Welcome to PILOT SPIN!
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
I thought it was consensual
Let me see I have this right. The media, educational institutions and the government have brain washed half of America with poisonous ideas with nefarious intent of destroying America and the other half of America just knows what is right and true. So if we want a united people, we just need to force the media, the educational institutions and all the branches of government to espouse only what is right and true, then the misguided half of the country will come around and join the "right" side of the country.
"Special interest" groups seem to be the boogie man to people until it's one of their special interests, then it's a collective voice on capitol hill speaking for the people. Why would people need these groups in the first place? Now I see how unification works for conservatives, just get everyone on the left to think as they do and we'll all be unified. No compromise required.
Since the beginning of this country, there have been people on the left and people on the right. The founding fathers fought and argued all the time. It is believed that the majority of the people in the colonies in revolutionary times took the conservative position of sticking with the king and remaining royal subjects of the crown. It is those that we hold dear now that were the lefty progressives of that era. What a radical and dangerous idea, that people should have a say in government!!
I agree that the media and particularly the internet, has amplified and increased the intensity of our opinions. They do this because there is good money in conflict. Ultimately though, it is the people that choose to be divided. If there were no TV, radio, newspaper, or internet, we would still have differences of opinion, but likely be much closer together as our positions wouldn't be so extreme and inflexible. There are millions of people in the country like this now. They avoid politics and the political media out there and they are much more open to other ideas. They are those annoying swing voters, or worse yet, those that don't vote at all.
How in the world that a single individual is supposed emerge and overcome the power of the media and all the rhetoric to bring the country together is beyond me. A very tall order for a mere mortal that was placed in that position by practitioners of partisan politics in the first place.
I'm honestly of the opinion that the Republic is more likely to survive a President Clinton than a President Trump.
Clinton lacks the charisma to "rule" by force of will. Trump would be far more likely to make a US version of "Triumph of the Will". A charismatic populist, without moorings to any principles ("Everything is negotiable") is a dangerous combination for republican governance.
As someone who lived through Senior's term as PM, I still cannot say the name without needing to spit on the ground afterwards. Junior is on course to complete many of his father's worst projects.
That's a relief.
I thought you were going to say you were tired of arguing with us racists and that you were going to go away, like Captain did.
That would be a solution to reducing the court's workload only. In every case, there's a winner and loser. That would be an absolutist solution that says to bring a suit it would have to be a slam dunk. Law rarely is that simple.
People keep talking about this, but how in the world would it ever happen? My understanding is, you need either a 2/3 vote by both houses, or 2/3rds of our 50 states to call for one. How could you ever get that many senators and representatives to support limiting their parties power and influence? How could you ever get 33 states to call a convention and then get 38 of them to agree to give more power back to the people? The Democrats alone could keep this from happening and they in no way want power to go back to the people. They like the established order just fine, they just desire less Republicans in the way.
Also, I completely disagree with term limits on Supreme Court judges. It just further politicizes the position and doesn't solve much. Just as it would provide more opportunities to toss liberal judges out, it would also provide more opportunities to toss conservative judges out. By making it a life time position, the individual judges can in theory, set politics aside and focus on the law, the constitution and what is right for the country without having to worry about what the electorate think, or the political parties, or the lobbyists, or whoever.
I agree that it's a potential issue but the turnout and energy seen in the primaries would seem to counter that.
I held my nose and pulled the handle in '12 (respected Romney tremendously as a person, just not as a Republican candidate, I liked Ryan but am terribly disappointed in his speakership to-date), and I personally feel that we won't get rid of the establishment unless/until they show themselves to everyone to be as inept as many of us already know/believe them to be - and that would mean losing yet another election by promoting yet another bad candidate and seeing yet lower participation.
The stakes went nuclear this year with Scalia's passing and I believe conservatives understand that - while I personally was not going to just 'show up' this year if the R's didn't put forward a candidate I could vote FOR, Scalia's passing changed that - I would begrudgingly vote for Cruz or Rubio, hell even Kasich, knowing we would get yet another shit sandwich and continue the influence of the establishment.
Edited to add - with Hillary 'stealing' the primaries from Bernie I think that the Dem coalition may suffer more than usual and their turnout could conceivably be lower than normal - basically the young skulls full of mush will stay home.
'Gimp
Diversity of Derogatory. Who'd a thunk it?
I'd like to publicly state that I was not acutely aware of the racial component of the term "Snowflake". I used it recently referring to Stan and if it was taken in that manner, it was not intentional. I suppose it's akin to the blackface issue at UW-Whitewater.
http://m.wisn.com/news/photo-of-uw-whitewater-students-in-blackface-causes-controversy/38071068
Maybe I need some racial sensitivity training (?).
That's how politics in America work. You make a claim and shout it from the highest hill, then it will go viral and a great multitude will believe it with any fact checking. The claim does not have to be true, or based in any fact what so ever.
There is now a certain amount of Americans that will believe that Rubio is eligible because they want to believe that and they will repeat it over and over to their friends and acquaintances. It's a shitty attack on a campaign rival and illustrates how the Donald does business. His art of the deal includes lying, deceit and manipulation, but to the Trumpeteers, the means justify the ends so shout it they will.
We've got a resident Trumpkin right here.
In terms of understanding it, it's a cult of personality. Just like Obama, just like Kim Jong-un.
1 Like
