Recent Forum Topics › Forums › The Public House › Spoiled Americans want to flee what they created
- This topic has 50 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 1 month ago by — X —.
-
AuthorPosts
-
November 12, 2016 at 8:16 am #57846wvParticipant
=============================
Spoiled Americans now want to flee what they created | Malak Chabkoun
November 12, 2016 – 11:25 am |
link:http://www.sodiumhaze.org/2016/11/12/spoiled-americans-now-want-to-flee-what-they-created-malak-chabkoun/Many Americans woke up on November 9 (or didn’t sleep to begin with) panicking about the future of the United States.
Citizens of other countries, particularly in the Arab world, were probably observing this mass panic with a smirk, thinking, “and now it’s their turn”. Certainly, not out of spite, but in the hope that Americans would finally understand where they were coming from.
The reality is, citizens of the US – minorities or otherwise – do have reasons to feel fear and disgust under a Trump presidency, not only from his proposed policies of alienation and repression, but also from those supporters of his, whose white power aspirations have now been made official.
However, it is also true that citizens of the US, particularly Arabs and Muslims, must not allow this election result to force them to act as frightened children.
Murmurs of migrating to Canada if Trump won apparently translated into reality, with the Canadian immigration website reportedly crashing as it became clear the electoral college votes were in his favour.
These reactions make one pause and wonder how long these same people would last under the Arab and African dictatorships and occupiers the US has propped up and maintained positive ties with over the years.
We now have a version of a “dictator-elect” in the US, and rather than promising to fight the changes he has threatened to implement, the initial reaction of many Americans has been to plot ways to flee.
Honestly, the arrogance of Americans who are threatening to flee is breathtaking. They assume that the world will now welcome them with open arms because in a few months, they will be ruled by a less-than-desirable leader. One which, the world will be quick to mention, was actually chosen by Americans and not imposed on them by occupation or intervention.
Political immaturity.
As young elementary school pupils in the US, we are programmed during our “social studies” classes to hold our civic duties, such as voting and obeying laws, near and dear.
In middle and high school and even college, we run for “political office”, setting up small governments within our schools that give us an illusion of holding power.
Schools hold mock voting days and colleges invite political officials to come and encourage American students – young and old – to be active participants in the political process.
Even naturalised citizens of the US go through a political socialisation process; one that details their rights and responsibilities as a citizen of the US and reminds them that citizenship is a promise to commit to the US and its form of government.
Yet, all of this political socialisation has apparently left us unprepared to deal with the sometimes unexpected and undesirable outcomes of the US’ version of democracy.
In fact, our reactions to the results of the 2016 election have shown us exactly how our political socialisation has failed us and made us complacent and passive rather than proactive members of our political system. But this is only one small symptom of our political immaturity and decay in the US.
Ignorant of suffering.
Contrary to what we may believe, we Americans aren’t the centre of the universe. Our country’s policymakers are often the cause of suffering overseas – the very suffering we are fearful of at the hands of Trump – but, as citizens, we tend to take one of two paths.
We either shy away from taking responsibility, blaming it on elected officials and claiming we aren’t responsible for their missteps in the Middle East and North Africa region, or we don’t even have a clue about the kind of suffering our policies contribute to.
Worse than that, we are quick to judge what Arabs and Africans should and should not do while living under dictatorships as we are sitting comfortably in the democracy we love to shove down other countries’ throats.
Americans have a hard time fathoming why Syrians would “abandon their country” and run from barrel bombs or why Egyptians would run from the threat of forced disappearances. We accuse refugees of “putting the lives of their children at risk” by getting into overflowing boats to escape extremism of all kinds – Islamic or otherwise -judging them harshly for these choices.
Yet, one little brush with a leader who might put us in a position even remotely close to citizens living under Bashar al-Assad, or Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, or the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, and we want the entire world to not only understand our urge to flee but also to coddle us and be concerned about our feelings.
Not unexpected.
A US under Trump is not going to be pleasant, on that we can agree. However, it is not the first time minorities were targeted and unwanted in the US.
African-Americans at some point in history were denied citizenship and their movements restricted. Japanese-Americans were actually placed in internment camps on US soil.
Even ideology has been a target of US government – for example, the First Red Scare. Yet, despite this, members of these groups did not flee the US in droves.
We have had months to digest that Trump had a chance at this race. We knew minorities would be facing some type of backlash. For some reason, however, we continued to arrogantly think that a Trump presidency couldn’t happen to us here in the US.
But it did, and perhaps that is what will finally force us to address and understand what it is about our political system that finally brought our aggression abroad to haunt us right here at home.
source
November 12, 2016 at 8:37 am #57849Billy_TParticipantGood article, WV.
