US Election 2012...the aftermath

[Hurlshort]

At this point I just vote for the person that says they are willing to compromise and work with others, since that seems to be utterly lacking in politics right now.  

[Malcador]

And that person is probably lying anyway.

[alanschu]

I actually do have a bias for voting for politicians that keep smear campaigns to a minimum (preferably completely non-existent) but that's more a reflection of my jaded perspective of politics than any sort of political affiliation.

[Meshugger]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/21/lindsey-graham-drone-strikes_n_2734133.html

 

4700 people have died in drone strikes with the authorization of this administration. Nobel peace prices do come cheap these days.

[Guard Dog]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/21/lindsey-graham-drone-strikes_n_2734133.html

 

4700 people have died in drone strikes with the authorization of this administration. Nobel peace prices do come cheap these days.

No kidding, and now they are saying he can kill us right here on our own soil.

[Guard Dog]

At this point I just vote for the person that says they are willing to compromise and work with others, since that seems to be utterly lacking in politics right now.  

To tell you the truth Hurlie, I'd have much greater respect for a politician who refused to compromise rather than allow a bad law to pass or bad policy to be enacted. And these days there is is very little else coming from Washington DC.

[Guard Dog]

 

I'm sure you noticed there are very few folks on this board with a libertarian/conservative viewpoint.

 

I've probably become more libertarian as well, although as with all "factions" the "crazies" typically make me not want to associate with them either haha.

 

 

Fiscal policy drives 90% of my voting tendencies, although some things like excessive/adamant stupidity that a candidate may say regarding other aspects is not completely ignored.

 

Having said that, I have also learned that many of my right-wing assumptions have been more fueled by propaganda than me actually carefully examining the details, especially from a pure economics perspective.  As you say, it's important to still acknowledge that different opinions can exist and be viable.

So you are becoming an example of what the folks in Ottawa are calling "Western Alienation"?

[Malcador]

Just guessing that he meant he doesn't want zealots, so politicians that will at least listen to a viewpoint honestly. As for voting here, well I've "wasted" my vote on the Green Party for the last couple of elections.

Edited March 8, 2013 by Malcador

[Hurlshort]

I know compromise has taken on a negative tone in politics, but I just think this political divide is self-destructive.  There is too much toxicity in the way these politicians are dealing with each other.  More time is wasted trying to tear each other down than actually fixing problems.  The sequester is a great example of that, instead of going through and eliminating bureaucratic redundancies to trim the budget by 85 billion, which is very possible, the two parties spent the whole time grandstanding about big ticket items.  

 

These people are all serving the same country when they are in office, they should be able to find a common ground.  Treating each other like enemies is ridiculous. 

[Guard Dog]

Hurlshot we ARE becoming enemies. It has already begun. One side wants the government to expand, to eliminate federalisim and for practical purposes nullify local government. Essentially to take over everything. The other side, I'm not sure what they want, but their constituents want to reduce the size of government to bring it back within the confines of the Constitution.

 

Where do we compromise here? They are competely mutually exclusive ends.

 

Policy may have room for compromise but fundamental philosophy and vision for the future just does not.

[alanschu]

So you are becoming an example of what the folks in Ottawa are calling "Western Alienation"?

 

 

I don't know if I'd say that.  In general I'd still consider myself Canadian first.

 

I don't always agree with my federal government's decisions, but I recognize that not all the citizens of the country will want the same things as I do and that's part of what it means living in a democracy.

 

 

An important observation I made, reading your recent response to Hurlshot, is that I don't consider anyone that has a different political preference to be an enemy of me.  The thing is, I get the impression that your perspective is much more common than I would like it to be.  Even then, from the little that I have looked into American politics, I find it interesting because the Democrats still come across to most Canadians as being firmly right of center, but in speaking with people like yourself, it's one step away from total socialism haha.

 

But still, that someone feels NDP (Canada's leftist party) is the way to go just means they see things differently.  I know some very successful and affluent people that still support that party, and whenever asked "How do you support all the expenses?" they pretty matter of factly state "You'll have to raise taxes, and I don't have any problem paying those taxes."  At least they aren't living in an ideal world where stuff comes from magic.

 

 

I suppose, due to my wavering on "hardcore" libertarianism, it's probably fairest to say that in many ways I'm pragmatic.  Despite considering myself right of center, there are things that I think government funding for is not a bad thing: primary and secondary education, as well as health.

 

The reasons for doing so, in my opinion, is because those types of things represent some level of investment into the future of the country.  It's easy to imagine the situations where people "take advantage" of the circumstances, but after doing a bit of research on it, those are things that I still support government support, even though they may not be specifically under the realm of traditional fiscal conservatism.

