Andrew Breitbart Dies at 43

Post Reply New Topic

Seconded!

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Can we assume that you haven't answered because there was nothing ACORN could legally do about it? They did as much as they could. If a form was suspect they put it in a different stack, but what the election staff do with the forms once they're picked up is out of ACORN's control.

In that case Florida's governor should be in jail.

Should be, but will he ever be? Jeb Bush may, after all, run for prez someday!

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

I'm talking about Florida's current medicare-fraudster governor who makes Jeb Bush look like Mother Teresa.

I haven't answered because I can see that this is going in circles. Its pretty much a 'I'd rather feel x than y' kind of thing based on political affiliation and attitude on ACORN and what they stand for. I've done research on this, its been a while since I have so I'd have to go back and read more on them (which, this weekend I've had my hands full completing a heck of a tune - that takes priority), but overall my nonresponse was a sign that I just didn't feel like chasing it further - IMO it wasn't worth the effort.

I just figure that ACORNs worst sin was helping poor people, and republicans hate that.

Right, and that's why we can't have much of a conversation. We live in completely different worlds.

It's the same kind of cynical reasoning as when you hear conservatives saying Democrats want people on welfare so they will have votes. Or that "Occupy" protests and such are purely about "envy" and wanting other people's money. Maybe if both sides would simultaneously stop the simplistic emotionally projectory accusations there could be more dialog. The problem though is that even after dropping all the rhetorical pretext there's often still a fundamental divide over certain values that can't be resolved through acknowledging facts and utilitarian arguments.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4T94aJToB_M[/youtube]

Oh, that Lurch looking Motherf***er who's guilty of medicare fraud! I agree 100%.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

There's an inherent problem with those bargaining chips though - ie. one side *is* trying to rip down the system in trade for something new and it seems like the only objection to it being said is if its said by someone who disagrees that its a good thing. Middle-ground is clearly somewhere else; where though I have no idea.

So what is this thing the republicans are trying to replace the status quo with? Is it the vast expansion of federal powers that George W. presided over?

Good rhetorical question.

My question to a leftist (the current alphas left of center) - if swapping out as much capitalism for socialism is the optimal most fair, most kind, most humane, unlike our current racist-by-definition system, why on earth would you make your presence known dominantly with polemics when any adult *knows* that if you have the winning hand of cards, the sheer upper hand in the argument - ie. when you know you're absolutely right and have all of the facts in a row - you get far more support by doggedly sticking to the facts, explaining inside and out what the spirit of your core beliefs are will gain you way more integrity/character PR and you leave the other side either sounding shrill or, conversely, agreeing with you? There should be absolutely nothing to hide or publicly deny either if you have the superior path because the superior path will sell itself. People want better lives, people want more out of things, and if you can put pen to paper on how we could have both a better nation under a dominant blend of socialism AND be debt neutral - I'm all ears! I want to see a proposal that's been well documented and reviewed by top notch accountants and economists who tend neutral on the subject.

That's the problem though, for sweeping change like that it hasn't been a process of get the math, worth the dollars out, and sell it on its merits, but rather its been divide and conquer, the centrist Democrats have the name 'blue dog' on account to how the new left treats them, and essentially that divide and conquer is divide and conquer by handouts - whether its unions, whether its the dole, whether its anything that you can get someone to vote on an elected official for 'Will they still give me x, y, or z?". That's not selling, its bribing. I mean I get this much, I truly and honestly do; that there are plenty of Democrats who are democrats because their parents were, their grandparents were, etc. and they don't pay a lot of attention to politics but know the stereotype - Republicans being country club, Democrats being common man, albeit the new left and new right really change that in a lot of ways that they either haven't kept up with or don't want to because they'd be too ashamed to what their neoliberal brethren did which was to switch sides and become Republican. You also do have both the religious and 'religious' Democrats who have a faith in the heart of what more social welfare and equality mean; they're truly nice people, they mean well, albeit their not particularly there on the math and they have the ethical policy of "Its the thought that counts", essentially meaning that they'll do whatever they can to make the world a better place (which I'm all for - I love that side of them and try to go that way myself, PLENTY of Republicans do) but at the same time with "Its the thought that counts" they then leave all objective measure of results or planning for results at the door. What tends to be the result of ideas handled like that? Typically the exact opposite of the result they wanted brought to them by none other than the law of unintended consequences. Republicans can see that and it drives them crazy, and then it gets even more saddening when instead of a lesson learned it gets thrown back at Republicans as having thrown the poison pill in the mix somewhere!

My present take on the US's social right and left vitriol though is this: GREATER TRANSPARENCY, also *real* consideration for outcome no matter which side is spearheading a bill. Seeing things taken to side-committees outside of congress is garbage. Chimera bills are garbage, people either voting on something that's 2000 pages and due in three days or delegating one particular person to have their staff go over it and make the consensus opinion - is garbage. I still don't think, anywhere in Washingon DC between Republicans and Democrats, that there's been a conversation in the last 20 years where they put ego at the door, spoke about their own take on the issues, economy, foreign matters, etc. candidly while trying to see the other side's points in earnest and pick them apart. If that did happen I can tell you who it was - John McCain and Joe Lieberman - RINO and DINO.

Here's a tip, if you can't even accurately characterize the arguments and beliefs of the other side, you are lost in your own head.

Or there's the possibility that what comes across when you try to get a big picture read of it is a hot mess.

I occasionally find a few people with clearly defined ideas, which is refreshing when it happens but ultimately they seem to do a better job of selling the notion that it's skewed idealism (based on fundamental tenets about psychopathy of the rich and other similar things) rather than anything I can tie out with reality.