Government can't help, it can only hurt

[Bob Butler 54]

(01-29-2018, 09:21 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(01-29-2018, 03:58 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: Extreme partisans often have strange beliefs that have nothing to do with reality.  Many labels have meaning only if they are not applied to some people.

Labels only have meaning if they're accurate. As I said, I've never labelled a socialist a socialist or a communist a communist or a fascist a fascist or an anarchist an anarchist without seeing/ gathering enough proof to use it accurately and make it stick. Hint! You should reexamine the way you use extreme partisan and consider who you are applying the label too as well. Do hippie blue values work with terrorists or my values better suited for getting rid of terrorist? Hint! You ain't going to be able to love them to death.

The communist and fascist labels are overused in my opinion.  In their heyday they properly defined authoritarian states with expansionist tendencies.  They often in the case of communism pretended to follow Marx.  Modern US  personalities are often mislabeled.  This doesn't mean they are not flawed.

Extreme partisans often follow simplistic principles that are well outside of observable reality.  My own view favors balance between opposing principles.  If Nebraska sees regulation as always bad, while the blue world view favors regulation to criminalize abusive behaviors, I will seek balance between the two.  

So, yes, I have endorsed many of Nebraskas principles and causes, but disagree in having some faith in representative democracy.

(01-29-2018, 09:21 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Hint! Don't approach a US taxpayer and use a blue argument that only works in the blues  favor when speaking to someone who has views like Nebraska. A US taxpayer with either walk away and vote against you or decide to get in your grill and educate you.  We aren't face to face here.   I don't know who taught the blues manners and taught them respect. I can only assume that weren't the people like my parents and the bulk of the older adults who were around during your hippie years. I'm pretty sure you spent the bulk of that time avoiding them as much as possible. Are you familiar with them? If you're familiar with them, then you know how critical and tough they were with raising their kids and instilling their values. I'm glad Nebraska showed up and gave me an opportunity  to point out the difference between the two of us for blues to see. If he decides to stick around and contribute more than blurts and rants.

I too had solid GI parents that taught solid values.  Their generation was also flawed in carrying race and gender prejudice, in lacking environmental values, in pursing containment to the extreme.  The protests of the 1960s did change things for the better.  The culture was imperfect then, and remains imperfect.  The need for change is eternal.

(01-29-2018, 09:21 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Ask yourself a question, is he one mine or is Nebraska more likely a loss of one of yours? I see a lot of hippie blue language and positions in his posts. What's a hippie blue kid doing advocating for the removal of the American government? You should realize that every time a group of blues place themselves or their views above the nation as far as importance, they loose another group/crop of Americans. Now, I don't think blue America would be able to survive alone without America as whole. How far away are we from blue America being placed on ignore by America? How far are we away from seeing blue states splitting up? I'd say we aren't that very far away at this point. 

Nebraska is not mine or yours, but himself.  If you see him as blue, I see him as more red.  The lack of government favors the elites and corporations.  A lack of government regulation is a Republican talking point and tugs in the direction of the wealthy elites.  Still, Nebraska is with neither you nor me.  Reds often see the government as bad, while the blue sees corporate power as often bad.  I see both as grey. both as part of the balance.  The optimum comes from balancing FDR and Reagan, not fighting one or the other.

Both parties bases are not thrilled by their establishments.  They are not thrilled by the strong influence of the elites and corporate interests.  Right now the urban / rural spit is more dominant than class divides.  I'd as soon see the parties back off using the government to force cultural change, and push the economic divide.

But that is me.