My theory, Conservative vs Liberal.

[lendaddy]

The main jist of my theory is the projection of malice.

I have always said and I believe most of the "righties" in here would agree with me, that liberals are not intentionally trying to screw the country over. The things they try to accomplish are for the most part good and decent. The problem we have is that their methods suck. We see you as treating the symptoms and not the disease. Drug addicts? Give em clean needles. Poor person? Give em enough money to be comfortible in their failure. Kids having sex at 13? Teach em how to use condoms. Pathetic schools? Throw money at em. etc.. etc.. etc..

I do believe these types of approaches are horrible, but I don't think they are done with malice. Though they end up causing great harm, it was never the intent.

Now a liberal in my experience firmly believes that pure evil greed and malice is behind most every conservative agenda item. For instance we prefer the government to be "pro-business", instantly this means we are greedy sobs' who only care about ourselves and wealthy business owning friends. When in fact it is simply our belief that a nation in which business thrives unhampered will lead to more and better jobs for everyone. It will make us more competative on a global scale and make us fertil ground for new industry. There are core economic reasons we believe this, but all that is seen is greed. We seriously believe this would result in a better standard of living for all Americans.........seriously we do.

When we want welfare reform we are seen as uncaring bastards with no empathy and again only greed. When in fact we want to help these people too, we just think trapping them at poverty level with little reason to achieve is unforgivable. We prefer a system that prods them into self-sufficiency.

I think you get what I'm saying. I can think of a few examples of things some on the right might say the left does out of malice (mostly religion based), but I cannot think of one Conservative position that is not viewed as "based in greed" by the left.

This I think is the communication gap.

[bryanthompson]

I do think the lefties just let their good intentions get in the way of good judgement... Instead of applauding Bush or minorities for gaining seats in the cabinet, they attack him and them for it. They use racist cartoons and slurs to attack Condi Rice, and they call the whole thing some tactic by Bush to gain support.

Some really do seem to hate the country, how else do you explain these idiotarians like Moore and pretty much anyone in hollywood?

[mtelliott]

Isn't the formation of unions a liberal idea. It was the greed of the business owners that forced the creation of unions. Out of this, we got not only more jobs, but better jobs, greater safety, the creation of the middle class, etc.

And the liberal agenda is not just about giving kids condoms. It's about giving kids who are going to have sex, condoms so that we can cut down on a number of things. At the same time, lets allow schools to talk to kids about sex.

There are extremes to every side. It's just that moderates on both sides are losing their voices. What I would call, the voice of reason.

[widebody911]

Liberals push for change, for what they percieve to be 'better'; conservatives resist change, because they think the status quo is 'better.' - I'm not qualifying 'better'

Liberals want to impose controls on corporations, ie labor & pay standards;
Conservatives want to impose controls on people; ie religion in schools, gay marriage

Simply put, liberals have been responsible for significant social changes, like them or not. Conservatives have been responsible for significant industrial/economic changes.

Piss and moan all you want about tree huggers and bleeding hearts, but if it weren't for liberals, unless you were lucky enough to have been born into nobility, your sorry ass would have been working as a farm hand or a factory worker since you were old enough to walk.

Piss and moan all you want about evil conservative industrialsists, but if it weren't for them, you'd be wearning handmade leather shoes and riding horseback.

[lendaddy]

I think I did a poor job at stating my point. I am not accusing Liberals of bad intentions, only bad solutions. I am also not saying all business practices are good. I think you are getting too specific.

My point was more general in that it is my belief that a liberal does not see ANY good intention in the Conservative agenda. This is the communication gap. Believe me that it's not all greed, we believe in our solutions as having benefit for all.

[Superman]

You've made many lucid and insightful posts here, and this is just the latest. I agree with everything you say.

Last night I had a conversation that included both liberals and conservatives, where the subject was income tax reform...particularly a flat tax. Seemingly impossible here, but productive discussions can occur and when I'm free of the kinds of idiots like I see here, and feeling that the conversation is intelligent and respectful, I say some things you guys don't hear me say. For example, as elegant as a flat tax is, and as much cheating as it could prevent, and as much revenue it could generate, there are severe problems with it. Our tax code is designed to encourage certain behavior and discourage others, and the reality is that our nation is a furnace for R&D, and our tax code has been a major major contributor. Another example is real estate. Absent the ability to deduct mortgage interest, far fewer people could own their homes.

