posted on December 22, 2000 12:11:31 AM new
We all know that politicians make promises that they can't possibly hope to keep in order to receive your vote. The "proof in the pudding" came when re-election time came around: you looked at that politician's voting record and saw where they truly stood and ignored the rhetoric. Then you knew what the truth was, you knew how to vote.
Not so anymore!
If you have to watch how your political party votes, then that takes EFFORT. If you have to think about how your politicians that you voted into office voted - for you or against you, well, that just is too much energy! While all segments of this politically lazy and lax society are guilty of this abdication of responsibility, no where is it more noticeable than republican voters.
You know, if anyone with half a brain and half an hour went and looked at the sort of nonsense and pure Special Interest legislation being passed by this New Republican party, it wouldn't take even a dimwit to see that they pass legislation that is no good for their constituents. Why do people vote for politicians who pass legislation that screws them? I know, I know -- too stupid to even be fed with a spoon. But there are so many of them lately!
No. A sensible, educated person would dismiss the campaign promises, ignore the Spin, and forget the rhetoric pumped out in mass quantities by the political machines. A sensible, level headed, intelligent person would look at how their party votes and what they vote for and either say, "I benefit from this!" or "Hey! This stuff screws me! Bull#$%!"
But not today! You can expect to see so many Americans vote to loose their freedoms, hard won by patriots in many wars, in many campaign battles to self-serving, power-hungry politicians who couldn't give a damn about the Voter until the very last moment of election time. With the OBVIOUS disdain for their voters, these New Republicans continue to SNEER at their voters with such obvious feelings of superiority - and the Republican voters loved it. What does that tell the average person about Republican voters?
posted on December 22, 2000 04:12:10 AM new
Gee, first ebay, now the New Republicans. You haven't said anything yet about the guys in black raincoats and sunglasses following at a distance.
posted on December 22, 2000 07:16:40 AM new
Borillar, you finally hit upon the real guts of what's wrong with the American political system (or any voting population for that matter)--Americans vote because of the rhetoric of course. The American public would rather be educated by the 5-second soundbite than to have to really delve into such things as the Congressional Record and the like.
This takes the issue back to a basic premise--The voters get what they deserve. But this too is a gross oversimplification. The system has become so bogged down that most individuals feel that it does not good to be involved.
The simple facts remain, that the majority of Americans DON'T get involved in politics except during election years. They DON'T know the issues except for the ones so blatantly extolled by the media.
While the RT members here seem to be far more into politics than the "average" American, how many of us do any more than gripe about politics? How many were out there campaigning with the party of choice at the local level? Not many, I dare say. It's far easier to be a critic of the system than to be actively involved in changing the system.
Apathy or laziness? The inability to work together to get things changed, or the unwillingness to make the sacrifice to do so?
Either way, the elections are over, and we are left with the results.
posted on December 22, 2000 11:37:55 PM new
Yes, Iswanson,that is the horror that Republican-minded voters did for all of us this Fall. They blindly and ignorantly follow the conservative media-blitzkreig and allow themseoves to be told what the truth is. In fact, both political parties bank on this fact and put out their share.
The problem is, is that the GOP has the most horrorific ANTI-AMERICAN voting reocrd in our nation's history! Are there any words to describe a voter who votes to put someone into office who will do them harm? Will make them poor(er)? Will dismantle thei friagile liberties? There are none.
Truely, having Al Gore in would not have fixed many of this nation's problems. But with the GOP in there now, it won't be long and we'll all have to be rasing a hand to our brothers . . . and shouting "Seig Heil!"
posted on December 22, 2000 11:42:53 PM new
Hi, HCQ!
Political discussion and ranting is my very first love, my heart and soul. I've read just a few snippets from you in this forum on political matters and I can't believe that you side with Conservatives and the Fascist Movement in America when they clearly have you and your lover at the top of the list of people to exterminate after the revolution beings. Or am I mistaken once again and you don't defend Conservatives?
