Advertisement

LJWorld.com weblogs Loyal Opposition

Compromise

Advertisement

Coming out of the conventions I cannot help but note that the level of discord is acerbic and escalating. The word liar is bandied about freely - frequently focused on opinion and beliefs. Intent is questioned and painted as base. Plans are challenged with high emotional content. Most exchanges are a few sentences long (or less). Horrendous problems are reduced to short sound bites.

In our own little LJW world, ad hominem attack is the coin of the realm. Both sides are absolutely certain as to the righteousness of their opinions. Contrary opinions are belittled and reduced to ridicule. A poster may be cosigned to psychiatric services for expressing anger at what in his/her opinion is a gross misrepresentation.

Now, I spend much time buried in our nation’s history with emphasis on our civil war. I have recently been reading James McPherson’s book “Battle Cry of Freedom“. I would commend it to our free wheeling debaters on here with focus on the political and civic environment from 1850 to 1860. In my reading a similar environment to the one today existed (different topic). That one led to a civil war and 600,000 casualties.

I cannot help but wonder where we are headed with our current debates. Having thoroughly debased the opposition is compromise any longer a possibility? Are we really so sure that our opinions are transcendent and our opponent’s ideas are so worthless? Shades of my kindergarten playground!

Comments

WristTwister 1 year, 7 months ago

Maybe this link will help our left wing friends understand our dilemma.

http://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/EW5IdwltaAc?rel=0

0

tange 1 year, 7 months ago

Now's your chance, Moderate. I've been blogger-banned from frankie's forums because she doesn't understand/appreciate the satire which is South Park, and I've been barred from directly replying to Liberty_Zero because s/he doesn't understand... most things.
Say the word and I yam outta here. Go ahead. Make my day...

_

0

75x55 1 year, 7 months ago

Good God - the amount of time and effort wasted typing nonsense in response to drivel - any more is a wasted effor

0

jayhawklawrence 1 year, 7 months ago

I would like to apologize to all 8th graders for any insulting comments I made today.

I know a lot of them are very bright.

Goodnight.

0

Paul R Getto 1 year, 7 months ago

America has always had nasty and lively politics. Back in the day you needed the sand to speak up in public or at least slink around at night with spray paint. Now, anonymous "avatars" fling monkey poo. Smelly and sometimes entertaining, but probably doesn't help us make good collective decisions.

1

tbaker 1 year, 7 months ago

"Another factor was the failure to regulate the emerging OTC derivatives market"

People often mistake de-regulation (lack of regulation / government control) with a failure to enforce the laws already on the books, as was the case with the SEC's failed role in enforcing the rules when it came to the derivatives market. Case in point was the SECs failure to enforce the law when it came to the behavior of the various bond rating services such as Standard & Poor's, Moody's and Fitc, not to mention the unchecked activities of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (which Bush tried and failed to regulate).

When one adds the effects of Dodd/Frank to this picture, the de-regulation aurgment collapses, but liberal folks do not want to hear about how government caused the problem in the first place. Facts make no difference. They will not/cannot let go of the mistaken belief that government solves problems, becuase if they do, their ideology comes unraveled.

0

George Lippencott 1 year, 7 months ago

fiddleback

Was Mr. Clinton not on duty when Glass-Steagail was repealed? Where were the Congressional oversight hoard when derivatives were born? Where was the press.

It would seem that there may be broad responsibility for what happened to include that many of the derivatives were not producing but included federally insured mortgages

We would all get along better if this particular canard was just used as a lessons learned and not a campaign issue.

0

fiddleback 1 year, 7 months ago

"Name the regulation that was done away with that caused it?"

Another factor was the failure to regulate the emerging OTC derivatives market:

1

tbaker 1 year, 7 months ago

"There is simply no rational moral or economic justification for massive tax cuts for rich people based on trickle down theories or deregulation that led to the banking crisis. Greed and the battle for power is an old story. As old as the human race." - Jayhawk

I'm not sure if your world view / ideology will permit this, but consider for a moment a world where the government took 100% of the money made by people making over $250K a year (aka; the evil rich) That won't even cover HALF the deficit for one year and this assumes people would actually continue to work even though everything they earned was taken from them. We are WAY past the point where raising taxes will do any good. Huge cuts in spending are required. Thats not my opinion - thats just simple math and 8th grade civics class. This is hard for liberals to process - I know. There is always someone out there who must be not paying his fair share causing all this hardship. The last thing it could be is a government that has grown much too large and spends way too much. All I ask is you aquiant yourself with the harsh realities of the economic numbers and come to your own conclusions.

The banking crisis was not caused by deregulation. Name the regulation that was done away with that caused it? This is just a baseless liberal talking point that tends to resonate well in focus groups, it is the farthest thing from a fact. Regulation was actually one of the pricipal causes (have you heard of the Dodd/Frank Bill?)

