Both sides are well intended.

[RickWhite]

Something occurred to me. I spend too much time posting about poor logic and not enough discussing good logic.

In this thread, I am going to attempt to explain the thought process of the reasonable mind and how wise, informed people view the world.

Both the Left and the Right are well intended. Both sides, want to see good things happen to people and for them to prosper. They disagree on how to make this happen, but their fundamental wishes for people are the same.

Nobody, on either side wants to see more poverty and nobody wants to wage war and send young people to their death for nefarious reasons. When our leaders do decide to enter into a war, it is done because they feel that doing so is in the best interest of the country. Now, they may be wrong, and reasonable minds can disagree, but rational people understand that even when wrong, they are doing what they believe is best for our country. Well informed, rational people understand this is true and know that claims to the contrary having to do with conspiracies or other nefarious reasons for war do not come from informed, level headed people.

Again, reasonable minds can disagree with any decision to go to war while understanding that our Leaders are doing what they think is right. It is when one begins to believe conspiracies or nefarious causes that they become unreasonable and irrational. Sure, that stuff all sounds sexy and fun, but it isn't reality.

Likewise, nobody wants to increase poverty, though if your voting base is made up of the poor it makes sense to keep them on board. But, in general, neither side wants to see people suffer because they are evil and mean spirited or in want of slave labor. The Left and Right just have different views on how to make all ships rise with the tide.


Our Leaders, while definitely influenced by campaign contributions, generally have good intentions. It happens to be the case that campaign finance is a serious issue and not one that is easily addressed. The fact that there always will be influence from large contributors as well as from a candidates base is simply an unavoidable part of the democratic process. While much discussion has occurred regarding keeping money out of politics, it is hard to do without running into free speech issues and causing as many problems as we would be preventing.

I could go on with example after example but i think you get the point. Most of the time, things really are much closer to what they seem and much further from some radical, revisionist theories than one might imagine.

Truth be told, in my youth I too thought everything about government was corrupt and was all about money. I believed in all the cloak and dagger covert operation theories about black CIA helicopters and back room deals. Hell, I think nearly all of us go through this phase. But, then as I learned and grew, I came to realize that much like the tooth fairy and big foot, that stuff is really all just a bunch of nonsense. Now that isn't to say that nothing shady ever goes on, just that it is far less prevalent than you might think.

No, the reality of the situation is much more boring. In reality things are pretty much what they seem. We were attacked by Muslim extremists on 911 and we waged war in order to combat global terrorism. Was Bush ill informed and did he make mistakes; perhaps. But there was no conspiracy, cover up or other nefarious stuff going on.

Does Obama hate America? I don't believe he does. Do I think he has ideas that are considerably opposed to Capitalism and more Socialist in nature? You bet. But, I also believe he is doing what he honestly believes would be best for the country. I disagree with him, but I recognize his good intentions.

Why? Because as explained, I don't think the US elects evil dictators and I don't think that type of logic is sound, nor do I think such opinions are held by informed, rational people.

I have no doubt what so ever that many people here will respond by telling me how naive I am and how I am a sheep who believes the lies of the other side's propaganda machine and how I simply can't think for myself. I am here to tell you, I have been there and done that. Like most informed people, I walked that road long ago and have left those childish notions behind for a reason.

I left them behind because while not perfect, America is pretty much exactly as we have always (until recently) been raised to believe. We have always been a great country that has done enormous good for the world and our politicians are generally well intended.

 

[abe23]

Who the hell are you and why are you using rickwhite's account to post here? I want answers!

In all seriousness though, yes absolutely. Good post!

It's always easier intellectually to question the motives of people who disagree with you rather than challenging their ideas, but we all fall into that trap sometimes.

 

[jeffchr]

I disagree for the following reasons. The Bush regime lied and minipulated intelligence to justify Iraq - even to the point of outing a CIA agent in retaliation for a truly well-intended report in evidence against WMD. The current Republican caucus is voting "No" on every piece of Democratic legislation in an attempt to cripple the administration as an election ploy. Their votes are not well intended (for the good of the country). But I'm glad to hear you think Obama is well-intended. I agree.

 

[RichiRich]

And that is exactly where you fail to understand the concept.

Left and Right are just smoke screens. There is only one elite, one group of people with MONEY and hence POWER who decide what's going on.

Not some black kid who graduates from Harvard.

Get that straight, and then you really see the world for what it is. People want to make money, and they do it through war, drugs and pharmaceuticals - the three biggest businesses on Earth, respectively.

Politicains aren't in charge, they're just the bitch boys who take the fall for the people behind the scenes.

