I never thought I'd quote Spiro T. Agnew but it was written by William Safire. He used it to refer to the press. I think the political section of forum is being taken over by the "nattering nabobs." There is nothing wrong with criticizing but when you constantly do it and have nothing to add on how to improve things what is the point? Surely there must be something positive in your life?
Why didn't you tell that to the liberals and atheists who swooped in on anyone who said conservative things all this time? Ever since I've been on here to attest to that fact anyway.
Oh...that's right....you're one OF those liberals.... And like the government can't investigate itself, neither would I expect you to hold yourself responsible for anything; nope, not anything at all. You are very very negative; I even see paranoia in that post of yours.
And I think you could use a dose of your own medicine, Brenda. What insights and solutions are you offering that are inclusive of all people in all religions or political ideologies that I'm not aware of?
And I am in complete agreement with UW. There is derision and contempt on all sides, and few offer any worthwhile, inclusive solutions that show equality for all.
I'm working on my own self and how I look at things as a way to try to begin to solve a few little problems. Perhaps some will make fun of that, but I think a change of heart and insight is where all problems begin their solution.
Tear the whole freaking thing apart. Everything. The defects of our present system of living are so extensive as to be way beyond merely incidental, and are in fact systemic. There is way more wrong than there is right, and for that reason, it all must burn.
And all of my contributions on the (political & social) forum are made in that anarchist spirit:-)
Today's Republicans/Tea Partiers don't really have a plan about how they'd govern if they were to be elected. They're against everything, but for nothing (unless it's to start a new war that I'm unaware of).
They're basically arguing for their status as an opposition party.
No, it is more than that,. There is genuine and understandable disenchantment with government. Unfortunately, too many of the disenchanted aren't very bright and their antics sometimes tends to drown out the intelligence that can be a part of this.
If we could strip away the racism and fear of homosexuality, the mindless flag waving, the fervent religious blabbering, there are issues we could at least have rational discussions about. That we will be distracted by the unintelligent is unavoidable, that we will disagree on basic principals is expected, but there are things worth talking about rather than talking past.
It isn't easy. I get pulled off track by the nut cases as easily as any of us and it is all too easy to be misunderstood when you can't inflect, soften, wave your hands and wink and grimace as you can when face to face. It's too easy to get angry and dismiss the other person as a hopeless fool. We have all done it and we will continue to do it.
That shouldn't stop us from trying to see the other guys point of view. I appreciate the arguments against big government and can even partially agree. I have strong reasons for believing that big has benefits also, but am willing to listen to why someone disagrees. I am not in favor of unbridled capitalism, but we can certainly talk about where the limits should be. I believe that the rich should be taxed more, but we can certainly talk about fairness and alternative revenue streams.
We are going to disagree. None of us are smart enough to be doing anything more than guessing about most of this stuff. Rather than insulting each other constantly, why don't we look for opportunities to hear each other?
I agree with all of you, and I do think there are sensible conservatives out there (although relatively few nowadays, and very, very few in the HubPages political forums). I will call out ledefensetech as a conservative who had pretty solid reasoning behind his positions. I rarely agreed with him, but at least he was coherent.
But a lot of the cranky, incoherent ranting that passes for conservative thinking this days starts with the current leadership, which is more concerned with tearing down the Obama administration by throwing everything possible at him than with putting out actual, actionable proposals of their own. It really is more than a turnoff to hear a bunch of bitching, moaning and insults, but complete silence when asked for an actual, concrete counterproposal.
I think some of the most intelligent political discussions I've heard or read are with those from the millennial generation, the 20 somethings. many of them are smart, college educated, optimistic and for the most part unbiased. they keep up with what's going on and they have something to say. they could be our next 'great generation.' and with what I see, they'll make sure they are!
I don't see why they can't have a discussion with me. I haven't insulted anyone. I have laughed out loud when I've seen the hypocrisy and pointed it out and mocked it openly. However it seems to be more palatable when it's someone you agree with against someone you don't agree with.
But it doesn't exactly lubricate the wheels of conversation, does it?
No, you didn't specifically single anyone out, but I get the impression that you think anyone with a liberal point of view is unintelligent. If that is your opinion, what could we possibly have to talk about?
