Newsvine
  • Welcome
  • Help
  • Report Bug
  • Conversation Tracker
  • Your Column
  • Replies
  • Friends
Type Comments Since You Last CheckedArticle Source Last Checked Stop Tracking All Clear Tracking All
Advertise | AdChoices
Log In | Register
Close the Login Panel
Existing users log in below. New users please register for a free account.

New Users:

Existing Users:

E-Mail:
Password:
Forgot Password?
Please enter the e-mail address or domain name you registered with:
E-Mail/Domain:
Back to Login
Log Out
  • Top News
  • Local News
  • World
  • U.S.
  • Sports
  • Politics
  • Tech
  • Entertainment
  • Science
  • Business
  • Health
  • Odd News
  • More
    • Arts
    • Education
    • Environment
    • Fashion
    • History
    • Home & Garden
    • Not News
    • Religion
    • Travel
Visit owlsview's column >>

OWLSVIEW

Don Quixote
Articles Posted: 55  Links Seeded: 0
Member Since: 8/2010  Last Seen: 5/17/2012

What is Newsvine?

Updated continuously by citizens like you, Newsvine is an instant reflection of what the world is talking about at any given moment.

Get a Free Account
Help
Fun Stuff
  • Your Clippings
  • Leaderboard
  • E-Mail Alerts
  • Top of the Vine
  • Newsvine Live
  • Newsvine Archives
  • The Greenhouse
  • Recommended Articles
  • Wall of Vineness
Put a Seed Newsvine link on your own site

Wednesday Weirdness --- President Obama Has Higher Approval Rating Than All of Congress - Big Deal

Wed Sep 14, 2011 11:43 AM EDT
politics, opinion, sarcasm
By owlsview
Advertise | AdChoices

     On a previous column I had a gentlemen put forth the possibility that the fact that Obama's approval rating is higher than "Congressional Republicans" as being a possible reason for Speaker Boehner to make remarks to the effect that most Americans would prefer football over a Republican response on Thursday night.

In my opinion your comparison of President Obama's popularity as versus the Republican"s as a reason for Boehner to speak truthfully indicates not only an underestimation of his political savvy and of his knowledge of how the American people think but also the value of having given the President "his" night.

The subtle actions or non-actions in politics have the ability to affect peoples perceptions and feelings gently. Gentleness is often more effective than any amount of banner waving, speech making or debating combined.

As a younger man, long before computers I was very active in political campaigning. Nobody of any importance mind you, I was merely a foot soldier who started out as an office boy, gopher or douphus (I'm still not sure which) to a speech writer and finally as an agitator. To put it in the context of the Vine, a "troll". Sometimes as a baiter others as a disruptor.We usually ran in packs, often times riding our bicycles to Democratic rallys with candidates giving speeches and call people names, hurl insults, sometimes maybe other things and then pedal off quickly when the cops got to close.

We weren't very nice. The only claim to fame to be had was that we beat the Democrats to the punch when it came to this style of dirty campaigning. Since then I do believe that the Democratic Party has taken the Republican breakthrough, improved upon it and molded it into a very effective campaign style.

I have not been a member for a goodly amount of time now. How far these politicians and political parties are willing to go in their battle for power is to say the least,very disturbing.It goes deeper than that.  Intellectually speaking we are faced with the fact that both party machines have a plethora of highly intelligent people employed for the sole purpose of tactical planning and implementation of those tactics.

They also recruit some of the best and brightest of our young people, especially those freshly out of or still in college. People who are feeling their oats, experiencing freedom from their parents. People filled with passion looking for a sense of purpose. People who can be led to believe so strongly in a cause that they convince themselves that nothing is more important than winning regardless of the cost.

Many of the politicians themselves are not much more than talking chowder heads with voter appeal. We have a tendency to be myopic in our focus on the politicians and often overlook the machinations of their backers in any area other than campaign donations. We pay more attention to where the money is coming from and going to, than we do to what is being done with it.

Faced with two of the best organized political parties we have a major task ahead of us to change the behavior of our government and get our country back on solid ground. Step back my friends, focus on the bigger picture. Connect the dots before making a decision.

I believe that the single biggest reason we have so many conflicting laws and conflicting jurisdictions between government agencies is due to the fact that winning an argument on an issue is more important than the complete effect of what implementation of the issue has on government and our country.