It has nothing to do with "conspiracy theories" - it's the god damn truth. Just look at how a mafia works, go watch the Godfather or something.

-Rich

 

[AhighPIPER]

And that is exactly where you fail to understand the concept.

Left and Right are just smoke screens. There is only one elite, one group of people with MONEY and hence POWER who decide what's going on.

Not some black kid who graduates from Harvard.

Get that straight, and then you really see the world for what it is. People want to make money, and they do it through war, drugs and pharmaceuticals - the three biggest businesses on Earth, respectively.

Politicains aren't in charge, they're just the bitch boys who take the fall for the people behind the scenes.

It has nothing to do with "conspiracy theories" - it's the god damn truth. Just look at how a mafia works, go watch the Godfather or something.

-Rich

Exactly!

 

[RickWhite]

It is idiotic to keep saying that Bush lied to get us into a war in Iraq. First, he didn't really need a reason because Saddam had been violating the cease fire for years and was in breach of numerous UN resolutions.

But, the main reason we know he wasn't lying is because every other world leader thought he had these weapons. I'm talking about people like Putin who holds no alliance with the US. In fact, it is entirely possible that even Saddam himself thought he had these weapons or would have them soon. See, when you are a scientist under a guy like Saddam and he asks if he will have his WMDs soon, your choices are to say yes or to have your family murdered.

Also, Saddam did use poison gas against the Kurds so he did have WMDs at one time. And we did find remnants of this as well as a massive underground facility. It is entirely possible that Saddam moved these weapons given that he had ample time to do so. And it is possible that we, like all the other world leaders who believed he was building these weapons, got bad intelligence. But it just isn't reasonable to say Bush was lying.

 

[NoDrama]

You know in a way rick is correct. Most people ARE well intentioned. But not the super Elite, super wealthy folks, they are much different than you and I and 99% of everyone else. A life of power and infinite wishes to come true changes a person.

 

[RickWhite]

And that is exactly where you fail to understand the concept.

Left and Right are just smoke screens. There is only one elite, one group of people with MONEY and hence POWER who decide what's going on.

Not some black kid who graduates from Harvard.

Get that straight, and then you really see the world for what it is. People want to make money, and they do it through war, drugs and pharmaceuticals - the three biggest businesses on Earth, respectively.

Politicains aren't in charge, they're just the bitch boys who take the fall for the people behind the scenes.

It has nothing to do with "conspiracy theories" - it's the god damn truth. Just look at how a mafia works, go watch the Godfather or something.

-Rich

As I stated, I used to believe the same thing in my younger years. So, let me ask you this. Do you think all of our Congressmen and Senators are just actors? Turn on C-span and watch a political debate. Do you think these passionate and heated debates are all staged? After all, if what you are saying is true and they all know it's really all about pay to play, it would make sense that none of them would really care wouldn't it? Wouldn't they just get together and decide how much each one gets and then pass what ever measure needed to be passed without all the heated debate?

What is your take on health care reform? Can you explain who is getting what amount of money from whom? Because what I see are to sides who both have different prescriptions for a successful health care system. What I see are two groups who genuinely disagree and who genuinely feel their way is better for our country.

 

[Dragline]

Rick did you just now start smoking weed to bring about these rational revelations? Have you recently hit your head? Did you just have mind blowing sex with a Liberal? I honestly don't see anything I want to argue with, except for the "until recently" comment at the end. But im willing to let that sllde....

 

[jeffchr]

It is idiotic to keep saying that Bush lied to get us into a war in Iraq. First, he didn't really need a reason because Saddam had been violating the cease fire for years and was in breach of numerous UN resolutions.

it is well established fact that bush lied. he lied about the yellow cake uranium purchases in Africa. it was joe wilson who was sent to Africa to investigate the African connection. his report came back negative. bush lied about this to the nation, in his state of the union address in jan 2003.

in a memo to tony blair, bush discusses his plans to send a u2 over iraq, disguised with UN insignia, hoping the iraqis fire on it so he would have a reason to go to war. he had already made up his mind to invade iraq, but didn't have a good reason.

there is no way this mf is getting off the hook for iraq. no way. you can attempt to rewrite history, but you just look like a fool.

 

[RickWhite]

it is well established fact that bush lied. he lied about the yellow cake uranium purchases in Africa. it was joe wilson who was sent to Africa to investigate the African connection. his report came back negative. bush lied about this to the nation, in his state of the union address in jan 2003.

in a memo to tony blair, bush discusses his plans to send a u2 over iraq, disguised with UN insignia, hoping the iraqis fire on it so he would have a reason to go to war. he had already made up his mind to invade iraq, but didn't have a good reason.

there is no way this mf is getting off the hook for iraq. no way. you can attempt to rewrite history, but you just look like a fool.