Anyway, it's also good to see you in here. You do have intelligent posts and it would be good to see you participating. I enjoy taking an anti-Conservative/Fascist stance because I love America and do not want to see it turn into a tyranny. But stupid voters being told what to think blindly fight those who would protect their liberties.
posted on December 23, 2000 02:59:46 AM new
Borillar, when you say "Conservative/Fascist," you're no different, and no better, than the Freepers who say "Democrat/Communist."
You should go there and post, they're just your type of people.
posted on December 23, 2000 05:48:09 AM new
You put it better than I ever could, donny.
Borillar, your name-calling tars with one brush every "New Republican" member of my caring, supportive family who somehow, despite their obvious limitations, actually understand that just because somebody doesn't share your political belief system, they don't deserve to be called un-American.
I also don't particularly care for being effectively called either an idiot or a hypocrite because of MY political beliefs, which don't jibe with what you appear to think a REAL dyke should hold. With "friends" like you, I don't need enemies, thank you.
posted on December 23, 2000 06:42:29 AM new
Yes, likening ALL conservative voters to fascists is over the top. And I can see how upsetting it is to you, HCQ. I also don't like the term, "dyke". Borillar, I think you are asking a question of HCQ of what her opinions are as with regard to what you perceive is the political agenda of conservative Republicans regarding gays in America. I think there is a better way to pose the question than to attack her politcal stance as fascist. That said, I have wondered too. Our two dearest friends are a gay couple together for 30 years who are died in the wool Republicans. NOT moderate, but conservative with a capital "C" ala Rush Limbaugh whom they listen to religiously. One of them has had major health problems in the last 7 years (3 heart attacks) and had been unable to get affordable health insurance as he is not employed. About a year and a half ago, his partner's employer began offering health insurance to "domestic partners" and this has been a big relief to them, even though they are still paying the hospital bills from the last heart attack. In our few political discussions (as we generally avoid talking about politics in election years) I've asked them how they reconcile "domestic partner" policies with their political beliefs. In our state, political opposition to such policies being legislated are led by Republicans. Note that "domestic partners" does not apply solely to same sex partners, but opposite sex as well. Neither one have ever been able give me an answer, or at least one that computes logically in my brain. I also have a hard time reconciling the idealogical philosophies of their political party to their personal lives. But despite this, they most definitely ARE NOT fascists or Nazi's (and extremely hurtful term to me).Generally, these days we avoid discussing politics at the dinner table, although I do detect a certain infuriating "smugness" since the election. Ah well, they play a mean game of Pictionary.
posted on December 23, 2000 06:43:24 AM new
Borillar,
Politics do make interesting "discussions" and I believe we can all feel deeply on either side of the aisle but what makes the discussions interesting to me is to state an opinion and listen to the other sides opinion. I may disagree avidly and state just that but I think it is possible to do so in a reasonable, polite manner. Wouldn't it be a bore if everyone felt exactly the same way and how else can a person learn why a person chooses one side or the other and feels their stand is right.
I have never understood why people use the word, "Facist" on either side, Democrat or Republican, right or left?
posted on December 23, 2000 09:54:39 AM newkatyd, it might be that your friends' political affiliation is based on an underlying philosophy about the proper roles of government and the individual, rather than on personal benefit.
Whether legislation is going to be good for ME isn't an issue for me at all. In fact I've suppoted legislation that would in some ways make my life tougher. I tend to take the long view, and IME the more one invites any outside agency - from the Federal government right down to one's next-door neighbors - to participate in one's life, the more autonomy one reliquishes. That autonomy is the most precious thing I own, and I'm not about either to give it up without a fight, nor tell my neighbors I not only KNOW how to run their lives better than they, but that I somehow have a RIGHT to insert myself. If I don't want them in my bedroom (I wouldn't participate in state-sanctioned marriage if it were available), how dare I expect access to their paychecks? No thanks.