If the common voter regardless of left or right ideology were to step back and take a good hard look many would realize and "comprehend" that the divisions between the voters is no where near as wide as we have been led to believe. We can refuse to take the baiting that leads to dissension on hot button issues.

We need to have a myopic issue of our own. A concentrated focus on being farsighted and open-minded. By doing so we can defeat the machines by turning their lust for winning into their own undoing. Look each other in the eye. Do you really hate each other socially as much as you do politically?

 

IN THE NEWS

Chances of another recession increasing: Reuters poll

The way I see it, it isn't another recession, it is a deepening of our current depression.

 

 

Sperm cells created from female embryo

All you men out there better pay attention. Won't be long before the ladies won't need us.

 

 

Debt Panel Focus Pushes Expiring Tax Breaks to Backseat

There you have it. The groundwork for another hot button issue to close out the year with. Once again small business will be held hostage though it will be made to look like banks are the real focus of stopping these tax benefits. Think about my article when you read the second paragraph.

 

What's Your Preference?

So what is it going to be? Are you ready to take on the government? Do you prefer to fight with each other and let the Parties keep on running things?

 

  • Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.

Back To Top | Front Page

Published to:

  • owlsview's Column, All of Newsvine
  • Groups: Anti Status Quo, Collector's Corner, Elderly Abuse Watch, Moderate Americans, No Main Stream Media Allowed, True Americans
  • Regions: none
  • Public Discussion (63)
owlsview

COH --- Crazy Old Hooter

  • 8 votes
Reply#1 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 11:45 AM EDT
believe anything

WOW..I mean Owl:)...you may be a crazy old hooter..but dang you have a great way with words.:)..I wish I was half as eloquent...

excellent points made, and humor maintained. Fantastic.

  • 10 votes
Reply#2 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 12:25 PM EDT
owlsview

Thank you.

  • 6 votes
#2.1 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 1:12 PM EDT
nobody-3221875

excellent points made, and humor maintained.

I especially like the "talking chowder heads" quip.

Well done owlsview.

  • 6 votes
#2.2 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 1:53 PM EDT
Reply
tesla013

Add two more million to the poverty roles. what's that like 4 more points?

Has any politician cared to ask us and not a poll what we think? I get a questionaire a day in the mail. How hard could it be? Facebooks, twitters, web sites. Just thinking outloud.

I do question the "most highly intelligent" part. If they are so damn smart then how come I can figure out what they are up to? If they is so on the ball why is the worst place in the world to keep a secret Washingtonn DC? And frankly, has public speaking become such a bother to our "leaders" that they are no longer capable of it unless electronically tutored? I mean I'm just sayin, if you can't string 7-10 words together and ya leave ever one scratching their heads, I am not sure I trust your policy stance.

  • 11 votes
Reply#3 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 12:39 PM EDT
owlsview

It is the myopic focus of their intelligence. When you have tunnel vision you expose yourself as a target. Would you willingly drive down a crowded high speed highway in a car without mirrors? That is exactly what they are doing. Gives the thinkers of the world a real advantage.

  • 11 votes
#3.1 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 12:55 PM EDT
mstanley2265

:) tesla you'd probably more likely to get a 'form' letter in the mail from them....that's all I've ever gotten.

Well written owl well written and a topic that needs to be dispersed to everyone. All this vitriolic is taking on a life of it's own and is not representative of most people in real time.

  • 9 votes
#3.2 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 12:58 PM EDT
owlsview

is not representative of most people in real time.

As perfect of a description that can be written about our current personnel in government.

Thank you mstanley.

  • 10 votes
#3.3 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 1:09 PM EDT
Reply
greg-709692

Based on the "Special Elections" that have occured since Nov. 2010, IMHO, I feel people are starting to look for statesman to put in office instead of a "Politician".

Take New york. Please !!

Seriously, A dem. wins in a republican heavy district and now a republican wins in a heavily dem. district. Wierd ain't it.

That's my opinion and I'm stickin' to it!

  • 10 votes
Reply#4 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 12:43 PM EDT
owlsview

Yes, people are definitely starting to vote for the person, not the party. The weird thing is that they haven't done so before now.

  • 7 votes
#4.1 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 12:56 PM EDT
greg-709692

Always takes a catastrophe to wake people up !!!

