This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Liberal/Conservative Divide Only Grows Uglier
It would be easy for me to dismiss Obama supporters as mentally defective but for one inconvenient fact: my mother, sharp as a tack at 92, is voting for him. And so is my sister, a San Francisco attorney who is no slouch in the brains department. I’m not sure where my brother, a municipal employee, stands, but neither am I eager to find out. There is no bridging the political gap between us, and so we simply avoid discussing politics. The same goes for old friends, although newer ones are another matter. One of them walked out on our dinner together in a huff when an innocuous remark I’d made about Abe Lincoln evidently bruised his self-righteously liberal, morally perfect heart . Good riddance. It is far better friends than he that I am worried about. Will they draw the line when I let slip my support for the right to bear arms, even concealed? A few of my wife’s closest friends are unmitigated liberals, and it’s unclear how much longer we’ll be able to tiptoe around the political rough edges when we get together socially.
The truce with my siblings and mother has held, but not without strain. When the latter referred to the eminently decent Mitt Romney as “a jerk,” I returned fire with an over-the-top fusillade of anti-Obama invective. That was a month ago, and we haven’t talked about the election since. Nor do I plan to rub it in after Romney wins on Tuesday — an outcome I believe is inevitable because the nation has been wallowing for nearly five years in an officially undeclared, if not to say brazenly-lied-about, state of recession. Romney voters will have to stifle the hubris, though, since there is no way he will be able to reverse the country’s inexorable slide into economic darkness. To be fair, I should state that Obama is no more culpable for the abysmal state of the economy than Bill Clinton was praiseworthy for its resurgence during his presidency. He got lucky, is all, while Obama inherited a disaster two generations in the making. Economic cycles are far bigger than the presidency, and this one is going to take its ruinous course no matter who is in the White House.
Dating Game’s Top ‘No-No’
In the meantime, the political gap between liberals and conservatives can only continue to widen. And to grow uglier. This unfortunate trend was underscored by a recent Wall Street Journal story that focused on dating services. It seems the matchmaking business has declined in recent years because clients seeking mates are increasingly putting political compatibility at the top of their lists. “In this neck-and-neck, ideologically fraught election season, politically active singles won’t cross party lines,” the Journal noted. “The result is a dating desert populated by reds and blues who refuse to make purple.” So much for romance these days. Time was when smoking, drinking, religion, education level and physical attractiveness were the main concerns of men and women looking for love; now, apparently, a date-seeker’s political views trumps them all.
Until a crisis equal to the Great Depression arrives, liberals and conservatives are unlikely to bury the hatchet. For voters on either side of the divide, the stakes in this election will not seem to have been exaggerated; for they involve nothing less than a fight for the nation’s economic well-being – nay, for its very soul. Over the next four years, and probably long thereafter, moral and financial jeopardy will confront each of us in ways that seem likely to widen political divisions. Putting aside the wild card of Iran, one of the most difficult issues we face will entail putting public employees’ pension and health care benefits on a sound financial basis. The unions will claim, correctly, that there is no legal precedent for denying workers benefits that were promised them when they were hired. Their employers will claim, also correctly, that the money simply isn’t there. But anyone who thinks the Federal Government will be able to “solve” this problem simply by printing money is in for a rude awakening.
The financial liability is in fact so large that attempting to monetize it would be tantamount to hyperinflating. If, say, the Government were to offer lump-sum settlements averaging $150,000, the money could conceivably be worthless on delivery, since the actual disbursement of digital cash would be taken as a sign by the rest of us that Uncle Sam was on the hook for everyone’s financial needs. If the Government were instead to assume responsibility for years of scheduled payments in “real” dollars, taxpayers would eventually riot in the streets. No matter how you work the numbers, there is no easy way out, at least not using monetary shenanigans. The very clear implication is that the “solution” will come in the form of a dramatically lowered standard of living for most Americans.
Pensions Too Big to Bail Out
What is the dollar amount of the unfunded liability? Many hundreds of trillions of dollars, according to some published estimates. Consider that a bankrupt Flint, Michigan, under the direction of a conservator, has cut its budget to the bone to effect annual savings of around $10 million. But the long-term structural shortfall imposed by Flint’s retirement promises is on the order of $600 million dollars over the next 25 years. Of course, Detroit’s long-term problems are orders of magnitude larger, and New York City’s vastly larger still — too big, in the aggregate, for even the U.S. Government to fix. Or rather, pretend to fix, since that’s all that the would-be fixers have been doing all along. Yes, the bailout has been a fraud – a con-game made easier by the fact that most of the bailout “money” has gone to sustain the illusion that the assets of our biggest banks net out to a positive number. But there can be no such shell game when it comes time to send out pension and healthcare checks after the coffers of states and cities have gone empty. Paying for the lives of retired workers will require coughing up real dollars each and every month, not virtual ones such as are posted as “reserves” by the banks. And that’s why it will be impossible for the Federal Government to pretend, as it has with the banks, that the bailout is other than a charade.