Okay, the point is I respect the conservative and status quo systems more than many folks know. And I think liberals' goals are largely shared by conservatives. It's a matter of tactics.

I have seen greed in action with my own eyes, and actually see it each day. It is a far more powerful and effective force than most folks understand. Nevertheless, not every pro-business suggestion is bad.

By the same token, we liberals do not just want band-aids placed on stuff. Fact is, that's the absolute most we think we can possibly get. We seem to want bandaids, and we fight for those bandaids furiously, because the alternative is nothing. What we'd rather do, is cure the actual problem. But programs that actually cure the problem are spendier than bandaids, and therefore out of the question.

The real discussion ground is in the middle, but we've all spent way too little time there in our discussions. We've been too busy name-calling. But having said that, I will confess to a fairly strong disagreement with the notion that if we pull our support from folks, they'll get off their lazy asses and work. That's cute, and simple, and bull****. And inexpensive. And still bull****. The motivation to work is already there. Where it's not, it's most often been replaced by hopelessness, not laziness. Sure, there are some folks who just need a kick in the ass. But this notion that our welfare system should be a simple as a kick in the ass is fairly ignorant, in my humble opinion. Folks need to understand HOW to get ahead (we understand this and take it for granted, but some folks just don't know. They truly lack basic skills), and they need to believe that they can. Hope. It's a Christian virtue that some "Christians" lack the heart to grasp.

Lendaddy, I continue to agree with your observations. We are not so far apart, and better communication are needed. Among those who are both interested, and mature. That's include you and hopefully me, but not everyone.

[lendaddy]

Thom,

I think the textbook definitions don't really apply anymore. Conservative is more a name than a descriptor and the same for Liberal anymore. There are huge amounts of change we would like to see.

[widebody911]

Originally posted by lendaddy
We seriously believe this would result in a better standard of living for all Americans.........seriously we do.

This is the Big Lie of American capitalism, as evidenced by the fight tooth-and-nail against labor and the headlong rush into outsourcing.

In reality, the American worker is simply a temporary inconvenience, to be disposed of as soon as possible.

[Superman]

My post was too detailed as well. I agree with Len's premises. Conservatives do not have horns and carry pitchforks. Liberals want to improve peoples lives and some of us cry when the Star Spangled Banner is played. IT's a matter of tactics, and communication. There is a great deal more that we agree on, than disagree.

[bryanthompson]

From an essay I wrote a few weeks ago:

...work outsourced to the United States accounted for almost $60 billion of the total exports, in 2002 while outsourced work only totaled $20 billion. Jobs outsourced to the U.S. from other countries grew by 82 percent, while jobs outsourced to other countries only grew by 23 percent.

I suggest you look into the statistics and facts involved in outsourcing before you start reading the talking points. Outsourcing doesn't automatically mean lost jobs--Some of those jobs might not exist if they weren't outsourced (24/7 tech support and a lot of customer service, for example).

http://www.ofii.org/insourcing/insourcing_study.pdf

[lendaddy]

Originally posted by widebody911
This is the Big Lie of American capitalism, as evidenced by the fight tooth-and-nail against labor and the headlong rush into outsourcing.

In reality, the American worker is simply a temporary inconvenience, to be disposed of as soon as possible.

The actions of independant businesses do not always reflect those of my party.

[Superman]

Again, we're getting into details. Outside Len's topic. Fact is, as much as we'd like to imagine that corporations have morals, they do not. They are legally not allowed to apply them, even if they had them. Industry will do whatever improves the bottom line, and that's the "bottom line." They are truly sociopathic. Anyone believing they have scruples is naive. Regulation is absolutely necessary.

But that does not mean that all things commercial are also evil. Promoting a healthy industrial environment is essential to our hhealth and happiness and security.

Len's point is that we demonize the folks on the other side, and that's neither an accurate nor a productive viewpoint.

[bryanthompson]

This is on Len's point that we demonize each other...

I have an idea for a contest... Find the number of times and sentences where a republican has pubiicly commended a democrat, then try to find the number of times a democrat has done that for a republican. We're all smart people, capable of research, surely it'd be a fair contest.