Complacency leads to the problems we have now, and name recognition voting too!

Of course, then you have the "Vote for the lessor of two evils" problem.

  • 5 votes
#4.2 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 1:26 PM EDT
my-pockets-r-mt

Yes, people are definitely starting to vote for the person, not the party. The weird thing is that they haven't done so before now.

I think people have voted the person not the party before now, but now it is in greater numbers where it actually shows in the final count.

  • 4 votes
#4.3 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 2:45 PM EDT
owlsview

Coincides with the increase in the number of independent voters.

I am optimistical about our future. The major lesson we have learned from the hardship we are now enduring is that we must never allow ourselves to become complacent with our government again.

  • 6 votes
#4.4 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 2:49 PM EDT
my-pockets-r-mt

we must never allow ourselves to become complacent with our government again

Completely agree and should be said often.

  • 5 votes
#4.5 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 2:54 PM EDT
owlsview

What we made need is a citizens "Bill of Responsibility" to go along with our "Bill of Rights"

The first being the first responsibility being :

"Not become complacent or ignorant of the actions of government."

Any other suggestions?

  • 5 votes
#4.6 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 3:15 PM EDT
my-pockets-r-mt

Keep an open mind and do not make judgement on people who change their mind.

  • 5 votes
#4.7 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 3:28 PM EDT
owlsview

That is a good one we may have to work on the wording a bit. We must be careful to stay away from appearing to be to religious by using something like "judge not yet ye be judged".

  • 3 votes
#4.8 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 5:23 PM EDT
my-pockets-r-mt

Keep an open mind and do not make judgement whoop up on people who change their mind.

Better?

  • 2 votes
#4.9 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 5:35 PM EDT
owlsview

Better LMAO.

  • 5 votes
#4.10 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 6:09 PM EDT
hole_in_the_wall

Like one that says you are responsible for your own life and nobody (including the government) owes you anything or will give it to you for free.

  • 5 votes
#4.11 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 6:38 PM EDT
agagnu

How about you fix the hole in your own road and never cross the driveway onto public roads?
the bill that I want to see is to make lying illegal and stop private political funding.

  • 4 votes
#4.12 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 7:46 PM EDT
owlsview

Hole, the one in the wall, not in your road, I do believe that I may just move that one to the top with just a little word simplification. Tell me what you think:

"Support Your Own Pursuit Of Happiness"

Agagnu I most assuredly hear you. Oh yes, I hear you. Hang on to those thoughts, one of these days we will get around to making a list of new laws. Think we could get away with making lying a "capital" offense? If we did we couldn't make a law against suicide of the species. The final solution. Shudder, it's Thursday and I am still being weird.

  • 3 votes
#4.13 - Thu Sep 15, 2011 11:19 AM EDT
Reply
Spikegary

Nicely stated, Owl. The sperm thing really is bothersome to me. We need to get that stopped ASAP.

It is a carpet bombing methodology that has been taken up in these things. no matter what your opponent says, it must be, has to be worng. Agreement is weakness and will not be tolerated. I think there is something inherently honorable in a person that can say, honstly, in the midst of an argument, say, you know what? You have apoint-I agree with waht you just said, but we are so polarized, you just don't see it anymore form anyone.

  • 9 votes
Reply#5 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 12:48 PM EDT
owlsview

We can't even agree on the definition of compromise these days.

  • 8 votes
#5.1 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 12:57 PM EDT
owlsview

You are right about stopping that sperm thing. Can't have the earth being renamed Amazona and us guys becoming nothing more than eunuch slaves.

  • 6 votes
#5.2 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 1:28 PM EDT
Spikegary

My thoughts exactly. No more service with a smile......

  • 6 votes
#5.3 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 1:45 PM EDT
agagnu

No more accidental impregnation and unplanned child perhaps.

  • 2 votes
#5.4 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 7:48 PM EDT
Spikegary

We were doing humor here. agagnu.

  • 3 votes
#5.5 - Thu Sep 15, 2011 7:31 AM EDT
agagnu

But as you said we are so polarized and here we have a new hermaphrodite.

  • 1 vote
#5.6 - Thu Sep 15, 2011 10:50 AM EDT
Spikegary

Fair enough, point taken.

  • 2 votes
#5.7 - Thu Sep 15, 2011 2:44 PM EDT
owlsview

Supercool.