Under the circumstances, hostility can only grow between liberals and conservatives, haves and have-nots, public and private workers, taxpayers and recipients. We wish Mr. Romney luck, but he’ll have his hands full merely trying to keep blood from running in the streets, never mind returning America to prosperity.
»
- advertisements -
I recently went to a local grocery store, part of a national chain, in which I was asked while being given my change (because I am atavastic and insist on using cash) "Would you like to donate your change for breast cancer awareness?". I was dumbfounded. So I asked the clerk "What is so special about breast cancer, as opposed to any other form of cancer? Why aren't you asking me about prostate cancer awareness too?" She just gave me a dirty look. But really, WTF?
What a joke. They've been researching cancer 70 damn years and STILL don't know what causes it nor how to cure it.
That's just fucking incompetence. By a whole damn profession.
No, they won't get a dime from me.
more profit in maintenance than in cures. that's the pharma model, maintenance of dis-ease.
That is why I support no canpaign of any kind. Cancer Inc, home of the Pink Ribbon Magfia.
Thanks, akak. I'm getting pretty tired of the focus on just one type of cancer. I'm dying from colorectal cancer, which is the third most fatal cancer. Yet I don't see any big push in that direction.
As an aside - folks, do yourselves a favor and get the recommended colonoscopy. I noticed a change in my bowel habits, but wrote it off to possibly hemorrhoids and waited until too late. They put you to sleep and you never feel a thing during or after. Do yourself a favor, though, and specify Suprep bowel flush - two small doses beats heck out of having to guzzle four liters of fairly unpleasant solution. Plus, a colonoscopy now could save you having to mess with a colostomy and all of the fun that entails...few things hurt a man's pride more than making uncontrollable rude noises without warning, not to mention having to deal with a bag of feces hanging on your belly which is so much of a joy to clean...sorry for being graphic, but you need to realize what could be at stake here.
God bless all of you on here.
had mine yesterday, everthing okay. whew. that supraprep taste like kerosene so the best way to drink it is to turn it up like beer at a frat policy and kill it. first dose i took a swallow, and it was harder and harder to drink it. that first cup was the worst part of the entire colonoscopy. the second dose i mixed it up turned it up and chugged it all the way down, that was way better.
my doctor said that colon cancer is the 2nd biggest killer of men over 50. and the 3rd largest killer of women over 50.
Do yourself a favor, contact Alcor or the Michigan Cryonics Institute and sign up to be cryonically suspended.
Out live the bastards.
Don't give up yet Takin. Do some research on Esiac. I did.
I am so sorry for you, Takeinthehighway.
But you are correct, I have been aware about the frequency of colorectal cancer, and how it is so often a "hidden" cancer until too late. I worry about it myself, having been for many years extremely irregular in that regard, although some of that was undoubtedly due to an apparently long-running tapeworm infestation (which is more common that most people would realize --- ask any radiologist) of which I was largely unaware until about ten years ago, now cleared-up.
Again, my sincere condolences to you.
So what would we do for that, start a Brown Ribbon campaign?
Fuck ribbons, of any color.
That's why I shop where they ask "would you like to donate your change to the NRA"
But they need too expand their product lines so I can buy milk and eggs there.
"Fuck ribbons"!?? WASSAMATTA U?
I LIKE ribbons. Big black ribbons. With the skull and crossbones on 'em. Or failing that, "Ride free or die".
So take that, akak, you crabby bastard.
Kramer, is that you?
there are two genders akak.
just like voting.
Cat, we here in the Commonwealth are all too aware that "gender is an evolving paradigm" just like marriage. We know this since the judiciary rulers have made decisions to support castrating inmates, despite the 8th Amendment's assurances against cruel and unusual punishment.
We, here, are commanded to pay for a convicted murderer's sex-change operation, yes, it is a choppadickofftome, aka castration. By a fricken judge; commanded no less.
And you are correct, this is just like voting. There are two choices: OBAMA .xor. Romney. All other votes are for the OBamster.
don't cha' know.
- Ned
Really disappointed here Ned. I think it's necessary for a lot of the guys here to rethink their relationships to women, and for my part, I would like to see some pro-women messages here once and a while, or is that being too much of a bitch?
A downvote with no response? Is that the best you can do?
Where did this bizarre belief that Romney is entitled to a vote from everyone who doesn't like Obama come from?
...from the misguided "anything but a red or blue vote is "wasted", school.
The President of the USSA's job is twofold:
1) sign whatever paperwork the CFR, Bilderberg Group, Fabian Roundtable, Oil Mafia, Banking Cartel, & MIC put on your desk.