We'll have to lay down some rules, like the comment can't be setting up a backhanded attack (like when Kerry commended the Cheney's for having a gay daughter).

Yea or Nay?

[lendaddy]

Pretty much, yep. I have never said companies have morals, they don't. They aren't designed that way. They are money making machines, nothing else. We can make it easy for them or hard to make money. We can make it easy or hard for them to cheat the people. They are very predictable

I am saying we can refine the system to have it both ways.

[widebody911]

Originally posted by bryanthompson
http://www.ofii.org/insourcing/insourcing_study.pdf

That 'study' is right up there with the ones claiming cigarette smoking is harmless.

One refutation of the 'insourcing' smokescreen here: http://home.alltel.net/bsundquist1/ins.html

[red ufo]

There's no difference between either party. After (D) takes over from (R) or vice versa. They adopt the exact same policies on Israel & terrorism & domestic polices on health care and school (those are campaign issue, they really don't do anything on this including social security).

You see they only have 2-3 pet projects they work on over 4 years but 90% of them are the same. They are just Bilderberger puppets for oil and pharmsydicat companies anyway. The game is to let you think there are major differences and blame the other team for your problems. The wealthy have the poor fighting over policies they have no control over and carrot you with a rigged, monopolistic voting system.

Someday when more people wake up and realize our food and drug companies are poisioning us and oil/war machines send us to die over pre-designed 911s we'll become a smarter species, until then we are the red headed step children of the Milky Way.

[lendaddy]

Originally posted by red ufo
There's no difference between either party. After (D) takes over from (R) or vice versa. They adopt the exact same policies on Israel & terrorism & domestic polices on health care and school (those are campaign issue, they really don't do anything on this including social security).

You see they only have 2-3 pet projects they work on over 4 years but 90% of them are the same. They are just Bilderberger puppets for oil and pharmsydicat companies anyway. The game is to let you think there are major differences and blame the other team for your problems. The wealthy have the poor fighting over policies they have no control over and carrot you with a rigged, monopolistic voting system.

Someday when more people wake up and realize our food and drug companies are poisioning us and oil/war machines send us to die over pre-designed 911s we'll become a smarter species, until then we are the red headed step children of the Milky Way.

The biggest problem with these conspiracy theories is that you give way to much credit to the people you claim are pulling it off. In order for all this to work, you have to have a lot of people involved without any of them ever growing a conscience. I simple do not see it as possible that over several decades not one "food &drug company" exec has had a deathbed awakening and spilled the beans. It's a neat fantasy, but utterly impossible to pull off in the real word.

[cegerer]

UFO's correct - the aliens are among us. Just look around .....

[CamB]

I reckon it is a NIMBY thing (for those not familiar, stands for "Not in my back yard").

NIMBY is actually usually applied to those who would campaign for some item (eg, power plant), but squeal if it was going to go near their house. They have empathy for the poor, but not if they want to live next door to them... and usually this is the type of accusation which would be made against higher socio-economic liberals.

But I reckon it applies to conservatives in their world view. For instance, cutting welfare and making businesses strong to benefit the economy has elements of NIMBY to it. Why? Because While it may work in the medium or long term, there is some severe short term pain. By and large conservatives wouldn't feel that pain - hence NIMBY.

I guess what I'm saying is that many conservatives are often motivated by policies which benefit them without any pain to them, whereas many liberals are motivated by a sense of justice.

Granted this sense of "justice" gets way out of control sometimes.

[lendaddy]

Cam,

I would somewhat disagree. I personally have spoken with a Congressman regarding SSI. I believe it is an inept program that it needs to be abolished and replaced by private retirement accounts. I volunteered my generation to take the hit. We would pay till year XXX to cover the gray hairs but would never get a dime in return. Thats it, when my generation hits 62.5 no more SSI. However we would also be allowed tax friendly personal retirement accounts that they(the gray hairs) were not, as a carrot if you will. As my generation phases out so would the extra tax savings since my generation took the biggest hit. I see no NIMBY in that and imagine those in their twenties wouldn't fight too hard since we're not planing on anything anyway

This is the kind of thing my party believes in. I think something like this just makes America better, period.