  • 1 vote
#5.8 - Thu Sep 15, 2011 3:26 PM EDT
Reply
merleliz

Here is the problem as I see it, Owls.

We have to find a way of making the Congress of baboons craft and vote for legislation that will reduce their ability to: accept bribes for votes, spend our money recklessly and without reason, exempt themselves from legislation that we will be bound by, insinuate the government into every aspect of our personal lives, abide strictly by the Constitution...in other words...to vote against their own self interest.

I don't see any of them doing that...regardless of party affiliation.

As far as Obama's approval rating...pfffttt. Which do you like best, spiders or snakes?

  • 7 votes
Reply#6 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 12:51 PM EDT
owlsview

First step is stop voting for baboons. Finding people to vote for is difficult, but enough of the baboons already.

Which do you like best, spiders or snakes?

Now what kind of question is that to ask an owl?

  • 7 votes
#6.1 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 1:00 PM EDT
tyler

Sonny Was A Loner banned, rereg of racism gimmick troll AmosonAndy.

...

Now what kind of question is that to ask an owl?

Snakes, right?

  • 6 votes
#6.2 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 2:26 PM EDT
owlsview

Thank-you Tyler.

Other than re-regs I have a definite affinity for snakes.

  • 4 votes
#6.3 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 2:51 PM EDT
CL1

We have to find a way of making the Congress of baboons craft and vote for legislation that will reduce their ability to: accept bribes for votes, spend our money recklessly and without reason, exempt themselves from legislation that we will be bound by, insinuate the government into every aspect of our personal lives, abide strictly by the Constitution...in other words...to vote against their own self interest.

Well said Merleliz; if only that were possible given 'they' control the system, as we vote for the candidate of 'their' choice. Even if someone of the "people's" choice were to somehow make it 'in,' how can we be sure they wouldn't be bribed or otherwise forced into following the precedents? Wishful thinking is nice, and so is being hopeful that this type of 'change' could happen, but without a complete overhaul of our current system, I think we are stuck with 'manipulation'.

  • 4 votes
#6.4 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 3:44 PM EDT
owlsview

CL1 if I may attempt to answer your question.

We can't be sure. We will never be sure of the capability of an individual to resist corruption on a daily basis. Lives change, needs change, wants change and quite often morals change.It doesn't require a complete overhaul of our current system. A statement like that is much more a mere catch phrase than accurate.

The basic design of our system is just fine. It is a system still in development in my opinion. As the occasion arises it becomes necessary to make adjustments. As breakdowns and weaknesses are discovered they must be fixed and strengthened.

To strengthen the system's ability to ward off corruption, term limits are now a necessity. They will not solve all of the corruption problems by no means. They will however be able to control how long the rotten oranges are allowed to fester and infect others.

Manipulation is a two way street. The ability to minimize a person stay in public service is a manipulative tool that we should be using.

  • 4 votes
#6.5 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 5:45 PM EDT
CL1

Thank you, owlsview! I, too, agree with term limits. There have been discussions in the past examining the pros and cons, and I can see how if someone is working on something that requires time to fully develop and implement their ideas, that could be negated by the 'limits'. However, the benefits to cramping the style of a Lobbyist supersede the other, in my mind. lol.

I find the Parliamentary Procedure and other structural elements allowing a large group (yet small in the big scheme of things) of 400 plus persons to have so much control and special interest, due to personal interests, to not be in the best interests of the greater whole, imo. I don't know what a 'better' system would be, I just don't think what we have is good. We are controlled by a minority; it seems somewhat 'Feudal'. I've thought getting government closer to the people being governed made more sense... essentially do away with a typical Federal government, yet still have an entity to cover the fundamental duties, e.g. FEMA, Trade, Foreign Affairs, et al (an entity that would have no power - just a facilitator). ..Just my thoughts.

  • 3 votes
#6.6 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 6:11 PM EDT
owlsview

CL1, please understand that a person's party affiliation and quite often when dealing with intelligent people even rather they are a lefty or a righty does not stay in my conscious mind.

I do believe that you are a Libertarian, in fact, when I see CL1 the words Centrist Liberal are what I read.

I find the ideals of the Libertarian stance on big government's role to be very appealing though at the same time not entirely feasible.