[Guard Dog]

Perhaps "enemy" was a poor choice of words. I posted elsewhere that disliking someone because their politics are not your politics was like disliking them for rooting for a different sports team. And you are also correct that one side is eventually going to win out because they (the majority) want something different. And I already know it won't be my side and I also know I will hate beyond words the end result. Hopefully the worse won't come to worst. Hopefully enough people will turn us back from where we are heading. If all else fails hopefully we'll just break up the country and go our own way peacefully. 

 

I would not call the US Democrats socialists. That would not be accurate, although they do have some socialist tendencies. I think Coporatists is probably closer to the mark. But one thing is for certain, their tone has changed in the past four years. Did you ever think you would hear the US DOJ proclaim the President has the right to order the summary excecution of a US citizen on US soil as long as he is satisfied they are terroists? You did last week. Did you ever think the US government would label people whose politics they disaprove of but who have comitted no crimes as likely terrorists? You did just three years ago :http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/apr/16/napolitano-stands-rightwing-extremism/, http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0811/60421.html. Maybe they are not my enemy, but apparently I've become theirs.

 

As far as taxes and funding the govenment I've made it clear that I'm certainly no anarchist. We need the government to play the role it was designed to play. The trouble it it has left that far behind and now is turning up in everything.

Edited March 8, 2013 by Guard Dog

[Hurlshort]

That was pretty clearly political rhetoric, which is simply unacceptable and needs to stop on both sides.  It doesn't mean Tea Party folks are going to be targeted by drones.  

 

Personally I think the Patriot Act needs to go away.  It never should have been extended.  But again, you've got to hold both parties responsible for that mess.  

 

GD, I know you are a history buff, so always try and remember that big government is cyclical.  We've gone through prohibition, we've gone through desegregation, and we've gone through massive military spending during the cold war (ok, maybe we are still in that one .)  We'll get through the healthcare crisis.

[Tsuga C]

 

Is there such a beast as a left-wing conservative?

The Catholic church is left wing conservative.

Good point. That's why I no longer attend mass. They long ago conflated massive social spending with compassion and lost my respect.

[Calax]

 

To reduce the size of government to bring it back within the confines of the Constitution.

To be fair, many would say that the "confines of the Constitution" is based around interpretation. And while some may think that means "You should only shoot those who want to shoot us, and earn just enough money to ensure that's done. Also ensure that states recognize each others laws." Others think that the Feds should have significantly more power when it comes to regulating trade, crime, and the rights of citizens.

 

Part of the issue we're dealing with right now, is that the Constitution was set up when telecommunications didn't exist. I mean, at the time of it's writing ambassadors were basically on their own in the nations they were in, and had massive leeway in negotiations. Now you might as well have the SecState on skype for negotiations. 

[Tsuga C]

My issue...

...is that you resent him being unapologetically conservative and refusing to compromise with the parasitic evils of the un-Constitutional usurpation by the Federal government of States' and Citizens' rights. I disagree with your assessment of him entirely.

I stated... my fiscal policy is the principal grounds by which I place my vote),...

I'm a social, fiscal, and national security conservative.

Since you also seem unaware,...

I was quite aware of this, but I'm not terribly interested in playing word games with what is or is not "technically true".

This is...

...condescension on your part, or at least that's how I read this section. I hear this from a good number of conservative-lites such as yourself who seem to hold moderation and reaching across the isle as great virtues. Perhaps you don't do this, though. Respectfully, I disagree with the "lites" as history has taught me that the LibProgs never, ever stop coming back for another attack upon traditional conservative America, be it our fiscal, moral, or national security perogatives.

Perhaps you and Rush are unaware,...

Again, I was aware of this. Living in the 21st Century as we do, however, we use the modern definition. Mark Levin will, from time to time, call attention to this and refer to LibProgs as "modern liberals". He did this a number of times in his book Liberty & Tyranny. Rush has done so on his show as well, but you don't listen, so you wouldn't know this. Edited March 8, 2013 by Tsuga C

[Guard Dog]

@Hurlshot: I can dismiss Bidens comments and well as those of the Congress Critters as political rhetoric. But that memo from the DHS I can't just wave off. Nor should you. That is a real policy from a real branch of the government and coupled with Holders comments earlier this week I would not just say "Oh it will never happen". I do consider myself a student of US History and I can think of numerous times that the rights of citizens have been trampled, ignored or abused. I certainly hope this will all pass and we will be none the worse for it. I'm far from certain though. This really isn't just about healthcare. I know that's the point now and the main topic of this discussion. What this is really about is two different and mutually exclusive visions of what this country is and where it is going.

 

@Calax: "Others think that the Feds should have significantly more power when it comes to regulating trade, crime, and the rights of citizens." Calax, that is the single most frightening thing I think you have ever said.I truely hope you are not one of those who think that. They DO NOT get to regulate our rights because our rights do not come from them. They day they do is the day we are finished as a free nation.

