Enthusiasm Rises for Romney; Obama Has a 'Right-Track' Retor

Post Reply New Topic

Yeah, look at the list of our achievements. First it was the Revolution of the Founding Fathers itself, the abolition of slavery, the New Deal and the labor movement and the minimum wage and the 40 hour work week. All of them were fought by the conservatives or precursors to modern conservatism. All of this talk about how they wish for things to be voluntary is just malarkey when you look at their history.

Exactly my point.

You are in love with what could be, not what was or currently is, especially when recalling 8 years of the Bush presidency and the tone the over whelming majority on the left had.

Leftists far more openly state their love for this country NOW, I wonder if they will be exceptional and say the same over the course of the next four years if Romney were elected this fall... because then I suspect things will shift, the Left will loose faith in government(and will be rather vocal in their critique), and they won't be the ones telling people to get in line with the president's agenda for the greater good. Nor will they be hush on drone strikes, Guantanamo, or a Benghazi part 2, or bad economic performances, and they won't associate gains in the stock market with the economy rising, but rather, in the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer, our military and not the President will get credit for future strikes or preventative measures against terrorism, and the state of the middle east will be Romney's and America's fault.

I don't doubt that the feeling leftists have in their heart is loving, but what you love is the possible, and as soon as a GOPer takes over, your love affair with the possible will be over, and back to the hate speech you go.

That's politics. Trying to find some kind of objective axis that we can all gather around is pointless considering that both sides practice this warfare. Do you think the Right is just going to think it's all coming up daisies if Obama wins a second turn? If the Right wing keeps sticking to its talking points about socialism, he's tearing this country down and then some nutball with a head full of this apocalyptic rhetoric decides to do something about it then where are you? I can tell you exactly what your take on it will be. You will say that he was just a bad apple and one bad apple doesn't spoil the cart. That is always what the hierarchy says when it's experiment with conspiracy theory proto fascism gets out of hand.

You obviously don't know the left very well - and no, what they tell you about the left on Fox doesn't count. We on the left will still love our country, even under a Romney presidency. We will probably be more critical, but that doesn't mean that we'll love our country even less.
And why should we accept poverty and racism to prove we love America? The spirit of America is that it can always be better for everyone.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Kraichguar, I don't watch tv. I podcast, I read, but I don't watch tv. You can arrive at these same positions by reading, listening, and watching Robert Samuelson, David Brooks, Dennis Prager, Robert Kagan, Thomas Sowell, Walter Russell Mead, Joel Kotkin, Charles Krauthammer, the WSJ editorials, and many others.

How can your side slander this country with all those charges and still claim to "love" it? Where else in life can you demean and talk badly about the object of your affection and call that love? As I said before, you love the possible, not what is.

Racism exists in America. Does that make America a racist nation that the left can walk around, comfortable, and call it so? And if America is racist, why would you love this racist country we live in?

You just cannot accept that people can be a contradictory set of interests. We have to be pure and have all of our ducks in row. That doesn't happen.

It is pointless because we have different and competing values. That is why Obama's call for unity is a sham, and any politicans for that matter. There are two uniquely different ideologies, and the success of one comes at the cost of the other. We practice this warfare to win, any leeway given can be a gateway issue that furthers other aspects of the oppositions agenda, and thus is the toxic political environment we have.

And you are absolutely right, if 1, or 100, or 1000, or 10,0000, or 100,000, or 1,000,000 exist, then so what? In a nation of 300,000,000 people, the action of a lone looney does not reflect on the country as a whole. What is representitive of Republicans, Democrats, or any group in particular is not the action of the few... but the then reaction of the many to it.

And in what way would you frame our points about socialism, and how Obama's tearing down this country in a way that would not lead a nutball to do something about it? a nutball with a short fuse is a nutball with a short fuse, and there are 150 million or so conservatives who hear this and do not then turn to violence. 8 years of bush, and the garbage the left was able to away with, comparisons to hitler, documentaries simulating his assassination, and 4 years of Obama and as soon as a shooting occurs, the right is pinned accountable for it because of their hate, even CNN was just aching to connect the colorado shooter to the tea party, and journalists comparing the tea party to muslim extremists. Our positions are not animated by hate, our values are the melting pot, in god we trust, liberty, amongst many others. What is hateful about any of those values? What is hateful about economic liberalism? What is hateful about school choice? What is hateful about being pro life?

Last edited by MarketAndChurch on 16 Oct 2012, 1:51 am, edited 1 time in total.

The only two names I recognize are Krauthammer and Prager, and I think they're a couple of creeps, personally.
And yes, I still love my country, despite the fact that there has been racism and other faults in American history. But as I already said, things are much better than they have been in the past. And it's because I love my country that I want America to be a better place. Are you able to comprehend that point?