If my impression is incorrect, please do let me know.
Why don't we just see where I think there is room for intelligent discussion from the conservative side?
Gun Control - I'm with the conservatives on this, so I'd be arguing against liberals, but the conversation can be intelligent.
Taxation - I'm L(liberal) but this is an area where we should be able to talk.
Gay Marriage - very little room for intelligence and seldom seen from the C side.
Separation of Church and State - same comment as for gay marriage.
Big Government - I am in favor, but can appreciate the C side and there is plenty of room for intelligent discussion
Foreign Wars - an area where I am so ambivalent that intelligent discussion only confuses me more :-)
Abortion - 99% emotional, but I can understand and have empathy for C views even if I don't agree. Nothing much to talk about though because of the high emotional pitch.
So, out of these subjects, I think two commonly held conservative ideas usually are devoid of intelligence. All the rest have potential and I do not see holding them as automatically wrong, stupid or anything else. Of course you CAN present stupid arguments, but that's true of anything.
So, I ask you again: you give the impression that you think all liberal positions are worthless. Is that true or not?
Interesting. Good to know that there are at least two subjects that you disclose where any view that conservatives hold you don't consider intelligent and seems any discussion with a conservative would be considered stupid by you. Because you didn't deny the wingnut namecalling it's safe to say that you call conservatives that during those times. So you should not feel injured when I reference libs who support Obama regardless as libtards in a general way when dicussing with conservatives on something that Obama did that I consider stupid.
And this is the crux, I've been open about my disdain when it comes to Obama, Pelosi, and various other public figures, usually liberal. That in and of itself is enough to get liberals foaming at the mouth it seems because they take it personally. And I will continue to be disdainful at anything these public figures do that I consider stupid. I am open to discussion even then with libs but it is the libs who are affronted and start attacking, start baiting, making snide remarks and don't talk intelligently. So I actually don't have any topics where I start libs at stupid, you do and I'm glad you told me. So bottom line no liberal positions are worthless to me, only some liberals.
So I'm going to stop here because we know where we both stand and I will, going forward continue to do what I do and you can feel free to converse with me on those topics other than the two you consider I can't intelligently discuss.
I didn't bother to respond to your "wing nut" charge because I can't be certain that I never, ever used it somewhere in some context, but it's not something I commonly would say except to an actual nutcase. But if I carelessly used it in a place where I should have not, I apologize.
I did not say that anyone who dislikes gay marriage or separation of church and state is stupid. There is simply nothing intelligent you can say about it. Those are emotional beliefs. I may think you are being "stupid" in the real meaning of the word - you aren't thinking, you are just reacting, but that does not mean you are not capable of thinking in other areas. Of course, some who hold those beliefs are not capable. I would not apologize for thinking of specific individuals as being unintelligent if they have amply demonstrated that.
However - your blanket dismissal of Obama as stupid is rather disturbing. Obviously he is not, therefore I can only assume (again) that you automatically dismiss all liberals as stupid.
Well, since you seem determined to accuse me of thinking all liberals as stupid, that's on you and that sounds like an emotional statement. Your apology regarding wingnut is neither here nor there unless you were thinking of me when you posted it.
And again, your post tells me that you are somewhat being hypocritical because it tells me that any criticism I may have of Obama is something that riles you up. How you connect a blanket dismissal of Obama to mean all liberals is very odd. I am not blanketly dismissive but there are many things that he does that I consider stupid. Also you're playing with semantics, if you don't think someone has anything intelligent to say when it comes to a topic, of course you think what they're saying is stupid.
Now if I think what Obama did was stupid and you get upset, that's your emotional problem. You can think any way you want about what I said but I doubt you can have any civil discussion if you've already gotten upset.
I think we've already established where we are with this and nothing more needs said. Thanks again.
I'm beginning to think that it isn't possible to rationally discuss politics with conservatives on these forums. Perhaps it takes a face-to-face encounter to see the "other side" as an intelligent and worthy human being. In real life, I have discussions with conservatives, sometimes very heated discussions, but in the end, we can recognize that both people are so passionate because they care about their fellow human beings and their country.
