Politics isn't binary

[Garraty_47]

I'm an independent.
Not a liberal; not a conservative.

I wanted to make a post critical of the entire duopoly but...

Where to put it?
Do I make two posts: one each in the respective Lib/Con Lounges? Redundant.
Lurker's Lounge? But it's not supposed to be used for politics.

Has this ever come up before and how was it resolved?

If I don't get a usable answer soon I suppose I'll just have to bore you fuckheads here with the poast.

Won't that be fun?

 

[Lily]

I believe that it is binary actually.

Does an individual believe in a just society or not? We make it so complicated, when it's really very simple, imho.

 

[Garraty_47]

I believe that it is binary actually.

Well you're wrong.
Not trying to be mean or anything, but you are 100% flat-out wrong.

Does an individual believe in a just society or not? We make it so complicated, when it's really very simple, imho.

You're asking a question about principles, or perhaps morals, or maybe even values.

Not politics.

 

[Lily]

Well you're wrong.
Not trying to be mean or anything, but you are 100% flat-out wrong.



You're asking a question about principles, or perhaps morals, or maybe even values.

Not politics.

I'm not taking it as you being mean. You're disagreeing with me and I'm completely okay with disagreement as long as folks keep it civil. You're civil. If we keep invective out of discussion then we're all being civil.

I don't believe I can divorce politics from principle or morality. Otherwise, what's the point? Politics serves a purpose. It's sort of like diplomacy, "it's war by other means." Because everyone wants things their way...

Btw, the person in my life is 180 degrees opposite of me. He still wants to change me, 9 years later...insanity right? So there are a lot of political disagreements. But we can turn if off on a dime because the cats need chow or I have to run off to get an oil change. We return to mundane as easy as that. What I mean is that we don't equate our disparate political beliefs with bad faith in the other.
He has come to understand, in spite of his erroneous beliefs that "lefties want to destroy America", that I am sincere in my love for my country. When things are pretty hot topic wise for either one of us, I tend to say, "Maybe save this discussion for later" as I'm more apt to want to maintain harmony and him, well he just wants to be victorious (lolol).

That's a long way of saying, we all ought to try better to be civil, even about topics we all care about. I think that's what you tend to do.

 

[Garraty_47]

I'm not taking it as you being mean. You're disagreeing with me and I'm completely okay with disagreement as long as folks keep it civil. You're civil. If we keep invective out of discussion then we're all being civil.

I agree with that up to a point, the point being I can and do use expletives for emphasis or to denote intense emotion.
You shouldn't take any of that as cursing *at* you.
I'm merely cursing *near* you. LoL

I don't believe I can divorce politics from principle or morality.

That's the result of cultural conditioning.
You may have heard it called by its other name: "propaganda".

Our two major political parties are corporate entities who exist solely to benefit themselves.

The DNC even admitted in court, after the 2016 primary debacle resulted in a lawsuit, that as a private corporation they weren't actually *required* to have a vote or care what anyone else thought... they could just go into a room, close the door, and pick their candidate.

Political parties do not embody virtues or deficiencies, values or indecency.
Even individual politicians are not paragons or demons... they're just people.

You can't say *everyone* in such-and-such party is good, and *everyone* in such-and-such party is evil.

That's because politics isn't a feeling or a belief; it's a process or procedure- not a nebulous concept that opportunists exploit to promote us/vs/them thinking.

The stuff inside a political speech is usually floating in virtue-signalling tropes but that doesn't equate the speaker or the speaker's party actually believing any of it and certainly doesn't mean the speaker or the speaker's party is going to literally DO anything about any of it.

Politics is the game.
Whether or not you think cheating to win is okay: that's your principles and morality.

 

[Lily]

I agree with that up to a point, the point being I can and do use expletives for emphasis or to denote intense emotion.
You shouldn't take any of that as cursing *at* you.
I'm merely cursing *near* you. LoL



That's the result of cultural conditioning.
You may have heard it called by its other name: "propaganda".

Our two major political parties are corporate entities who exist solely to benefit themselves.

The DNC even admitted in court, after the 2016 primary debacle resulted in a lawsuit, that as a private corporation they weren't actually *required* to have a vote or care what anyone else thought... they could just go into a room, close the door, and pick their candidate.

Political parties do not embody virtues or deficiencies, values or indecency.
Even individual politicians are not paragons or demons... they're just people.

You can't say *everyone* in such-and-such party is good, and *everyone* in such-and-such party is evil.

