>
>> - The majority opinion is trying to push through policies and ideals that
it
>> has been trying to work with for several years, much to the consternation
of
> > the minority.
>
> because I do not think that those who question the policies of the current
> administration are in the minority.
>
> I am willing to attempt this discussion if you like, but erm, your
> postulates aren't terribly objective, assuming that I read them right.
I guess I didn't state that well enough. If you look at the current layout
of our representative houses there is a minority and a majority. That is
who I was referencing, not the general populace. In addition, I made no
comment of the administration, only the majority group, which is defined as
the group or body that is currently in control of the majority of the
government. This is as opposed to the minority group, or that group that
does not control the majority of elected seats at the Federal level.
Also, I'll agree that it's a difficult thing to do. I'm not sure if I
follow your comments about the War of 1812, but that's one conflict that I'm
not heavily versed in. Adding to the confusion is the fact that while I
made the comment that history repeats itself I wasn't necessarily referring
to our own country. There are at least a few other nations out there that
have been at or are at our size.
So let's try it adding that comment as well.
Until Later!
Hatton
-----Original Message-----
From: Dana Tierney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 03, 2003 10:35 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Political thoughts - reality check
I was trying to :) But while I do not think I disagree with your premise
there is a difficulty in implementing it, which I was trying to point out.
Let us assume that history does repeat itself; I might agree with that.
The
thing is that events at any given time are interpreted through filter of
our education and experiences. Thus Nick and I probably never will agree
about who won the war of 1812, since we disagree on what it would have
meant to win.
For example, I disagree with
> - The majority opinion is trying to push through policies and ideals
that it
> has been trying to work with for several years, much to the
consternation of
> the minority.
because I do not think that those who question the policies of the current
administration are in the minority.
I am willing to attempt this discussion if you like, but erm, your
postulates aren't terribly objective, assuming that I read them right.
Dana
C. Hatton Humphrey writes:
> Why has no one answered my question yet?
>
> I said in my initial message:
> "I'm starting a new thread because I don't want to talk about people. I
> don't want to beat on issues that have been debated by the worst, the
best
> and all the rest."
>
> I simply wanted to try and take the names and parties away from the
current
> scene of events and try and get at least someone to make a suggestion of
> where in our chronological past are we. Instead I'm still seeing names,
> parties and prerogatives. Have we pushed ourselves so deep into our
> political identities that we can't disassociate them for at least one
> message thread?
>
> As the child of a History teacher I've been told time and time again
that
> large events repeat themselves. I am simply trying to ascertain where
it is
> on that mystical timeline that we are right now.
>
> Let's try to objectively summarize things:
> - There is a single nation that, over the course of the last 100 or so
years
> has built up a large military force and who now is tasked with handling
or
> helping with every major struggle worldwide.
> - The actively voting population of that said country is split on the
means
> and actions of handling international affairs.
> - The governing body of this country is split almost evenly, supposedly
> based on the core political, philosophical and ideological differences.
> - The minority opinion is currently pushing a doom-and-gloom, our way or
> doomsday message that is being ignored by the majority.
> - The majority opinion is trying to push through policies and ideals
that it
> has been trying to work with for several years, much to the
consternation of
> the minority.
>
> We could continue the list for some time... We're all bright people on
this
> list, who's with me to take up this challenge and try and find out what
> point we're at in the past and take some guesses as to where we're
going.
>
> Until Later!
> Hatton
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Doug White [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, October 03, 2003 8:37 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: Political thoughts - reality check
>
>
> A good example of polarized is evidenced by the squabble in the Texas
> legislature over redistricting in order to ensure more republicans get
> elected
> to the US congress.
>
> They could not pass it is a regular session because the Democrats
> prevented a
> quorum by walking out
> Then in two later special sessions, there was another Walkout.
> Now in the third special session, and everyone is there, the
republicans
> in the
> House and the Republicans in the Senate in conference cannot agree on
> whose home
> district will be eliminated in the final bill.
> In the final analysis it is self interest between republicans causing
the
> stalemate. The whole economy and support for schools is being held
> hostage by
> the Governor pending passage of "his" bill.
>
> This, with the attempt to disenfranchise Democrats who supported Bush
in
> his
> first election, is polarizing the entire state. Combine this with the
> layoffs,
> unemployment, and drastic drop in salaries and other compensation, the
> Republicans will need all the tricks in their bag to win re-election
in
> 2004
>
> Add to this Bush's speech only today, "The economy is improved, it
just
> needs a
> little more work. Tell this to the 9 million looking for work who
cannot
> find
> jobs, and the increased enlistments in the Army, etc, by high school
> graduates
> who cannot find jobs.
>
> Were it not for the huge spending rate by the Defense department - the
US
> economy would be in the middle of the worst depression, even exceeding
the
> 1929
> event.
>
> No nuclear or WMD in Iraq - No person or money from Iraq contributed
to
> 9/11 as
> we were led to believe. lies and more spin, but dubya is falling on
his
> face,
> but he is taking care of his friends and contributors.
>
> Wonder how many more Republicans will wake up and smell the roses in
the
> months
> to come?
>
> |
> | > TRUE STATEMENT:
> | > History repeats itself.
> | >
> | > QUESTION TO CONSIDER:
> | > Was America this divided and polarized before, during and after
> Prohibition?
> | > What about just after the Great Depression hit? Or maybe the Dust
> Bowl
> | > (which hit around the same time). What about when our country was
> founded?
> | >
> | > Having grown up in the South I thought everyone fought on the side
of
> the
> | > colonies during the Revolution... only some small mention was made
> about
> | > Loyalists. Now that I live up here (Buffalo area) I'm seeing
things
> like
> | > Old Fort Niagara... a Loyalist base during the Revolution.
> | >
> | > So, back to the original true statement that History repeats
itself...
> what
> | > are we about to see?
> | >
> | > Until Later!
> | > Hatton
> | >
> | >
> |
>
>
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