But I’m seeing an excess of self-flagellation happening on the left the last coupla days, and I don’t think all of it is productive. Some, definitely. But it’s selective, etc.
And all of these “You brought it on yourself!!” pieces and $5.00 may get us a cup of coffee at Starbucks. I just don’t see most of them achieving much beyond maybe making the writer feel temporarily superior. And I’m guilty of that “told you so” urge as well. On another website, dominated by Clinton supporters and centrist Dems, I clashed with them before the election repeatedly, but decided to end that futility a coupla months back. Too tired of feeling hopeless in the face of their acceptance of neoliberalism, Republican-Lite and Clintonian, crackpot realism.
You should read the article linked, btw.
To me, now is for the left to “come together.” Bigly.
November 12, 2016 at 8:43 am #57851wvParticipantGood article, WV.
But I’m seeing an excess of self-flagellation happening on the left the last coupla days, and I don’t think all of it is productive. Some, definitely. But it’s selective, etc.
And all of these “You brought it on yourself!!” pieces and $5.00 may get us a cup of coffee at Starbucks. I just don’t see most of them achieving much beyond maybe making the writer feel temporarily superior. And I’m guilty of that “told you so” urge as well. On another website, dominated by Clinton supporters and centrist Dems, I clashed with them before the election repeatedly, but decided to end that futility a coupla months back. Too tired of feeling hopeless in the face of their acceptance of neoliberalism, Republican-Lite and Clintonian, crackpot realism.
You should read the article linked, btw.
To me, now is for the left to “come together.” Bigly.
——————
I dont see it that way at all, Billy. I dont think the ‘real left’ is blaming ‘themselves’ at all — i think the are blaming the DNC and Neoliberals.w
vNovember 12, 2016 at 9:30 am #57862Billy_TParticipantGood article, WV.
But I’m seeing an excess of self-flagellation happening on the left the last coupla days, and I don’t think all of it is productive. Some, definitely. But it’s selective, etc.
And all of these “You brought it on yourself!!” pieces and $5.00 may get us a cup of coffee at Starbucks. I just don’t see most of them achieving much beyond maybe making the writer feel temporarily superior. And I’m guilty of that “told you so” urge as well. On another website, dominated by Clinton supporters and centrist Dems, I clashed with them before the election repeatedly, but decided to end that futility a coupla months back. Too tired of feeling hopeless in the face of their acceptance of neoliberalism, Republican-Lite and Clintonian, crackpot realism.
You should read the article linked, btw.
To me, now is for the left to “come together.” Bigly.
——————
I dont see it that way at all, Billy. I dont think the ‘real left’ is blaming ‘themselves’ at all — i think the are blaming the DNC and Neoliberals.w
vI can it that too. And if that’s the case, I reserve the right to retract everything I’ve just said.
;>)
November 12, 2016 at 9:35 am #57863znModeratorin a few months, they will be ruled by a less-than-desirable leader. One which, the world will be quick to mention, was actually chosen by Americans and not imposed on them by occupation or intervention.
Reminds me of the old joke.
Why will there never be a coup leading to an imposed dictatorship in the USA?
Because there’s no American embassy there.
.
November 12, 2016 at 9:46 am #57865Billy_TParticipantin a few months, they will be ruled by a less-than-desirable leader. One which, the world will be quick to mention, was actually chosen by Americans and not imposed on them by occupation or intervention.
Reminds me of the old joke.
Why will there never be a coup leading to an imposed dictatorship in the USA?
Because there’s no American embassy there.
.
That’s a good one.
But have we really been “coup-free”? One could argue it happened in 2000. One could also argue that the GOP’s prevention of hearings to replace a dead Supreme Court justice, after that Court’s majority had gutting voting rights, which made mass voter suppression possible, is pretty close to a “coup.”
One could also argue that an FBI faction, leaking docs harmful to just one candidate, and not the other, along with Wikileaks and Russia doing the same . . . . Well, it at least has some of the elements.
The likely reason why those of us on the left don’t “go there” in this case is because we see the existing state apparatus as too similar to the one replacing part of it via the election. It’s not like we had this really awesome, “people first” governance, crushed by a right-wing revolt. We had a donor-class lovin’, center-right tilting, corporatist borgified, soft-neoliberal rule replaced by a more aggressive version of all of that . . . . with heightened bigotry, proudly anti-science and know-nothingism thrown in to sweeten the pot.
In short, while there is “contrast,” perhaps it’s not enough to make people think “coup”?
November 12, 2016 at 10:06 am #57874znModeratorBut have we really been “coup-free”?
Compared to what we’ve done to other countries? I would say yes. We DO have nasty machine politics, but then those of us (which will be many) who remember Mayor Daley won’t think that’s necessarily new.
