What has happened to our country?

clax said:

My opinion is right because my opinion is that the truth is true, out really isn't my opinion, its just an inconvenient fact that you can't deny, so you play this game with opinions, its intellectually dishonest, and I will have no part in your denial of the truth, so try harder, produce some fact or learn to play in your own league.

Click to expand...

Hahaha... right. You still neglect that the people often disagree. And once more you misrepresented my position...

clax said:

I know the answer, it lies in the people.

We have been told that to defend what we believe in until our deaths is terrorism, and that other opinions are just as valid.

First, it is absolutely the definition of the word patriot if you sacrifice time money and blood for your nation (people). The next statement I make will scare some folks.

"I love my nation and its people, I will absolutely eliminate any threat to her with any necessary force". Our nation's most threatening enemy is within, mixed up among our people even thinking they are our people.

Second, not all opinions are valid. If it goes against our constitution it is not valid. You have the right to have an opinion, you do not have the right to have a valid opinion or to have your opinion validated. It doesn't matter who the holder of that opinion is, our which office they hold, the constitution takes into consideration nothing of the titles of nobility any would be emperor chooses to bestow.

There comes a time when the patriots must get our hands dirty.

Click to expand...

STAY HOME and get your hands dirty, please.

clax said:

People can disagree, who cares, people disagreed with mlk. Your post really want misinterpreted, it was incorrect

Click to expand...

So you agree that people disagree. Nice. SO maybe now you realize that my interpretation of the 2nd amendment is mine and yours is yours. Neither is necessarily better as they are interpretations of the same thing with roughly the same facts in consideration.

clax said:

Yeah, you are free to fabricate meanings that are unfounded and that you can't support, I just will not accept your interpretation and pretending that there are any facts that support you.

You see the reason you attempt and fail to beat me in debate every single time is because you think your opinion is supported by fact, you never produce any fact and I call you out on that then you whine and cry, and attempt to insult and eventually give up because you can't prove your opinion.

Your opinion is just interpretation of fact, to me, my interpretation is far more accurate, mainly because its mine, you don't sleep in my bed, you don't live in my house so your interpretation of facts if disagreeing with mine are of no importance to me. So no I don't value your opinion, you do have the right to have it, and I have never taken that away.

Instead of ranting and raving and posting your interpretation of facts and insisting everybody that disagrees just doesn't understand science. Post a fact and explain why you came to the conclusion you did, and know that to you that your opinion is the best for you. I don't know why you get so irritated because I disagree.

Every single time, I know there are things you and I do agree on, just try my disagreement as you do my agreement.

Click to expand...

Your Idea Of Debate Runs Counter To That Which We Strive For Here.

Either Refrain From The Negativity You Rely On, Take A Class On Human Interaction, Or Be Prepared To Search For A New Forum.

Iolo said:

STAY HOME and get your hands dirty, please.

Click to expand...

In 2013, THE WHOLE WORLD is home, due to the threats that come from multiple continents. To illustrate on a smaller scale, if bad guys are plotting to throw molatov cocktails at your house, just staying home isn't good enough. You have to go after those bad guys wherever they are, and contact the police. And SOMEBODY has to be that police. Get it ?

What has happened to our country is a complete clash of 2 sets of political ideologies, which cannot work together. Republicans, while having generally acceptable (opposing) ideas on immigration, Islamization, affirmative action, simultaneously have horrible ideas on economics, which clash against the wishes of the American people (ex. protecting the rich from taxation, shutdown, not spending on needed projects, etc). Democrats are the reverse of this. This entanglement must get untangled or this country will forever be in a detrimental morass, which seems to be worsening with time.

Probably the answer is for Republicans to soften up their opposition to raising taxes on the rich (which the people overwhelmingly support), thereby allowing for more spending on NECESSARY projects (defense, law enforcement, border protection, infrastructure, etc), and simultaneously creating more jobs. At the same time, Democrats need to stop supporting anti-American groups like Muslim Brotherhood front groups (CAIR, ISNA, etc), stop supporting unnecessary immigration (solely designed to bring them VOTES), stop supporting affirmative action (and similar anti-white racism), and stop feeding American dollars and jobs to foreign immigrants (Visas) while American go unemployed.

There's more to it than this, but these items would be a solid foundation for fundamental repair of the tangled up mess we have become.

Aufgeblassen said:

The rich pay more MORE MORE than their fair share in absolute out-of-pocket dollars. They should pay less, so the rest can carry their fair share of taxes.

It is not percentage, but absolute dollars you should look at what is paid.

The middle and poor get FAR more services per tax dollar spent that the rich.

Click to expand...

Ridiculous, and completely against the wishes of the American people who overwhelmingly support tax raises on the rich (67-85% depending on the poll).

Sure, we can look at absolute $ paid. And we can simultaneously look at absolute $ RECEIVED by the rich. And I don't agree that the rich get much less back from tax $. The rich get law enforcement protection, infrastructure, national defense, disease control, environmental protection, and lots more. It IS % we should look at, and the %s are far less now that they have been for most of the past 95 years. 70% when Reagan took office. 92% during Eisnehower's term.

Aufgeblassen said:

LOL!!! Of course if you ask one class of people if another class should have something taken away from them they'd say "SURE!", because IT DOES NOT AFFECT THEM!!! So that makes it fair???

I'm sure if you surveyed white folk pre civil war and asked them if the agree with a tax on slaves (not slave owners), they'd overwhelmingly say "SURE!"

Click to expand...

When percentages are considered, and thus the majority....it is pretty much expected that the 99% (or whatever), will expect the one percent to suffer as they do.

Is the problem taxation levels or is it how the money is spent? I think we could raise taxes on the rich today and it wouldn't change a thing, money would still not be spent on the 'essentials', bridges would still crumble, roads would still fall into disrepair, people would still go hungry.