2) lie to the people about how the paperwork you just signed is in their best interest. When the people figure out you've been lying the last 4 years, TPTB will just hold another season of "American Presidential Campaign."
Red or Blue, follow these simple rules and you become a Made Man. Disobey, and you get JFKennedy-ed.
Needless to say, it doesn't matter which Imperial Puppet you vote for. Vote with your feet, start gunning the bastards down in the streets of DC and NYC, or secede your State from the Empire. Everything else is masturbation.
New_Meat,
I'll risk pissing folks off by repeating myself here, but "gender" is a social construct, whereas "sex" is a more a function of hormones and body presentation. that cultures like to confuse the two, intentionally or not, doesn't really surprise me. "gender" roles, for both males and females, do vary from culture to culture, although with the globalising of such things as Hollywood stereotypes, Western music styles, etc. - I do realise this too is blurry of late. but one need only study culture(s) over time, and maybe watch such things as The Century of the Self documentary, and others, perhaps even some Mad Men to see how advertising sells a persona - and anyone with some critical thinking skills might see the connection between the ideas put forward as to how to act to be seen "as" what one desires.
I lived outside of amrka for much of my earlier adult years, and so coming back to the States it was somewhat easier to see how the cultures varied, how amrkns were coddled into their notions of inherent superiourity, excessive reliance on basic religious memes, etc. having a mind that naturally questions things helped, and also a desire to not be part of any herd-thinking. so I don't vote, I don't go to church, I don't do recognisable "women" stuffs, I question the need to "fit in" etc. it's also how I ended up at ZH, I believe. . .
there are MANY more choices than the ones they put in front of us. . . there is a whole world of ideas most people will never even un-cover, so captured are they by their small spaces. . .
as to "paying for a convict's sex change" - does it make you angry? does it make you angry towards the people having the sex change? then the story is working as intended. . . I understand why anger is a response, but I also realise that everything those who hold the purse strings spend monies on is anger inducing, particularly lately. . . we can't let it eat out our hearts.
peace.
Well, there are always more than just two options when it comes to voting, including not doing so in the first place.
But regardless of that fact, why do you (apparently) chose to let gender define and dominate your political views? Constantly viewing the world based on gender makes for a narrow and woefully incomplete picture.
lol, and those who constantly view the world through the gender "Men" - are those folks targeted in your scope today?
I post all the time on topics not gender related, but you don't like those posts either, as you've let the thread know.
the majority of guys that post here believe their man-perspective is the "norm" to measure everything else against, including anything that feels "woman" about their world - dualist oppositional thinking is the mind trap.
assigning me the "feminazi" tag, or whatever variant, just positions you in the opposite Menz space, which obviously is the main demographic here - well done, majority rules, "We're #1!!" etc.
but it will most likely get you many fans today. . .heh.
I'm sure a few of the commenters have indicated their gender, but how do you know enough to make generalized statements?
"generalized statements" such as?
not sure what your point is related to this side discussion, but if you'd like to address something I've posted, feel free?
You said "the majority of guys that post here believe ..."
How do you know which posters are guys to know what the majority of them believe?
I would think that most of the men that post here intentionally let it be known, in thread, over time.
I've also had posting interactions over time that indicate the same, though there are some surprising outliers, and I always look forward to finding those who can think outside their cultural box(es).
again, to each their own perspective - but I do like to see points argued in thread, I'll admit to this. . .
I noticed you did not answer my question. For future reference, the plural of anecdote is not data.
I believe I did answer your query, but obviously not to your liking.
I know which posters refer to themselves as men, which posters like to use themed bitches commentary that might suggest menly-ness, which posters have avatars that suggest a propensity to fuck women - though there is a chance that these are women who prefer women, but the attire or lack of might suggest otherwise. . .
in other words, I've been here a while and I'm not stupid. the majority of posters here are men. and there is a tendency to share the same points of view amongst them, particularly when it comes to predictable cultural stories - witness the voting patterns, which yes, might be all women, undercover. . .
does that work for ya?
Nope. Doesn't work. You could have backed up your assertions with facts, not spin. If you had an answer to my question you would have already posted it. Since you didn't, you lose.
Thanks for your efforts to point out the water to the fishies. Clear as day to me, but I'm somewhat desensitized to it from working in a mostly-male profession which is probably why I rarely chime-in on this topic.
However, I must say I find it simply incredible that the manly-men republicans seem unable to comprehend that "legitimate rape" and all the other batshit crazy talk coming out of that party is a great way to lose half their voting base. I'm no fan of Obama or the democrats, but at least they're not treating women as though we're little more than chattel. From what I'm seeing, women all over the political spectrum are frankly shocked and concerned over the idea of a Romney win, and especially the nutbags like Akin and Mourdock.