Waiting...

You don't owe your freedoms to Sister Campbell. You owe them to the fact you were born in the United States which holds that human beings have inalienable rights. Our founders put these in a constitution our leaders are sworn to protect and defend (so you can keep having these rights). In the United States the individual person is sovereign, not the government. The reverse is true in much of the rest of the world. You should be thankful.

0

jayhawklawrence 1 year, 7 months ago

The viewpoints expressed on this blog are a good cross section as to the variety of political views present across this country.

I have found reading them to be very valuable.

It seems even more miraculous and mysterious to me that we could ever have created a United States of America.

As I watch the Republican Party try to rig the elections this year, including the work of Kobach I wonder how these people can say they have any understanding of the history of this country or understand the real beauty of our Constitution and Bill of Rights.

It makes the work of Sister Campbell ("Nuns on a Bus") even more special for me because I know I owe my freedoms to special people exactly like her. Somehow, we have always had these small voices who rose up above the rest of us to remind us of what is truly worth fighting for.

There is simply no rational moral or economic justification for massive tax cuts for rich people based on trickle down theories or deregulation that led to the banking crisis. Greed and the battle for power is an old story. As old as the human race.

0

George Lippencott 1 year, 7 months ago

28 hours ago Progressive Thinker posted the following

"I cannot help but wonder where we are headed with our current debates. Having thoroughly debased the opposition is compromise any longer a possibility? Are we really so sure that our opinions are transcendent and our opponent’s ideas are so worthless?"

This topic is a worthy discussion. History is replete with this cycle. Victors become vanquished, then victor again. Each iteration of the cycle brings a new level of instability to each and to the whole.

I have to agree with Moderate. I have to wonder where this is all going."

We could have pursued that notion but we didn't. Wonder why?

0

George Lippencott 1 year, 7 months ago

Must be a teacher

I think it best to not state what specific people think - Not a good idea. I have no trouble with intuiting from a number of posts an individual’s position and restating it. If I am wrong I can be corrected. Generalizations as to "putting words in people's mouth: are useless. As a poster I have a right to challenge misinformation or bias used to challenge my posts.

Sweeping generalizations about groups. Is it wrong to say that the Nazis killed 6 million Jews or the democrats have advocated for a tax increase on those with incomes above $250K? Is it right to write that Republicans want to kill Medicare?

I would submit our anger (I am not alone there) stems from the opinions that follow the generalization. Now I categorically reject the brand opinion as opinion. Hardly anybody on here does that and in most cases it is obvious anyway. The real problem is that many posters can not themselves differentiate between their own facts and opinions.

Perhaps the solution is to simply post ones own opinion or statement as to why another post is off base without challenging personally the other poster Perhaps it would be more profitable to keep to the focus of the thread and not jump shift to some other perhaps meaningful but irrelevant topic for the current thread

Lastly, it does matter who throws the first rock. It also matters as to the size of the rock. Rock throwing almost always ends up in a fire storm. Best to not throw rocks to begin with. I do not buy what I perceive to be the current PC to turn the other cheek. I might do so for somebody with no history of rock throwing but not for regular practitioners in that art.

0

verity 1 year, 7 months ago

A number of other posts have been made since I started writing mine above.

Cases in point of stating, without basis, what others think.

How about not putting words into other people's mouths?

How about not making sweeping generalizations about other groups of people?

How about stating opinions as opinions, not facts?

And don't give me the "s/he did it first." When I used to babysit and that excuse was used, my reply was, "I don't care who did it first. I don't care if your parents allow it. I don't allow it." Hint: yes, Charlie may have hit Charis first, but Charis was purposely agitating Charlie. Just because my back is turned doesn't mean I don't know what's going on.

1

verity 1 year, 7 months ago

I agree that these boards have degenerated, although if one tries, one can still have a conversation without personal insults. Conflict generates clicks and the LJW needs advertising to survive. As we are getting this for free, we can't really blame them because somebody has to pay for it. Maybe we just have to agree to clean it up ourselves.

I have this clever little device called a mouse. I just swipe it and fly by those things I don't want to read. Sometimes, out of sheer cussedness, I read things I know will cause consternation, but I don't have to respond. Obviously, even admittedly, some people come here just to get their jollies by irritating and getting a rise out of others. I don't know if ignoring them would cause them to to away, but at least they wouldn't be getting off on it. Might save a few keyboards from death by drowning.

As far as the greater world is concerned, unfortunately once we have gone down this path, it's hard to go back. Jayhawklawrence's comment is a case in point. Feuds, once started, are passed down through the generations. The only answer, I think, is not to respond in kind.

That doesn't mean letting misinformation stand, but one can counter it with facts, not insults.

Yes, a few people can make a difference. (OK, OK, I know that's a cliche.)

