## Polarized Politics

Post by Jason Toddman » Mon May 28, 2012 2:38 pm

Is the American political climate becoming so polarized as to dangerous?
http://news.yahoo.com/political-polariz ... 49186.html
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

### Re: Polarized Politics

Post by drawscore » Tue May 29, 2012 12:16 pm

From 1953, Republicans have dominated the presidency, holding it for 36 out of 60 years. Democrats dominated in congress, particularly the House, which was under Democrat control for 40 consecutive years, from 1955 to 1995. Up through the late 60's, both seemed to get along, and were willing to compromise, but then came the failed appointments to the Supreme Court of Haynesworth and Carswell by Nixon, and the deep divide in the Democrat party, with the Johnson wing favoring continuing the war in Vietnam, and the Kennedy/McGovern wing wanting to immediately pull the troops out of Vietnam, and abandon it to the communists.
It got worse when Teddy Kennedy led the opposition to the Supreme Court nomination of Robert Bork, and for many Republicans, that was the last straw. The divide between the parties just got deeper and wider. Johnson Democrats became Reagan Republicans, while the Kennedy/McGovern Democrats spawned Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Joe Biden, Jerry Brown, and, of course, Barack Obama.
What we have, is the lunatic left taking over the Democrat party, and the wacky right in charge of the Republicans. "And never the twain shall meet." Instead of comparing statesmen, we get stuck with a choice between the lesser of two evils. And it does not look like it's going to get better anytime soon.
Drawscore

### Re: Polarized Politics

Post by Jason Toddman » Tue May 29, 2012 12:25 pm

A bit simplistic I think but, alas, essentially correct.
You have a way of painting conservatives as overly heroic and righteousness and liberals as villianous scum which I disagree with somewhat. I opposed the Viet Nam War myself and did not like Nixon very much even before Watergate. The idea that the US should be the moral policeman of the world was and is an arrogant and impractical one, and one of the major reasons we've run such huge fiscal deficits since the start of the 1950s. We were too isolationist before WW II and too active in world affairs afterward; both extremes brought us nothing but trouble. As with out politics we need to find some safe and affordable middle ground before we end up over-extending ourselves like every great world power before us has done.
Trouble is, in today's current political climate, we might as well wish for Superman to come along and save us.
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

### Re: Polarized Politics

Post by drawscore » Tue May 29, 2012 12:52 pm

I keep telling the people in Congress that the best way to solve all our nation's problems, is to make me king. But they don't pay any attention.
Drawscore

### Re: Polarized Politics

Post by Jason Toddman » Tue May 29, 2012 1:39 pm

> drawscore wrote:I keep telling the people in Congress that the best way to solve all our nation's problems, is to make me king. But they don't pay any attention.
> Drawscore

Consider yourself lucky. The day they pay do attention is the day you might find yourself stuck inside the 'loony bin'!
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

### Re: Polarized Politics

Post by drawscore » Tue May 29, 2012 2:38 pm

>>>Consider yourself lucky. The day they pay do attention is the day you might find yourself stuck inside the 'loony bin'! <<<
Either that, or in charge of the whole country.
Drawscore

### Re: Polarized Politics

Post by Kyle » Wed May 30, 2012 7:42 pm

I don't think things are quite as bas as the article says. Here in the South at least there still are some conservative Democrats, though they tend to not make it to the national level of government anymore. I also think it's a bit of a stretch to describe things as "dangerous". But I do agree with the general tone of the article that things have gotten worrisome. Some of the attitudes and things said are just ridiculous. It seems now as if people don't even care about fixing problems as long as they can put one over on their opponents.

### Re: Polarized Politics

Post by drawscore » Wed May 30, 2012 8:10 pm

I think Kyle has nailed it. Politics has become a big game of "Gotcha!" It's something of a contest as to which party can make the other look like a collection of horses' asses, thus increasing their own political power, while stepping on the necks of their political opponents. The ones taking it in the shorts, are the people.
Drawscore

### Re: Polarized Politics

Post by Jason Toddman » Wed May 30, 2012 8:57 pm

I agree... but I also think that, in the long run, this is dangerous!
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

