Political discourse in this country

[Genx87]

http://www.startribune.com/191/story/1411875.html

I found this an interesting op-ed piece. It talks about a lawyer who is about to ship off to Iraq. Abouta couple of his experiences in political debate. I think what he experienced is not uncommon within our country. We have gone from openly debating to simply ordering our opinions. When capable we will even go so far as to shut up the opposition thus eliminating the debate.

While his experience has been with the left. I can think of many instances where hard liners from the right pull the same crap.

Opinions?

 

[lozina]

I agree. It's really hard to have a rational political discussion nowadays. Either side will just dig their heels in and vehemently tote their party's line no matter what. Totally blind to any contrary evidence. It's like watching Red Sox fans argue with Yankees fans.

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: lozina
I agree. It's really hard to have a rational political discussion nowadays. Either side will just dig their heels in and vehemently tote their party's line no matter what. Totally blind to any contrary evidence. It's like watching Red Sox fans argue with Yankees fans.

Exactly. Political Parties, Car Companies, etc are becoming like sports teams. This is something that needs to change I just hope it'll happen soon.

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: Genx87
http://www.startribune.com/191/story/1411875.html

I found this an interesting op-ed piece. It talks about a lawyer who is about to ship off to Iraq. Abouta couple of his experiences in political debate. I think what he experienced is not uncommon within our country. We have gone from openly debating to simply ordering our opinions. When capable we will even go so far as to shut up the opposition thus eliminating the debate.

While his experience has been with the left. I can think of many instances where hard liners from the right pull the same crap.

Opinions?

My opinion? Left or Right who gives a damn - they're both playing the same game.

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: lozina
I agree. It's really hard to have a rational political discussion nowadays. Either side will just dig their heels in and vehemently tote their party's line no matter what. Totally blind to any contrary evidence. It's like watching Red Sox fans argue with Yankees fans.

Exactly. Political Parties, Car Companies, etc are becoming like sports teams. This is something that needs to change I just hope it'll happen soon.

I've said this many times. People pick and argue for their party with the same arbitrary conviction they do for a sports team. It's pathetic. The political discord in this country is ridiculous.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: lozina
I agree. It's really hard to have a rational political discussion nowadays. Either side will just dig their heels in and vehemently tote their party's line no matter what. Totally blind to any contrary evidence. It's like watching Red Sox fans argue with Yankees fans.

Exactly. Political Parties, Car Companies, etc are becoming like sports teams. This is something that needs to change I just hope it'll happen soon.

Indeed. My "politically minded" friends will yell at me for applauding the actions of a Senator from "the wrong side of the aisle." True example: one of our state's Senators, Gordon Smith, has recently been a vocal opponent of many facets of the Iraq war, including the surge. I applauded him for this reversal in his stance, and sent him a letter sayin how much I appreciated him listening to the voice of Oregonians who are largely against the war. My friends accused me of selling out, and implied that Gordon Smith couldn't possibly be a good person because of the (R) that follows his name. Granted, he endorses views that I don't support, and would probably keep me from voting for him (primarily abortion rights, though I think his fiscal policies are generally wrong as well); but I can give kudos when someone does something right, regardless of their party affiliation. Sadly, even the educated among us seem less and less able to do so.

 

[Tab]

Anyone think it's a little ironic how this thread has so few posts?

 

[ahurtt]

At least in our country, political debates in congress do not end up in fisticuffs like they do in other places. . .yet.

 

[BMW540I6speed]

Genx87 said:

I found this an interesting op-ed piece. It talks about a lawyer who is about to ship off to Iraq. Abouta couple of his experiences in political debate. I think what he experienced is not uncommon within our country. We have gone from openly debating to simply ordering our opinions. When capable we will even go so far as to shut up the opposition thus eliminating the debate.

While his experience has been with the left. I can think of many instances where hard liners from the right pull the same crap.

Opinions?