 

The rest of your point is good though. There are those who do think we need to evolve as a nation. But do you think evolving into a nation that is less free is a good thing?

Edited March 8, 2013 by Guard Dog

[Tsuga C]

Calax, that is the single most frightening thing I think you have ever said. I truely hope you are not one of those who think that.

He is just such a one. His posts regarding the Second Amendment and gun control laws make it entirely clear that he's very much akin to Sowell's "anointed", Levin's "statist", or Codevilla's "ruling class"--take your pick.

[Hurlshort]

 

 I hear this from a good number of conservative-lites such as yourself who seem to hold moderation and reaching across the isle as great virtues. 

 

How are these not great virtues?  How do you expect to get any work done if all you do is build walls around yourself?  

 

I have an interesting question for you guys, which one of the founding fathers do you feel you relate closely to?  I tend to find Benjamin Franklin the most appealing, with quotes like this speaking out to me:

 

There is perhaps no one of our natural passions so hard to subdue as pride. Beat it down, stifle it, mortify it as much as one pleases, it is still alive. Even if I could conceive that I had completely overcome it, I should probably be proud of my humility.

 

But I believe all of them, with their very diverse beliefs, play a key role in the creation of our country.  

[Guard Dog]

 

Calax, that is the single most frightening thing I think you have ever said. I truely hope you are not one of those who think that.

He is just such a one. His posts regarding the Second Amendment and gun control laws make it entirely clear that he's very much akin to Sowell's "anointed", Levin's "statist", or Codevilla's "ruling class"--take your pick.

  ROFL.... wait I gotta catch my breath. Hey Calax, you're a member of the ruling class, all your problems are solved... who knew all this time you spent working so hard you were really running the show!

 

No seriously Tsuga Calax is a good guy and smarter than most here. He is a little left of center for sure but he is consistent and intellectually honest about why he thinks the way he does. I'm not familiar with Codevilla but Thomas Sowell I do know and he is one of the most brilliant men alive today. And he was NOT talking about guys like Calax in his book The Vision of the Anointed. I know, it's on the bookshelf behind me right now. Now Calax's professors at ISU that are reinforcing his political leanings, that is another story.

[Guard Dog]

 

 

 I hear this from a good number of conservative-lites such as yourself who seem to hold moderation and reaching across the isle as great virtues. 

 

How are these not great virtues?  How do you expect to get any work done if all you do is build walls around yourself?  

 

I have an interesting question for you guys, which one of the founding fathers do you feel you relate closely to?  I tend to find Benjamin Franklin the most appealing, with quotes like this speaking out to me:

 

>There is perhaps no one of our natural passions so hard to subdue as pride. Beat it down, stifle it, mortify it as much as one pleases, it is still alive. Even if I could conceive that I had completely overcome it, I should probably be proud of my humility.

 

But I believe all of them, with their very diverse beliefs, play a key role in the creation of our country.  

 

Thomas Paine and Thomas Jefferson, hands down.

 

This quote is for you Hurlie: "Moderation in temper is always a virtue, moderation in principle is always a vice" Thomas Paine

 

And my personal favorite "Society in every state is a blessing but government even in it's best stage is necessary evil, in it's worst stage an intolerable one"

[Calax]

 

@Calax: "Others think that the Feds should have significantly more power when it comes to regulating trade, crime, and the rights of citizens." Calax, that is the single most frightening thing I think you have ever said.I truely hope you are not one of those who think that. They DO NOT get to regulate our rights because our rights do not come from them. They day they do is the day we are finished as a free nation.

 

I didn't mean regulate the rights of citizens, more the protection of citizens from abuse and the protection of the rights of citizens. I mean if that was left up to the states in entirety, you'd still wind up with pre-civil rights era south trumping and griping about how "those dastardly liberals" keep moving down there and trying to agitate to change the system.

 

If you keep having the same attitudes and thought processes perpetuated, very little will change.

[Hurlshort]

Totally relevant:

 

http://www.theonion.com/articles/youre-my-best-friend-says-obama-to-drone-that-appe,31594/?ref=auto

[Tsuga C]

  ROFL.... wait I gotta catch my breath. Hey Calax, you're a member of the ruling class, all your problems are solved... who knew all this time you spent working so hard you were really running the show!

 

I'm not familiar with Codevilla...

You needn't be exceptionally wealthy, well connected, in government, or a titan of industry to be included in Angelo Codevilla's "ruling class"; many who seek acceptance by or patronage from the ruling class espouse their views are considered as being of that group despite their "wanna-be" status.

 

Here's an article that formed the nucleus of his book, The Ruling Class.

Edited March 9, 2013 by Tsuga C

[Calax]

Then wouldn't YOU be part of the "ruling class" as you share more views with "titans of industry" and those in power than I.