Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Recommended Posts

America is reaching a simmering point. Our politics has gone to the point of civil distaste. But there's hope.

This story from CNN highlight that we should all remain civil and respect one another regardless of our political differences. 

Public figures and the media from both sides are to blame for this. They've shown to be callous in stoking an already highly contentious election.

But most of all we are all to blame, don't let your disagreement turn into hatred. Respect and be civil to one another. This is a fundamental value for all people.

 

"
Another woman came up to me at the press pen and urged me to change my approach to reporting on the Trump White House. She accused me of being rude to both the President and press secretary Sarah Sanders.
"What's going to happen is we're going to end up with a civil war. You're going to have people shooting people," she warned. "You need to tone it down a little bit. The language, everything. It's gotta stop. Be decent, please be decent. Don't ask any more stupid questions."
 
Then came the highlight of the night. Shortly before Trump's speech, a gentleman asked if any of us in the press could lend him a chair for an elderly woman who was not feeling well. She, like so many of the President's supporters, had stood in line for hours in 90-degree temperatures to get a glimpse of Trump in action. Without hesitation, I offered him mine. The man later came back to us with his mother who thanked me.
"You're a good man. Your mama raised you right," the man told me. "She tried," I joked to him.
"

 

https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/26/politics/trump-south-carolina-reporter-acosta/index.html

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

No big deal yet...most of these people never lived through the 1960's in America.

Now that was "civil unrest" !

Valid point, probably because they couldn't tweet back then. 

But in all seriousness things like alt-right and anti-fa worries me. I really hope the rest of the country doesn't turn into the riot at charlottesville. 

Edited by paxrom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, paxrom said:

Valid point, probably because they couldn't tweet back then. 

 

Yes, I think that is part of difference....much more drama just because of so much more media diarrhea....even when the issues pale in comparison to 1960's civil rights struggles.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/26/2018 at 5:06 PM, bush_cheney2004 said:

No big deal yet...most of these people never lived through the 1960's in America.

Now that was "civil unrest" !

And the backlash to that started with the Coulters and Limbaughs of the world - that's where the civility really started breaking down.

Edited by eyeball

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, eyeball said:

And the backlash to that started with the Coulters and Limbaughs of the world - that's where the civility really started breaking down.

 

No....there was also a thing called The Civil War...civility really broke down.

Democrats got mad because the Republicans freed their slaves.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/26/2018 at 8:02 PM, paxrom said:

 But most of all we are all to blame, don't let your disagreement turn into hatred. Respect and be civil to one another. This is a fundamental value for all people.

It's an old tactic for the side that has an advantage to call for a cease fire.   There were plenty of calls for violence when Obama was president, because he was Kenyan and taking away the guns.  What people don't often realize about civil society was that it was built on a very long gone ceasefire.  

If you take away peoples' rights, take away their healthcare and don't allow them to organize then you are just asking for trouble IMO.  Saying 'Be Civil' isn't going to cut it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

If you take away peoples' rights, take away their healthcare and don't allow them to organize then you are just asking for trouble IMO.  Saying 'Be Civil' isn't going to cut it.

Rather than civil unrest, or disobedience, how about winning elections? And you know how to do that right... develop policies that are useful and good, and present them as alternatives for the people. But I don't see kind of positive messaging coming out, just moral grand-standing, which if analyzed becomes silly hypocrisy. A great example is the child separation law prompting this huge outrage. Such an explosive emotional issue, you can see what can come out of it if exploited. Well they did that, and we find the same activity under Obama. That issue seems to have suddenly died down now, although I didn't hear of its resolution.

As you know there are elections coming up and the right way to effect change in democracy is to win at the polls, not in restaurant parking lots. And from the info coming out, that future doesn't exactly look bright, for the Dems. They may very well soon fall on their own sword.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

1) Rather than civil unrest, or disobedience, how about winning elections?

2) That issue seems to have suddenly died down now, although I didn't hear of its resolution.

1) Well, you have a good point.  If people actually continue to support reduced/no healthcare, support taking away rights that were given decades ago then there will be no problem and the election wins will continue.

2) The president, after denying he had anything to do with a problem, wrote an executive order ending the practice.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

It's an old tactic for the side that has an advantage to call for a cease fire.   There were plenty of calls for violence when Obama was president, because he was Kenyan and taking away the guns.  What people don't often realize about civil society was that it was built on a very long gone ceasefire.  

If you take away peoples' rights, take away their healthcare and don't allow them to organize then you are just asking for trouble IMO.  Saying 'Be Civil' isn't going to cut it.

Part of being in a free society is the ability to have strong vigorous debate over tough issues, with the goal of reaching an agreement or understanding of each other's view point. But when people resort to ad homein attacks, oversimplification of the other side and many other logical fallacies then the issue is that communication breaks down. That is not the way to a healthy debate. I've seen it done by all sides. This isn't a call for a cease fire, this is a call to listen, truly listen, you can only do that by respecting one another. Respecting each other's right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Respecting our core fundamental values. This is one of the core foundation of civil society. 

Issues like healthcare and organization are being vigorously debated but they can't be debated if we don't listen to one another. 

 

 

List of fallacies http://my.ilstu.edu/~jecox/FOI Materials/Logical Fallacies Definitions and Examples.htm

Edited by paxrom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

... develop policies that are useful and good, and present them as alternatives for the people. But I don't see kind of positive messaging coming out, just moral grand-standing, which if analyzed becomes silly hypocrisy.

What's really silly is how virtually every analysis of an alternative policy is universally peppered with a bunch of big ol' lol's and references to Stalin, Suzuki and communism.