And we also have the traditional american problem many other democracies do not have—namely, that the USA does not have a left. We aren’t represented by a major party and our worldview is simply made nonexistent in the mainstream media.
But a real american-imposed dictatorship where there’s brutal reprisals for opposing the regime? Obviously not.
Which doesn’t mean of course that we’re all flowers and pancakes.
…
November 12, 2016 at 10:13 am #57878Billy_TParticipantBut have we really been “coup-free”?
Compared to what we’ve done to other countries? I would say yes. We DO have nasty machine politics, but then those of us (which will be many) who remember Mayor Daley won’t think that’s necessarily new.
And we also have the traditional american problem many other democracies do not have—namely, that the USA does not have a left. We aren’t represented by a major party and our worldview is simply made nonexistent in the mainstream media.
But a real american-imposed dictatorship where there’s brutal reprisals for opposing the regime? Obviously not.
Which doesn’t mean of course that we’re all flowers and pancakes.
…
Agreed. That’s a good way to put it, too, the part in bold especially.
But I definitely disagree with your last sentence. Here’s proof:
November 12, 2016 at 10:26 am #57881Billy_TParticipantThe pancakes, of course, are inside everyone’s home who lives beneath the rainbows beside the flowers.
Or, as Carlos Williams Carlos once wrote:
so much depends
upona red pan
cakeglazed with rain
waterbeside the white
flowers.November 12, 2016 at 11:03 am #57894— X —ParticipantIs that a balsamic reduction on those pancakes?
Because that just sounds awful.You have to be odd, to be number one.
-- Dr SeussNovember 12, 2016 at 11:04 am #57895Billy_TParticipantIs that a balsamic reduction on those pancakes?
Because that just sounds awful.I don’t even know. I’m not a “foodie.” But I did stay at Holiday Inn Express once.
November 12, 2016 at 11:16 am #57901— X —ParticipantIs that a balsamic reduction on those pancakes?
Because that just sounds awful.Mrs. X and I are foodies. But not the shitty, ‘post immediately to Yelp as if I review Michelin Star restaurants for a living’ type foodies. We just like to try different stuff from all of the up and coming chefs and new restaurants/diners/dives in the area. We had Tapas the other day at Zambra, and it was really good. Expensive, but really good. http://zambratapas.com/cuisine/
You have to be odd, to be number one.
-- Dr SeussNovember 12, 2016 at 11:22 am #57905Billy_TParticipantIs that a balsamic reduction on those pancakes?
Because that just sounds awful.Mrs. X and I are foodies. But not the shitty, ‘post immediately to Yelp as if I review Michelin Star restaurants for a living’ type foodies. We just like to try different stuff from all of the up and coming chefs and new restaurants/diners/dives in the area. We had Tapas the other day at Zambra, and it was really good. Expensive, but really good. http://zambratapas.com/cuisine/
That’s cool. I do love good food. And my long-time dream was to have a thousand acres of my own, grow all of my own food, have a coupla lakes and streams for fish and fowl, maybe breed rabbits too as a meat substitute. I’d have giant greenhouses as well, fill them up with every exotic fruit, plant and herb. Would do my best to make sure I never had to go to a grocery store for anything. Everything home grown and fresher than fresh.
Also dreamed of having work shops for wood and metal. Make my own tools and musical instruments. The whole 19th century deal.
Simplify, get back to the earth, get back to basics. End my dependence on corporations, etc. etc.
November 12, 2016 at 11:38 am #57911— X —ParticipantThat’s cool. I do love good food. And my long-time dream was to have a thousand acres of my own, grow all of my own food, have a coupla lakes and streams for fish and fowl, maybe breed rabbits too as a meat substitute. I’d have giant greenhouses as well, fill them up with every exotic fruit, plant and herb. Would do my best to make sure I never had to go to a grocery store for anything. Everything home grown and fresher than fresh.
Also dreamed of having work shops for wood and metal. Make my own tools and musical instruments. The whole 19th century deal.
Simplify, get back to the earth, get back to basics. End my dependence on corporations, etc. etc.
Well that sounds awesome. I had a similar dream for a while, but not about the non-meat rabbits. *razz
We did pick up 5 acres in Western NC with a steam in the back in a town that is almost entirely chain free with the exception of two lower-end grocery stores and a gas station. Lots of small independent shops, health food stores, soap and candle makers, an actual cobbler, a taco truck, and within 5 miles of a farmers market. We eat a lot of Quorn products too as a real meat substitute. If you haven’t tried it, I recommend it. Especially the Quorn burgers. Almost identical in taste to a real hamburger with the right seasonings and cooking temp. [review here]
You have to be odd, to be number one.
