Reply
Honored Social Butterfly

The left has taken over the Politics and Current Event Board

Posters...321, TX, John258, runner50, Mandm, oldscout66 and others on the left have taken over the P & C board and show they will do anyting to get others that do not agree with them off.

 

They own it...pushy people seem to get their way....attack, attack, bait, bait, iinsult, insult, make snide reamrk whatever they can do.  It seem to work as many have left the P & C board. 

2,000 Views
330
Report
1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION
Honored Social Butterfly


@corb0503 wrote:

@TxGrandpa2 wrote:

@KidBoy2 wrote:
What Obama said was that it was Congress job to approve his budget and that he would not discuss it unless they FIRST approved what he wanted. That's not negotiating.
__________________________________________________

Yes, Obama said he would not negotiate...and he wonders why things do not get done.

Why should Obama negotiate?  They wanted him to surrender, not compromise.


Because the president cannot make laws, cannot fund his agenda, cannot do anything without Congress.  Because every president before Obama understood that and negotiated and compromised to move the country forward.  Because he's the president, not the king.  And by the way, YOU don't know if they wanted him to "surrender" or what they wanted him to do.  You don't know because the only way to find out is to negotiate and King Obama thought he was better than every past president and that he shouldn't have to do that. 


If somebody following the news cannot determine what one party expects why do you claim to know exactly what Obama should have done?

View solution in original post

1,304 Views
60
Report
Honored Social Butterfly

I didn't say that the GOP shut down the government to defund the ACA.

 

No, but others have alluded to it and you never offered a correction. So, what is one to think??

0 Kudos
1,611 Views
0
Report
Recognized Social Butterfly


@cat2011 wrote:

This is a nonsensical argument. Fox isn't in the news business. It's in the opinion business. I'm sure Fox can figure out when it's Tuesday--LOL!

 

Fox is the only station to fight a lawsuit to establish its constitutional right to air falsehoods. Why do you think they wanted to establish that principle? There have also been several studies establishing that Fox viewers are more likely to be misinformed than any other segment of the population, including those who don't follow the news.

 

So there will always be a problem with using Fox as a source. It's not a credible source, by its own in-court admission. If you want to establish a fact, use another source.

 


The problem is not using Fox as a source.  The porblem is that 90% of the morons on the left think that if they say "it must have come from Fox" it proves it's a lie.  And I say morons because saying that doesn't prove something isn't true.  It only proves that the people saying it aren't bright enough to know that it doesn't prove anything.

0 Kudos
4,014 Views
2
Report
Honored Social Butterfly

No, corb, the problem is indeed using Fox News as your source. Nobody is going to believe your "facts" because you haven't supported them with a credible source. It doesn't mean that there isn't some remote possibility that what you post is true--it just means that you have to establish your proof.

 

Do you understand?

 

Recognized Social Butterfly


@cat2011 wrote:

No, corb, the problem is indeed using Fox News as your source. Nobody is going to believe your "facts" because you haven't supported them with a credible source. It doesn't mean that there isn't some remote possibility that what you post is true--it just means that you have to establish your proof.

 

Do you understand?

 


Hillary Clinton was on Fox last night.  Since she was on Fox, nothing she said was factual, right?  

 

Take a look at the posts here.  I seldom, if ever, see Fox being used as a source. Regardless of the source, I see many people saying, "it must have come from Fox" to indicate whatever is said is false.  The point is, saying it comes from Fox does not prove anything other than the person saying it can't refute the FACT so they try to diminsh the source.

 

Do you understand?

Honored Social Butterfly


@mandm84 wrote:

 

 Nice, so you just go ahead and believe what they tell you to believe, especially if you like what your'e hearing. I want the truth whether left, middle or right.


I presume that means watching MSNBC and reading the NY Times for "your" fair news?

0 Kudos
288 Views
2
Report
Honored Social Butterfly

NOT,

 

Have I ever used them as a source ?  If I ever did I would do the same thing I do with all my sources - Politifact them.  Politifacting Fox is a waste of time and BTW has MSNBC ever been challenged and found guilty in court for fabrications and defended themselves by " opinion based freedom of speech ".