Four hundred does sound like a low number to have so much influence. Expansion of the numbers would become counter-productive and serve only to increase the preponderance of government.

To reduce the role of government to the levels that you describe would essentially turn government into a military style law enforcement agency. I don't like the sound of that.They would not be powerless, rather their power would become centralized. Armed and dangerous.

FEMA -- First responders are primarily firemen and policemen.

Trade -- Goes way beyond negotiations and treaties. Customs agents needed to inspect for dangerous and illegal materials, collect import duties. Coast Guard and or Navy to protect ports and prevent smuggling.

Foreign Affairs -- Control of the military and intelligence agencies. No sense in listing everything else.

Bringing government closer to the control of the people is in my opinion is critical. Term limits would guarantee a scenario where more seats would come open more often creating the need for more people to step up and participate more often at all levels.

The necessity to remove power from Washington is not in all ways advisable.

"Of the People, By the People, For the People"

The power that Washington has is the power of the people, it is the power acquired by the efforts put forth by the people, the benefits of this power is to be used for the people.

Returning control to the people is what I believe to be the most important task we face. Does anybody disagree?

  • 3 votes
#6.7 - Thu Sep 15, 2011 12:34 PM EDT
owlsview

I have decided that the topical tangent that this discussion that CL1 and I are having is worthy of being a topic of an article itself. I hope to have it published within the hour. I will return and provide a link here and hope that you will participate.

  • 1 vote
#6.8 - Thu Sep 15, 2011 1:28 PM EDT
owlsview

Here is the link I promised. I'll be back over there shortly.

  • 1 vote
#6.9 - Thu Sep 15, 2011 2:32 PM EDT
CL1

To reduce the role of government to the levels that you describe would essentially turn government into a military style law enforcement agency. I don't like the sound of that.They would not be powerless, rather their power would become centralized. Armed and dangerous.

Ack!! I sure wouldn't want that!

I do believe that you are a Libertarian, in fact, when I see CL1 the words Centrist Liberal are what I read.

I've always wondered what I was (although, the "Liberal" part doesn't sit too well with me - lol)!! ..Any help I can get in figuring out who I am, is always appreciated! :) ..just joking with you.

Bringing government closer to the control of the people is in my opinion is critical. Term limits would guarantee a scenario where more seats would come open more often creating the need for more people to step up and participate more often at all levels.

That makes sense to me, so I do agree with that goal.

Returning control to the people is what I believe to be the most important task we face.

Yes.

Thank you for the discussion, owlsview. I just wanted to mention that it was not my intention to sway the direction of the conversation (not that I think you thought so - I'm just making sure that you know my intentions). I just wanted to reiterate and support Merleliz's comment, and wanted to support your opinion on "term limits". ..Nothing more. :)

    #6.10 - Thu Sep 15, 2011 4:14 PM EDT
    Reply
    Sonny Was A LonerDeleted
    Elaine-1503791

    Very nice article Owl and a good reminder that we should all keep a keen "owlsview" on politicians!

    • 8 votes
    Reply#8 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 1:09 PM EDT
    Donna-3163307

    Owl--Enjoyed your article. I have a number of Republican friends and I like them. We never discuss politics as we know we would not remain friends if we did. We don't discuss religion either. Our only real differences are at the ballot box. I prefer to keep it that way.

    • 3 votes
    Reply#9 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 2:12 PM EDT
    HonestIndy

    Just pointing out that President Bush's poll numbers were always better then congress too.

    • 3 votes
    Reply#10 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 2:51 PM EDT
    owlsview

    That's to be expected, the superciliousness of Congress and Presidents has been going on for several administrations. As people have gotten more aware, what used to be positive numbers have become the negative numbers they always should have been.

    • 5 votes
    #10.1 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 2:57 PM EDT
    Reply
    Libertarian y2k

    Congress is a faceless entity too. Might as well have an opinion poll on "government" period; I doubt the results would change. Obama won't be running against congress so the difference in "popularity" is meaningless.