BTW, the most vicious hate mail I've ever received has been from my soi-disant lesbian sisters, generally excoriating me for not only my politics, but everything from my diet, sexual practices, and relationship structure to the fact that I am a member of a maistream organized religion. When it comes to rigidity, IME the Far Right has nothing on these folks.
posted on December 23, 2000 10:35:34 AM new
Where are the fascists in the GOP? I am always amazed when I begin seeing fascist linked to the Republican party or a Conservative party.
posted on December 23, 2000 10:49:40 AM newit might be that your friends' political affiliation is based on an underlying philosophy about the proper roles of government and the individual, rather than on personal benefit. Perhaps this is it, HCQ and the next time our conversation meanders into politics, perhaps I will ask them if this question, cautiously, of course
IME the more one invites any outside agency - from the Federal government right down to one's next-door neighbors - to participate in one's life, the more autonomy one reliquishes. Quite so, and precisely the reason I feel the abortion right issue is so important to me, as well as the "school voucher" issue, religion and prayer in public schools, etc. etc.
Imagine that! You and I can agree philosophically on something, even though we may disagree on the practical implementation of such philosophies. Now I must go wrap some presents while my husband is out of the house. Merry Christmas to you HCQ!
posted on December 23, 2000 11:30:58 AM newkatyd, I've always known your heart's in the right place - just like my girl, who's a registered Dem. People wonder why we get along so well. It's probably because we act on the basis that the other party's intelligent and thoughtful, and is merely standing at a different vantage point. It helps to have more than one perspective.
Sorry about the effete reference, toke, and thanks for bringing me back to earth. "Soi-disant" translates from the French as "saying about oneself" - i.e., "self-described".
posted on December 23, 2000 11:46:53 AM new
Ah...thanks, HCQ. Stay right where you are, please! I love words, and couldn't figure it out from the context...just had to ask...
posted on December 23, 2000 12:30:55 PM new
No! NO! NO! I never called the voters Fascists, but these New Republican politicians! If you look at how they vote, and often enough, which hate groups they were stalwart members of in the past and are now trying to distance themselves from, one comes to the conclusion that they follow the political believes of a Fascist system!
Boy, you are ALL too ready to jump on me, simply because I watch and read how New Republicans vote in the House and Senate, what they vote for and agaisnt, what their watered-down consumer bills really read as, and so forth. Can you claim the same?
I did rail at the voters for being so lazy as to listen to the political garbage media-blitz machines and not paying attention to what ther politicians are actually doing! While it is not better for the Democrats, but more often than not, the Democrats push through legislation that is actually good for everybody, not just for private individuals like the GOP does.
HCQ said: "Whether legislation is going to be good for ME isn't an issue for me at all. In fact I've suppoted legislation that would in some ways make my life tougher."
So, in other words, there are times when you blindly ram yourself into a wall. You experience the crushing red pain and jump back twith an unvoluntary movement. But then, you say,"In the long run . . . it'll just happen to me again, so here I go and do it some more! Wheee!!! WHAM!" What words describe this sort of thinking? N-E-W R-E-P-U-B-L-I-C-A-N
donny says "Borillar, when you say "Conservative/Fascist," you're no different, and no better, than the Freepers who say "Democrat/Communist."
But, donny, the principles of the Democratic party this century IS based upon the theory of Communism! Do you know so little of both history and political theories that you don't know this? And the way that these New Republican politicians vote, there IS NO OTHER NAME for it, but Fascist! Go look up the definitions for yourself! Sheese!
KatyD said, "I also don't like the term, "dyke". Borillar," Dyke? Did I say Dyke? Did I call anyone a Bull-Lesbian? No. I mearly referred to the fact that while HQC may fondly vote for the New Republican party, the New Republicans do not return her sentiments. Rather, these New Republicans would likely love to come to her home and burn it down . . just because she picked someone to love that they don't approve of. Reminds me of Jews voting for the Nazi Party, and makes as much sense.
shar9: I DO listen to those of other political beliefs than mine - I'm not a blind fanatic! I'm simply exasperated at the idea that nearly ALL Americans are so blind on how to vote and WHY they should vote that I must rail at them. Yet, with so little patience of readers anymore, even the Conservatives in this forum complain to me that I ought to be reducing my points down to Bite-sized chunks that they can understand. So I must, perforce, focus on the WORST OFFENDERS of our American way and that's the GOP and the politicians that are turning our country Fascist.
posted on December 23, 2000 12:45:32 PM new
A version of economic fascism was in fact adopted in the United States in the 1930s and survives to this day. In the United States these policies were not called `fascism' but `planned capitalism.' The word fascism may no longer be politically acceptable, but its synonym, `industrial policy,' is as popular as ever.