Honored Social Butterfly


@NOTHAPPENING wrote:

@mandm84 wrote:

 

 Nice, so you just go ahead and believe what they tell you to believe, especially if you like what your'e hearing. I want the truth whether left, middle or right.


I presume that means watching MSNBC and reading the NY Times for "your" fair news?


What's this fascination with MSNBC by the right?  Hardly anyone considered liberal keeps quoting from MSNBC while most from the right uses FOX as a reference.  Even Shotgun Cheny insisted that every TV in the hotel rooms he stayed in was tuned to FOX.

Honored Social Butterfly


@corb0503 wrote:

@JANMB wrote:

No depth to the discussions?   I disgree with you ....we have very knowledgable people posting here.   But the fact is, conservatives prefer to hear what they want to believe is true and when some people  post and validate information  the conservatives  are very unhappy because they prefer to stay with early convictions....it's easier than thinking.   . 
They don't care if FOX for example won a law suit in Florida in 2003   that gave them permission to lie.   Or that  Fox News, the NY POST   and The Wall Street Journal, for example, ... belong to Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal.,,,,,,   who owns the largest chunk   outside the Murdoch family.    But I'm sure the Saudi's wouldn't do anything to hurt the USA.....and Murdoch isn't in it for the money. 


Yeah, yeah, yeah.  Personally, I prefer the facts, regardless of who prints/broadcasts them.  Obviously, you don't.  You prefer to blame the media regardless of the facts.  Unfortuantely, I have some bad news for you.  It doesn't matter who owns an outlet or which outlet publishes the facts.  They are still the facts and because the left likes to say "it must have come from Fox" doesn't mean it's not a fact.  It only means the left doesn't understand or agree with a fact so they attack the source. 


When are you going to start posting facts instead of just attacking everybody with name-calling?

Recognized Social Butterfly


@Snoopy48 wrote:

@corb0503 wrote:

@JANMB wrote:

No depth to the discussions?   I disgree with you ....we have very knowledgable people posting here.   But the fact is, conservatives prefer to hear what they want to believe is true and when some people  post and validate information  the conservatives  are very unhappy because they prefer to stay with early convictions....it's easier than thinking.   . 
They don't care if FOX for example won a law suit in Florida in 2003   that gave them permission to lie.   Or that  Fox News, the NY POST   and The Wall Street Journal, for example, ... belong to Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal.,,,,,,   who owns the largest chunk   outside the Murdoch family.    But I'm sure the Saudi's wouldn't do anything to hurt the USA.....and Murdoch isn't in it for the money. 


Yeah, yeah, yeah.  Personally, I prefer the facts, regardless of who prints/broadcasts them.  Obviously, you don't.  You prefer to blame the media regardless of the facts.  Unfortuantely, I have some bad news for you.  It doesn't matter who owns an outlet or which outlet publishes the facts.  They are still the facts and because the left likes to say "it must have come from Fox" doesn't mean it's not a fact.  It only means the left doesn't understand or agree with a fact so they attack the source. 


When are you going to start posting facts instead of just attacking everybody with name-calling?


Gee, I don't know.  Probably about the same time you stop making personal attacks like the one above that has aboslutely nothing to do with what I said.

0 Kudos
296 Views
0
Report
Regular Social Butterfly

Bleeping Balderdash. 

 

You right wingnuts have never been able to distinguish between true leftists and moderates. 

Honored Social Butterfly


@drawpoker wrote:

Bleeping Balderdash. 

 

You right wingnuts have never been able to distinguish between true leftists and moderates. 


Some here are so far Right of center, a moderate Republican is seen as "far-left".  They have little to no perspective.


"FAKE 45 #illegitimate" read a sign at the Woman's March in DC, 1/27/2017
Honored Social Butterfly

You right wingnuts have never been able to distinguish between true leftists and moderates.

 

Except the the probably intentionally provocative opening, draw makes an interesting point. What is the difference? I'm sure that among the cadre of people using terms like "right wingnuts", "repugs", "1%ers", "Ubers", etc. there ares some that consider themselves "moderate".

 

But there are political philosophies out there from anarchism to Communism and everything in between. There are economic philosophies from laissez-faire to Fascism and Socialism and everything in between. Socially we have Conservatives to Progressives. And, of course, there are overlaps between catagories. So, it is quite a mish-mash. 

