Quote:
Originally Posted by The Villager II
I would like to follow you around for a day to get some of your mojo. I have watched you post for several years and to this day, I can not define you as a DEM or REP or even anything in between. My first instinct is to say WHATS UP WITH THAT?, but realize, If we all could get on your wave length, we would have most of the problems of the world solved or at the very least a lot closer than we are today. My main weakness is that I can not for the life of me understand why anyone would choose to be Hard Right or Hard Left; therefore, I find myself acting out in a childish manner right along side of the 6 PAC by trying to defend the underdog. I do understand that I need to stop responding to any extremest as it is not productive and leads to childishness and I hope I am better than than that. I know, I have not been up till now. Guilty.
|
Thanks for the kind words.
I'm not a Republican (though I used to be) and I'm not a Democrat (though I've occasionally cast a handful of votes that way - literally - less than 5).
I strongly believe that each issue stands on it's own. Certainly some are related but it's impossible to think that the country's problems can be solved by EITHER "Plan R" OR "Plan D" where each plank of the respective plans is the diametric opposite of the other's.
I believe in the death penalty, gun rights, immigration reform (not total amnesty), some lower taxes, some higher taxes, gay marriage, religious rights, law and order, the Constitution, some public services, private ideas and government paving the way in certain areas until the private sector can take over - AND SOMETIMES THE REVERSE if the private sector can't do it.
Take taxes for instance. One side says we're at historic low levels of taxation (as a percentage of GDP) and they're right. The other side highlights half the citizenry paying no federal taxes (ignoring some of the other taxes) and a disproportionate percentage coming from wealthier citizens. And THEY are right as well. But they're BOTH looking at the issue through a narrow lens. They both miss the big picture.
The same holds true for transportation in transit vs. roads arguments.
I won't call Tea Partiers "**********". I find it preferable to 'attack' on substance rather than jingoistic name-calling. I *will* use the term "legislooters" from time to time. I will afford the respect that is deserving of the offices of both the President AND the Speaker of the House. I won't try to highlight only the parts of the President's name that sound more foreign or call Rep. Boehner names for his occasional emotional displays. It does NOTHING to contribute to any progress towards solving the problems we face.
For what it's worth, I wish Ron Paul were more polished. Of all the GOP candidates, he seems to be the one most backed up by facts as opposed to ideology bordering on theology. I still disagree with him on many points, but he makes many more points of substance than the other candidates.
So there's some of my 'mojo' for today...