Text 6753, 91 rader
Skriven 2006-08-23 11:46:00 av Robert E Starr JR (7250.babylon5)
Ärende: Re: My presidential pick
================================
 * * * This message was from gabiks to rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.m * * *  
         * * * and has been forwarded to you by Lord Time * * *         
            -----------------------------------------------             

@MSGID: <1156310081.560709.145990@74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com>
@REPLY: <sI2dnVVFpLuWDnfZnZ2dnUVZ_rKdnZ2d@comcast.com>
Vorlonagent wrote:
> "Wendy of NJ" <voxwoman@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:obuke2tcbbj8d3bar15ku3g76gfqqgrstg@4ax.com...
>
> >>long time lurker here.  (hope you don't mind me jumping into the
> >>conversation at your post wendy)
> >>
> >>is bringing the republican (and the democratic, for that matter) party
> >>back to center really necessary?
> >
> > I think so. But I'm left of center, so the far right sort of scares
> > the hell out of me.
>
> I agree that a centerward pull is needed and I'm right-leaning.
>
> When we're at each other's throats just because of our political
> differences, there's something very, very wrong.  And with both parties
> pulling toward worse and worse extremes, our ability to compromise for the
> good of the nation is itself compromised.
>
> I don't share Wendy's apprehension toward the extreme Right.  Nor am I
> particularly scared of the extreme Left.  No matter the ambitions of its
> component people, the Left's gone as far as it can go and is mostly in
> "rearguard mode" trying to hold onto what it has against a resurgent Right.
> The Left wants to hold onto everything, but some of it deserves to be rolled
> back.  That debate--what to roll back--is occurring the the USA's collective
> subconscious right now.  Because the Right wants to roll back wholesale and
> some of what it'd like to see gone shouldn't be lost either.
>
> I think some vigilance is in order concering the Extreme Right, however. I
> have no desire to "christianize" the US.  Everything else is stuff on which
> resonable people can disagree...even a lot of the christian-driven stuff.
> Resonable people can disagree on life vs choice and gay marriage.  Indeed
> they must be able to accept disagreement or the process of hashing out a
> societal norm is made much more difficult by the all-or-nothing extremists
> on both sides.


that all sounds reasonable.  :^)

i guess i'm really musing about cause and effect.  is the movement
toward 'extremism' within the parties an organic process driven by the
wants and needs of the voting public, or an artificial construct
powered by sound bits and a need to tell people how to vote by
providing a, ah,..... 'political compass' by which they might easily
identify themselves as one thing or the other.

lately i'm wondering what all the fuss is about.  in so many ways i
think our political system is completely broken.  not so much because
of party in-fighting but because of a basic inability to think beyond a
2 year time frame.  never mind the out of the box thing.

some friends and i were discussing our nations 'energy crisis.'  with
conservation (i'm sorry i can't remember where i heard/read these
numbers) we can stretch our current supply (reserves and what's
available world wide) out for about 100 years, give or take.

why?  from my point of view all this accomplishes is to allow car
manufactures to limp along 'innovating' as little as possible for the
least amount of retooling dollars.  it also conveniently dumps the
problem in the lap of our grandchildren.

we concluded it might serve us better as a nation (and a planet) to
completely remove fossil fuel from the energy equation.  we proposed
subsidizing gas down to 35 cents a gallon and offering huge tax
incentives (as in a 100% deduction on price, insurance and mileage) on
new car purshases; thus promoting everyone in the country to run out
and buy the biggest, most gas guzzling suv on the market. we figured
with a good "just fill up and go" ad campaign we could run out the
entire world supply of gas in a week and a half. :^)

different world, different solutions.

which brings me back to....is pulling to the center really necessary?
perhaps it would serve us better to let that go.  i understand that
within the confines of a two party system the inability to offer up a
much compromise, vote getting candidate is problematic.  but if there
where 3 or possibly 4 parties?  if the lefting and righting of the
parties is an 'organic' outcome of people voting on issues they relate
to, why not invite an owl and a ferret to the convention?

lg
   
--- SBBSecho 2.11-Win32
 * Origin: Time Warp of the Future BBS - Home of League 10 (1:14/400)