News Article: WSJ: Why the left is so consumed with hate

Its On A Slab

All-SEC
Apr 18, 2018
1,295
1,733
182
Pyongyang, Democratic Republic of Korea
I do.

Get rid of those two parties and start five new ones.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
Either that, or a big realignment needs to occur.

Maybe three parties: The Trumplanders, The Free Stuff Party(Bernie Sanders, et. al.) and the centrists (we would be the dominant party).

I remember when I was moderating on this forum years ago, we had a long thread, where everyone put forth their own personal party platform. I was amazed at how similar we all were - once we put aside the partisan stuff.
 

Bodhisattva

Hall of Fame
Aug 22, 2001
21,601
2,259
287
Ponte Vedra Beach, Florida
One thing we have all heard for years is that the government needs to be run like a business, by a successful business man and not a career politician. I understand where this desire comes from and in principle I would be willing to give it a try. The problem we are now faced with is we are trying this with a self proclaimed real estate mogul whose business success, business ethics and real worth are all highly questionable. Trump is a narcissistic, sociopath, pathological liar, whose real business acumen has shown to be at best elementary. I am not saying the government cannot be run in a business manner by the right person, but Trump is absolutely not the right person.
Businesses are forced to be efficient due to competitive market forces. If they don't they cease to exist. Governments have no such constraints. It doesn't go out of business if it fails. It just fails and builds upon failure.

The solution is not to make government like a business - because it can't be - but to make it as small and as less inefficient/destructive as possible.
 

uafan4life

Hall of Fame
Mar 30, 2001
15,615
7,449
287
43
Florence, AL
Either that, or a big realignment needs to occur.

Maybe three parties: The Trumplanders, The Free Stuff Party(Bernie Sanders, et. al.) and the centrists (we would be the dominant party).

I remember when I was moderating on this forum years ago, we had a long thread, where everyone put forth their own personal party platform. I was amazed at how similar we all were - once we put aside the partisan stuff.
I'd go with:
Libertarians (centrist, small government, personal freedoms, etc.)
Progressives? (leftist, big government, socialist leaning, etc.)
Conservatives? (rightist, still kinda big government, fiscally conservative, etc.)
Environmentals? (centrist, slightly left-leaning, environmentally friendly, strong regulatory focus, etc.)
Industrialists? (centrist, slightly right-leaning, industry/trade focus, proponent of stronger States' rights, smaller Federal government, etc.)

I don't know about the names but I like the balance in foci, there.
 

bama_wayne1

All-American
Jun 15, 2007
2,700
16
57
If an idea is antithetical to American principles, the people who are speaking out against those ideas aren't the intolerant. They are people who are willing to stand up for principles, that are now being replaced with patriotic pageantry by the right. I've seen a whole lot of "the party of Lincoln" references as of late, as an attempt to try and distance the right from the white supremacists that have been so excellently courted since 2016. It is funny that the idea that it was the Republican Party that released the slaves, is the same party that elected Trump is even gaining any traction. However, it is a popular soundbite because when people forget that most issues are nuanced, its easy to attempt to drop such soundbites as an end to the conversation.

I am tired of being expected to not call a spade a spade when it comes to bad ideas. Just because someone is willing to fact check you or doesn't agree with your position, doesn't mean they are being intolerant. It means that either come up with a better argument in favor of your ideas or figure out how to package them in a more appealing format. The right has been doing the latter for years.


All this coupled with the right decrying their oppression at the hands of the "hateful, intolerant" left is absolutely laughable. Last I checked, any measure of progress is attained through compromise. I will give you one guess as to the party that has systematically attempted to restrict rights of minorities time and again. Now many may attempt to bring up the so called oppression of the right, and even more particularly the christian conservative right. Last I checked there was no other "oppressed" group that had their slogans on the US currency, enjoyed tax benefits for Sunday club houses, and national holidays that are celebrated/pushed in the public mind 24/7 for the two months leading up to them.
Remind me. Who passed the civil rights act?
 

Jon

Hall of Fame
Feb 22, 2002
15,647
12,572
282
Atlanta 'Burbs
Businesses are forced to be efficient due to competitive market forces. If they don't they cease to exist.
I used to agree with you, then I spent the last 5 years at a fortune 100. Our inefficiencies are spectacular and multiple and we just keep plodding along
 

92tide

TideFans Legend
May 9, 2000
58,309
45,150
287
54
East Point, Ga, USA
Remind me. Who passed the civil rights act?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964

By party
The original House version:[22]

Democratic Party: 152–96 (61–39%)
Republican Party: 138–34 (80–20%)

Cloture in the Senate:[23]

Democratic Party: 44–23 (66–34%)
Republican Party: 27–6 (82–18%)

The Senate version:[22]

Democratic Party: 46–21 (69–31%)
Republican Party: 27–6 (82–18%)

The Senate version, voted on by the House:[22]