Too bad Bush never made that claim about the yellow cake. What he said was that the British had produced intelligence suggesting Saddam was trying to acquire it. This statement was true - the British did supply such intelligence. Whether or not the intelligence was correct is not the issue.

And the U2 story is pure crap. There are dozens of instances of Saddam firing on planes enforcing the no fly zone - each one is enough reason.

But see, you are looking at things through the radical prism of "Bush lied." You can criticize him for a lot of things but saying he lied is itself a lie. It is not a rational position. Did Putin and Blair also lie? Did all the Democratic Congressmen who saw the same intelligence as Bush lie?

 

[jeffchr]

Too bad Bush never made that claim about the yellow cake. What he said was that the British had produced intelligence suggesting Saddam was trying to acquire it. This statement was true - the British did supply such intelligence. Whether or not the intelligence was correct is not the issue.

And the U2 story is pure crap. There are dozens of instances of Saddam firing on planes enforcing the no fly zone - each one is enough reason.

But see, you are looking at things through the radical prism of "Bush lied." You can criticize him for a lot of things but saying he lied is itself a lie. It is not a rational position. Did Putin and Blair also lie? Did all the Democratic Congressmen who saw the same intelligence as Bush lie?

" ................... The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa. Our intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production. Saddam Hussein has not credibly explained these activities. He clearly has much to hide. ............................"


facts show that Bush KNEW the above was false ... so he lied. He knew the African-Uranium connection was a false lead. He also knew the tubes were disassembled from rockets, and couldn't be used for centrifuges. He knew, he lied. And not just a little lie, the above quote was from the State of the Union Address in Jan 2003. i love how the right just makes shit up, and then calls it fact. they think they can "buy" anything, including their own version of the facts. wrong.

 

[GreatwhiteNorth]

You guys are falling into the same old Right/Left paradigm as before.
How about trying to fix the problem and not the blame?

 

[RickWhite]

" ................... The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa. Our intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production. Saddam Hussein has not credibly explained these activities. He clearly has much to hide. ............................"


facts show that Bush KNEW the above was false ... so he lied. He knew the African-Uranium connection was a false lead. He also knew the tubes were disassembled from rockets, and couldn't be used for centrifuges. He knew, he lied. And not just a little lie, the above quote was from the State of the Union Address in Jan 2003. i love how the right just makes shit up, and then calls it fact. they think they can "buy" anything, including their own version of the facts. wrong.

Can you produce proof of said knowledge?

Suppose though, there were some embellishments - do you think they were for nefarious reasons or because the administration felt that Iraq was of geo-strategic importance in the war on terror and they needed a more simple explanation that would resonate with the people?

Which is more likely?

 

[medicineman]

Rick the Dick as a liberal, say it isn't so. I'm with the "Must have hit his head" theory. I do agree with some of his "Lets just all get along" rhetoric, although I find it kind of strange he is advocating this now. If the party of NO would take time to actually look at some of the legislation they are holding up, I'm sure they could find some they could agree with. There are something like 290 bills just sitting in the senate that have been passed by the house, but blocked by the party of NO. Come on guys, putting the function of government on hold may be a good thing in some cases, but not all.

 

[jeffchr]

Can you produce proof of said knowledge?

Suppose though, there were some embellishments - do you think they were for nefarious reasons or because the administration felt that Iraq was of geo-strategic importance in the war on terror and they needed a more simple explanation that would resonate with the people?

Which is more likely?

Joe Wilson made his African trip in Feb 2002 and submitted his report in March 2002. Valerie Plame was outed by Cheney et al in July of '03. Based on the Bush admin reaction to the report, it is obvious that they didn't want to gather intelligence and respond to it, they preferred to manipulate it. In other words, they lied.

It doesn't matter what their reasons were for lying. And lying to the public because Bush thought it would be resonate better...can Obama do that too? Would that be OK? You know, if he though he knew best and just lied to everybody else. I've actually heard that "arrogant" charge against Obama. I guess it's not OK. At least when Obama does it. Is it OK when Bush did it?

What is most likely as the primary impetus for the Iraq war was Cheney, and Bush is just a patsy. That is what I truly believe. And Cheney ... that's a conversation that makes me sick.

 

[jeffchr]

You guys are falling into the same old Right/Left paradigm as before.
How about trying to fix the problem and not the blame?

how do you suggest we fix the problem? in my opinion, lobbying should be eliminated. taking the money out of public service is the only way to fix the problem. eliminating lobbying is only one aspect. campaign reform, filibuster reform, and education reform are some others. and the media ... I have no clue. but they are distortionists, not journalists. perhaps if the money is out of politics, so too will the media find other ways of getting paid-off.