-- Dr SeussNovember 12, 2016 at 11:48 am #57913Billy_TParticipantThat’s cool. I do love good food. And my long-time dream was to have a thousand acres of my own, grow all of my own food, have a coupla lakes and streams for fish and fowl, maybe breed rabbits too as a meat substitute. I’d have giant greenhouses as well, fill them up with every exotic fruit, plant and herb. Would do my best to make sure I never had to go to a grocery store for anything. Everything home grown and fresher than fresh.
Also dreamed of having work shops for wood and metal. Make my own tools and musical instruments. The whole 19th century deal.
Simplify, get back to the earth, get back to basics. End my dependence on corporations, etc. etc.
Well that sounds awesome. I had a similar dream for a while, but not about the non-meat rabbits. *razz
We did pick up 5 acres in Western NC with a steam in the back in a town that is almost entirely chain free with the exception of two lower-end grocery stores and a gas station. Lots of small independent shops, health food stores, soap and candle makers, an actual cobbler, a taco truck, and within 5 miles of a farmers market. We eat a lot of Quorn products too as a real meat substitute. If you haven’t tried it, I recommend it. Especially the Quorn burgers. Almost identical in taste to a real hamburger with the right seasonings and cooking temp. [review here]
That sounds great. I wish we could go back to our pre-capitalist past in America. Capitalism wasn’t dominant here until after the Civil War. Prior to that, most people worked for themselves, were their own bosses, had small farms, were artisans, craftsmen, etc. etc. Capitalism crushed the life out of that and forced people to go to work for others instead. Made them dependent on “suits” hundreds or thousands of miles away. I despise our current economic model and see it as obscenely immoral — just in case you haven’t gathered that by now.
;>)
Also: I got my second undergrad degree in Boone. Went back there last year, though, and it’s grown waaay too fast and is hopelessly congested now. It’s supposed to be a “small town” but it’s starting to feel like a mini-city instead, and there’s just no room there for that. I don’t like the change.
November 12, 2016 at 11:54 am #57917NewMexicoRamParticipantPersonally, I don’t see what the angst is all about. Don’t people realize that the GOP doesn’t have 60 votes in the Senate, like Obama had for 2 years? That means there will need to be major compromise and negotiation like we haven’t seen in many a year.
I doubt Trump uses executive orders to push his way through. Not like Obama did, anyways. He’s a populist not an idealist conservative.
I believe negotiation will now find its way back into our federal system.November 12, 2016 at 11:58 am #57918NewMexicoRamParticipantin a few months, they will be ruled by a less-than-desirable leader. One which, the world will be quick to mention, was actually chosen by Americans and not imposed on them by occupation or intervention.
Reminds me of the old joke.
Why will there never be a coup leading to an imposed dictatorship in the USA?
Because there’s no American embassy there.
.
_________________________________________
That’s a good one, zn. Sorry, I don’t have something funny to respond with. It would just mess up anyways.
I must admit that I was afraid we might have a result like 2000, or worse, and that Obama would declare martial law to stay in power. Not real seriously, but the thought crossed my mind a few times.
November 12, 2016 at 12:28 pm #57931Billy_TParticipantPersonally, I don’t see what the angst is all about. Don’t people realize that the GOP doesn’t have 60 votes in the Senate, like Obama had for 2 years? That means there will need to be major compromise and negotiation like we haven’t seen in many a year.
I doubt Trump uses executive orders to push his way through. Not like Obama did, anyways. He’s a populist not an idealist conservative.
I believe negotiation will now find its way back into our federal system.Obama went the executive order route less often than Dubya, Clinton, Reagan and every president going back to Benjamin Harrison. And Trump has promised to overturn all of them — at least until he met with Obama and changed his mind about some of them. But we’ll see. Overturning them is also using the power of executive orders.
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/orders.php
As far as the lack of negotiation and compromise? That’s virtually entirely on the GOP, whose leaders said on Obama’s inauguration day that they would block everything he tried to do, and they were able to for the most part.
The Dems, in stark contrast to the GOP, are all too willing to compromise and negotiate. That’s one of their biggest faults as a party. Rolling over and playing dead for the other side of the aisle, caving in, basically always starting the negotiation process within the frame the other side creates. Drives me up a wall.
November 12, 2016 at 1:26 pm #57936NewMexicoRamParticipantPersonally, I don’t see what the angst is all about. Don’t people realize that the GOP doesn’t have 60 votes in the Senate, like Obama had for 2 years? That means there will need to be major compromise and negotiation like we haven’t seen in many a year.
I doubt Trump uses executive orders to push his way through. Not like Obama did, anyways. He’s a populist not an idealist conservative.
I believe negotiation will now find its way back into our federal system.Obama went the executive order route less often than Dubya, Clinton, Reagan and every president going back to Benjamin Harrison. And Trump has promised to overturn all of them — at least until he met with Obama and changed his mind about some of them. But we’ll see. Overturning them is also using the power of executive orders.