Democratic Party: 153–91 (63–37%)
Republican Party: 136–35 (80–20%)
By party and region
Note: "Southern", as used in this section, refers to members of Congress from the eleven states that made up the Confederate States of America in the American Civil War. "Northern" refers to members from the other 39 states, regardless of the geographic location of those states.[24]

The original House version:

Southern Democrats: 7–87 (7–93%)
Southern Republicans: 0–10 (0–100%)
Northern Democrats: 145–9 (94–6%)
Northern Republicans: 138–24 (85–15%)
The Senate version:

Southern Democrats: 1–20 (5–95%) (only Ralph Yarborough of Texas voted in favor)
Southern Republicans: 0–1 (0–100%) (John Tower of Texas)
Northern Democrats: 45–1 (98–2%) (only Robert Byrd of West Virginia voted against)
Northern Republicans: 27–5 (84–16%)
 

UAH

All-American
Nov 27, 2017
3,611
4,168
187
Businesses are forced to be efficient due to competitive market forces. If they don't they cease to exist. Governments have no such constraints. It doesn't go out of business if it fails. It just fails and builds upon failure.

The solution is not to make government like a business - because it can't be - but to make it as small and as less inefficient/destructive as possible.
I believe that you are exactly correct in your final sentence. All of my adult life I have felt that our form of government would not function as we approached 220 and now 350 million population. On practically every continent there are forces that pull large confederations of people toward separation from the central government. Even China with its autocratic structure has deep regional issues that threaten it long term. I believe in the long term, whatever the time frame is, the US will break apart. It already appears to be happening with California. The eventual and practically certain financial failure of the central government and its inability to fulfill its basic roles may well be the final nail in the coffin.

I don't relish the eventuality of this but find little evidence that what we are doing now is heading us toward a more positive outcome.
 

uafan4life

Hall of Fame
Mar 30, 2001
15,615
7,449
287
43
Florence, AL
Getting back on topic and answering the original question:

It's because they don't realize it is hate.

They view their derisive attitudes as a mere statement of fact from their perceived moral high-ground at best and mocking derision at worst, failing to realize that mocking derision is, in and of itself, an expression of hate.

And since they tend to truly not understand the definition of the word tolerance, they view and express their views to anyone with differing views with nothing less than mocking derision. Anyone who deigns to express differing opinions on anything that matters to them is, at best, an ignorant redneck if not a troglodytic neanderthal. And since they view even a willingness to discuss and consider alternate viewpoints as a form of condonation, they refuse to even participate in logical discussions - making them as dogmatic, illogical, ignorant, and backward as those they profess to be above.

Of course, the far right exhibits identical behavior - only with different talking points.

It used to be - or at least seemed to be - that this type of behavior was limited to a small minority of those who fell, in American political terms, at the extremes of the left and right viewpoints. These days it seems like this behavior is becoming much more the norm - even among those who profess to not possess more extreme viewpoints.
 

Bodhisattva

Hall of Fame
Aug 22, 2001
21,601
2,259
287
Ponte Vedra Beach, Florida
I used to agree with you, then I spent the last 5 years at a fortune 100. Our inefficiencies are spectacular and multiple and we just keep plodding along
The efficiency test is not against perfection but relative to competitors. Government has no such check against inefficiency. Of course, business can always be more efficient. Large businesses can afford to be fatter than small businesses. I've worked for large and small companies in the past. Nothing is as inefficient as government. Not even close. Billions of dollars. The built-in waste is sickening.
 
Last edited:

UAH

All-American
Nov 27, 2017
3,611
4,168
187
I don't think the Kochs are loonies like the John Birch folks. They just want power for their own sake, and to enrich the uber-wealthy. And they figured out a pretty good con job to make people vote against their best interests.
Excellent comment. It requires a massive propaganda effort to sustain due to the fact that if any ordinary person (Defined as not part of the 1%) came to grasp their agenda they would be universally against their objectives. The fact that they are so greatly outnumbered at the voting booth they are required to utilize other means such as nominating a Brett Kavanaugh to continue to tilt the field in their favor.
 

bama_wayne1

All-American
Jun 15, 2007
2,700
16
57
I believe that you are exactly correct in your final sentence. All of my adult life I have felt that our form of government would not function as we approached 220 and now 350 million population. On practically every continent there are forces that pull large confederations of people toward separation from the central government. Even China with its autocratic structure has deep regional issues that threaten it long term. I believe in the long term, whatever the time frame is, the US will break apart. It already appears to be happening with California. The eventual and practically certain financial failure of the central government and its inability to fulfill its basic roles may well be the final nail in the coffin.

I don't relish the eventuality of this but find little evidence that what we are doing now is heading us toward a more positive outcome.
Be careful you are sounding more like a tea party member than a liberal.
 

New Posts

Latest threads

TideFans.shop - NEW Stuff!

TideFans.shop - Get YOUR Bama Gear HERE!”></a>
<br />

<!--/ END TideFans.shop & item link \-->
<p style= Purchases made through our TideFans.shop and Amazon.com links may result in a commission being paid to TideFans.