Originally posted by truejedi
the irony is in the time he wasted on it as opposed to actually using his 2 minutes to fix the problems he was complaining about at the top.These 2 parties are in it together, that should be obvious by now.
what better do you think he could have accomplished during 2 minutes of dialogue with a republican party that trumpets the fact they wont negotiate with the democrats?
Originally posted by dadudemon
I'd say that they do have a left-bias. It's hard not to be leftist when you interview remote tribal leaders, political activists in other countries, and have debates which clearly show how stupid Republicans are, currently.
in terms of american politics at least, the truth has a liberal bias
Originally posted by dadudemon
I'd say that they do have a left-bias. It's hard not to be leftist when you interview remote tribal leaders, political activists in other countries, and have debates which clearly show how stupid Republicans are, currently.
Originally posted by inimalist
what better do you think he could have accomplished during 2 minutes of dialogue with a republican party that trumpets the fact they wont negotiate with the democrats?
Originally posted by truejedi
what do you consider negotiation? I mean, i look at Wisconsin and Indiana, and the Democratic party doesn't seem all that interested in negotiation there.
neither did the republicans. in the prank call to governor walker,'it was revealed he was trying to use negotiations as a ruse to pass the legislation behind their backs.
I guess, my question more is, why do you think mocking satire isn't a good use of that time? what better point could he have made? I'm not even American and is vote for that man.
Originally posted by inimalist
neither did the republicans. in the prank call to governor walker,'it was revealed he was trying to use negotiations as a ruse to pass the legislation behind their backs.I guess, my question more is, why do you think mocking satire isn't a good use of that time? what better point could he have made? I'm not even American and is vote for that man.
to answer that question: I watched that video, and I have no idea what point he was trying to make. So maybe a coherent one?
Originally posted by truejedi
do you deny his satire probably did nothing to help the partisan problem? Do you think the Right will be more willing or less willing to negotiate with this man in the future? If his message was "negotiate with me" he did it wrong.
what is the partisan problem?
but no, i think that was his point. It is silly to be negotiating about NPR in the first place when the government has bigger issues to face. There is no need to reach across the aisle here, NPR serves an excellent purpose and its funding is trivial compared to the real problems that plague government, and the issue itself is a red herring used by a party that is becoming further and further distanced from the ideals of the American people. Its not as funny said like that though.
the partisanship. Where the Right won't negotiate with the Left, and the Left won't negotiate with the right, and they keep passing temporary benefits because they can't reach an accord. How is 2 minutes wasted on satire going to do anything other than alienate the lawmakers who worked on the bill he is mocking and make it more difficult for the two sides to work together? These two parties make me sick.
You haven't noticed the trend in recent years towards strict party line voting? It didn't used to be that way. Rural democrats would side with rural republicans on some issues. Mostly representatives would vote with the best interest of their constituency in mind, not vote the party line on everything. In that way, compromise could be reached, and things got passed.
Now its D vs. R, and the country is divided, even though both parties do the SAME THINGS. The whole country is divided on a few social issues while the economy gets ripped apart no matter who is in power.
so, because Weiner makes a satirical speach, you think he is voting party line, rather than pointing out how silly it is to be talking about NPR funding?
you don't have to negotiate on every issue. Just because a bill is introduced to cut some funding, doesn't mean a negotiation and comprimise needs to be made. Sometimes, the Democrats are actually serving the will of the people who voted for them by saying "no comprimise". this is how a democracy works. We dont want a system where the powerful just collude to make deals that serve eachother's interests, you want real challange to all ideas.
Originally posted by inimalist
so, because Weiner makes a satirical speach, you think he is voting party line, rather than pointing out how silly it is to be talking about NPR funding?you don't have to negotiate on every issue. Just because a bill is introduced to cut some funding, doesn't mean a negotiation and comprimise needs to be made. Sometimes, the Democrats are actually serving the will of the people who voted for them by saying "no comprimise". this is how a democracy works. We dont want a system where the powerful just collude to make deals that serve eachother's interests, you want real challange to all ideas.
I thought you originally said that your main problem with the R is that they won't negotiate? If you say Left is justified with saying "no compromise" surely you wont' deny the Right the same option?
Originally posted by truejedi
You haven't noticed the trend in recent years towards strict party line voting? It didn't used to be that way. Rural democrats would side with rural republicans on some issues. Mostly representatives would vote with the best interest of their constituency in mind, not vote the party line on everything. In that way, compromise could be reached, and things got passed.Now its D vs. R, and the country is divided, even though both parties do the SAME THINGS. The whole country is divided on a few social issues while the economy gets ripped apart no matter who is in power.
The increasing "divide" on parties lines being a contemporary issue is a myth. There was a video made which was basically a "voice-reenactment" of the political parties in days past that showed that even as far back as the very beginning of the US, there was very severe sh*t-slinging, lying, and logical fallacies being committed in campaigns across party-lines.
Originally posted by truejedi
I thought you originally said that your main problem with the R is that they won't negotiate? If you say Left is justified with saying "no compromise" surely you wont' deny the Right the same option?
Well, to sum up the Dems over the last 2.5 years...they've been appeasing the right on almost every major issue, direclty contradicting campaign promises to their constituents. What we need is a 70% saturation from one party or the other in both the house and the senate. THEN we could see some real change.