Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

cookinwithgas

Why I no longer give a crap what conservatives want or think

81 posts in this topic

it had its share of ridiculous fallacies and double standards but there's a high level of constructive debates in here (at least as far as it pertains to checks and balances that help shape the way I view an issue.) I wouldn't spend my time here if it was just a gaggle of morons

IMO, it has devolved into groups of conservatives and liberals pointing fingers and making insulting comments about each other. With the occassional conspiracy theorist thread of course. Although I guess in that regard, its mostly following the pattern of the rest of the country. Or mayber the board always been that way, but I am just burnt out on political discussions.

I still come here sometimes and will probably come more when football season is over, and I guess I do see rational discussions of issues on occassion, but it seems to be a rare occurence anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you are falling into the trap of the faux rage. and when i say the other side, its to show that within a group, no matter how much you love or identify with it, has some epic jackasses in it and just might be more clever and discerning at masking it's true view on things. or at least has the sense to NOT post it on fb.

so let's all just throw our hands up because of this fb post because now humanity needs another harmonal convergence because of what a few cro magnon's said.

hence me saying bigger fish to fry. are there not much more important issues facing the US right now than some chuckleheads on fb? srlsy?

How am I faking outrage?

And it's not just about stupid people on facebook. The only role facebook plays here is documenting what we know has been a problem.

And yes, every "side" has dumb people. I don't need to hear this in every thread. That doesn't mean that they're equal. If that was truly the case, the people in the middle that I'm guessing you identify with aren't actually the ones putting out the fires or whatever. Since every shade of the spectrum has dumb people, why does that not apply to the free-thinking moderates for some reason

:/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i would say 80% of liberals and the same # for con's are stuck in mental quicksand on seeing the bigger picture of things. the other 20% are putting out fires or trying to be some kind of liason between opposing viewpoints.

Again I ask, why are the "middle men" somehow above everyone else?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

how many articles, cable news shows etc have segments dedicated to everyday people solving issues? how often do they have someone on air in an interview that is boringly bland middle of the road? not often.

more often than not, the media will have the most fringe person they can find, from either side, on a show.

im not putting them above anyone in as much as im saying those that see the world a bit more even handedly, are less apt to go after the camera or a blog or chasing noteriety. instead they just quietly go about their business.

those same folks, from either side, usually don't get caught up in the muck and mire on fb. they just take a less visable route to everyday life or issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

actually presenting both sides of any argument no matter how stupid and finding middle ground or saying "both sides r bad nobody wins" is quite common

You should watch CNN some time

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

watch it all the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hence me saying bigger fish to fry. are there not much more important issues facing the US right now than some chuckleheads on fb? srlsy?

the OP was a screen cap of a heavily-viewed piece of social media that very clearly reflects the sentiments - overt or passive (the latter being the most insidious, i'd argue) - of a segment of the population who can elect officials that reflect their paradigms. this alone makes it worth discussing. ignoring it would be foolish.

the real question that needs to be discussed is whether or not this line of thinking reflects a high enough percentage of voting americans to suggest that they're in any way indicative of conservative ideology and voter blocs (the southern strategy has led to the republican party inheriting these people, so i'd say there's a strong correlation.)

oh what a surprise the same person who thinks that there is some sort of virtue in finding "common ground" between republicans and democratics also thinks he's smart. i've never heard that one before

not sure i agree with you here (unless i'm misreading your intent.) ideological ties - liberal versus conservative - are reflected in the political arena by democrats and republicans, and while there's an obvious correlation there's also a differentiation in how they react in their structural context. ideology as an entity is more susceptible to pitting groups against one another without leeway whereas the political embodiment of those ideologies is designed to be a symbiosis (though often it is not) wherein finding middle ground is imperative.

in other words there is not necessarily a virtue in liberals finding middle ground with conservatives, but there is a clear neccesity for democrats finding middle ground with republicans.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

philly what you described so well is buzzy corporate word called silos. middle managers and up love to throw the word silos around like candy and say well this group doesn't work well with that group and we need to get out of our silos blather blather.

so me, since I only have a southern education, i remember something i learned in school where they said the shortest distance between two points is straight.

i would frustrate various leaders because i would just cut to the chase and go who leads group A? ok, so like who leads group B? ok, when was the last time they were either in the same room together or on a conference call? umm...crickets.

that's what we get here or with congress or a whole myriad of issues. we go around the universe on what we think is wrong and what should be done instead of just going to the source.

i hear more and more on cable news where they say congress and really most everyone in the beltway doesn't know how to reach across the aisle(and i really hate that phrase) or whatever. when so many of our biggest issues going on today could truly be remedied by simply having that face to face talk.

maybe im too much of an idealist when it comes to this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

on track: so what do y'all think ghetto means?

I was told the southern strategy was a myth as well as subtle racism so can someone explain the term in this context?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

we know what ghetto means.

and you are right. those folks that posted on fb have youtube up this very moment going back over the southern strategy to make sure they are doing it just like they did back in the day.

keep in mind the southern strat was a counter to the dem stronghold in the south that im pretty sure was all jim crowish and racist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

on track: so what do y'all think ghetto means?

i'm sure those fine gentlemen were simply referring to the urban settlement patterns of those individuals exhibiting cultural traits of low economic status. nothing to see there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

of course today's republican party more clearly reflects the religious fundamentalism that embodies the south than the overt racism (the latter being disguised in "common sense" terminology to better justify it)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites