What if Republican Right fully implements agenda?

[hokiefan33]

Actually, I'd argue that the right actually being uncaring and indifferent is what prompts the attacks, but hey, that's just me.

But shucks...If only we could stop all welfare (except the corporate variety, of course)...allow employers to discriminate against groups of people that they don't like (read: that are different from them)...legislate for prejudice against gays instead of against it...give health care only to those that can afford it (why should poor people be given access to a doctor ?!?)...lower taxes on the people that can most afford to pay them while raising them on everyone else...teach religion (ONLY christianity, of course, since those others don't really count) in schools rather than science...legislate what people can do in the privacy of their own homes and doctors offices...install a press that only glorifies our illustrious leader rather than asking tough questions when they need to be asked...

If only we could have all of that, then we would have the perfect society.

By george, I think you might be on to something...

 

[wvrevy]

By george, I think you might be on to something...

As an old friend used to say, you just can't make this stuff up.

 

[cardaway]

I waited and I knew it was only a matter of time. I knew when I typed the post I had spelled a word wrong. My friend said wait and see how long till the spell check police come out.

I am hardly the police or any where close to perfect when it comes to errors in my posts. But you can bet that when I make my case on the subject, I'm going to be a little more careful.

Noting worst then a post about grammer erors ful of misstakes.

 

[cardaway]

As an old friend used to say, you just can't make this stuff up.

It's not at all shocking when the extremists own up to their opinions. They can confess, point you to the bodies, supply the murder weapon, and still claim innocence on the stand because in their mind they really are innocent.

 

[DawnCt1]

Noting worst then a post about gammer erors ful of misstakes.

Yes there is; someone rude enough to notice.

 

[cardaway]

Yes there is; someone rude enough to notice.

Don't worry, it's only one thread. I'm not trying to take your spot as rude poster of the year.

 

[DemonLlama]

I thought I had learned to never, EVER post on political threads and yet here I am. . .

The squabbling over the greater sin:

to misspell and thereby represent oneself as under-educated and inarticulate

OR

to less than diplomatically point out said appearance

seems to me to be a shadow of the content of the debate in this thread.

Ideally, we would all be articulate and capable of not making (or at least quickly correcting) grammatical errors so that communication was unimpeded from confusion, ambiguity, distraction, or the like.

Ideally, we would all be kind enough not to mock or ridicule one another's communication mistakes when they do happen.

Ideally, the conservatives would find balance in their support of business and capitalism to care for those who, through limited and targeted assistance, could leave the chains of poverty and lack of education to become productive members of society.

Ideally, the liberals would find balance in their support of governmental control and social causes to acknowledge that the government cannot and should not be all things to all people, particularly those who refuse to help themselves.

Welcome to the real world.

 

[Laugh O. Grams]

Wow...this thread suck!!

Hey Charade...can I borrow something?

<YAWN>

Thanks...you can have it back now...

 

[TnKrBeLlA012]

I am hardly the police or any where close to perfect when it comes to errors in my posts. But you can bet that when I make my case on the subject, I'm going to be a little more careful.

Noting worst then a post about grammer erors ful of misstakes.

The end of your post gives me an idea of your character. One word spelled wrong is one thing. Your example is ridiculous. I hope you don't make fun of people with speech problems?? I think it comes down to how you were raised. I guess I was taught better. If the only problem we have in life is spelling a word wrong on a Disney site, we are VERY lucky. Have a great day!

 

[RickinNYC]

By george, I think you might be on to something...

Never ceases to amaze.

 

[RickinNYC]

Then the US would be a better place, and I would be a happy camper!

Fortunately, this won't ever happen so does that mean the US wouldn't be the country you so adore? Might that mean you won't be a happy camper?

 

[hokiefan33]

Never ceases to amaze.

I do what I can, if only for your amusement, Rick!

 

[hokiefan33]

Fortunately, this won't ever happen so does that mean the US wouldn't be the country you so adore? Might that mean you won't be a happy camper?

I said it would be a BETTER place, which means comparatively better than it is right now, to me. I am already privileged to live in the greatest country on the planet, but that could make it better for me.

I'll be a happy camper either way, just happier if that were to happen!

I thank you for your interest in my feelings, though!

 

[leighe]

Ideally, the conservatives would find balance in their support of business and capitalism to care for those who, through limited and targeted assistance, could leave the chains of poverty and lack of education to become productive members of society.

Ideally, the liberals would find balance in their support of governmental control and social causes to acknowledge that the government cannot and should not be all things to all people, particularly those who refuse to help themselves.

Welcome to the real world.

Exactly.

 

[cardaway]

The end of your post gives me an idea of your character. One word spelled wrong is one thing. Your example is ridiculous. I hope you don't make fun of people with speech problems?? I think it comes down to how you were raised. I guess I was taught better. If the only problem we have in life is spelling a word wrong on a Disney site, we are VERY lucky. Have a great day!

You may have seen my post as rude, but taking shots at my character and upbringing took it much lower. Congratulations, you win.

 

[AlanH]

Well it been over 24 hours since I started this thread. I thought that it might make a bit of a splash. 54 replies later it seems to have resulted in a veritable maelstrom.

Reply #4 criticized my grammar and spelling rather than address the issues.

Reply #5 assumed that my post is an endorsement of liberalism.

Reply #9 assumed that my post advocates socialism.

Replys #15 & #16 criticized the spelling in Reply #11 rather than address the issue that the poster raised.

Unfortunately a number of the posts focused on the issue of criticizing grammar and spelling in posts. (I agree that such criticism doesn't belong in an informal forum like a discussion board and borders on a personal attack.)

Most thoughtful post goes to DemonLlama in Post #47.

First, I will admit that I put up what I view as the "worst case scenario". But the replies to some extent point up the irrational character of most of the debate in the public square. On the 24 hour cable news networks a "debate" between a "liberal" and "conservative" is a public shouting match. In Congress each party demonizes the other. My feeling is that rational debate went in the toilet with the advent of conservative talk radio.

That's why a week or two ago a discussion on NPR between an economist at the Heritage Foundation and an economist who is a New York Times columnist and professor at Princeton University was such a breath of fresh air. The issue was the budget deficit and taxes in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.

There was broad agreement that the deficit was a big problem that needs public debate. They also agreed that the biggest long term issue for the budget was the cost of health care.

When the interviewer questioned them on the seeming agreement on so many things the economist from the Heritage Foundation said some like this. There is broad agreement among people of goodwill on the left and the right on the problems that need to be addressed by the nation. We disagree on how to solve them.

Note that the assumption is that the person with whom one disagrees is a person of goodwill who has the best interests of the nation at heart. They are not devils who only are interested in power for themselves and to hell with the nation.

When one assumes that one's opponent is a person of goodwill then the debate can be rational and civil rather than a shouting match of "I'm right and you're wrong". Last I heard no one had cornered the infallibility (Bush administration to the contrary) market.

That said (whew) I'll try to address the issues in my thread starter in another post.

 

[jimmiej]

But shucks...If only we could stop all welfare (except the corporate variety, of course)...allow employers to discriminate against groups of people that they don't like (read: that are different from them)...legislate for prejudice against gays instead of against it...give health care only to those that can afford it (why should poor people be given access to a doctor ?!?)...lower taxes on the people that can most afford to pay them while raising them on everyone else...teach religion (ONLY christianity, of course, since those others don't really count) in schools rather than science...legislate what people can do in the privacy of their own homes and doctors offices...install a press that only glorifies our illustrious leader rather than asking tough questions when they need to be asked...

If only we could have all of that, then we would have the perfect society.