### Re: Polarized Politics

Post by drawscore » Thu May 31, 2012 1:53 pm

It is said that "Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." We got a taste of what happens when one political party wielded absolute power in 2009-10, when the Democrats held the White House, the House of Representatives, and had a fillibuster-proof majority in the Senate. The only place they fell short, was in the Supreme Court, which was a narrow 5-4 conservative edge. Even long time Democrats were dismayed over the actions of their own party. For that year and several months before Teddy Kennedy died, and was replaced by a Republican who campaigned on the platform that he would be "the 41st vote," the Democrats had no interest in compromise. Hell, they didn't even want to hear the Republican point of view.
Apparently, the people didn't like it very much. In the elections of 2010, the Democrats lost the House of Representatives. They lost six more seats in the Senate, too, but maintained a 51-47-2 edge. The two "independents" (Bernie Sanders, Socialist, Vermont and Joe Lieberman, Independent, Connecticut), vote with the Democrats.
The mood of the public is, in a word, "ugly" toward the Democrats. Despite polls that show Obama being personally popular, most indicate a tight race between him and Romney. Democrats are in danger of losing the Senate, too. Several prominent Democrat senators are retiring, plus the Dems have to defend 23 seats, while the Republicans are defending 11.
Another omen looming on the horizon, is the recall election of Scott Walker in Wisconsin. Every poll shows that Walker will beat back the Democrat attempt to recall him, by anywhere from three to seven points. (Some are within the margin of error; others show a clear win for Walker.) The national Democrat party recently cancelled a significant media advertizing buy, and Obama, while paying "lip service," had not been to the state to campaign for Walker's opponent, as it would be a huge embarrassment for, and repudiation of him, should he do so, and then Walker wins. Perhaps the Democrats' internal polls are showing Walker winning by as much as 10-15 points, and the Dems are cutting their losses. But this is politics, and you never know.
Besides, it's not who votes that counts, but who counts the votes. That was made abundantly clear to Norm Coleman, who "lost" to Al Franken by a handful of votes in Minnesota, with the assistance of a Democrat Secretary of State (chief state election officer) named Marc Ritchie. (And wasn't that the state where Democrat operatives slashed the tires of vans rented by Republicans who were going to use them to transport homebound voters to the polls?)
Make no mistake, politicians from street sweeper to president, will do whatever they can, within the law,to maintain their hold on power. Their supporters and party members will go beyond that. OK, I've mentioned a few Democrat "indiscretions," but the Republicans have pulled some election stunts that were, shall we say, "less than ethical." The 1972 break in at the DNC HQ at the Watergate complex comes to mind, as well as the Republican operatives breaking into the office of Daniel Ellsburg's psychiatrist. (Ellsburg leaked the "Pentagon Papers." Find out more by Googling "Pentagon Papers" or "Daniel Ellsburg.")
The bottom line, is that most of them are a bunch of damned crooks. I think the honest ones could be counted on one hand; possibly two. A good start, would be for the people to descend on Washington with torches and pitchforks, tar and feather the lot of them, then throw them in the Potomac River. (Then make me king. )
Drawscore

### Re: Polarized Politics

Post by Jason Toddman » Thu May 31, 2012 2:32 pm

As usual your views are completely one-sided, and in fact simply point out why I think too much of this is so dangerous. Demonizing one side while trying to make the other side look completely virtuous is a complete distortion of reality - and strikes me as somewhat naive to boot - though at least you amend this.... a little, and I think grudgingly... towards the end.
Everyone is at fault for the mess we're in; conservative and liberals, religious and atheist, rich and poor, saint (if there are any) and sinner alike. After all, we voted for those idiots in Washington, didn't we?
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

### Re: Polarized Politics

Post by drawscore » Thu May 31, 2012 8:20 pm

Ahh, one sided they might be, but they are factual. >>>. . .in 2009-10, when the Democrats held the White House, the House of Representatives, and had a fillibuster-proof majority in the Senate.<<< That is a fact.
>>>In the elections of 2010, the Democrats lost the House of Representatives. They lost six more seats in the Senate, too, but maintained a 51-47-2 edge.<<< That is a fact.
>>>The mood of the public is, in a word, "ugly" toward the Democrats.<<< That is opinion, based on what I read on the internet and see in the local newspapers. The mood of the electorate could be significantly different by November 6th.
>>>Another omen looming on the horizon, is the recall election of Scott Walker in Wisconsin. Every poll shows that Walker will beat back the Democrat attempt to recall him, by anywhere from three to seven points.<<< That is a fact. But the only poll that matters is on June 5th.
Reporting facts isn't dangerous, except to the people they affect adversely. There are plenty of people here and elsewhere, perfectly happy to report on the follies of Republicans. I just air the Democrats' dirty laundry to provide some balance.
And yes, "we" did elect the idiots in Washington. But I sure as hell didn't vote for Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reid.
Drawscore

### Re: Polarized Politics

Post by Jason Toddman » Fri Jun 01, 2012 10:52 am

> drawscore wrote:
> Reporting facts isn't dangerous, except to the people they affect adversely. There are plenty of people here and elsewhere, perfectly happy to report on the follies of Republicans. I just air the Democrats' dirty laundry to provide some balance.

