I'm sick of this Left VS. Right mentality

Why wouldn't you tell such a person the truth? No one enters business with the primary goal of employing people. They do it to earn money.

 

Perhaps a more comprehensive read of what is in front of you wold reveal that the debate is not as shallow as you make it out to be.

True, there are a few who do not seem to tire to misuse the term "fascist" and those who throw out communist far too easily.

But these comments offend you, you have the right not to read them, which is far simpler than trying to change the rest of society.

 

Actually his point is extremely valid, since the two party system itself offers no solution just more of the same failed tactics that didn't work the first time democrats or republicans tried to save the country and only made things worse.
　
　
The main problem is the majority of the voters, will not stop jumping on the two party bandwagon long enough to accept the fact that the two party scam is the problem.
　
It is pathetically disturbing that the majority of the voters are insane, and continue to act accordingly, making the exact same choices expecting different results.
　
The saddest part is anybody who points out obvious problems and tries to actually make a reasonably sane contribution to the discussion is immediately demonized & vilified by the extremists, and shot down, given a label, and accused of being the problem. Sound familiar??

 

The simple answer is for the Left to realize the Right is the "right side" to be on!

 

George Washington (who presided over the Constitutional Convention, the first President of our new nation, and considered the father of our country) in his farewell address advised against political parties. Unhappily, the rest of our so-called "founding fathers" had no hesitation to choosing sides.

 

I agree, although it is disingenuous to assume that Washington was unaligned. As President, he sided with Federalist Alexander Hamilton more often than he sided with the anti-Federalists.

 

And it was Thomas Jefferson who wrote most of the constitution, the declaration of independence as well as the bill of rights so disagreed with him he formed his own party and was the first president to have the election stolen from him; he had the most votes but lost the electoral college to John Quincy Adams.

Jefferson won four years later destroying the back room boy idea of having the Vice President automatically assume the presidency when the president stepped down after two terms


Jefferson's departure from the elitist view is considered by many to be the birth of democracy.

We should be thankful we get to have these differences; there are a lot of places where people cannot; China, Korea and that idyl of paradise so worshiped by the left: Cuba...

 

Like I said... malcontent is a state of being that requires no compromise. Sounds like it's the comfort zone many seek.

 

Yes, they do all suck.
Yes, we must get rid of them and start over.
Yes, there is a best way to do that.
Yes, it is to expose the most dishonest ones first.
Yes, it is to shine light on the greedy ones second.
Yes, that it is why I, as a true Independent, start by exposing
the Left, and will then move on to the Right.
Yes, I understand that my (our) exposing of the Left tends
to look like bickering. And that is because one gets rid of the
greatest enemy first, and does it with the help of the lesser
enemy if need be.

Anyway, that's how I see it.

 

Actually, the point on the Constitution is incorrect. Thomas Jefferson was ambassador to France during the convention. He absolutely was the main writer of the Declaration of Independence. However, James Madison is considered to be the main writer of the Constitution. His Virginia Plan was the main framework for the document. The other contributions came from the supporters of the New Jersey Plan.

James Madison wrote the entire Bill of Rights.

 

I'd put it at 'dishonest' for the Democrat, 'greedy' for the Republican.

We can in fact, tolerate some greed for a while; I cannot say that we can tolerate significant dishonesty at all.

 

Yes but in most cases they cannot do it without help, so they "need" labor to create their produce or provide the service, and they "need" consumers to buy whatever it is they are selling. Problem is the philosophy of modern day cronyism capitalism is to create an illegal monopoly, with government coercion and approval, that on paper doesn't appear to be one, and then the "goal" is to screw/cheat the other two thirds of the equation (laborers and consumers) out of their contribution, to obtain an isolated maximized wealth at everybody else's expense.
　
That is the problem with the two party system, it makes that sort of thing easily obtainable and maintainable.

 

Outstanding post.
/end of thread - IMO.

 

Is that true? And are those the most significant three things that he accomplished outside of school?

Wow, that's .........uh, disconcerting...no that's hilarious.

 

You miss the point of true religion. Some people believe that if you go into business to HELP people, or to employ people as your main motive, your primary driver,... that your needs will be met due to the reflection of the universal Principle that can be called Divine Love.

Granted, most religions do not foster this great a belief or understanding in most of their adherents.

 

Contrary to popular belief, the Declaration of Independence was not a foundational document; it was a declaration of our independence from the colonial rule by the English Monarchy, and an act of war. It was also, idealistically, a pretty piece of propaganda! Likewise, it may come as a surprise (even a shock) for some to learn that Thomas Jefferson’s ideas about natural rights were not adopted by the framers of our Constitution. (Jefferson was not a framer of the Constitution. He was serving as Ambassador to France at the time of the Constitutional Convention; and except for his correspondence with some of the delegates, what resulted was largely the work of James Madison. Even his draft Constitution and Declaration of Rights for Virginia was rejected in favor of the model of George Mason.) Jefferson wrote in the Declaration of Independence: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights; that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the consent of the governed . . . ." The framework of our government, however, did not incorporate the ideals expressed by Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence. The intoxicating ideas of Rousseau and Locke that Jefferson so admired, and that inspired our revolution (and that of France as well), gave way to a more sober expression of our rights and freedoms in the Constitution and Bill of Rights. The framers of our Constitution created a nation of laws and not men; which represents a compromise between the rights of individuals and the power of the state. All men are not created equal, they are equal under the law; and the rights to "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" are not unalienable, they are subject to law. In this compromise - this social contract that is our Constitution - rests the security for our individual rights and liberty.

