General Assembly Update - September 9, 2105 (Welcome: low income, rent, crimes)

[carolinadawg2]

Originally Posted by Rich6896

Yes driver's ed, is the only example of parents abdicating responsibility to the government. Somewhere Saul Alinsky is looking up at you and smiling at your arguments.

Its your argument, not mine.

[MikeyKid]

It's this cyclical argument perpetuated by partisan positions that allow us to overlook how bad our government has become REGARDLESS OF WHAT PARTY IS RULING. When you overlook incompetent governance with the excuse that "the other party did the same thing when they were in control", you're making all of us the laughing stock of every politician in some special interest's pocket.

They (both parties equally) are playing all of you for fools. They are looking out for their benefactors, not us.

[carolinadawg2]

Originally Posted by MikeyKid

It's this cyclical argument perpetuated by partisan positions that allow us to overlook how bad our government has become REGARDLESS OF WHAT PARTY IS RULING. When you overlook incompetent governance with the excuse that "the other party did the same thing when they were in control", you're making all of us the laughing stock of every politician in some special interest's pocket.

They (both parties equally) are playing all of you for fools. They are looking out for their benefactors, not us.

That ignores the reality that there are real differences between the parties and what they seek to accomplish. While the system overall is obviously corrupted by our current campaign finance system (and needs to be reformed), that doesn't mean that whatever laws get passed don't matter, or one law is as good as another.

[MaxtheRoadWarrior]

Is this really the depths to which our society has fallen, where people can honestly rationalize ending various government programs aimed at social equity? I especially like the humor behind throwing stones at "big government liberals."

The "survival of the fittest" mentality seems to be robbing mankind of its basic humanity.

[MikeyKid]

Originally Posted by carolinadawg2

That ignores the reality that there are real differences between the parties and what they seek to accomplish. While the system overall is obviously corrupted by our current campaign finance system (and needs to be reformed), that doesn't mean that whatever laws get passed don't matter, or one law is as good as another.

I completely agree with you in principle, but these types of forums and social media in general are way too blindly partisan. It's not enough about the politicians themselves... It's become almost like cheering for your favorite sports team with memes generalizing liberals and conservatives. Everyone is thrown into 1 of those 2 buckets and what this perpetuates is the idea that there is no room for any middle ground. Proper governance has always been about compromise throughout the entire history of a democracy. When personal beliefs or financiers drive the agenda above the good of the many, it's broken.

Why can't a fiscal conservative be socially liberal? Where do those people fit in? I personally know very few people who would classify themselves both fiscally / socially as hard right conservative or hard left liberals. The vast majority of this country are somewhere in the middle, yet we are being trained to take sides... thus taking on key issue positions that we may not necessarily agree with it because our team (party) needs to win.

[carolinadawg2]

Originally Posted by MikeyKid

I completely agree with you in principle, but these types of forums and social media in general are way too blindly partisan. It's not enough about the politicians themselves... It's become almost like cheering for your favorite sports team with memes generalizing liberals and conservatives. Everyone is thrown into 1 of those 2 buckets and what this perpetuates is the idea that there is no room for any middle ground. Proper governance has always been about compromise throughout the entire history of a democracy. When personal beliefs or financiers drive the agenda above the good of the many, it's broken.

Why can't a fiscal conservative be socially liberal? Where do those people fit in? I personally know very few people who would classify themselves both fiscally / socially as hard right conservative or hard left liberals. The vast majority of this country are somewhere in the middle, yet we are being trained to take sides... thus taking on key issue positions that we may not necessarily agree with it because our team (party) needs to win.

Until we have a viable third (or fourth) party, then its the system we've got. Personally, I'd much prefer a european style system with 4, 5 or 6 parties having to work together to form a coalition in order to govern.

In the meantime, Phil Berger and his friends in the state senate scare the crap out of me, so I will be rooting against them, to use your sports analogy.

[southbound_295]

Originally Posted by carolinadawg2

Until we have a viable third (or fourth) party, then its the system we've got. Personally, I'd much prefer a european style system with 4, 5 or 6 parties having to work together to form a coalition in order to govern.

In the meantime, Phil Berger and his friends in the state senate scare the crap out of me, so I will be rooting against them, to use your sports analogy.

Berger is a nightmare. Can't agree more with you there. That said, I doubt that he's too happy that his buddy Tillis is no longer running the house. Tim Moore is conservative, but he's not in lockstep. When Volvo was up for grabs I remember seeing a clip of Moore on the news. He was picking up books, shaking his head, & muttering "I thought we were trying to get jobs." That was right after some yahoo thought that it was more important to let magistrates bow out of gay marriage than put together an incentive for Volvo.

[Third Strike]

Originally Posted by MikeyKid

I completely agree with you in principle, but these types of forums and social media in general are way too blindly partisan. It's not enough about the politicians themselves... It's become almost like cheering for your favorite sports team with memes generalizing liberals and conservatives. Everyone is thrown into 1 of those 2 buckets and what this perpetuates is the idea that there is no room for any middle ground. Proper governance has always been about compromise throughout the entire history of a democracy. When personal beliefs or financiers drive the agenda above the good of the many, it's broken.

Why can't a fiscal conservative be socially liberal? Where do those people fit in? I personally know very few people who would classify themselves both fiscally / socially as hard right conservative or hard left liberals. The vast majority of this country are somewhere in the middle, yet we are being trained to take sides... thus taking on key issue positions that we may not necessarily agree with it because our team (party) needs to win.

The Republican's primary base, the Tea Party, will not tolerate a fiscal conservative who is liberal/moderate on social issues. A couple of Republicans in this country since 2010 have been pushed out of their own party through primary challenges. It's less true for Democrats, as there are plenty of Blue Dog/Dixiecrats still in their ranks, including their base in more rural states (a la Kim Davis). I also see this being a huge wall in the nearby future, as the country is becoming more socially liberal and less religious/theocratic. Plenty of people in this country still support fiscal policies, but the breaking line for many is when government dictates what or what you can't do in your personal life (including from a party that supports "small government")...

[Hollywood]

Originally Posted by MikeyKid

Why can't a fiscal conservative be socially liberal? Where do those people fit in? I personally know very few people who would classify themselves both fiscally / socially as hard right conservative or hard left liberals. The vast majority of this country are somewhere in the middle, yet we are being trained to take sides... thus taking on key issue positions that we may not necessarily agree with it because our team (party) needs to win.

We're called Libertarians. Welcome to the club.

[Rich6896]

The problem with being socially liberal and fiscally conservative for me is, well, for example, abortion. I do not fit into the pro-life or the pro-choice camp. It is not enough for some for me to concede that it should be legal, I also need to concede that my tax dollars go to planned parenthood.