On the other hand, libs would be in paradise if the we...subsidized the poor forever (by overtaxing hard-working Americans)...forced private employers to hire minorities over possibly better candidates...let them define "morality" (read: "If it feels good, do it.")...de-valued the traditional family & instead promoted "alternate family units"...made hard-working Americans subsidize insurance payments for lazy people...gave everyone (workers & non-workers) an equal (small) monthly stipend...completely re-wrote American history and instead focused on how "evil" white Christians really are...de-valued life (read: "If it feels good, do it & don't worry about the consequences.")...canned Fox News & made CNN the "Official" (read: ONLY) news organization of the land...

Ah..true paradise!!!

 

[Jalva22]

What does a ghost have in common with a fiscal conservative? Answer: Neither one exists.

Honestly, what would make the country a perfect place to me?

1. Never coming across or hearing from an "activist" of any sort.
2. Finding a politician, any politician, who didn't outright lie in his campaign to spin an issue his/her way. Did anybody believe a word Bush or Kerry was saying by November? Anybody?
3. Coming to the Disney boards and not finding a political post.

 

[wvrevy]

On the other hand, libs would be in paradise if the we...subsidized the poor forever (by overtaxing hard-working Americans)...forced private employers to hire minorities over possibly better candidates...let them define "morality" (read: "If it feels good, do it.")...de-valued the traditional family & instead promoted "alternate family units"...made hard-working Americans subsidize insurance payments for lazy people...gave everyone (workers & non-workers) an equal (small) monthly stipend...completely re-wrote American history and instead focused on how "evil" white Christians really are...de-valued life (read: "If it feels good, do it & don't worry about the consequences.")...canned Fox News & made CNN the "Official" (read: ONLY) news organization of the land...

Ah..true paradise!!!

Stretching the truth just a bit, there, aren't you?

1 - Liberals don't view the poor as deserving of their plight because they aren't "hard working". Your post says that conservatives do.

2 - Liberals want fair hiring practices. Everyone to have the chance to prove that they are the best candidate for a job. Your post says that conservatives disagree.

3 - Liberals want people to define morality for themselves, not have it imposed by some stick-up-the-*** right winger. Your post obviously disagrees.

4 - Liberals want people to be able to define for themselves who their family is, rather than some homophobic right wing windbag. Your post obviously says that you disagree. (Meaning you are the only one trying to force your morals on other people.)

5 - Liberals believe that the "right to life, liberty, et al" means that, if someone is sick, they should be able to receive medical care in this "great" country. We also don't view them as "lazy" because they can't afford to pay. You obviously feel differently, and apparently think that the only reason millions of Americans can't afford health insurance is that they just aren't worthy of it.

6 - Pick up a history book. Ever heard of the American Indian ? Ever heard of the Salem witch trials ? Ever heard of Joe McCarthy and his tirades against the "godless" communists ? Ever heard of the KKK (who lay claim to being a CHRISTIAN organization) ? We don't need to "change" history. It's all there in black and white.

7 - You're right..."Streamlining" executions doesn't do anything to "devalue" life.

8 - Liberals' biggest problem with Faux News isn't that they lean to the right. It's that they claim to be "fair and balanced", while doing nothing to question those in power and only presenting one side of ANY story (when they can be bothered, anyway). Aside from that, a NEWS organization can not be nothing more than a mouthpiece for the administration and still expect to be taken seriously (at least, not by anybody that knows anything at all about journalism).

In short...Thanks for proving my point

Yes, we liberals (and particularly the Democratic Party) have our problems. But a totalitarian world run by people who care more about their bank account than their fellow human beings (all while hypocritically calling themselves "Christians") is a nightmare George Orwell couldn't have described any better if he'd been living under the Bush administration.

 

[Free4Life11]

Yep. That's what happens when you have a welfare and tax system that rewards people for staying at the bottom of the income range. There's no motivation to work hard and learn skills that would put people in the middle class.

No motivation?

I guess having a car to drive isn't motivation, or a house to live in, or being able to afford good health insurance, or take multiple trips to Disney every year, the list goes on and on.

I guess I must be doing something wrong because I sure as hell am not reaping the "rewards" of being at the bottom of the income range! You make it sound like people WANT to live on the least income possible so they can save a small amount in taxes.