My take on all this is, What is so wrong with Capitalism?
People from all corners of this planet have come here, and worked hard, and many made it very well.
Or your or my children, hoping they will succeed in what they do.
Many may not like Bill Gates, but he had the freedom to take nothing, and become one of the wealthiest men in the world.
Should we all not strive for that.
Should we all sit back and let government go 'redistribute the wealth'?
Let us all be of the same economic class, let there be no low, middle or high income, let us all be the same?
I don't think so.
There are programs for those who really need it, and yes I believe in those.
posted on December 23, 2000 01:31:45 PM newA sensible, level headed, intelligent person would look at how their party votes and what they vote for and either say, "I benefit from this!" or "Hey! This stuff screws me! Bull#$%!"
Actually, that's what a self-centered, short-sighted person says. Me, me, me. All about moi.
THIS sensible, level-headed, intelligent person looks at how her party votes and either says "This does the community/nation good, even though it may cause difficulty for me" or "Hey, this is no good for the long-term interests of the community/nation as a whole". You know, like when I vote for an increase in property taxes so our local schools have more revenue - even though I never have and never will use those schools, and any possible benefit is years away. With your logic, I should just vote those damned tax increases away, huh.
nearly ALL Americans are so blind on how to vote and WHY they should vote
And, unlike me, [b]Borillar[/i] knows exactly HOW those folks SHOULD vote, since after all, "the Democrats push through legislation that is actually good for everybody". Dopey me. I had the idea that it's the right of every individual to make that decision for himself - and the responsibility of every individual, even those of us who have greater insight than the Great Unwashed, to respect the decisions our fellow citizens have made, rather than "railing" at them.
katyd, I prefer the term "dyke", despite borillar's pathetic inability to separate it from "bull" . Aside from the fact that I'm not from any Greek island, to me "lesbian" implies a clinical condition that requires gloves and probably a speculum
borillar, I will make sure this Christmas to pass on to my Republican friends and family your assertion that they want to burn down my house...including, I'm assuming, the new washer and dryer they bought us.
posted on December 23, 2000 08:21:19 PM new
Do as you will, HCQ. You keep mentioning these long-term policies that may hurt you in the short-run, but are good for the nation in the long-run. Yet, I have to read anything that tells us exactly what you are referring to.
Do you refer to the tax-cut for the ultra-wealthy? You know, like NearTheSea says, "Should we all sit back and let government go 'redistribute the wealth'?" Yes, should we all sit back and have our hard-earned taxes go to pay Welfare to the top 1% of the wealthiest? Talk about re-distribution of wealth! And the GOP and the NEw Republicans complain about Democrats redistribting the wealth to the poor to help them to get to their feet and make themselves self-sufficient.
Do you refer to the total, 100% anti-consumer legislation and the blocking of all consumer-protection bills that the GOP is guilty of as being good for everyone in the long run? That the large corporations who make their billions of dollars and carelessly dump toxic wastes in our school yards and our homes -- and let them off the hook when it comes to clean-up time? Make the tax-payers pay instead? Talk about re-distribution of welath! It OUR wealth that's getting re-distributed to those who don't need anymore with those creeps you voted into office this year.
Do you refer to so-called "moral" laws? Some sort of laws that overturns the First Amendment force Americans to all believe in one religious system? Or is it where science is to be thrown out of the classroom and the Bible put in its place? You have some explaining to do with that!
Or do you refer to Bush's plan that only teaches kids how to take tests? Kids won't get a real academic education. Nope. They will only learn just what they need to know to pass the test and more importantly, how to pass tests period. Now THAT's long-term thinking! Log-term into the poor-house!
So, tell us what legislation it is that you want to sacrifice yourself for the long-run?
P.s. you can discuss this with your family as much as you want to. Indeed, have them log-on , sign-up as an AW member, read the posting rules, and have at me! C'mon! I'm waiting here!
posted on December 24, 2000 08:28:33 PM newOr do you refer to Bush's plan that only teaches kids how to take tests? Kids won't get a real academic education. Nope. They will only learn just what they need to know to pass the test and more importantly, how to pass tests period.
