Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
In the context of this thread, the definition of victory would be amicable compromises that support and defend our constitution. Not any side dominating the other, which appears to be the objective of the right, and becomes the reactionary counterpoint from the left.
So we have two extremists trying to stomp on the other foot presuming we ought to hop around through life on their ideology. First blood was drawn by the right. Any of you on the right care to deny this?
I don't think it's as bad as it seems. These days fringe elements have a means of getting themselves heard like never before.
Exactly. The people who are the most extreme tend to scream the most, say the most provocative things, and are therefore media darlings to exploit for ratings. They are also the ones who create the most hub-bub on these forums.
In the context of this thread, the definition of victory would be amicable compromises that support and defend our constitution. Not any side dominating the other, which appears to be the objective of the right, and becomes the reactionary counterpoint from the left.
So we have two extremists trying to stomp on the other foot presuming we ought to hop around through life on their ideology. First blood was drawn by the right. Any of you on the right care to deny this?
I'll let you guess who's words these are....
Quote:
"the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth"
Quote:
"didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution."
Quote:
"Says what the Federal government can’t do to you, but doesn’t say what the Federal government or State government must do on your behalf, and that hasn’t shifted and one of the, I think, tragedies of the civil rights movement was, um, because the civil rights movement became so court focused I think there was a tendancy to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change."
Over and over again, on this board and elsewhere, I see this attempt to put everyone in the US into two camps: Liberal and Conservative. Red and Blue. Us and them.
Constantly, on this board, we see people putting words into other people's mouths and making assumptions about other people based on one or two beliefs.
What gives? Must we all be either "Liberal" or "conservative" and move lock-step with those groups? Or are we, indeed, more complex than that, as people and as thinkers?
Oh come on now, don't you know stereo typing makes things so much easier when summing up a person or group? In this fast paced world, you have to paint with a broad brush. No one have time for little nuances.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