If absolutely everything comes under the same whithering fire from people with no responsibility for providing an alternative, then eventually the politicians become obsessed with media management over policy and the electorate decides that all politicians are equally corrupt.

We already have this, in abundance, but without the benefit of a critical media exposing actual mendacity and corruption. Instead, what we have is blanket, aimless cynicism rooted not in factual instances of malfeasance, but in a "pox on both your houses" general malaise about government - except when blatant patriotism is invoked, in which case we are expected to reflexively salute the Commander in Chief.

I submit that much of this generalized cynicism and malaise is in fact a consequence of our media's lassitude. The media fails in its duty to scrutinize and inform, then, when the government screws up massively, we are left blinking and confused how it happened. This creates a general sense of powerlessness among the people, and a dismissive attitude that government is inherently corrupt or incompetent no matter how much attention is paid or pressure applied to it.

Skepticism isn't a bad thing if it is rooted in knowledge and specificity. Our leaders must expect to be challenged on their assertions, and they must be prepared to back up statements with solid argumentation and/or evidence. Regular and consistent critical analysis and confrontation of our leaders by prominent media sources can help restore a sense of empowerment to the people, particularly if they sense that these leaders have begun to fear popular outrage.

I have always envied Britain's "Prime Minister's Questions" and other direct confrontations of the executive apparatus. Pitting ambition against ambition within the government, and subjecting politicians to the glare of public scrutiny, is not a poison, but the very life blood of democracy.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: BMW540I6speed
Genx87 said:

I found this an interesting op-ed piece. It talks about a lawyer who is about to ship off to Iraq. Abouta couple of his experiences in political debate. I think what he experienced is not uncommon within our country. We have gone from openly debating to simply ordering our opinions. When capable we will even go so far as to shut up the opposition thus eliminating the debate.

While his experience has been with the left. I can think of many instances where hard liners from the right pull the same crap.

Opinions?

If absolutely everything comes under the same whithering fire from people with no responsibility for providing an alternative, then eventually the politicians become obsessed with media management over policy and the electorate decides that all politicians are equally corrupt.

We already have this, in abundance, but without the benefit of a critical media exposing actual mendacity and corruption. Instead, what we have is blanket, aimless cynicism rooted not in factual instances of malfeasance, but in a "pox on both your houses" general malaise about government - except when blatant patriotism is invoked, in which case we are expected to reflexively salute the Commander in Chief.

I submit that much of this generalized cynicism and malaise is in fact a consequence of our media's lassitude. The media fails in its duty to scrutinize and inform, then, when the government screws up massively, we are left blinking and confused how it happened. This creates a general sense of powerlessness among the people, and a dismissive attitude that government is inherently corrupt or incompetent no matter how much attention is paid or pressure applied to it.

Skepticism isn't a bad thing if it is rooted in knowledge and specificity. Our leaders must expect to be challenged on their assertions, and they must be prepared to back up statements with solid argumentation and/or evidence. Regular and consistent critical analysis and confrontation of our leaders by prominent media sources can help restore a sense of empowerment to the people, particularly if they sense that these leaders have begun to fear popular outrage.

I have always envied Britain's "Prime Minister's Questions" and other direct confrontations of the executive apparatus. Pitting ambition against ambition within the government, and subjecting politicians to the glare of public scrutiny, is not a poison, but the very life blood of democracy.

I've watched that numerous times and always got a chuckle when I'd wonder how Bush would fare in a format like that:thumbsup:

 

[Moonbeam]

Everything can be understood if you will remember the greatest truth that is repressed, that we hate ourselves, don't know it, and don't want to know that we don't want to know.

Then it would be possible to put a simple two and two together, that because we hate ourselves and are avoiding that realization, we avoid any data that makes us feel bad, because we feel like the worst in the world, already, and are trying to keep that out of consciousness. Anything that stirs up those feelings will be met with aggressive rage.

So any political position we take, we take because that political position has been made to appear to us as good and our ego needs that as a subterfuge to pretend we don't self hate.