    I never thought after Reagan I would consider the democratic party as more social authoritarian but today I can't hardly tell the difference. The new liberal is just as much a hawk; only the prey changes. And they have no problem standing behind the Patriot Act either. The TSA is getting even more oppressive as witnessed after their recent detention, hand cuffing and strip searching of a US female citizen. Mandating health care. And now they are proposing making e-cigs illegal on aircraft. For no reason except "it doesn't look good" for lack of any other reason. I won't be surprised to see the administration push again to make them illegal; the FDA tried once already. So anybody expecting liberals to legalize pot should just as well give it up because they are more likely to ban nicotine then legalize Mary Jane. And don't get me started on the "light bulb" legislation :)

    Once I could identify with liberals on many social issues but no longer. Now they are no longer "half correct". The new progressives have turned me against the democratic party for the most part. At least there are fiscal conservatives, smaller government proponents, and constitutionalists in the new GOP. And that is why people need to think about voting for the person not the party. Because while there are good GOP and Dems out there their views can be very different compared to yours. Know the canidates and at least vote against the worse one if you can't find one you agree with. The worse canidate IMO would be the one that always puts party first; always votes the "party" vote. And always put their party and government period ahead of citizens.

    • 4 votes
    Reply#11 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 6:47 PM EDT
    owlsview

    You may be surprised Libertariany2k, i can quite easily see the liberals get behind the legalization of pot while banning e-cigs and nicotine in general.

    The medical benefits are real. That is a dead issue except to the most ignorant. Their are just as many Democrats that benefit from it as Republicans. Illness and pain don't play politics.

    More relevant but not a topic of conversation. Social usage amongst liberals is just as great as it is amongst any other portion of the populace.

    • 3 votes
    #11.1 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 6:58 PM EDT
    Libertarian y2k

    You may be surprised Libertariany2k, i can quite easily see the liberals get behind the legalization of pot while banning e-cigs and nicotine in general.

    And how moronic would that approach be? What do they base their ideology on; simply majority rules? At least I know the religious right and where they come from. They are consistant with their desires to legislate morality. The left though confuses me to no end. You can never tell what freedom they will go after and for what reason. Sorry from straying from the topic. Just had to voice my lack of understanding of where they are coming from half the time :) If I don't know what they stand for how can I vote for them?

    • 4 votes
    #11.2 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 7:29 PM EDT
    owlsview

    I appear to be just as far off topic as you at the moment.

    I have no scientific studies or theories to back me up and I only have a layman's basic understanding of psychology. I see the left as being both obsessive and compulsive on their issues and in their voting habits.

    Obsessive in their tendency to form an opinion and never change it, they close their minds to the possibility that they may have made a wrong choice.

    Compulsive in that they are willing to jump onto an issue that is popular so that can be with it. In with in crowd so to speak. Easily led into becoming part of something they really don't know much about. The kind of people that fall prey to the impulse products put near checkout stands in every store. People who are guided by image more than substance.

    I know that saying these things publicly is going to antagonize a lot of people on the Vine, but that's the risk you run being honest some times.

    • 3 votes
    #11.3 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 7:53 PM EDT
    CL1

    People who are guided by image more than substance.

    Interesting, owlsview. I hadn't connected that before, but I see what you mean, in a general sense.

    • 3 votes
    #11.4 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 8:02 PM EDT
    believe anything

    as far as I am concerned you can antagonize away. Truth is Truth and Common Sense is Common Sense and Courtesy is Courtesy...something I would like to believe are still very common traits in this country I love so much.

    Some will understand and appreciate, others will want to continue to just "pound sand"...

    I use to think a little Revolution is not a bad thing occasionally..but I now realize how naive I was..even a little revolution can cost too much. I am about compromise and negotiation.

    sorry, don't know where that came from...must be tired. Time to Log Off and go play some Yanni.

    • 4 votes
    #11.5 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 8:09 PM EDT
    Libertarian y2k

    I used to know what liberals stood for. Agree or disagree, I knew where they stood and why they stood there. I respected their opinions. And I am sure there are some true liberals out there still; but no longer do they have the helm of the Democratic Party. No set ideology; no steady compass. They have lost their way IMO. What do they stand for? Not issue by issue; they do make their stance clear on individual issues. But they often are conflicting or hypocritical anymore it seems to me. To me they seem to be "soulless" for lack of another term.

    As that country singer penned, "You got to stand for something or you will fall for anything". This is most appearent on such attributes as leadership. Reagan, like him or not; at least I knew what he stood for and most importantly, HE knew what he stood for. Polls be damned; he governed how he felt. I had some problems with him but not in the leadership department. He had a vision and wouldn't be moved without resistance.