0

George Lippencott 1 year, 7 months ago

JAFS

Tangs picture blocked the "post" box.

I asked for an example of where I had maligned you: None was forthcoming.

As far as distortion. Your definition of a distortion may well be my consdiered opinion. What makes you right?

Are we taking all our toys and going home??

1

Liberty_One 1 year, 7 months ago

I don't think your comparisons to the run-up to the Civil War to be apt. This is because there was a real difference of opinion on major issues back then, while today the two mainstream parties agree on almost all the main issues. For example, both the Republicans and Democrats agree that there should be an income tax, that the wealthy should pay more than the poor, that employers should collect this tax for the state and so on. They only disagree a few percentage points one way or the other on exactly how much the tax should be. That's hardly a monumental divide.

The divisiveness is all really just a show. There are very few real differences here.

1

jayhawklawrence 1 year, 7 months ago

I have also been interested in how the Civil War still impacts our political dialogue today, particularly in light of the fact that we have our first Black President.

South Carolina seems to be a strong base for Tea Party support and I believe this was the first state to secede from the union.

Southern families that harbored resentment from the Civil War passed along their prejudice and their political ideas to their offspring. I believe I witnessed this in my own family.

The Civil War was not that long ago and I believe it still impacts us today in ways we are probably not aware of. It is hard to erase the negative effects of war.

1

overplayedhistory 1 year, 7 months ago

False premise: There are two sides to every story.

Proposed new rule: You can not disparage and participate.

Suggestion: disparage by not participating.

Partisan mud slinging could be minimized by a little more truth. When provable measurable facts are not acknowledged, it becomes hard to not throw around terms that happen to be accurate like "liar".

Fact: repeat a lie often enough some people accept it as truth.

1

Carol Bowen 1 year, 7 months ago

I've just about given up on these blogs. They've become little more than banter. At one time, I actually learned from them. Now, being labelled a conservative or a liberal is intended as an insult. Liars, socialists, communists, libertarian. Running to my dictionary (Yes, I still own one.) does not give me information to justify that any of these labels are truly bad, not even liar.

Am I a conservative? Sometimes. Am I liberal? Sometimes. Am I a liar? No, I'm running around with a lantern looking for the truth. Am I a socialist? A libertarian? Capitalist? Sometimes, sometimes not. Do I believe any group needs to bend over backward for another? Never. That's where compromise needs to happen. No group has the ultimate solution.

2

overplayedhistory 1 year, 7 months ago

On the topic of liars, Forgive me if I don't give much credence to the judgment of a person, who will maintain their certitude of facts involving the history of taxes, when their claims can easily be debunked by a quick google search or trip to the library.

Paul Ryan lied in his speech at the RNC convention. At what point do you concede that it is no longer spin and a strait out lie?

2

tange 1 year, 7 months ago

Is that the sound of history leaving the station...?

/ days of future past

0

George Lippencott 1 year, 7 months ago

Wow! it.is unfortunate that those who have contributed to the country and paid their taxes will be destroyed along with those who live off them. In fact the former will be hurt worse.

However, IMHO we will not get to the point you suggest before civil unrest leads to real push back.

I really believe that people like JAFS are clueless on economic reaities. They really think people will willingly give up most of what they have worked to get in prusuit of an idealized notion of social justice.

We have an annual imbalance of 1 trillion and our liberals ignore it. Either we cut programs or we raise taxes. To meet that level we would need to almost double taxes on those who actually pay them.

Of course people like JAFS refuse to acknowledge the reality. I have repeatedly asked the question as to who pays and how much. I have yet to receive an answwr - only suggestions I seek thearpy - shades of the USSR. The "rich" at best will contribute 10%. The real puch back starts when the real costs are recognized by those middle class workers who must pay them.

The big liberal lie. We can have it all if only we raise the marginal tax rates on the "rich" by 10%

0

tbaker 1 year, 7 months ago

I’ll tell ya where we are headed George: depression and hyperinflation leading to record unemployment and civil unrest that will be much worse than the riots in the 60’s.

Compared to the rest of the world, things in the US are WAY, WAY, better than just about anywhere else on the planet. Nowhere have this many people had it so good for so long. Consequently no one is moved to make significant political changes when the majority of the population is generally happy.

All that is going to change because roughly half the country wants to live off the other half the country and since this gets them elected, politicians are all too happy to oblige. What was supposed to be a temporary government safety net has become a career choice for tens of millions of people.

This is unsustainable and anyone with an IQ of a house plant can understand this – but they won’t even try because ideology blinds them.Even if we taxed people making over $250K a year at 100% (and through some bizarre set of circumstances they were willing to pay it) it wouldn’t even cover half of the deficit for one year.