If somebody tells us we are wrong, they are in effect stripping us of our needed pretense. They are really saying to us on an emotional level, that we are the worst in the world, what we really feel. We would rather die, or kill, than allow that.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Tab
Anyone think it's a little ironic how this thread has so few posts?

Unfortunately I didnt expect a whole hell of a lot of responses. For that took the time to respond, I thank you very much. Anyways I think people didnt respon because it would be facing the truth that the majority of us(me included) do the very thing mentioned in this article. It isnt about factually winning a debate, but beating your opponent with wit, insults, or trying to shut them up.

 

[bbdub333]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
blah blah blah I hate myself blah blah blah

Do you ever post anything intelligent, or just this repetitive pseudo-intellectual blather?

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Originally posted by: bbdub333

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
blah blah blah I hate myself blah blah blah

Do you ever post anything intelligent, or just this repetitive pseudo-intellectual blather?

Oh stop that, you obviously hate yourself. Now you are just projecting your aggressive rage because of your repressed self-loathing. The sooner you realize that you hate yourself, the sooner the healing can begin. Aww, forget it, lets just go shoot some beer cans or somethin'

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: bbdub333

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
blah blah blah I hate myself blah blah blah

Do you ever post anything intelligent, or just this repetitive pseudo-intellectual blather?

I post the same thing over and over because people raise issues that have the same answer over and over again. It is your own blindness, the same one I mention again and again, that makes you think this has something to do with intellect. It's not that you're stupid, as you feel, but that you are blind. You don't know how you feel.

 

[yllus]

Originally posted by: bbdub333

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
blah blah blah I hate myself blah blah blah

Do you ever post anything intelligent, or just this repetitive pseudo-intellectual blather?

Wait until you get a load of his thoughts on nuclear energy.

 

[imported_Lothar]

"What you see depends on where you stand."
or...
"Where you sit is what you're seeing."

Pick whichever is appropriate.

 

[imported_Lothar]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: bbdub333

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
blah blah blah I hate myself blah blah blah

Do you ever post anything intelligent, or just this repetitive pseudo-intellectual blather?

I post the same thing over and over because people raise issues that have the same answer over and over again. It is your own blindness, the same one I mention again and again, that makes you think this has something to do with intellect. It's not that you're stupid, as you feel, but that you are blind. You don't know how you feel.

What are your thoughts on nuclear energy?

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Tab
Anyone think it's a little ironic how this thread has so few posts?

Unfortunately I didnt expect a whole hell of a lot of responses. For that took the time to respond, I thank you very much. Anyways I think people didnt respon because it would be facing the truth that the majority of us(me included) do the very thing mentioned in this article. It isnt about factually winning a debate, but beating your opponent with wit, insults, or trying to shut them up.

I was gonna say...you're hardly in a position to be calling anyone out on this issue, but maybe you're the perfect person to do so. I agree, you're not exactly perfect here...but then again, neither am I. I see myself doing it all the time, and even when I notice myself being a partisan jackass while I'm typing I can't resist. I think it's because humans as a species are much better wired for fighting rather than thinking, it's a lot easier to get all hot and bothered and even more steadfast in your viewpoint than to actually intelligently reconsider your ideas and admit that maybe someone else has a better idea. After all, intelligent discourse and compromise are relatively new things, while our fighting instincts and our "tribe" instincts have been with us for millions and millions of years. Maybe in another couple million years our lower brain functions will finally catch up with what we KNOW we should really be doing.

 

[Darwin333]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Tab
Anyone think it's a little ironic how this thread has so few posts?

Unfortunately I didnt expect a whole hell of a lot of responses. For that took the time to respond, I thank you very much. Anyways I think people didnt respon because it would be facing the truth that the majority of us(me included) do the very thing mentioned in this article. It isnt about factually winning a debate, but beating your opponent with wit, insults, or trying to shut them up.