William said:

Is the problem taxation levels or is it how the money is spent? I think we could raise taxes on the rich today and it wouldn't change a thing, money would still not be spent on the 'essentials', bridges would still crumble, roads would still fall into disrepair, people would still go hungry.

Click to expand...

1. Upon what do you base this seemingly unfounded statement ?

2. What makes you say bridges would still crumble ? Got a source ? Got a link ? Got anything ?

William said:

Is the problem taxation levels or is it how the money is spent? I think we could raise taxes on the rich today and it wouldn't change a thing, money would still not be spent on the 'essentials', bridges would still crumble, roads would still fall into disrepair, people would still go hungry.

Click to expand...

The primary responsibility of government is to protect the citizenry and maintain civilization. Should it fail in this it tends to be removed, as history shows. Taxation is the form of continuation developed to allow this, and the problem arrive where society decides on the fairness and amounts.

Aufgeblassen said:

LOL!!! Of course if you ask one class of people if another class should have something taken away from them they'd say "SURE!", because IT DOES NOT AFFECT THEM!!! So that makes it fair???

I'm sure if you surveyed white folk pre civil war and asked them if the agree with a tax on slaves (not slave owners), they'd overwhelmingly say "SURE!"

Click to expand...

Many of the super rich have been asked if they should have their taxes raised, and they said "SURE!" when IT DOES AFFECT THEM. Yes, it is fair. One might also ask, whatever made them so rich to begin with, is THAT fair ? (while millions of hard-working people make a tiny fraction of the imcomes of those rich people)

Aufgeblassen said:

These are just Liberal talking point to tax and spend more & more with no end in sight. I have not personally seen any of this non-sense. Can you give some actual examples???

Click to expand...

Sure, go to the DOT website and see how many bridges and overpasses are deemed to be structurally deficient. My reasoning is that this country brings in $1.7 Trillion in revenue. We spend an additional $1 Trillion beyond that every year. We can't take care of roads and bridges with that? That's not enough money? How much would be enough? I don't think we're prioritizing what we've got right now correctly and if that is the problem I don't see what raising the top marginal rate would do to help.

Protectionist said:

1. Upon what do you base this seemingly unfounded statement ?

2. What makes you say bridges would still crumble ? Got a source ? Got a link ? Got anything ?

Click to expand...

It is my opinion, I think we have government officials whose idea of a 'priority' differ greatly from mine and after spending my life watching the government battle drugs and poverty (and spending trillions of dollars to do so by the way) I don't think the word "unfounded" is the word I would have chosen to describe my opinion after seeing the results.

Go to the DOT or the Homeland Security website and check on the condition of our bridges and read up on some of the stop-gap measures being employed to "shore them up". Truly awe inspiring. Can't fix bridges but if you want an Obamaphone they've got ya covered.

The reason I'm not giving you the links is because they're government websites. They're not obscure therefore they're considered general and common knowledge and I as a rule will not spoon feed someone information so readily available.

tecoyah said:

The primary responsibility of government is to protect the citizenry and maintain civilization. Should it fail in this it tends to be removed, as history shows. Taxation is the form of continuation developed to allow this, and the problem arrive where society decides on the fairness and amounts.

Click to expand...

I partially agree with you. Taxation is step one, responsible spending is the next step. If the government is irresponsible with the money then it doesn't matter how much revenue you bring in.

Back to the question asked in the OP: What has happened to our country?

I agree with something clax said, he said it's the people. We have the representation that we have right now because we have done nothing to change it. I've seen a dramatic drop in local participation in politics over the last 20 years. The Dems and the GOP aren't really that different, the bulk of the membership of both parties are people I consider to be Centrist and make up the dominant ideological bloc in this country but over the last 20 years the extreme positions on both sides have gained traction. We now have extremists in positions of influence with the dominant ideological bloc divided between two parties (and therefore conquered) and that can't be good for anyone unless they're an extremist.

The base unit in politics used to be the precinct, just a few neighborhoods grouped together into a political unit, and people did get involved at the precinct level. People went to the meetings of their party of choice, went door to door fund-raising and discussing the issues with residents, talked issues at the meetings as well as holding meetings open to the public in order to gather input, handled signage placement (and re-placement ) during campaigns but most important of all forwarded their positions up the chain to whatever candidate needed to see them. Even if a candidate did have an extreme bent he had to somewhat put the brakes on and moderate himself in order to gain the support of the precincts. We don't have that moderating influence anymore. In my precinct, there are no political parties active at the precinct level and the county Party commissions hire temps to place signage.

I think three things caused this change:
1) Super-PACS. Money collection, and therefore power, shifted from bottom-up to top-down so the state and national guys didn't need to listen to the precincts anymore although this by itself didn't result in the death of precinct participation.

2) The Internet. People used to go to meetings to be heard, now any idiot with a computer can vent and then forget about politics until the next time he logs in. And yes, I see the issue with posting that opinion on an online political forum

3) Education. Yes people our government really is dumbing down the kids, at least as far as civics is concerned. When I was a young'un civics class was about teaching kids that they have a responsibility to understand the issues at hand, that they sometimes had to decide to do what is right for the country or society and not themselves, and that participation in the process is key. All of my kids are out of the house now, they all graduated from high school within the last 6 years. Only two of them even had to take civics in order to graduate and their civics class taught that following the MSM is key and that you should do whatever you have to do to convince yourself that you agree with the MSM opinion (even if you don't) and that questioning the status-quo is how terrorists get their start. No mention in their textbooks of getting involved in any capacity other than running for office or becoming an activist.

So I think that's what we've got...the biggest bloc divided and conquered, the radical squeaky wheels getting the grease and no one pushing back from the local level.