After nearly 25 years or more of bellicose vitriol I think it fair to ask why smacking someone upside the head with a shovel on occasion isn't an appropriate response.

Edited by eyeball

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, paxrom said:

1) with the goal of reaching an agreement or understanding of each other's view point. But when people resort to ad homein attacks, oversimplification of the other side...

2) Issues like healthcare and organization are being vigorously debated but they can't be debated if we don't listen to one another. 

1) Violence at rallies, offering to pay jail costs for people who interfere with others' right to speak, "lock her up".   The time to declare a cease fire is now, clearly, after those tactics have worked.

2) I think it's too late for that now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Michael Hardner said:

1) Violence at rallies, offering to pay jail costs for people who interfere with others' right to speak, "lock her up".   The time to declare a cease fire is now, clearly, after those tactics have worked.

2) I think it's too late for that now.

LOL you sound like as if you  lost the election.

Once again I think both sides are guilty of these things. 

1) not a cease fire, more like a Geneva accord. 

2) never too late to turnaround, turnaround, every now and then I get a 
little bit lonely and you're never coming around....

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

The president, after denying he had anything to do with a problem, wrote an executive order ending the practice.

 

And he was not lying. He can still deny he had anything to do with the problem, as this is a law that has been put into practice for many years now. Trump is not a career politician so would have had nothing to do with the implementation of this law. It was passed by a former congress.

Putting a child in temporary housing or foster care when their parent engages in illegal activity is standard practice — even for U.S. citizens. A bit of information that’s been largely ignored is that there are an unknown number of American children who’ve been seperated from their parents and placed in foster care when their parents are incarcerated.

An estimated 20,939 American children were put in foster care when a parent was incarcerated in 2016, according to the Department of Health and Human Services. That accounts for about eight percent of the total number of children who entered the foster care system that same year.

Link

Of course I know he wrote an executive order ending the practice. What i meant when i said I've heard little else is, they haven't implemented the change yet. I believe they have up to 30 days to do so, or something. I want to see how they're going to deal with it, because some parents are in prisons, adult jails which is no place for a 5 year old to be. That is why the law currently exists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, eyeball said:

After nearly 25 years or more of bellicose vitriol I think it fair to ask why smacking someone upside the head with a shovel on occasion isn't an appropriate response.

Perhaps because you are an old, old man who has only become more bitter and jaded as time goes on. Final outcome of unchecked leftism...

Edited by OftenWrong
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

Perhaps because you are an old, old man who has only become more bitter and jaded as time goes on. Final outcome of unchecked leftism...

Actually I'm feeling more like Ann Coulter which suggests a different reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, eyeball said:

Actually I'm feeling more like Ann Coulter which suggests a different reason.

Why even argue ?  A foreign country has made their choice, and we should make ours.  

The arguments I have seen so far:

1) You lost the election so you have to be civil, not us. [made to a Canadian, btw]

2) You are old

We're on to the next phase, I'm guessing.  No more discussions of public health care, but instead it will be about privatizing all education and policing, eliminating minimum wages and ending anti-trust legislation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

Why even argue ?  A foreign country has made their choice, and we should make ours. 

 

Agreed....I don't know why some people get so worked up over American domestic politics from another country.

Canada (and Canadian news media), more than any other nation that I can see, ingests and reacts to U.S. politics habitually.   Consistent FEAR about the U.S. unraveling (civil unrest) apparently spooks many in Canada, as if what has gone before was relatively better and acceptable.

America has progressed in its own way from the very beginning....even had a full blown civil war.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, eyeball said:

Actually I'm feeling more like Ann Coulter which suggests a different reason.

What are you wearing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Why even argue ?  A foreign country has made their choice, and we should make ours.  

The arguments I have seen so far:

1) You lost the election so you have to be civil, not us. [made to a Canadian, btw]

2) You are old

We're on to the next phase, I'm guessing.  No more discussions of public health care, but instead it will be about privatizing all education and policing, eliminating minimum wages and ending anti-trust legislation.

All joking aside, it's becoming clear that Donald Trump is not going away any time soon. In fact some say it's entirely possible he may win a second term. I bring it up because, as I said,  the left needs to win at the polls not in restaurant parking lots. Yet they have nothing. All they continue to do is try and foment civil unrest, which is a complete political dead-end.

Democrats badly underestimated Trump
 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

All joking aside, it's becoming clear that Donald Trump is not going away any time soon. In fact some say it's entirely possible he may win a second term. I bring it up because, as I said,  the left needs to win at the polls not in restaurant parking lots. Yet they have nothing. All they continue to do is try and foment civil unrest, which is a complete political dead-end.

Democrats badly underestimated Trump
 

Trump will win 2020 election because leftist civil unrest have only hardened the conservative resolve.

The liberal media has gotten so outrageous about it that all their headlines are how to hate on trump more today. 

Everything he does is criticized, without even presenting an objective view on the matter. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

1)  the left needs to win at the polls not in restaurant parking lots. Yet they have nothing.  

 

1) The Democrats are not 'left'.  They do offer a lot, especially in contrast to what Trump has delivered to working class people.  His promises for better healthcare at lower cost, for example.  They can also now add 'fiscal responsibility' to the list relative to Trump.

 

1 hour ago, paxrom said:

2) Trump will win 2020 election because leftist civil unrest have only hardened the conservative resolve.

3) Everything he does is criticized, without even presenting an objective view on the matter. 

2) What civil unrest ?

3) Yes, it's true that he is criticized too much but then again he is also a terrible president and a terrible person.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...