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/orders.php
As far as the lack of negotiation and compromise? That’s virtually entirely on the GOP, whose leaders said on Obama’s inauguration day that they would block everything he tried to do, and they were able to for the most part.
The Dems, in stark contrast to the GOP, are all too willing to compromise and negotiate. That’s one of their biggest faults as a party. Rolling over and playing dead for the other side of the aisle, caving in, basically always starting the negotiation process within the frame the other side creates. Drives me up a wall.
___________________________________________________
That’s not the history I’m looking at. Many times Obama blasted the GOP to get on his side before Congress even debated an issue. And Harry Reid did the same in the Senate. Did the GOP try to block things? Of course. Will the Dems try to block things now? Of course. But look at the tone the last 24 hours where there are reports that Trump is changing his tune some on major issues. It may make many in his camp angry, but it does show me that there is a willingness to negotiate. That’s important going forward.
I thought you agreed in another thread to look at the other’s POV?
November 12, 2016 at 1:46 pm #57938Billy_TParticipantPersonally, I don’t see what the angst is all about. Don’t people realize that the GOP doesn’t have 60 votes in the Senate, like Obama had for 2 years? That means there will need to be major compromise and negotiation like we haven’t seen in many a year.
I doubt Trump uses executive orders to push his way through. Not like Obama did, anyways. He’s a populist not an idealist conservative.
I believe negotiation will now find its way back into our federal system.Obama went the executive order route less often than Dubya, Clinton, Reagan and every president going back to Benjamin Harrison. And Trump has promised to overturn all of them — at least until he met with Obama and changed his mind about some of them. But we’ll see. Overturning them is also using the power of executive orders.
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/orders.php
As far as the lack of negotiation and compromise? That’s virtually entirely on the GOP, whose leaders said on Obama’s inauguration day that they would block everything he tried to do, and they were able to for the most part.
The Dems, in stark contrast to the GOP, are all too willing to compromise and negotiate. That’s one of their biggest faults as a party. Rolling over and playing dead for the other side of the aisle, caving in, basically always starting the negotiation process within the frame the other side creates. Drives me up a wall.
___________________________________________________
That’s not the history I’m looking at. Many times Obama blasted the GOP to get on his side before Congress even debated an issue. And Harry Reid did the same in the Senate. Did the GOP try to block things? Of course. Will the Dems try to block things now? Of course. But look at the tone the last 24 hours where there are reports that Trump is changing his tune some on major issues. It may make many in his camp angry, but it does show me that there is a willingness to negotiate. That’s important going forward.
I thought you agreed in another thread to look at the other’s POV?
NMR,
I read your point of view, considered it carefully, and I disagree. That’s all. And I said why. There is no evidence that Obama or the Dems were unwilling to compromise or negotiate. Again, IMO, they’re guilty of being all too willing to do that. And no American president in my lifetime has tried as hard as Obama to reach across the aisle. Again, he did this to a fault. It’s one of the worst things about the way he governed, IMO.
And the GOP didn’t just try to block things. They took unprecedented steps to do so, and broke every record for filibusters and holds in American history. The Dems don’t come within light years of the recent GOP for that. Think about it, NMR. The GOP refused to even allow hearings to replace Scalia! That’s never been done.
And to make it worse, they said “Let the people decide,” as if they hadn’t already. Obama was elected twice and his term runs four years, not three. And when Republicans thought Hillary was going to win, they changed their mind again about “let the people decide” and said they would block ALL of her nominees for SCOTUS.
Now we get, “The people have spoken,” cuz Trump won the Electoral College. Apparently, that only counts when a Republican is elected. If it’s a Democrat, it’s “We’re going to block everything they do,” despite the people’s vote.
November 12, 2016 at 2:09 pm #57944NewMexicoRamParticipantPersonally, I don’t see what the angst is all about. Don’t people realize that the GOP doesn’t have 60 votes in the Senate, like Obama had for 2 years? That means there will need to be major compromise and negotiation like we haven’t seen in many a year.
I doubt Trump uses executive orders to push his way through. Not like Obama did, anyways. He’s a populist not an idealist conservative.
I believe negotiation will now find its way back into our federal system.Obama went the executive order route less often than Dubya, Clinton, Reagan and every president going back to Benjamin Harrison. And Trump has promised to overturn all of them — at least until he met with Obama and changed his mind about some of them. But we’ll see. Overturning them is also using the power of executive orders.
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/orders.php
As far as the lack of negotiation and compromise? That’s virtually entirely on the GOP, whose leaders said on Obama’s inauguration day that they would block everything he tried to do, and they were able to for the most part.
