The Partisan Divide on Issues

[Bob Butler 54]

(01-20-2020, 01:12 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Did you see any sign of his defense during the House impeachment, did you see any sign of Republican involvement in the proceedings either or did you only see liberal prosecution/persecution of him and personal disagreements relating to him and his foreign policy pertaining to Ukraine? Trump didn't deny what was said to the President of Ukraine and he made it known to everyone that there seems to be an obvious  double standard in place to protect so called liberals  that you and many others here are now directly associated with these days.  


Me, conspiracy theory ain't my cup of tea either. I never bought into any of your conspiracy theories relating to Bush II or the invasion of Iraq back in the day, I didn't buy into the conspiracy relating to Trumps direct involvement with Russian collusion or buy into the liberal speculation/ hype relating to Mueller's investigation and so forth. To be fair, I didn't buy into the conspiracy that Obama was born else where and he wasn't an American born citizen either.  Also, I haven't bought into the liberal notion of themselves and their new wave of minority voters eventually politically over powering Americans and taking over and controlling everything either. Are you sure that you and other so called liberals aren't as into using/ advancing conspiracy theories or as susceptible to believing conspiracy theories as other groups of social conservatives are these days. BTW, the Ukrainian President was viewed as weak on corruption or corrupt by those who supported/ voted for  the current President of Ukraine these days.

I am into theories of history. Turnings. Civilizations. Ages. But then, aren’t we all on this site?

I did see a sort of Republican involvement in the House inquiry. It was mostly to distract from the main question and slow things down. It wasn’t to the point or effective. More pertinent, I saw the short form of the supposed defense. Trump did nothing impeachable? We want foreign states interfering with elections? We want the White Hose not responding to subpoenas for people or documents? I don’t care if these are crimes or not, I don’t want them.

If there is a comparable standard, can you name a few times the Democrats sought out foreign intervention in US elections?

I do believe in that the Bush 43 administration lied to justify their war in Iraq. They just changed their story to fit the facts too many times. They had too many oil and military people in the administration. I am aware of partisan leanings as to what conspiracy theories one is drawn to believe, but that one isn’t close.

The 17 US intelligence agencies to 0 puts the Russian Collusion thing in the same category.

You don’t believe Trump yelled out in a room full of media to the effect of, “Hey Russia, if you are listening, please…”?

The information behind Obama being born in Kenya was really weak. Good choice to ignore that one. I’d like to say I made up my mind when a researcher found a birth announcement in a local Hawaii newspaper, but I had made up my mind long before.

You might try looking at the evidence? If evidence exists, it doesn’t fit the conspiracy theory category anymore?

I do suspect a new progressive era is coming. Demographics. They need to address problems at intervals. The cyclical rhythm of politics as major parties stick with what got them in power long after they reach a point of diminishing return. The need to react to changing technology. The bad presidents, likely to look really bad in the history books, discrediting the old ideals. I am too dubious about the 2020 candidates and the likely outcomes not to get my hopes too far up for the near future. It will come. If you are into cyclical history, you have to know that it will come. I just am not all sure when.

On one of my other web sites, I am role playing a Star Trek character. She is currently raising the Prime Directive. I find myself echoing some of the stuff I say here. The Prime Directive warns against trying to change cultures before they are ready to change. The high technology of the Star Trek universe makes it kinda dumb not to adopt to the new science, even if accepting it does force a change. There is a kind of balance to walk, between adapting to the available science, and wanting to remain true to yourself. The balance is in offering the benefits of the new, while respecting the compulsion to keep what is established. Progressive. Conservative. It is very possible to err in either direction. The problem is that America is diverse enough that some areas have a greater population density, have a greater need to change. That is a lot of the friction.