There are a few conservatives (and more moderates with certain conservative leanings) that eschew the usual partisan rantings that are all too common nowadays and can actually discuss their views with other people.
They are, unfortunately, vastly outnumbered, if not in their numbers, then in their number of posts here.
I agree, they probably won't align themselves with a party because the two we have are on the whole just godawful. I referred to them as conservative because the generational studies show that this group values stability. Not a lot of risk-taking in this group according to the studies by one of th Big 4 accounting firms.
What is the counter-proposal in politics? The people who have the radical,yet rational ideas are dealt with swiftly,either that or the become pariahs.Look at what is happening to Michael Steele right now,he is speaking truths that do no vibe with his party lines,they are saying maybe he should just be a politician and not speak the truth.Does that make any sense to you? With all that we are bombarded with in the news media,it is not hard to,"keep up with what is going on." We all know that it is time for change,but at whose cost?
The way is being paved for those up and coming 20 somethings,hopefully(hope?)we of the older generation do not leave them with too much of a mess to clean up with all of the nonsense that is going on today.
I guess I don't really understand the problem people have with others being critical of the POTUS or Congress. Are we supposed to sit quietly and not have opinions, be good little sheep?
It is our right and our duty to question what our leaders do, it is important that we don't just follow in lock step with politicians, any politician.
I read a few posts back that the Republicans are arguing for opposition, they are the opposing party, what should they be doing?
It is not the job of the opposing party to see that the agenda is accomplished, where did that idea come from? My representative is representing me, that is why I voted for him, I wanted him to oppose the opposition, what do the rest of you expect?
Ironic isn't it UW, that even this thread wasn't spared the 'negativity' ? All I know is that these forums, esp. the political/religious ones represent a 'mini' world where you will always have opposing views on anything and everything. Except here, everyone is free to join in...which in itself would be a good thing if the civilities that guide our manners in real life weren't so easily dispensed with online...
And I want to be just like you Jim, in fact I am going to waste the next 3 days of my life posting worthless posts about crap on this forum in an attempt to lose all 1048 of my followers. Thank you for the inspiration, I may even copy your avatar too, its an art piece. A blank canvas for a blank mind
It seems you have at least one person enjoying your presence as the latest Hubpages troll, somebody has to encourage the freaks though hey Flightkeeper?
Criticizing and condemning others for their personal views isn't what UW was discussing. One must be able to sit back and anaylize objectively without taking a conversation into a personal context hence the question, why complain and vent in anger and give no solutions. Isn't it more constructive to offer ideas for a solution? can you imagine the ideas many of us could come up with between us?
You are absolutely right, they squandered the chance to regain power for many years to come.
But I am not talking about Bush I am talking about solutions offered by current members of congress. Constantly saying the republicans are the party of no (which makes a great political statement) does not make it so. Of course Obama doesn't have to be bipartisan he can continue to thumb his nose at the American people all he wants, but he shouldn't be surprised when he is traded in for a more compatible model.
That is the language of politics and religion - because so few people seem to have any grasp of any of it that attack is all that is left - I include myself in this - my reasons are that not understanding is no excuse for making obviously stupid statements and they just sooooo invite a similar response
So my reference to the terrible choices made by the right in putting a man in office responsible for many thousands of needless deaths, not once, but twice is a personal attack?
Are all truths personal attacks because you do not like them? Tell me why I should think otherwise about those who want to go back to the same war mongering representatives? Your articulate Palin, for example.
Have you ever tried to read her answers to question? She has a problem talking in complete sentences. Some writers notice these things. Others apparently do not see the significance of this at all! Nor the confusion evident in her attempts to answer easy questions.
Not terrified at all, Jim! And I did not insult you that I know of. Perhaps it's just me, but I learn much from a person's hubs. Perhaps you may surprise me with something I can agree with in your writings.
But heck, don't feel compelled to write anything. Many others who post here don't either. Would it lend a bit of credibility to your opinions with a well written piece? You Betcha! LOL
I may be wrong, but it seems like some people are playing "Oh, so you haven't written a hub yet, eeeeeeeeeh?" as a way of implying that your opinions are less legitimate because of it. Just another manifestation of the nastiness that leads too many discussions astray here. I am still hopeful that we can all do better and elevate the level of discourse to what HP deserves.
No, it's because HubPages is a site primarily for publishing hubs, not participating in the forum.
Because people have been banned from the forums in the past only to reappear soon after under a different guise, someone without any hubs but an instantly aggressive presence in the forums is looked at with a bit of suspicion.
Once you start publishing hubs, expect that suspicion to subside.
I am not sure what constitutes a troll but I assure you that I am not one. You seem to be irritated by a redundancy in forum posts, and I for the life of me can't understand why? If my punctuation bothers you so much then you may have to reevaluate your time spent out of school, as far as I know I am not receiving a grade for anything I write here.
The thing is a lot of people are very sensitive about people creating sockpuppet accounts, usually shown by the fact they have no hubs and have posted on the forums a lot. Of course, that is not always the case. I believe now that you aren't a sockpuppet Jim, but you better not prove to be one after all
I was making reference to your SheToldMe.com referral link. I was hoping that you would be one of my many referrals, however that would appear not to be the case. I happen to top that referral board, and Uninvited Writer is second. Not that it makes me any money.
There seems to be a lot of people concerned about my presence on this site. I am writing a hub that is very lengthy and am blowing off steam in the forums, I am sorry if that bothers you Ryan, but I'm sure you will get over it.
Jim, sock puppets have been the single biggest cause of confrontation and controversy on this site. There have even been people known to have conversations with themselves on threads to get ahead in a debate or argument. Sad, very sad in fact, but true.
You have to ask yourself the motives behind a second personality established solely to join discussion on a forum, when the human behind that account already has an established hubpages account which they also actively use on the forum. Then ask yourself what the motive would be for people to set up dozens of other accounts on a forum. I would give you strong examples, only it will just serve to bring up the past. Jim, get over this thread.
Ryan,I am way over this thread. I haven't attacked anyone and don't plan to. I will have civil discussions and try and treat people with the respect they deserve, but don't be surprised if I tease a tad. I mean nothing by it.
~Criticism, as it was first instituted by Aristotle, was meant as a standard of judging well; the chiefest part of which is to observe those excellencies which delight a reasonable reader ~ ........John Dryden
Methinks we have strayed!
~ They criticize me for harping on the obvious - If all the folks in the United States would do the few simple things they know they ought to do, most of our big problems would take care of themselves ~ ......Calvin Coolidge
This was a political thread? I didn't see that. Anyhoo - I just think that people who like to argue for real with each other about politics, religion, social mores etc. should go ahead and do that and not pretend to come into thread proclaiming positive solutions to natter about how bad the opposition is. This is why I stick to the vacuous fun and quipping parodies threads with cute images and silliness - which reminds me - where are all the wacky queries awaiting my wacky advice?
You people who like to label each other and blame deserve each other. Leave the rest of us alone in our blissful ignorance, if that is so, but I don't believe it.
If this refers to me then I never called neonazicons stupid - =and the use of nazi seems appropriate to describe the brownshirt tactics that are being openly used verbally in these forums with direct vehhement unsubstantiated and unjustified attacks on the leader of your country
Sadly, civilized debate used to be possible. I remember some great conservative and liberal orators from the past who, even if they vehemently disagreed with who they were arguing with, were civil in their arguments.
Let's start here! How many accounts do you have here Sab? And do you post on the forums with several? A true answer from you would go a long way to making us think you are sincere in your new role as a "caring, polite hubber who wants good dialogue with other members."
See, when you use "dope of hope" it becomes hard to see you as anyone I can have an intelligent conversation with. Of course you may be such a person. but when you toss out that kind of nonsense, you rile me up and for at least a few seconds, I stop thinking rationally too.
Why don't you try again and maybe we can actually have a useful conversation about hope and hopelessness? That subject is actually a decent pivot point for liberals and conservatives to spin around.
Why don't you try to have an intelligent conversation with me? Do not give up so easily.
Okay,when you deal with politics,you are dealing with politicians,politicians are GREAT with words,I am saying that everyone went on hope and change.What is hope when dealing with politics? It can become like dope,something to get us by until it is over,and we find out that things are not going for the better.Where does hope leave us then? We need something a little more concrete.Can a politician deliver anything that is going to please EVERYONE and not just their worthy constituents?
I say "dope of hope" because at the time it was being used,it was a panacea,just like dope to a junkie.
Obama did represent hope to many of us. He has let us down, but we knew in our hearts that he would, because the liberal agenda he represented never had a chance. If he hadn't let us down, the conservatives would be ten times more angry than they are now.
But that's the nature of the beast. Politicians say what we we want to hear, they paint the world as we'd like to see it, maybe even as they'd like to see it, but we all know that reality is going to pull things back from ideals, whether the ideals are from my side or the other. We judge Presidents by how well they can sell and how much they can sell and by that standard, yes, Obama comes up short. But as I said, if he had done better in my wishes, the other side would hate him even more.
Of course he has had just a few problems here and there that were a teeny bit distracting :-)
Really, I hope he doesn't seek a second term. In my ideal world, the Dems would just stand aside, bow politely and wave in whatever Republican is fool enough to want the job. It's what we should have done in 2008; if we had, you probably wouldn't see another Republican President fot twenty years. I'd see that as a good trade, but I would still feel badly for whoever tried to pick up the pieces. This Humpty-Dumpty isn't going to look anything like an egg for a long time to come.
OK, so now lets turn to hope. Where does it come from? From my POV, the rich are destroying us. There is too much disparity in income, too much injustice, too much political influence. I'd like to see change in those areas. Obama sure isn't going to do it and I can't imagine a Republican candidate who would even think any of that was important, so where does that leave me?
I get frustrated when I hear people not even as well off as I am championing the cause of the super-rich and refusing any idea that would put back wealth to the middle class they so cleverly extracted it from. History shows us time and time again that situations like this end badly for everyone, but nobody seems to see that.
What are you disagreeing with? My hope would come from myself,I sure would not place it on guys who are paid to,"paint the world we'd like to see."Hatred of Obama"? That is the nature of partisan politricks.Remember when George Bush number one said,"NEW WORLD ORDER"? That is what we are experiencing now,the beginning stages of the NEW WORLD ORDER,and what scares most people is that they can't do anything about it.Things are happening to people who were fine with it happening to someone else,now it is happening to them,it is happening to all of us.
Perhaps both parties should step aside and give "the new kids on the block" a go at it... that is... in an ideal world.
What you resist you get more of. And, it is a comment people, an opinion which is different from a fact. "Too many Nattering nabobs of Negativism" is not a question and it is not an answer to a question therefore it is not an origination it is merely an opinion.
People with red hair and freckles should not be allowed to vote = an opinion
Some people have red hair and freckles = a fact
We start wars with each other over opinions - opinion (noun) a belief, conclusion, judgment of feeling that may or may not be true.
Fact (noun) something that can be perceived and is real; something having actual, verifiable existence
“It is more fun to talk with someone who doesn't use long, difficult words but rather short, easy words like "What about lunch?"”
I find it interesting and think UW has made a very important point about the behaviors among these threads.
But let's face it, watching people, I would say more than half love the drama, can't wait to read the attack back fro a comment, some just can't wait for some males to come and post and follow them around and vs versa, many just absolutely love the repetitive political and religious threads first they are perfect to try and look smart and secondly it gives others another venue to gossip, people talk in sarcastic code about others and the insults are ridiculous given the poster has no clue about the actual truth, nor cares to.
I also believe to some extent all forums are the same, a competition of who can be noticed and smartest first. The quest to prove who is right. Bottom Line.
No one in this thread has taken any responsibilities for this issue and sadly are happy to feed the exact opposite of what UW was talking about. Hey maybe it's a good thing as we all have proven in detail the very symptoms of negativism .
I have taken my bans and were justified fr entering the forums in an emotional state of mind.
Banning has certainly increased whether you feel justified or not. I see small changes starting to happen and believe more support is peaking it's way through
Anyways, just what I think
ps I wonder how negative the responses will be to this post, this would be sad, not to say everyone of course has the right to their own opinion
no need to let me know at this point, sad, i don't even now you but respected you from reading your posts, so I just don't get it. I'll end with that. Randy you don't knot know me and maybe could be open to the possibility my message was meant in a different tone.
Never mind this is so weird I can't articulate what I mean/
Your point is heard and I will not hold judgement because I don't know your motives just the same
Oh Randy, you being a dangerous snake and I a powerful witch, surely this combination can be lethal. We shall get each others back if needed and my spells I don't wish on too many people Oh fun! And we are such nice folk!
Be You, and your second impression actually got me thinking how ridiculous some peeps are, so let the games begin
If I did ever have a face-to-face conversation with any of the conservatives here, I know which "other side" I'd be seeing! they scare me, actually! so vociferous and violent and vituperant (is that a word) basically, also, vile!
I've never understood this "You think you are right" complaint.
Of course we think we are right. We may have minor doubts, we may be willing to listen to new evidence, but what is the point of having an opinion if you don't think it is "right"?
Oddly, one of the character failings conservatives sometimes say liberals exhibit is being too ambivalent on the issues, being too willing to see both sides. That is "weak", they say. But when we do assert a strong opinion, there we go, "thinking we are right".
Liberals have a tiresome habit of insisting that no one can legitimately disagree with their point of view. Anyone who doesn't see everything their way is "blind" "asleep" "uninformed" or not "thinking for themselves." That's why you never hear a democrat who loses an election say, "well, the people have spoken and they just agreed with the other guy this time." It is always, "we didn't explain clearly enough to make the voters understand" and such.
The people who have actually read my various hubs in the area of Conservatism vs. Liberalism must be quite puzzled by your assumptions.
It's funny, isn't it? I actually tried to engage in an intelligent discussion, but the Three Horsemen decided that trampling all that while waving their hats in the air and egging each other on was much more fun.
Anytime you actually do want to try to discuss anything, please be sure to let me know. I won't hold my breath.
I have to leave for my weekly poker game now. It's usually me and one other liberal against all the other conservatives. Unlike this, we actually manage to talk to each other now and then.
Please feel free to pick me apart while I'm gone. Definitely DO NOT go read anything I have written about this because I would hate to make you choke on your words.
"I have never seen a liberal willing to see anything other than what they have been told to see."
I feel that is an unfair statement. My beliefs have been formed over a lifetime of experience. Not every single thing I believe is liberal, and I disagree with a lot of what I see; no one tells me what to see.
I find it humorous that many topics do not get taken up here by conservatives on HubPages until they have been roundly reported on Fox or conservative blogs. That is not saying the all conservatives are told what to see either.
I didn't fall for any of his lies I didn't vote for him.
But, the liberal contention that the election in 2000 was a selection is a lie. The lie is easy to see if you can read a law and are capable of understanding.
Lie "I did not have sexual relations with that woman, ms Lewinsky!" Lie "If my stimulus plan is made law unemployment will not rise above 8%" Lie "I will not have lobbyists in my administration" Lie "I will leave proposed legislation on the internet so all citizens will be able to see it for 5 days"
Lies, lies, lies! I was not referring to lies that politicians told, I was referring to lies liberals in general tell!
We have two major political parties that would seem to stop at nothing to get or keep power. This was highlighted to me when my son and I went to see The Campaign. Who do you feel is the least scrupulous? Please...
Who are right, believers or atheists?We don't know how the universe works, and science does not yet have all the answers, so all we can do is assume what we believe in is true.Some things can't be explained, but does...
In a rather desperate effort to divert the gaze of the American people away from the wreck that is his presidency, Obama, in conjunction with his press secretary, has started to call the various scandals that have...
http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/03/ … minor.htmlSo this is how the democrats want to govern by running away to hide rather than do their job! Is this proper behaviour for elected officials? What if both...
Maybe. The 17th Century term High Crimes and Misdemeanors may not mean what you think it might be after seeing President Clinton impeached, but not convicted. A common interpretation is as follows:The...
The premise "This too will pass" means that everything in life come and go, it's either we outgrow them or they outgrow us, or in many ways they just have to be left behind; not just objects or material...