This is just 8th grade economics. We have a huge and growing structural deficit. That means we have a deficit even when the economy is operating at its full potential and tax revenues are maxed out. 41 cents of every dollar we spend is now borrowed. We print money (quantitative easing) and go through life with our head in the sand ignoring what this is doing to the value of our money. You cannot arbitrarily increase the money supply with no corresponding value-added and then be surprised when inflation comes along as it is doing and robs everyone in the country – rich and poor alike. The only thing making a dollar actually worth a dollar these days is the bond market’s expectation of future tax collection.

The tyranny of simple math is being ignored (and scorned as you point out) because people don’t like it when their world view is challenged with facts and reality. The only way to snap people out of this mass psychosis is to make things very bad for everybody so we can collectively wake up and realize the error of our ways as a country and return to the paradigm where people are expected to take care of themselves. Government is supposed to be guaranteeing everyone’s equal opportunity (rights) and helping clear a path for people setting the most favorable conditions possible for them to look after themselves. Just as we are all born unique individuals, such will be the outcome of our lives. No two will be the same and government should not attempt to make it so.

Robbing Peter to pay Paul has never worked. Socialism has failed every single time it is tried. Personal responsibility, free markets, and individual liberty are the only recipe that works but we will all have to suffer before enough people come to this conclusion to make a real difference.

1

uggadyboogadyboo 1 year, 7 months ago

This is all just in good fun to see who has the best wit about others core beliefs. But I'm here today to tell you there is just one person to read about in the civil war, Nathan Bedford Forrest

0

George Lippencott 1 year, 7 months ago

JAFS not everything I post is directed at you personally. The “mote extreme liberals” is directed at those who want to repeal the Bush Tax Increase, who want free medical care, who would indirectly tax the upper middle class with a cap and trade regime that takes from them and gives to others. This is the group that thinks it is just fine to overtax the upper half of the middle class while not taxing half of the citizenry. This is the same group that denies abuses in the social safety net. I can go on.

Now your comment on studying the civil war coupled with past comments on paying for war, and comments on cutting defense are IMHO reflective of a peace at any cost mentality. I am free to make such a comment as it speaks to posts you have made. I have made no posts personally suggesting you need therapy.

Another strawman JAFS. I neither distort posts nor am angry at any specific person - not even you - dispite my perception that you are trying to provoke me.

0

George Lippencott 1 year, 7 months ago

JAFS Wrote: Also, perhaps books on the Civil War may not be the most peace inducing ones to read.

What was it that Plato said "Only the dead have seen the end of war". You will not make it go away by making believe it does not exist. But then avoiding things that impact their "love at all costs" philosophy is typical of the more extreme liberals like JAFS.

0

progressive_thinker 1 year, 7 months ago

"I cannot help but wonder where we are headed with our current debates. Having thoroughly debased the opposition is compromise any longer a possibility? Are we really so sure that our opinions are transcendent and our opponent’s ideas are so worthless?"

This topic is a worthy discussion. History is replete with this cycle. Victors become vanquished, then victor again. Each iteration of the cycle brings a new level of instability to each and to the whole.

I have to agree with Moderate. I have to wonder where this is all going.

2

tange 1 year, 7 months ago

Folks, we're not solving the world's problems here. Except for a handful of us :-P , we're not even addressing them very well. This is an open forum, accommodating a variety of perspectives and forms of self-expression. It's a resource, not a remedy (except, perhaps, in a some personal sense). Civil is good; flippant, flappant, and inane can be grand. While I value the grounded, well-developed argument, I enjoy and (gawd-help-you) sometimes am given to the worst sort of poemry. I'm not opposed to the occasional character assassination—and this LJWorld certainly has its share of characters—but only with the little nerf darts which can be launched from this portal. (I'm often surprised at how much "skin" some folks seem to have in this game, and how thin it indeed can be.)

So, lighten up, and light one up, for me (and thee).
Moderate is always so much more entertaining when he's on fire.

0

Liberty275 1 year, 7 months ago

No compromise! As long as government is fighting among themselves, they can do less damage to America. Gridlock is the only defense we have left against the liars and thieves in government.

Lock it up tighter than well-drillers ascot.

1

jafs 1 year, 7 months ago

Of course this is right - I agree about the level and kind of conversations on here.

I suggest to the author that he choose not to engage in that sort of thing, as I have chosen - it's the only thing we can do to elevate the level of the discussions.

If he's referring to my suggestion of a good therapist for anger issues, it was just a friendly suggestion - if I found myself increasingly angry, as he comments, I would seek that for myself.

Also, perhaps books on the Civil War may not be the most peace inducing ones to read.

0

Alceste 1 year, 7 months ago

Moderate notes: "A poster may be cosigned to psychiatric services for expressing anger at what in his/her opinion is a gross misrepresentation."

Projection at play here, finally??

0

Commenting has been disabled for this item.