Just for the record, we have this exact same system in California and we have a Democratic Governor. He is also now in the process of suing some of the school districts because of problems in the schools. Oh yeah, that's the way to solve our problems. Take money away from the school districts and give it to lawyers.
posted on December 25, 2000 06:27:28 PM new
Then you will have a copy of the Japanese school system. Makes sense. Designed to churn out conformists who won't make trouble.
About voting.
They thumped into us in school that it was our obligation to vote. Did not matter if they offer us anything worth voting for. In some foreign countries they have the logical end of this - You are required to vote by law for the one candidate as a show of support. Otherwise they take you out and shoot you. Here you are offered two fat cats with minor philosophical differences who are owned by the same industrialists. And is you want to stay home and watch TV - Hey we gave you a choice didn't we?
posted on December 26, 2000 06:25:23 AM new
I see we've gone from me-me-me to they-they-they. Same tune, different verse.
If you don't like the choice of candidates you're given, find somebody you DO like and work to get that candidate nominated.
Of course, that would require surgical separation from one's TV, wouldn't it.
I have no fondness for the politics of the Greens and Nader (or for several other fringe parties on either side of the spectrum), but jeez, at least they put their money where their mouth is.
posted on December 26, 2000 08:14:14 AM new
It must be a height of altruism for a self described homosexual person to vote a modern republican ticket because "This does the community/nation good, even though it may cause difficulty for me" or "Hey, this is no good for the long-term interests of the community/nation as a whole" when that same ticket shares the perception that his or her sexual preferences are immoral and so should also be illegal in law.
posted on December 26, 2000 08:39:25 AM new
Mmmm....not quite.
(a) The odds of other kinds of legislation being passed, and directly affecting me and my fellow citizens, is considerably greater than the odds a federal bill outlawing homosexuality actually being passed - even assuming that such legislation would have a greater effect in suppressing this horrid behavior than all the other sodomy laws in the history of the world.
(b) Who I am is not defined solely by or limited to my gender orientation. Among other things, I'm also a small-business owner whose raw materials costs are affected by import fees. I'm a parent of a 20-year-old whose hopes of finding work are affected by the jobless rate. I'm a homeowner and landlord who doesn't want to be told whom I must rent to nor now much I may charge. I'm a consumer who wants the widest selection of goods at the lowest price possible. I have a parent over whose income depends on the stock market, and a son whose inheritance from his grandmother relates directly to death taxes. I've worked in litigation long enough to have seen a stunning number of frivolous lawsuits. I had the dubious privilege of living under socialized medicine in the UK. I had friends who were illegal immigrants unable to get refugee status even though they fled documented persecution. I have friends who let the military because the pay was so bad they couldn't survive as singles, let alone support a family. None of this relates at all to my gender orientation.
posted on December 26, 2000 10:17:58 AM newBo, What occurs in Washington DC, either in the recent past, or the present bears no comparison to what occurred during the Holocaust, or any other mass violation of human rights in this or any other century, e.g., the Stalinist purges of the Soviet Union, the genocide of the Pol-Pot regime in Cambodia, or the destruction that occurred under Mao in Communist China.
The free exchange of ideas that occurs on these boards is a great demonstration of the First Amendment, but it is truly no place for histrionics.
You do a great injustice to those who died because of racial differences, religious preferences, political orientation, sexual orientation, etc. To whit:
posted on December 26, 2000 01:37:04 PM new
I always am amazed when someone attacks a group of people on the basis that they don't know what is best for themselves.
The group is either too lazy, too ignorant, too apathetic, too stupid, too venal, too corrupt, too blah blah blah to be allowed to exercise their right to choose.
And because of their lack of qualifications someone else inevitably offers to choose for them.
posted on December 26, 2000 02:32:39 PM new
Borillar- I don't think I mentioned putting the Bible in our schools,
but after reading in another thread, you said:
And I speculate on the level of intelligence of people who vote republican in several other threads
I will respectfully back off these subjects, and just watch.
Ah well, they play a mean game of Pictionary.