    • 4 votes
    #11.6 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 8:21 PM EDT
    owlsview

    Most of what is being said here is counterbalanced by conservatives, who have a few hangups of their own.

    • 5 votes
    #11.7 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 8:45 PM EDT
    Libertarian y2k

    They sure do. When the outsiders, independants, and moderates have to make a choice though they have to often choose the lesser of two evils. Sometimes its better the "devil" you know then the unpredictable shifting "devil" you can't know; or even doesn't know themself.

    • 4 votes
    #11.8 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 8:55 PM EDT
    owlsview

    Are you feeling impish today my friend, your comment had a ring of devilish evil to it LOL.Great having you here today.

    Being left with only a choice of the lesser two evils is the result of the conservative nature. By it's own definition conservative indicates a fear of making a decision without long and arduous consideration. You've seen these kind of people. " I'll take this one. No make it that one instead. Wait a minute. What do you think? Would this one be better? Or do you think this one?" Time doesn't stand still for anybody, not even politicians. By the time they make up their minds it turns out to be to little to late.

    I would never be comfortable living with one I know to be a devil. Better to cast out and move on to the next devil and the next devil. Waiting for that great roulette wheel to land on an angel.

    • 3 votes
    #11.9 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 9:41 PM EDT
    merleliz

    You've seen these kind of people. " I'll take this one. No make it that one instead. Wait a minute. What do you think? Would this one be better? Or do you think this one?"

    Those are both and neither Liberals or Conservatives.

    It sounds very much like my 85 year old MIL trying to make up her mind what she wants to eat in a restaurant for lunch.

    • 2 votes
    #11.10 - Thu Sep 15, 2011 11:34 AM EDT
    owlsview

    Really hard to remember sometimes that the liberals and conservatives are of the same species.

    • 1 vote
    #11.11 - Thu Sep 15, 2011 3:31 PM EDT
    Reply
    agagnu

    I see the Constitution more of a socialist manifesto of Welfare for the People by the People, viz. The people's health safety and security. All the laws revolve and embrace these big three for all; not just the rich, the middle class or the poor. So it seems that distribution and redistribution is necessary, the government playing Robin Hood if you like.

    • 1 vote
    Reply#12 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 7:58 PM EDT
    Libertarian y2k

    I see a whole different Constitution. One designed to limit the authority of the government over the individual. Constructed to provide for the minimum governmental powers to be a cohesive nation while still providing individual liberty. It does not grant power to government so much as limit the power of government; because governments will always naturally grow powerful and oppressive if uncontrolled.

    And some of these differences in opinions were argued back in the day while they were creating the foundations of government and still guide many of our ideologies. If you put a wig on and handed a quill pen to a true conservative, a classical liberal, and their economic counter parts today you would still have many of the same differences they argued about 200+ years ago. That is what made this country great. People arguing ideologies but all doing so for what they felt was best for the country. Today the arguments are less "noble" in purpose to put it kindly.

    • 5 votes
    #12.1 - Wed Sep 14, 2011 8:33 PM EDT
    Spikegary

    I fully agree with that comment, Ly2K. Far less noble.

    • 3 votes
    #12.2 - Thu Sep 15, 2011 7:36 AM EDT
    owlsview

    This conversation would fit in nicely over here.

    • 1 vote
    #12.3 - Thu Sep 15, 2011 2:33 PM EDT
    Reply
    Leave a Comment:
    You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
    You're in XHTML Mode. If you prefer, you can use Easy Mode instead.
    (XHTML tags allowed - a,b,blockquote,br,code,dd,dl,dt,del,em,h2,h3,h4,i,ins,li,ol,p,pre,q,strong,ul)
    Newsvine Privacy Statement
    As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
    FUN STUFF:
    • Leaderboard |
    • E-Mail Alerts |
    • Top of the Vine |
    • Newsvine Live |
    • Newsvine Archives |
    • The Greenhouse |
    COMPANY STUFF:
    • Code of Honor |
    • Company Info |
    • Contact Us |
    • Jobs |
    • User Agreement |
    • Privacy Policy |
    • About our ads
    LEGAL STUFF:
    • © 2005-2012 Newsvine, Inc. |
    • Newsvine® is a registered trademark of Newsvine, Inc. |
    • Newsvine is a property of msnbc.com