 

Yet Jefferson was not the main writer of the Constitution. He was not even at the Constitutional Convention. He was serving as ambassador (or minister) to France at the time. The main writer of the Constitution is by far James Madison. His Virginia Plan provided the majority of the framework for the document. I would also pay due to the writers of the New Jersey Plan. Without them the Great Compromise would have never occurred.

In addition, Madison was the writer of the Bill of Rights. He introduced it to the First United States Congress.

Thomas Jefferson deserves credit as the writer of the Declaration of Independence.

 

I can. and many others can too. but many are paid to keep spinning this crap. if you pay attention to stuff like googletrends, and situation on the ground, you will notice a large gap between reality and the propaganda world on television and even on internet. but I believe I have a solution and I will ask for your help in getting the word out (not money, don't worry) i will release a speech, it will have the details if you care. in a week or so.

 

Principles this country was founded on, everything the two party scam detests about this country, individualism, liberty/justice, and stability. It's entire premise for existing control of the two party system is to create discontent where none should exist, and using that instability to maximize the profit margin for the selected few.
　

Anyone who does not see the two party system as what it is, an influential, regulatory tool that provides a domination factor, is not paying attention.

 

There is far more than just that. With 95% of the dollar gone, you're either part of the few that have more money than they know what to do with, or part of the majority who could work 100 hour weeks for 1000 years and never get ahead, thanks to inflation. Compound that with free trade/outsourcing, and there is no reason for wages to ever go up again, in fact, many would like to see them go down for laborers, while of course owners raise their prices once a month until they go out of business. Fact is, fiat currency and state intervention economically have walked hand in hand. Since 1913, with every loss to the dollar came a new program to supplement the loss to lower wrung workers, at the expense of higher wrung workers. Free trade with China and NAFTA, not only compounded the problem in the last 20 years, it hurt so many higher wrung workers that public revenue from higher wrung workers shrunk, while state involvement to lower wrung workers needs to be doubled to make up for both, and now you have the answer as to why 14 trillion in debt popped out of nowhere in the course of 2 decades. As long as fiat currency and free trade are in place, government has to grow, along with the debt. There is no way around it, and YOU support both. YOU support the 2 main reasons why the government is so huge in the 1st place, but like most neocons and their puppets, you want your cake and to eat it too. Life simply doesn't work like that.

 

　
Greed is a sin not a religion?? The reason our economy is failing is because we have completely polluted the ideals and goals of capitalism. If capitalism is working, monopolies cannot survive, prices are kept low and wages are high. The entire premise of capitalism is that everyone who participates, benefits. We have none of this today because cronyism capitalism is not, capitalism, by any distortion of the meaning. The government is corrupt, the two party scam is the driving force that keeps it that way.
　
　
It's not really that complicated, and it has nothing to do with religion. An economic system either works for the majority or it doesn't work at all. What the two party system has brought us is an absolutely dominating corrupt government that serves an extremely small minority. It can be repaired but it will get worse before it can get better. Something that scares the heck out of the idiots in lock step with an extremists idiotology (the two party system), and something those who are in control use against all of us.

 

The title of this thread and the discussion in the OP are at odds with each other; they don't "mesh". The two parties do not represent "right" vs. "left". They represent moderate center-right vs. extreme right today.

Together, they have taken this country rightward, from a very brief experiment with democracy, to the extreme right of today. Together, they have brought us to the very brink of corporatism and democracy of the corporations, by the corporations, for the corporations.

Both parties would much, much more prefer that we fight over who is more "left" and who is more "right" than to see that all alternatives presented to us by those parties are simply differing degrees of "right" politics.

To truly represent opposition to the current trend toward corporatism on steroids, it is necessary to go outsied both parties' political comfort zone and embrace genuine politics of the left because that is the only ideology that takes a thorough-going, informed, unwaivering, principled, and promising position against corporatism. All others involve sentiments and concerns that make for more or less gradual continuation of the slide to the right and toward corporatism.

This does not mean that it is necessary to embrace Marxism or communism or violent revolution. Politics of the left today means a preference for democratic socialism as supported by Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont. It means favoring new regulations on big business to reflect the need presented by recent developments in big business. It means preserving or restoring democracy for the public. It means putting the good of society before the good of big business.

So any push to shy away from clear identification of politics as "left" or "right" is a service to those who would love us to remain ignorant of what they are perpetrating upon us and how they do it. They are the ones who carry out class warfare against the public by passing and/or supporting laws like the Patriot Act, Millitary Commissions Act, Citizens United, lower taxes on the wealth and income of the rich, undermining of Social Security and Medicare, all without ever mentioning the term "class warfare" until the public objects to their class warfare on them. Then the public is smeared as those who are starting class warfare by objecting.

Therefore, it is essential that we becoome very clear on "right" vs. "left" if we are to avoid corporatism and save democracy, and call it what it is.

 

It's too late...

 

It's never too late. It only gets easier as more realize what is happening.

 

That has got to be the most idiotic thing I have ever heard!

Have you ever had any dealings with the US system of so-called justice? If you have never served on a jury, than I invite you to go to your closest court room, that isn't being televised, sit through a docket of trials and gain some much needed knowledge.

Besides "Pro Life" means from the moments leading up to natural conception, to natural death.