That's because politics isn't a feeling or a belief; it's a process or procedure- not a nebulous concept that opportunists exploit to promote us/vs/them thinking.

The stuff inside a political speech is usually floating in virtue-signalling tropes but that doesn't equate the speaker or the speaker's party actually believing any of it and certainly doesn't mean the speaker or the speaker's party is going to literally DO anything about any of it.

Politics is the game.
Whether or not you think cheating to win is okay: that's your principles and morality.

When I say invective, it's about cursing at people...not cursing to emphasize a point. I'll try to keep your view in mind though.

I was raised by an extreme leftist parent. Justice was all that I was taught that politics were a means to that end. I was raised poor, very poor, so it was literally about survival. Games? Not for me.

What do you think the purpose of it is? I'm not interested in a game. I care about policy that leads to healthcare coverage for all Americans, fewer to no homeless people, economic justice, and a lot of other things.

Gamesmanship

 

[Garraty_47]

What do you think the purpose of it is? I'm not interested in a game.

It may not be a game to you but the people in the democrat and republican parties, especially the ones in leadership positions, are absolutely playing a game. The game called "more for me". More power, more influence, more impunity, and always but always more money.

Over the past 10-20 years enough behind-the-curtains information has leaked, as if it were needed, to show that both halves of the duopoly are hopelessly corrupted. As in plainly visible to anyone who cares to look.

If you think they're not playing games they've already won.

I care about policy that leads to healthcare coverage for all Americans, fewer to no homeless people, economic justice, and a lot of other things.

Sounds good. But the major parties have a looong and sordid history of saying nice things then doing fuckall or, even worse, the exact opposite of what they promised.

That's another of their favorite games: "say anything to get elected".

I've seen that game for what it is and hated it my entire adult life.

 

[Lily]

It may not be a game to you but the people in the democrat and republican parties, especially the ones in leadership positions, are absolutely playing a game. The game called "more for me". More power, more influence, more impunity, and always but always more money.

Over the past 10-20 years enough behind-the-curtains information has leaked, as if it were needed, to show that both halves of the duopoly are hopelessly corrupted. As in plainly visible to anyone who cares to look.

If you think they're not playing games they've already won.



Sounds good. But the major parties have a looong and sordid history of saying nice things then doing fuckall or, even worse, the exact opposite of what they promised.

That's another of their favorite games: "say anything to get elected".

I've seen that game for what it is and hated it my entire adult life.

I absolutely agree with you that their game is all about power and money. Anyone that doesn't see that is a fool.

 

[Omnipotent]

If you keep morals you stay healthy and don't burden health systems.... why should we pay for people who live with loose sexual morals, drinkers, smokers and supreme idiots who want to climb Mount Everest?.... these are arguments put to the general citizenship.

 

[Garraty_47]

If you keep morals you stay healthy and don't burden health systems.... why should we pay for people who live with loose sexual morals, drnkers, smokers and supreme idiots who want to climb Mount Everest?.... these are arguments put to the general citizenship.

And ^that^ is, I imagine, a prime example of why @BF decided he had to segregate the politics subs.

It's off-topic, inflammatory, and stupid.
The only purpose a poast like that serves is to cause conflict and drama.
The motivations of such poasts are selfishness, bitterness, and being a nuisance.

Gosh... almost as if it was poasted by a horrible person.
Go figure.

 

[Krieg]

And ^that^ is, I imagine, a prime example of why @BF decided he had to segregate the politics subs.

It's off-topic, inflammatory, and stupid.
The only purpose a poast like that serves is to cause conflict and drama.
The motivations of such poasts are selfishness, bitterness, and being a nuisance.

Gosh... almost as if it was poasted by a horrible person.
Go figure.

No. Those are fair questions that are about issues that concern that person. If you dismiss these concerns, the average citizens concerns are the basis of a functioning form of govt, the you are denying a person agency. Would it not be simpler to answer the questions? Why should they be of concern about the poor lifestyle choices of others?

To simply deny the questions while asking for a fair and unbiased discussion about politics is to play the role of the Bad Actor. If -YOU- can't answer these questions when posed they will find someone who will.

 

[Omnipotent]

And ^that^ is, I imagine, a prime example of why @BF decided he had to segregate the politics subs.

It's off-topic, inflammatory, and stupid.
The only purpose a poast like that serves is to cause conflict and drama.
The motivations of such poasts are selfishness, bitterness, and being a nuisance.

