establishment than any impact that might have been made in policy if the 'R' had been retained via 'compromise'. As you say, the most productive strategy is to stay relevant ... while aggressively twisting as many squishy arms as possible ...
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard."
-- Henry Mencken
Reply
#9
The most leverage of all come from the electorate. When we flooded the Washington switchboards over E.O. 13083, we forced Congress to rescind it. When we did the same thing with McCain's amnesty proposals, that got tossed, as well. Obama rules with a plurality - mostly the result of low-information voters and a complicit media - and has little real support down deep.

Sure, Clinton got impeached, and the Senate was able to avoid kicking him out, but enough outrage may have changed that. Insofar as lies were not vetted in the press, and the outrage was constrained, it didn't happen.

It's a continuing struggle: The informed vs. the ignorant, and the hypocrites use of useful idiots to get by. It's not easy to keep applying the pressure and twisting those arms, but in the end, there will be goodness and light.
Reply
#10
(01-20-2013, 10:42 PM)WmLambert Wrote: ... in the end, there will be goodness and light.

I'm normally pretty optimistic, but I've begun to become increasingly alarmed. We are at or very close to the tipping point where a plurality of people have come to believe that they can tax themselves wealthy. At some point it doesn't really matter how effective a minority can be, because they are still a minority.

Our standard of living is going to decline along with the percentage of workforce participation. We're at the leading edge of a major demographic tilt. Trillion$ in capital investment is going to be pulled out of the system to fund living expenses. And instead of looking at ways to replace it with new jobs and new wealth, all our government seems to be obsessed with is merely shuffling it around and itself consuming the dwindling quantities of newly created substance.

It's beyond ludicrous that we have major political battles over 'new' revenue totaling $60 Billion/yr (half of which comes from sunsetting a payroll tax holiday) when we are borrowing around $2.5 Trillion/yr from a Federal Reserve that has only imaginary collateral. The coming cat fight over sequestration is even more off the wall ... there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth and a horrible clamor ... all over the slight reduction in caps that will reduce less than 2% of federal spending ... there will be a horrible outrage ... over legislation that was proposed and signed off by the Senate and the Obama administration but of course will be all the GOPs fault if it remains "the law".

Quote:If buttercups buzz'd after the bee,
If boats were on land, churches on sea,
If ponies rode men and if grass ate the cows,
And cats should be chased into holes by the mouse,
If the mamas sold their babies
To the gypsies for half a crown;
If summer were spring and the other way round,
Then all the world would be upside down.
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard."
-- Henry Mencken
Reply
#11
I am guessing this is the same as it has always been with the exception of the WWII era. The only difference I can see is the level of hatred is greater. It goes both ways , too.

We all are beginning the hate each other and that's not going to be a good thing for us to do.
Reply
#12
(01-21-2013, 05:00 PM)Palladin Wrote: I am guessing this is the same as it has always been with the exception of the WWII era. The only difference I can see is the level of hatred is greater. It goes both ways , too.

We all are beginning the hate each other and that's not going to be a good thing for us to do.

Hate is one thing, the more immediate concern is the roughly half the country that expects the other roughly half the country to pay the bills. (Powerline warning John!!) S5 The plurality of the electorate voted last November in favor of a doomed Ponzi strategy that's collapse is only a matter of time. The real question is whether it will take us ALL down in it's wake.
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard."
-- Henry Mencken
Reply
#13
(01-21-2013, 12:08 AM)mr_yak Wrote: ...We are at or very close to the tipping point where a plurality of people have come to believe that they can tax themselves wealthy

Not really. Obama got far fewer votes than last election - and the difference were cowed opposition voters who stayed home. As it was, he only won half the states, and won the majority votes from those populous areas supported by the nanny state. The state houses and Governorships are still showing opposition in numbers. As the successful flee the pick-pocket states, like California and New York, the standard of living will reflect the loss.

Things will change. The problem is Obama and his cronies trying to set into concrete new standards and settled law that will allow Wilson-era Progressivism to grab a foothold, hard to dislodge.
Reply
#14
The problem with those fleeing California is they are likely liberals who don't want to pay for their own idiocy.
Reply
#15
(01-23-2013, 06:21 PM)Palladin Wrote: The problem with those fleeing California is they are likely liberals who don't want to pay for their own idiocy.

The real problem is that idiocy is portable. S4
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard."
-- Henry Mencken
Reply
#16
(01-23-2013, 02:05 PM)WmLambert Wrote:
(01-21-2013, 12:08 AM)mr_yak Wrote: ...We are at or very close to the tipping point where a plurality of people have come to believe that they can tax themselves wealthy

Not really. Obama got far fewer votes than last election - and the difference were cowed opposition voters who stayed home. As it was, he only won half the states, and won the majority votes from those populous areas supported by the nanny state. The state houses and Governorships are still showing opposition in numbers. As the successful flee the pick-pocket states, like California and New York, the standard of living will reflect the loss.

Things will change. The problem is Obama and his cronies trying to set into concrete new standards and settled law that will allow Wilson-era Progressivism to grab a foothold, hard to dislodge.

A majority still voted for the guy Bill. The demographics are not in favor of a fair society. The young OWS folks are in for a shock, but not before the structures are fully and deeply emplanted to screw them. Things will change, our living standard is going to decline ... the only issue is who is going to be set up to bear the brunt of the burden. Did you listen to the Inauguration Speech? Was there much mention of actually dealing with entitlement infrastructures that are eventually going to bleed our children dry? Did I miss something? ... because all I heard was gun control and immigration reform and more goodies. People will continue to love goodies and the same people will continue wanting somebody else to pay for them ... right up to the point of collapse.
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard."
-- Henry Mencken
Reply
#17
Of course Obama did not address the economy at all, did he? At the most veiled allusions to an improvement of things caused by the opposition. ...Veiled assertions that were wrong.

A majority did not vote for him, per se - It is more realistic to say the majority did not vote, allowing the plurality to win again. The Obama-Axlerod strategy was the personal destruction of their opponent. Limbaugh refers to the low-information voter as the ones who believed the unbelievable media coverage that depicted the nicest human being ever to run for office as a greedy tax-dodger with Cayman Island accounts, who hated gays, women, and dogs, and who killed a woman by taking away her health insurance and allowing her to die of cancer.
Reply
#18
There are lots of well-meaning morons out there and Obama has them in his back pocket.
The true purpose of democracy is not to select the best leaders — a clearly debatable obligation — but to facilitate the prompt and peaceful removal of obviously bad ones. 
Reply
#19
Well-meaning morons and Useful Idiots.
Reply
#20
It's not so much morons or idiots really. Folks really are self absorbed and leftist voting in many respects reflects that reality.

Vote yourself benefits and this includes corps that angle for greater regs to strangle out smaller competition. Just today a small local bank has had to folk the tent over The Dodd-Frank banking regs. They sold out to a larger bank.

Small local franchises just can't amortize these regulations like CitiBank,etc.

Heck, I have my own "vote myself benefits" where I work, a federal lab.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)