The Dems, in stark contrast to the GOP, are all too willing to compromise and negotiate. That’s one of their biggest faults as a party. Rolling over and playing dead for the other side of the aisle, caving in, basically always starting the negotiation process within the frame the other side creates. Drives me up a wall.
___________________________________________________
That’s not the history I’m looking at. Many times Obama blasted the GOP to get on his side before Congress even debated an issue. And Harry Reid did the same in the Senate. Did the GOP try to block things? Of course. Will the Dems try to block things now? Of course. But look at the tone the last 24 hours where there are reports that Trump is changing his tune some on major issues. It may make many in his camp angry, but it does show me that there is a willingness to negotiate. That’s important going forward.
I thought you agreed in another thread to look at the other’s POV?
NMR,
I read your point of view, considered it carefully, and I disagree. That’s all. And I said why. There is no evidence that Obama or the Dems were unwilling to compromise or negotiate. Again, IMO, they’re guilty of being all too willing to do that. And no American president in my lifetime has tried as hard as Obama to reach across the aisle. Again, he did this to a fault. It’s one of the worst things about the way he governed, IMO.
And the GOP didn’t just try to block things. They took unprecedented steps to do so, and broke every record for filibusters and holds in American history. The Dems don’t come within light years of the recent GOP for that. Think about it, NMR. The GOP refused to even allow hearings to replace Scalia! That’s never been done.
And to make it worse, they said “Let the people decide,” as if they hadn’t already. Obama was elected twice and his term runs four years, not three. And when Republicans thought Hillary was going to win, they changed their mind again about “let the people decide” and said they would block ALL of her nominees for SCOTUS.
Now we get, “The people have spoken,” cuz Trump won the Electoral College. Apparently, that only counts when a Republican is elected. If it’s a Democrat, it’s “We’re going to block everything they do,” despite the people’s vote.
_________________________________________
I’m sorry Billy. Those comments are in the extreme. So the GOP “always” does the wrong and the left/Dems/whatever term you want “always” is correct and fair. Now you’re trying to change how to use the votes that were cast. Disagreement is fine, but villifying the other side with extremes just doesn’t sit with me.
Here’s the facts on fillibusters. Looks like the Dems have had more than their share of them:
FillibustersThere it is. Obstructionism goes both ways.
So, I’m done with this. I’ll comment on your future posts if it appears you are using terms that are inclusive in arguement, but as it is, this feels like the “old board” to me. And I had enough of that to last me for a very long time.
- This reply was modified 8 years, 1 month ago by NewMexicoRam.
November 12, 2016 at 2:15 pm #57946bnwBlockedNMR, Please don’t leave. Go outside and breathe some of that blue state air. Definitely return tomorrow for the game chat.
The upside to being a Rams fan is heartbreak.
Sprinkles are for winners.
November 12, 2016 at 2:25 pm #57949Billy_TParticipantI’m sorry Billy. Those comments are in the extreme. So the GOP “always” does the wrong and the left/Dems/whatever term you want “always” is correct and fair. Now you’re trying to change how to use the votes that were cast. Disagreement is fine, but villifying the other side with extremes just doesn’t sit with me.
Here’s the facts on fillibusters. Looks like the Dems have had more than their share of them:
FillibustersThere it is. Obstructionism goes both ways.
So, I’m done with this. I’ll comment on your future posts if it appears you are using terms that are inclusive in arguement, but as it is, this feels like the “old board” to me. And I had enough of that to last me for a very long time.
Nothing extreme in anything I said, NMR. I just stated objective fact. And no way did I say or suggest that the Dems were always correct or fair. Far, far from it. I despise both parties, remember? And you must have skipped over the part where I criticized the Dems and Obama, which was each time I said they were far too willing to compromise and negotiate.
As for filibusters. Yes, the GOP broke all records since Obama took office. The two parties haven’t been close to equal in their usage of that tool. Not at all close.
(your own link shows that, btw. But I’ll provide another.)
3 Charts Explain Why Democrats Went Nuclear on the Filibuster
November 12, 2016 at 2:34 pm #57951znModeratorm sorry Billy. Those comments are in the extreme. So the GOP “always” does the wrong and the left/Dems/whatever term you want “always” is correct and fair.
Thats not what he said NMR.
Two things, both important to the discussion.
First, the majority here, BT included, are not dems. We;re leftists and (speaking generally) we consider dems to be center-right sell-outs. So BT was not defending the dems.
2nd, what he actually DID say is not only right, it;s backed by endless fact. The reps in office tended to react to the Obama presidency by fighting everything. BT’s complaint about the dems is that they tended to compromise too much (you took that as him complimenting the dems, and, no, it’s a very stinging criticism). That’s just all true. Speaking just from an historical perspective it’s accurate. And it’s backed by numbers on different things. Everything he says in this paragraph is strictly accurate:
And the GOP didn’t just try to block things. They took unprecedented steps to do so, and broke every record for filibusters and holds in American history. The Dems don’t come within light years of the recent GOP for that. Think about it, NMR. The GOP refused to even allow hearings to replace Scalia! That’s never been done.