Gosh... almost as if it was poasted by a horrible person.
Go figure.

Bullshitto mutant. People want their hard earned tax dollars to go to programs benefitting their own familes lives not to money drains.

 

[Lily]

If you keep morals you stay healthy and don't burden health systems.... why should we pay for people who live with loose sexual morals, drnkers, smokers and supreme idiots who want to climb Mount Everest?.... these are arguments put to the general citizenship.

Because we pay for premature babies born so young that cost about 1 million dollars on average compared to a full term baby that cost maybe $15k...morality should have nothing to do with healthcare.

 

[Garraty_47]

No. Those are fair questions that are about issues that concern that person.

That's why she started her own bloody thread about it then, I suppose?

 

[Omnipotent]

Because we pay for premature babies born so young that cost about 1 million dollars on average compared to a full term baby that cost maybe $15k...morality should have nothing to do with healthcare.

I disagree.... you don't have proper medicare like we do. We have been paying into system for over 40 years. Why should we have to pay for people who act irresponsibly? The example you are using with prem babies is NOT one that is caused by someones selfish behaviour. It doesnt fall into the same category of a drinking, drugging person who has unprotected sex and cops AIDS.....Why should I pay for him or her?

Also, medical people risk their own lives nursing those selfish types however they don't risk their live nursing prem babies.

 

[Lily]

I disagree.... you don't have proper medicare like we do. We have been paying into system for over 40 years. Why should we have to pay for people who act irresponsibly? The example you are using with prem babies is NOT one that is caused by someones selfish behaviour. It doesnt fall into the same category of a drinking, drugging person who has unprotected sex and cops AIDS.....Why should I pay for him or her?

Also, medical people risk their own lives nursing those selfish types however they don't risk their live nursing prem babies.

A preemie baby and their family isn't at fault for anything. But is it our kid? Family? Nope. But we agree to take care of people that we don't benefit from.

I don't judge people for their behaviors. I am not a Christian so I guess I won't leave people dying in the streets uncared for like the loving Christian type.

Do you do all the things to be in good health?

It's a long list...

Eat only nutritious food
Exercise about 150 minutes of moderate intensity cardio per week? And 2 sessions of resistance/weight training per week where you work your upper and lower body muscles out.
Are you within your proper weight?
I hope you don't smoke or drink more than 1 glass of liquor per day.
Do you practice stress reduction?
Sleep 7-8 hours?
Make sure to brush and floss your teeth?
Do you hydrate properly?
Get all your health screenings done as recommended?
Get vaccinated?
Do you keep your mind learning by reading, doing puzzles, learning new skills - all suggested for staving off dimentia.
Do you have maintain a social life with friends?

If you don't why should anyone subsidize your less than stellar choices?

 

[Omnipotent]

A preemie baby and their family isn't at fault for anything. But is it our kid? Family? Nope. But we agree to take care of people that we don't benefit from.

that is what medicare is for..... like pandemics, like accidents, like genuine illness caused by faulty genes.

Genuine Christians are very welcome to pick up the dying street person and what....do what with him or her Lily?

So how many have you rescued off the street Lily?

 

[Lily]

that is what medicare is for..... like pandemics, like accidents, like genuine illness caused by faulty gene.

Genuine Christians are very welcome to pick up the dying street person and what....do what with him or her Lily?

So how many have you rescued off the street Lily?

I don't pick off anyone off the street. What I don't do is complain about my tax dollars being spent on indigents and all the people you find to be undesirables.

Who would Jesus walk past in disdain? If I recall the gospels correctly he cared for the sick and he was with the wretched.

 

[Omnipotent]

so where did I say I didnt want tax dollars spent on indigents? You must be talking about the alkie druggies. You're right. I don't care about them, very true. Where did Jesus say I had to care about them? The Good Samaratan was a male,... Jesus does not require or expect a woman to administer to strange men on the road. That is a man's job.

Jesus did not care for the sick. He cured them on the spot.... Sorry I don't have messiahonic power. I am merely mortal...

 

[Omnipotent]

If you don't why should anyone subsidize your less than stellar choices?

Every single tax payer in Australia (whether they have Private health isurance or not) have to pay a 3% levy on their taxable income. It stated off over 40 - 45 years ago at 1% under MEDIBANK now it is 3% into Medicare...we PAY for our public system out of our own pocket... the money does not grow on trees.