 

[Leothwyn]

Good post Rick - very refreshing to see around here.
Personally, I don't see the whole Iraq thing as some big conspiracy/grab for power and money. I do think that they lied, but I suspect it was to bolster support for the attack - and they really did believe that there was some threat there (WMDs).

 

[jeffchr]

Good post Rick - very refreshing to see around here.
Personally, I don't see the whole Iraq thing as some big conspiracy/grab for power and money. I do think that they lied, but I suspect it was to bolster support for the attack - and they really did believe that there was some threat there (WMDs).

I understand that position. But there was too much bs associated with that situation. The Libbey conviction, the Plame outing (which was really hard-core, Chicago - yes "Chicago" - style politics), spying on Americans, Guantanomo, and rendition. So why should I believe there was anything honorable going on in that camp.

 

[jesus of Cannabis]

Something occurred to me. I spend too much time posting about poor logic and not enough discussing good logic.

In this thread, I am going to attempt to explain the thought process of the reasonable mind and how wise, informed people view the world.

Both the Left and the Right are well intended. Both sides, want to see good things happen to people and for them to prosper. They disagree on how to make this happen, but their fundamental wishes for people are the same.

Nobody, on either side wants to see more poverty and nobody wants to wage war and send young people to their death for nefarious reasons. When our leaders do decide to enter into a war, it is done because they feel that doing so is in the best interest of the country. Now, they may be wrong, and reasonable minds can disagree, but rational people understand that even when wrong, they are doing what they believe is best for our country. Well informed, rational people understand this is true and know that claims to the contrary having to do with conspiracies or other nefarious reasons for war do not come from informed, level headed people.

Again, reasonable minds can disagree with any decision to go to war while understanding that our Leaders are doing what they think is right. It is when one begins to believe conspiracies or nefarious causes that they become unreasonable and irrational. Sure, that stuff all sounds sexy and fun, but it isn't reality.

Likewise, nobody wants to increase poverty, though if your voting base is made up of the poor it makes sense to keep them on board. But, in general, neither side wants to see people suffer because they are evil and mean spirited or in want of slave labor. The Left and Right just have different views on how to make all ships rise with the tide.


Our Leaders, while definitely influenced by campaign contributions, generally have good intentions. It happens to be the case that campaign finance is a serious issue and not one that is easily addressed. The fact that there always will be influence from large contributors as well as from a candidates base is simply an unavoidable part of the democratic process. While much discussion has occurred regarding keeping money out of politics, it is hard to do without running into free speech issues and causing as many problems as we would be preventing.

I could go on with example after example but i think you get the point. Most of the time, things really are much closer to what they seem and much further from some radical, revisionist theories than one might imagine.

Truth be told, in my youth I too thought everything about government was corrupt and was all about money. I believed in all the cloak and dagger covert operation theories about black CIA helicopters and back room deals. Hell, I think nearly all of us go through this phase. But, then as I learned and grew, I came to realize that much like the tooth fairy and big foot, that stuff is really all just a bunch of nonsense. Now that isn't to say that nothing shady ever goes on, just that it is far less prevalent than you might think.

No, the reality of the situation is much more boring. In reality things are pretty much what they seem. We were attacked by Muslim extremists on 911 and we waged war in order to combat global terrorism. Was Bush ill informed and did he make mistakes; perhaps. But there was no conspiracy, cover up or other nefarious stuff going on.

Does Obama hate America? I don't believe he does. Do I think he has ideas that are considerably opposed to Capitalism and more Socialist in nature? You bet. But, I also believe he is doing what he honestly believes would be best for the country. I disagree with him, but I recognize his good intentions.

Why? Because as explained, I don't think the US elects evil dictators and I don't think that type of logic is sound, nor do I think such opinions are held by informed, rational people.

I have no doubt what so ever that many people here will respond by telling me how naive I am and how I am a sheep who believes the lies of the other side's propaganda machine and how I simply can't think for myself. I am here to tell you, I have been there and done that. Like most informed people, I walked that road long ago and have left those childish notions behind for a reason.

I left them behind because while not perfect, America is pretty much exactly as we have always (until recently) been raised to believe. We have always been a great country that has done enormous good for the world and our politicians are generally well intended.

So why cant the Democraps tellBarney Frank and Chris Dodd to go take a flying fucking leap off the Golden Gate for putting this country in the mess it is now by pushing all the sub prime mortgage bullshit?
Democraps want more government and less personal freedom and the Repubs are the opposite. But both love to spend money and are drunk off their own power.