He was speaking in straight-up specifics. You took that as being general when it wasn’t.
And let me stress this. Because it has to do with how fair YOU want to be. Namely, you need to hear this—most of us are simply not dems. In different ways, we’re all highly critical of the dems for their economic policies, their foreign policies, and for being corporate-money beholden centrist sell-outs. If you keep reading us as pro-dem, it only distorts the discussion, and we have have to keep repeating this same thing. Which gets tiring.
You are not in a traditional, mainstream, business as usual political discussion here. We as a community, or the majority of us, are very different from that.
There’s not just 2 choices and we are to the left of dems.
Not hearing that might be why you somehow heard BT as praising the dems when in fact he was slamming them.
.
November 12, 2016 at 2:40 pm #57954bnwBlockedThat is a cop out. Always slamming the republicans while claiming the democrats are better or not as bad as the republican IS choosing a side in the election. Read a lot about Jill Stein around here until she said Killory is the warmonger and a vote for Trump is not a vote for war.
The upside to being a Rams fan is heartbreak.
Sprinkles are for winners.
November 12, 2016 at 3:15 pm #57957NewMexicoRamParticipantOK, I’m cutting back in to make one last comment.
I know the GOP increased the use of fillibusters. I knew that when I posted my link. I believe that to be the result of a president who tried to force things through rather than negotiate. He is the one who said “elections have consequences.” That should be a red flag for any party to hear. I want to see a President who will take the time to discuss with the other side and find ways to compromise. That’s the way things get done. I believe we are seeing Trump begin to do that. Maybe I’ll be proven wrong, but I doubt it. I’m ok with the fact that the GOP won’t get everything they want. And the left should feel the same.
And I’m sure there are over 300 million ways in this country to take positions on an issue. Somehow, over our history, this has boiled down to 2 major parties instead of the 3,4,5 or whatever numbers of positions there are. It works as a 2 “position” platform for the most part, with each party having its disagreements within their ranks. But it still works as a big awkward 2 party system. So, while I respect the opinions of everyone here and their multiple sides, 2 parties is what is largely seen in public and I’ll use terminology that fits as best it can within that, hoping people realize I know there are a multitude of opinions and positions.
I am not going to be a guy who takes his ball and bat and goes home whining. Please don’t think that of me. But I want to see discussions that recognize none of us are perfect, no party or position is perfect, and we live with flaws. I can respect the positions of others here, while disagreeing. But let’s not use “they always, or never” and terminology like that, please. If there are multitudes of positions, please recognize that in “the other side” as well. I tend to vote GOP, but believe me, there are things that frighten me about doing so. I just hope and pray that the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness can continue for years to come.
November 12, 2016 at 4:09 pm #57965wvParticipantOK, I’m cutting back in to make one last comment.
I know the GOP increased the use of fillibusters. I knew that when I posted my link. I believe that to be the result of a president who tried to force things through rather than negotiate. He is the one who said “elections have consequences.” That should be a red flag for any party to hear. I want to see a President who will take the time to discuss with the other side and find ways to compromise
————-
Well you are coming at that from a point of view on the ‘right’. You know how us leftists see it? — Obama didnt fight hard enough for ANYTHING. He was MR COMPROMISE. Or actually MR THROW IN THE TOWEL WITHOUT FIGHTING FOR ANYTHING. Honestly thats how leftists view him.
So, different ‘truths’ based on where we stand politically.
Different views.
I will not try to change your mind though. I’ll not hammer you with a gazillion reasons why you are ‘wrong’ and why you should change your mind, etc. THAT is where political boards always simmer and boil over.
We all gotta stop trying to prove the other person WRONG about stuff. Just share
yer view, listen to the opposing views, and acknowledge the difference and…..next topic.w
vNovember 12, 2016 at 4:15 pm #57966Billy_TParticipantOK, I’m cutting back in to make one last comment.
I know the GOP increased the use of fillibusters. I knew that when I posted my link. I believe that to be the result of a president who tried to force things through rather than negotiate. He is the one who said “elections have consequences.” That should be a red flag for any party to hear. I want to see a President who will take the time to discuss with the other side and find ways to compromise. That’s the way things get done. I believe we are seeing Trump begin to do that. Maybe I’ll be proven wrong, but I doubt it. I’m ok with the fact that the GOP won’t get everything they want. And the left should feel the same.