I found this infographic outlining recent history of this madness and there are many legitimate reasons to be concerned, despite the oft-invoked irrationality of women when it comes to voting. What can one say when you have all-male legislatures spending so much time regulating all the minutiae associated with pregnancy and childbirth, something they'll never experience? It just boggles the mind in its stunning arrogance. None of these neanderthals wants to pay for contraceptives or abortions, even in cases of rape(!!!), but oh, they absolutely want their Viagra, without which they would likely lack the ability to do more than think about it.
More of my friends are guys, so it's not that I have an axe to grind against men. I also don't identify as a feminist, but if there is ever to be a line in the sand for our liberties, it starts and ends with control of our own bodies. If we lose that, then there is very little else that matters.
I think everyone may have been put off by this Cat...
"when/if you ever get enough brain cells working in tandem to make the connection between armed men, crime, and violence against women, then you MAY begin to understand why some women are not in favour of armed men."
Everyone with a "brain cell" is familiar with serial killers from Molly Hatchet to Elizabeth Bathory. Amy Bishop is just the latest unless you're also counting the metrosexual freak with the orange hair in the movie theater ;-)
You cannot connect ärmed men with violence against women so "cavalierly". There are many armed men who would (and do) rush to the defense of unarmed men & women.
Maybe you can help me out here Cat, you seem to follow "womens issues" more than me...why are radical lesbians so concerned with contraception when they can never be "accidently" impregnated?
I know I'll catch hell for that...but I've always found it curious.
And by doing so, aren't they themselves being "woman centric"?
ahhh, fancy seeing you here nmewn.
as to your questions, do take it up with akak, he'll no doubt have answers you'll find appealing.
I'm not asking for something I might (or might not) find appealing, afterall, I was asking you ;-)
hey akak, I'll post what I like, and let you do the same, including all your repetitive trolling of AnAny, etc.
this is Fight Club, and if I want to point out the skewed thinking of some of the posts here, I'll do it - if you'd like to ARGUE a point about my post and not just score brofists with the obvious response, then let me know.
the militant feminism meme, after all the interactions I've had with you and other men here, is such a tell.
You want fight club? You're a retarded faggot fuckwit dipshit cuntbag Marxist pansy commie bedwetting douchebag who's lower than than bacteria on whale shit at the bottom of the Mariana's trench.
How do you like them apples???
hey buckaroo where's your legendary deep south gentlemanlyness? Lost in unionist transalation?
Don't ever badmouth A WOMAN whatever your views on womanhood and women's rights, that is the Rubicon no self respecting man ever crosses...
ad hominem. fail.
as to apples, for most of my life I preferred a tart Granny Smith, but I've read that the sweeter apples have more to offer nutritionally - currently the Braeburn's are my faves. *wink*
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Braeburn2008.jpg
edit: ah, you picked up a downvote while I was posting, here, have a gratuitous equaliser)
It's one thing to point out skewed thinking, Chatty Cathy. It's another thing altogether to skew it yourself, and then attack your straw hermaphrodite.
Oh. One other thing; Stayman-Winesap cross for eating, Pink Lady for pies. Anything else is Apple Fail. Never, ever lower your standards in things that really matter.
Granny Smiths aren't worth the wood they're carved out of.
thanks for your opinion imminent crotchbell, I'll file it with the rest of 'em. . .
we are lucky to have a nearby orchard that includes some Cox's Orange Pippins that we barter for - I used the Braeburn as a familiar example, but round this time of the year, we're putting up the Pippins. first tasted them while living in Somerset England, they're really old skool apples, their pedigree is evident in the amazing flavours. . . they also have a couple Arkansas Black trees, another great apple. . .
http://www.orangepippin.com/apples/coxs-orange-pippin
http://www.orangepippin.com/apples/arkansas-black
There are seven people on this board with the same mental affliction as you - Your comments are way offside. Sad.
Problem with american politics, is the social side, not the fiscal.. in honesty i bet most americans would prefer a socially liberal, fiscally conservative government... ie more libertarian..
I concur
amen........exept remove the word "liberal" and replace with "free" and remove the word "conservative" and replace with "responsible"..............
One of the many things that Confusious said was if he were in power: "I would first restore words to their proper meanings."
I stop reading the minute I figured out this hack thinks there is a difference between Democrats and Republicans.
Vote Local!
Well, he also believes in the non-existent bogeyman of "deflation" as well --- apparently expecting a radically appreciating dollar any day now, in violation of all of monetary history --- so what else can one expect. Delusions tend to come as a package deal.
I wish I wouldn't have bothered reading this at all...I knew better from the title, which told me all I needed to know. He has perpetuated the subversion of the word "liberal" and is thus squarely in the same class as Sean Hannity, et al.
“He who joyfully marches in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would suffice.” —Albert Einstein