Uh huh. Balance, huh? Riii-iiggghhh-hhht!!!
I will agree though that with the over-riding potential Democrats had in Congress in 2008, Obama managed to do amazingly little with it. George Bush had no such advantage but managed to get more done (for better or for worse - and IMO it was worse).
As for Reid or Pelosi, blame the voters of California and Nevada (I have never lived in either state);it's not Obama's fault that they're there.
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

### Re: Polarized Politics

Post by drawscore » Fri Jun 01, 2012 3:21 pm

Well, like the Obamatrons like to blame everything on Bush, I like to blame everything on Obama. Give me enough time, and I'll convince you he was responsible for the assassinations of Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley, and Kennedy; the attempted assassination of FDR; the sinkings of the Titanic and Lusitania, and the stock market crash of 1929.
Drawscore

### Re: Polarized Politics

Post by Kyle » Fri Jun 01, 2012 5:44 pm

> drawscore wrote:Well, like the Obamatrons like to blame everything on Bush, I like to blame everything on Obama. Give me enough time, and I'll convince you he was responsible for the assassinations of Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley, and Kennedy; the attempted assassination of FDR; the sinkings of the Titanic and Lusitania, and the stock market crash of 1929.
> Drawscore

Not likely, and this is someone who's not a fan of Obama. I don't really like the "they did it to Bush" argument. Yes they did, but do people really have to be that stupid--or worse-- in response? This is part of the problem being discussed.
Besides, we all know it was really the Illuminati who was behind those things.

### Re: Polarized Politics

Post by Jason Toddman » Fri Jun 01, 2012 8:15 pm

Darned secret societies!!!
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

### Re: Polarized Politics

Post by Chris12 » Sat Jun 02, 2012 7:26 am

> Besides, we all know it was really the Illuminati who was behind those things.

What utter nonsens!....We all know the bilderberg club was behind it

### Re: Polarized Politics

Post by Jason Toddman » Sat Jun 02, 2012 10:02 am

> Chris12 wrote:

> > Besides, we all know it was really the Illuminati who was behind those things.

> What utter nonsens!....We all know the bilderberg club was behind it

The what?!?
I've heard of the Illuminati since I was in high school and several fictional series (including Disney's Gargoyles) made use of them, but wtf is the Bilderberg club?
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

### Re: Polarized Politics

Post by drawscore » Sat Jun 02, 2012 1:03 pm

Wikipedia says: "The Bilderberg Group, Bilderberg conference, or Bilderberg Club is an annual, unofficial, invitation-only conference of approximately 120 to 140 guests from North America and Western Europe, most of whom are people of influence. About one-third are from government and politics, and two-thirds from finance, industry, labour, education and communications. Meetings are closed to the public."
Although they are a secret society, they do have a website. Google them for additional information.
Drawscore

### Re: Polarized Politics

Post by Jason Toddman » Mon Jun 04, 2012 8:07 am

You mean these guys?!?
http://news.yahoo.com/alex-jones-believ ... 14136.html
Weird!!!
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

### Re: Polarized Politics

Post by Chris12 » Mon Jun 04, 2012 11:01 am

Eating babies? hadn't heard that one yet

### Re: Polarized Politics

Post by drawscore » Mon Jun 04, 2012 4:02 pm

And you believe this?
Drawscore.

### Re: Polarized Politics

Post by Jason Toddman » Mon Jun 04, 2012 8:42 pm

> drawscore wrote:And you believe this?
> Drawscore.

An article from Yahoo News? Don't be absurd!!! I said it was weird, not believable!
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

### Re: Polarized Politics

Post by drawscore » Mon Jun 04, 2012 10:23 pm

Sorry, but there are still people around that believe the world is flat; that the moon landings never happened; that the earth is the center of the universe; and that Obama is a good president.
Drawscore

### Re: Polarized Politics

Post by Jason Toddman » Mon Jun 04, 2012 10:28 pm

Just had to take that shot at Obama didn't you? One would think you get paid for doing that.
No that I necessarily disagree... until or unless you claim that Bush Jr. was (or Romney would be) any better!
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

### Re: Polarized Politics

Post by drawscore » Mon Jun 04, 2012 10:45 pm

Reagan was a good president. Romney might be lousy, but he'd be an improvement over Obama and his Chicago thugocracy of Valarie Jarrett, Eric Holder, and David Axlerod. Hell, I have a 17 pound tomcat with the disposition of an alligator that would be an improvement over Obama.
Drawscore