And I’m sure there are over 300 million ways in this country to take positions on an issue. Somehow, over our history, this has boiled down to 2 major parties instead of the 3,4,5 or whatever numbers of positions there are. It works as a 2 “position” platform for the most part, with each party having its disagreements within their ranks. But it still works as a big awkward 2 party system. So, while I respect the opinions of everyone here and their multiple sides, 2 parties is what is largely seen in public and I’ll use terminology that fits as best it can within that, hoping people realize I know there are a multitude of opinions and positions.
I am not going to be a guy who takes his ball and bat and goes home whining. Please don’t think that of me. But I want to see discussions that recognize none of us are perfect, no party or position is perfect, and we live with flaws. I can respect the positions of others here, while disagreeing. But let’s not use “they always, or never” and terminology like that, please. If there are multitudes of positions, please recognize that in “the other side” as well. I tend to vote GOP, but believe me, there are things that frighten me about doing so. I just hope and pray that the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness can continue for years to come.
NMR,
On that part in bold. If that harmless little statement caused problems among the GOP — and I don’t for a second believe it did — then the people who did react to it are incredibly sensitive and need to buck up. It’s also a statement I’ve heard come out of the mouths of presidents and congressional leaders after every election in my lifetime. It’s standard fare. Nothing more. Both parties always say that.
And, again, Obama did take the time to discuss the issues with the GOP. He continuously reached across the aisle and had his hand slapped down. As ZN said, I’m highly critical of this, that the Dems do this all the time, that they go fetal, spineless, cave in. It pisses me off. But, from everything I witnessed and read about, following politics far too closely for my own health, I have never in my life seen a president more willing to work with the other side — to a fault. This is all the more stunning given the way his overtures were met.
Take the ACA. The Dems and Obama set up endless meetings between the two parties, industry, etc. etc. including the Gang of Six — basically three conservadems and three republicans. They hashed things out for nearly two years. The Dems agreed to more than 150 GOP amendments in hopes of getting them on board, and they began the entire thing with the Heritage Foundation and Romneycare as its basis. It started on the Republican side and they still added 150 GOP amendments. Did the Dems receive a single GOP vote after all of that?
Um, nope.
This happened with the Stimulus too. Major concessions toward the Republicans, including tax cuts that made up nearly a third of the Stimulus. That wasn’t good enough either.
(more below, to split this up a bit).
November 12, 2016 at 4:17 pm #57967NewMexicoRamParticipantOK, I’m cutting back in to make one last comment.
I know the GOP increased the use of fillibusters. I knew that when I posted my link. I believe that to be the result of a president who tried to force things through rather than negotiate. He is the one who said “elections have consequences.” That should be a red flag for any party to hear. I want to see a President who will take the time to discuss with the other side and find ways to compromise
————-
Well you are coming at that from a point of view on the ‘right’. You know how us leftists see it? — Obama didnt fight hard enough for ANYTHING. He was MR COMPROMISE. Or actually MR THROW IN THE TOWEL WITHOUT FIGHTING FOR ANYTHING. Honestly thats how leftists view him.
So, different ‘truths’ based on where we stand politically.
Different views.
w
v___________________________________________________
So, you’re saying it’s ok for the “right” to compromise, but not the “left?”
See, I don’t see compromise as “throwing in the towel.” I see it as negotiation. Both sides get something out of it they can both feel good about (again, remember I know there are more than 2 sides to politics, but bear with me please). Just pushing and ramming through things all the time is tiring and creates friction before the next fight even begins. IMO, this is where Obama failed as a President.
I know extreme rightists will be disappointed in Trump and probably say the same thing about him, that he will “give in” too quickly and not fight. Just watch.
November 12, 2016 at 4:25 pm #57969Billy_TParticipantObama also held a summit on the deficit in the middle of a recession. A major concession to the Republicans, and incredibly stupid to boot. In the capitalist system, it’s economic suicide to cut spending and try to reduce deficits in the middle of a recession.
He also reupped Bush’s tax cuts twice
Kept his defense secretary
Rehired his Fed chairman
Kept his wars going and expanded them
Kept his GWOT going and expanded it
Radically increase his drone program
Continued his Wall Street bailouts, TARP and TALF, etc.
Never once suggested we should roll back Bush’s surveillance state measures
Added to them
Offered Boehner the “Grand Bargain,” which included slashing Medicare and Social Security, something that would have been unthinkable for a Democratic president a few years before thatThe above is just for starters.
Obama’s record is “conservative” in every way except for a few culture war issues and the DREAMers act. Maybe a coupla “green” items. But on balance, Republicans should have seen Obama and the Dems’ governance and danced in the street, day after day. Because far from getting some “far left radical,” bent on “transforming America,” they actually got a old-style, moderate Republican with the D on his sleeve. And Obama worked hard to maintain the status quo ante he received from his predecessor.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.