Respect in Politics


#1

I have heard a lot this election cycle about the viciousness, the gridlock, the personal hatred and the pettiness of politics these days. I’m not gonna lie, it made me depressed.

That’s why I want to ask everyone to put aside ideological disagreements and agree, as they say in preschool, to disagree. Disagreeing with someone does not mean hatred or personal enmity, a lesson that I think is missed by many Americans nowadays. If Jon Stewart and Bill O’Reilly can be friends, so can every American.

In addition, I find it hard to reconcile today’s political situation with what I am told in church every Sunday - that God loves all of us, that He died for all of us, and that the second most sacred mission of all of us on Earth is not to convert anyone, or to save anyone, but to love all our brothers and sisters as we love ourselves.

Thanks!


#2

Just curious. What if someone off the street wanted to stab you in the face or take all the doughnuts off your kitchen table in your house against your will? Would you still want to be so “civil”? Should we remain polite when the thief or murderer is polite?


#3

No…but as far as I’m aware no one has been stabbed…


#4

That’s pretty metaphorical, but politics in and of itself is about who gets stabbed and robbed legally. Why should it be polite? It’s an ugly, disgusting business.

And, just a note, I do just fine getting along with folks; but these are thoughts I have now and then when I hear these calls for unity from folks who want to take my stuff, tell me how to live and then dole out drops of subsistence if they can ever actually put me out of work with all their fiddling in the free market.

O’Reilly and Stewart aren’t that far apart by the way.


#5

“Agree to disagree”?

I think we all are in agreement that we disagree, the fight is over which group will get what they want after the election is over and when that winning group is the Left they force everyone else to comply at gunpoint; even those who “agreed to disagree”.

I really think that this is the crux of the problem, many people think politics are no more relevant than a High School sports rivalry that some blow out of proportion.

Politics is real and the winners create real consequences that real people must endure.

Real businesses are driven to bankruptcy over real Enviro-Nazi laws.

Real people lose real jobs and real families lose real homes.

Real property rights are taken away from real property owners.

Real babies are slaughtered by real abortion mills.

Real money is taken from real people who earned it and then is given to real people who do nothing for it.

Real doctors, nurses and medical technicians wake up to find out that the real education that they paid for and earned has placed them in an occupation that everyone else has a “Right” to access for free.

Real children are deprived of a real education and instead are required by law to be indoctrinated with Statist propaganda in “government schools”.

Real industries are driven out of a real America because real confiscatory taxation and regulation makes it impossible to produce here and still compete in a real world market.

Real deficits that are funded by real dollars borrowed from real creditors must be repaid by real taxpayers or those real taxpayers will be crushed under a real economic collapse caused by our real currency debasement.

This is not an irrelevant sports rivalry, this is real life. Ignorance of the devastating consequences of how elections turn out is only “bliss” until it hits you in some way, by then it is usually too late to help stop it.


#6

I’ll stop disagreeing with people as soon as they recognize that Indivduals own their bodies, no man or group of men have authority over another (all men are created equal), and no one should enact aggressive force against another man. Once we all have this figured out everything else are trivialities.


#7

In politics, there’s a very fine line between “agree to disagree” and getting run over by the opposition.

Romney tried to play nice with the opposition and appeared to “turn the other cheek” a lot, and he got his butt handed to him because BHO and his cronies, while mouthing “agree to disagree”, did just the opposite. In reality they got down in the mud and threw it at Romney . . . and it stuck. Meanwhile, Romney stupidly “turned the other cheek.”

One of the risks of “agree to disagree” is that your opposition may say that, but actually not follow through . . . just like BHO did with Romney. Romney took the risk (perhaps it was his idiot advisors really), and all that maturity and fellowship got him nowhere.

As one poster in this thread said, “Politics is a dirty business.” And especially dirty if your opposition comes from Chicago, where “vote early and vote often” is a moral value. It may be fine if you take that “agree to disagree” approach on an Internet political forum, but it’s a lot different in the real world of Politics.

If you’re going to play the “Agree to disagree” game in politics, you’ve got to trust the other guy. I know of no Dem or Liberal in politics that I would trust. (For that matter, I know of no one in Politics AT ALL, on either side of the aisle, that I would trust.)

The posters in this thread have expressed some very valid points. Compliments.