I was gonna say...you're hardly in a position to be calling anyone out on this issue, but maybe you're the perfect person to do so. I agree, you're not exactly perfect here...but then again, neither am I. I see myself doing it all the time, and even when I notice myself being a partisan jackass while I'm typing I can't resist. I think it's because humans as a species are much better wired for fighting rather than thinking, it's a lot easier to get all hot and bothered and even more steadfast in your viewpoint than to actually intelligently reconsider your ideas and admit that maybe someone else has a better idea. After all, intelligent discourse and compromise are relatively new things, while our fighting instincts and our "tribe" instincts have been with us for millions and millions of years. Maybe in another couple million years our lower brain functions will finally catch up with what we KNOW we should really be doing.

Is it really that simple? Do you really believe that we are we that hopeless?

I will make the accusation that most of us are more concerned about our "team" winning then we are the welfare of our country/fellow man. I have done it myself, as you have, the question is how do we reverse a system that WE support?

Unfortunately, I believe that we will have to hit rock bottom before we change our ways and we aren't anywhere close to rock bottom yet.

 

[Darwin333]

Originally posted by: ahurtt
At least in our country, political debates in congress do not end up in fisticuffs like they do in other places. . .yet.

What would be the difference, honestly (besides entertainment, comeon who wouldn't enjoy a Chenny/Kennedy battle royal? We could give Dick a shotgun and Kennedy a bottle of scotch and a car.)

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: Darwin333

Originally posted by: ahurtt
At least in our country, political debates in congress do not end up in fisticuffs like they do in other places. . .yet.

What would be the difference, honestly (besides entertainment, comeon who wouldn't enjoy a Chenny/Kennedy battle royal? We could give Dick a shotgun and Kennedy a bottle of scotch and a car.)

Oh my GOD!!! A traitor calling for the death of a US Senator!! Better watch out, some people on this board are making a list. They're going to find out who's naughty or nice.

 

[Darwin333]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Darwin333

Originally posted by: ahurtt
At least in our country, political debates in congress do not end up in fisticuffs like they do in other places. . .yet.

What would be the difference, honestly (besides entertainment, comeon who wouldn't enjoy a Chenny/Kennedy battle royal? We could give Dick a shotgun and Kennedy a bottle of scotch and a car.)

Oh my GOD!!! A traitor calling for the death of a US Senator!! Better watch out, some people on this board are making a list. They're going to find out who's naughty or nice.

That is exactly the problem. It doesn't matter who is "naughty or nice". It matters only whose "team" you are on.

 

[Lemon law]

Originally posted by: lozina
I agree. It's really hard to have a rational political discussion nowadays. Either side will just dig their heels in and vehemently tote their party's line no matter what. Totally blind to any contrary evidence. It's like watching Red Sox fans argue with Yankees fans.

It is quite prophetic that lozina comes out as a posting genius by getting to the total heart of the matter in this thread by citing the Yankee Red Sox feud. My baseball cap is donned in salute to you.

What an apt analogy! Historically the Boston Red Sox used to be the dominant team in baseball until they made the mistake of trading off a player named Babe Ruth to the New York Yankees. At which point the Yankees acquired the almost instant baseball hegemony and the Red Sox spent almost a century saddled by the so called curse of the Bambino. A curse not even the death of Ruth could dispel.

And here we are many a moon later and GWB is somewhat that latter day franchise player champion of political discourse who must retire by 1/20/2009 if the commissioners don't give him the boot earlier.

And there may well be that new curse of the Bushie. The question is what team will it bite and for how long?

 

[Lemon law]

What would be the difference, honestly (besides entertainment, comeon who wouldn't enjoy a Chenny/Kennedy battle royal? We could give Dick a shotgun and Kennedy a bottle of scotch and a car.)

Well one thing for sure, the lesson is clear. Don't ride in a car with Ted Kennedy and don't go hunting with Dick Cheney.

A word to the wise from a wise guy. Always retain your sense of humor, none of us will get out of this mess alive. Cheer up, other people will inherit the messes
we created and didn't solve.