Quote:
Originally Posted by Oberon
(Post 2122144)
You're not exactly speaking from a position of neutrality here though, are you? Obama may have failed to shut down Guantanamo, but who set it up in the first place? Who brought in the PATRIOT act? Who killed Kamal Derwish? Who declared war on Iraq?
You see, you can google for any kind of attack ammunition on both sides of the political spectrum in America, and that's a good part of what has gone wrong with the American system. Both sides are shouting at each other so loudly that neither can actually hear what each other are saying, nor do they have any interest, it's like the middle part of World War One, with neither side making much progress and everything in the middle being turned into a morass.
But don't you think that rather than weeding out the pseudo liberal neocons you should be looking to create a balanced party that appeals to a broader voting base and gives a more stable government when elected? Right now in America there are vast swathes of middle ground that have been left unclaimed, whoever moves to take it first could well win the next election. Furthermore you might want to take a look at the definition of 'neocon' because I'm not sure you're using it in the context that you are wishing to use it in, there's not a great deal that is liberal about a neocon.
Personally, I think what sets the past two US governments (Bush and Obama) aside from other US governments before them has been one thing, the internet.
I firmly and fully believe that if we had had the internet in the days of Roosevelt we would be having exactly the same conversation. The explosion of opinions that the internet has created has served to polarise the country. Mud-raking, soundbites and propaganda which is easily assembled and posted in a chain email has taken precedence over actions and speeches.
In short, the American governmental system was designed and implemented over two hundred years ago, it has had to change over the years to accommodate new media and the fact that the world has become a smaller place with each passing decade, and now the world has caught up to and surpassed the system, the system cannot handle it, and it has broken down. It is seemingly now a rare thing to find a neutral ground in America, because to be a neutral ground seems to be unacceptable. If you don't support the Republican viewpoint then you must be a Democrat, if you don't support the Democratic viewpoint then you must be a Republican.
That's not a good situation for any nation to be in. :hmmm:
|
Did you not see me admit Bush Admin was wrong on many levels? I discussed the PATRIOT Act and my disdain for it .I admitted I was not sure if Bush killed US citizens with drones, so if Kamal Derwish was killed, okay then, that is just as bad as obama, does not give obama a pass because Bush did it, especially with his "holier than thou" attitude he had when running for election.I am insulted by your google comment also, lets drop the condescending tone please.I don't blame Bush for Iraq as much, he was duped like the rest of us by Cheney and his circle.Bush is overall a good man who meant well, just was not up to the job intellectually.Don't think he is dumb but not exactly the brightest person out there. Cheney was the de facto president in many ways.
I am well aware of Neo-Cons, they are pseudo liberals, different foreign policy views and may want less government than Liberals, but still too much, definitely do not deserve to be called conservatives.
Yes, weeding them out is a great thing.The average voter can't tell a real difference between GOP and Democratic party at times, esp the Bush era.They figure, well they both spend a lot, both war monger, both are owned by money etc. The GOP brand is still stained by Bush, getting ready of the neocons so when do get back into power, can put through real conservative policies and have a real alternative to big government, high tax, anti liberty socialism. The American voters are still pretty fair, they need a real alternative though. Honestly, there was not a huge difference between Mitt Romney and Obama.Romney perhaps wanted lower taxes and more business friendly, which would help the economy but other than that, not much difference.Admitted he would have signed the NDAA(indefinite detention), continued the drone strikes on US citizens ACCUSED of being terrorists, spending etc Oh, his healthcare plan on national would have probably been just as bad as obamacare, maybe little less.See, no clear alternative substance wise. Now, the fluff and in this age of class warfare among the masses, they saw Romney as the out of touch rich guy, obama is the same lol but he had better fluff even with less or equally as awful substance, so aside from the padding(voter fraud, not much but enough to help) some undecided voters who could have been swung over to the GOP if had a real alternative, went with the devil the know, Barry Obama.
The new GOP that is emerging, the conservative party that respects the constitution and individual liberties, understands the dire straits socialism has left the US and that in order to save our country, we must change course, is one that with the proper messaging and right candidates, can win.The down side is we are stuck with the jesus freaks who raise hell about abortion etc but they can be managed.Really, yes, it's a good thing to weed out RINO's and neo cons.
Even with all the problems of the Bush Era GOP and the current one as it transitions and is undergoing house cleaning, it is the party closer, generally speaking to the American party.The Democratic party might as well just be called the socialist party, it is controlled by a foreign ideology that has no place in this country as it conflicts with our constitution and our traditions.Sadly, like a cancer it has grown over the years and we may be at or close to the point where its just too late to beat the cancer.Anyways, we saw what a Democratic House, Senate, and Presidency got us...stagnant economy,17 percent real unemployment, a deeply unpopular healthcare laws, indefinite detention of US citizens signed into law via the NDAA, expanded drone strikes, trillions in spending, trillions in more debt, antagonism of israel, support for enemies, naivete towards threats like Russia.Most disturbing of all is their tendency to just ignore the constitution and appoint justices and federal judges who follow the illegitimate and absolutely false notion of a "living constitution" so their agenda can be furthered.
I assure you under a President Paul, you would never see laws that violated the constitution and certainly no judges who believe in raping the constitution each time they pen a decision.