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Status Quo. You have to love the Status Quo or you're just a bitter hater. Like there has never been a mother who wants their child to do better because she loves him.

Very good point, indeed, DancingDanny.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

well then I highly suggest to you David Brooks, he writes for the NYTimes, and Robert Kagan, the most influential neocon out there. It is pathetic that the right reads the left, but so few on the left read the right, they are afraid that they will be "poisoned" by the oppositions inherent "hate" that they even have folks who watch fox news as to "interpret" it for those can't stomach it.

The Left will return to calling America all of those things if Romney wins this fall, and its not like other leftists are ever like... hey guys, maybe we shouldn't s**t on this country so much that we claim to love because it seems kind of hypocritical... no, you don't challenge fellow leftists, who constitute the majority, who behave that way. Paleocons, neocons, libertarians, and any other groups on the right happily compete with each other in realm of ideas, but there is a strict adherence to ideological purity on the left, you don't challenge each other, unless of course you are moving rightwards or in a conservative direction.

I think those guys on the right you've been reading have been giving you an unrealistic view of the left.
And I'll give you an example of how the left is loyal even to Republican presidents. When Hugo Chavez - while in the UN building in New York - had called George W. the devil, Democratic leaders like Nancy Pelosi and others came to Bush's defense, because he was their president. I have yet to see Republicans defend Obama.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

A call for unity is a sham because you're arguing from a critical, dialectical point of view coupled with a conservatives cynicism of politicians. I could just as easily take a mono-national, patriotic, optimistic viewpoint but I'm not even going to bother because I don't have the energy and you are mostly correct in your analysis of the pitched battle that Democrats and Republicans are in too.

I would frame how the points about socialism, Islam, fascism, he's the Antichrist etc. are essentially pitching your side into a messianic movement that is full of historical purpose that is under the cloud of the Apocalypse. And we know no violence ever occured in those eras.

The Left compared Bush to Hitler. The Right compares Obama to Hitler. Either both are wrong or you're sliding into moral relativism.

I'm really surprised to learn that the melting pot was conservatism. I thought the conservatives in that era were happy to keep the dirty foreigners down but apparently because neither of us were alive in that era you get to claim the melting pot as yours. Just like how every liberal movement was fought by the Right and eventually when enough time passes and everybody who was alive in that era is dead the Right eventually moves to see our point of view. Economic liberalism sounds like one of our achievements as well.

School choice and pro life are different, tertiary arguments to the main body.

I read the Right's side as well just to know what they're talking about and see if they have valid reasons. I just mostly see the validity in liberals more because my compass is just weighed in that direction.

What? From my point of view, the Left is like herding cats. Just look up how many different Socialist parties there are in the USA and maybe you won't think of them as this monolithic beast where it's veboten to pick on each other.

Last edited by DancingDanny on 16 Oct 2012, 2:19 am, edited 1 time in total.

Not at all.It depends on what you think the status quo is. On a few issues:

America is not a racist country, if racists exist in it, then they do, but racists exist in Europe and we don't call Europeans racist, racists exist in China and we don't call the chinese racist, or the Australians. Don't judge an entire nation by the actions and feelings of a tiny majority.

America is the least xenophobic country in history.

America has issues with sexism, that is fine, we are working those kinks out, and I don't even think it exists to the level those on the left say that it does.

America is not homophobic, though many homophobes exist and are largely christian, but one is not a homophobe for simply opposing gay marriage. that charge confuses things.

America is not islamophobic, we hate the worse of Islam which has culminated into a movement, and so should the rest of the world. If Christofacists were to arise in south america or here at home and did on par what fringe muslim jihadist movements are doing, we would appropriately hate them, so would the left, and so should christians world wide.

You don't have to love the status quo, but lets at least acknowledge what this status quo is.

It depends on what racism you're weighing. Popular majority counting is not valid in the USA because of the liberals work in the civil rights movement has largely been a success. Are you considering institutional racism to be a valid criticism?

Sure, maybe in comparison to all of our neighbors, but what kind of compliment is that considering that they all hate each other for an intangible web of wars throughout history? We simply have not had enough neighbors to invade or to invade us for us to be as xenophobic as other parts of the world. Saying that, our historical xenophobia is true. Just look at the bad wrap that the Irish got at first before they moved into the middle class and up.

How is that confusing things?

Yes, appropriately is what you're weighing though. What about proportionally? Would the outrage directed at Christofascists be the same when it's weighed?

Like you said, we different viewpoints and that will definitely impede a pure, common acknowledgment in the middle of what is the status quo.