 

Under those circumstances, how do we distinguish between leftists and moderates and everything else??

2,950 Views
48
Report
Honored Social Butterfly

Im a pro labor leftist.

 

So it begins.
Honored Social Butterfly

RK asked a good question, " how do we distinguish between leftists and moderates and everything else??"

 

Unfortunately members like KidBoy define anyone who agrees with any Obama policy as a left wing liberal. Of course intelligent people realize that isn't true. Anyway, back to RK's question. Here are some suggestions:

 

  • A moderate is someone who understands the differences between FACTS and OPINIONS.
  • A moderate in this forum would be someone who agrees with Obama on some issues and disagrees with him on others.
  • A moderate is someone who isn't always cheering for Obama policies under all conditions. For example, I'm in favor of the ACA but realize it has several components which need to be modified or eliminated.
  • A moderate is someone who takes a position most people would consider normal and reasonable, even if we disagree with that position.
Trusted Social Butterfly

Critical,

I can’t say much about our Leftists because I am on that Right. However, I can say this about our moderates:

 

They want all of our government spending done with “revenue”. Also,

 

They want all of the welfare (income-help) given to individuals above our middle cut, cancelled, wiped, eradicated.

0 Kudos
461 Views
1
Report
Honored Social Butterfly


@alotofgrey wrote:

Critical,

I can’t say much about our Leftists because I am on that Right. However, I can say this about our moderates:

 

They want all of our government spending done with “revenue”. Also,

 

They want all of the welfare (income-help) given to individuals above our middle cut, cancelled, wiped, eradicated.


Spoken like a true leftist!

Honored Social Butterfly


@CriticalThinking wrote:

RK asked a good question, " how do we distinguish between leftists and moderates and everything else??"

 

Unfortunately members like KidBoy define anyone who agrees with any Obama policy as a left wing liberal. Of course intelligent people realize that isn't true. Anyway, back to RK's question. Here are some suggestions:

 

  • A moderate is someone who understands the differences between FACTS and OPINIONS.
  • A moderate in this forum would be someone who agrees with Obama on some issues and disagrees with him on others.
  • A moderate is someone who isn't always cheering for Obama policies under all conditions. For example, I'm in favor of the ACA but realize it has several components which need to be modified or eliminated.
  • A moderate is someone who takes a position most people would consider normal and reasonable, even if we disagree with that position.


Now I have a question for you, How many in this Message Board will agree with your definition of what is a Moderate? I am pessimistic about the what you may find. but curious nevertheless.

no name
0 Kudos
2,783 Views
43
Report
Contributor

I don't agree with any part of this definiton of a moderate. All a moderate is (in the politcal sense of the word) is someone who takes a middle ground position.  It has nothing to do with opinion versus facts. A person may be a moderate on a single position but if they are that way on all positions they are nothing but a fence sitter with no real opinions they can defend.

Social Butterfly

Viviajm, "I don't agree with any part of this definiton of a moderate. All a moderate is (in the politcal sense of the word) is someone who takes a middle ground position.  It has nothing to do with opinion versus facts. A person may be a moderate on a single position but if they are that way on all positions they are nothing but a fence sitter with no real opinions they can defend."; Excellent point. 

Please note that in several scandals discussed in these threads, the facts are most available at the start, then are held hostage for an 'investigation' that turns out to be a cover up, then everything is denied, then inconvenient uncontested evidence comes out, then they can say, "Dude, that was so 2 years ago". So whether it's from left/center/or right, let's not reward those who mix truth with a truckload of manure by waiting when we know what's going on. Atty General Holder can do impartial investigations implicating the Administration of which he is a linchpin?

0 Kudos
1,085 Views
0
Report
Honored Social Butterfly

Obvously there is no single definition of a moderate but I disagree with Viv. My definition of a moderate doesn't mean you always take the middle ground which sounds more like someone who can't make up their mind. A moderate is someone who reads up on the issues and takes what I would consider a reasonable position. 

 

A moderate can take a stand on one side of the issue as long as that position is one which most people see as reasonable.

 

Of course there's no set definition of reasonable but most of us can discern reasonable from radical. Would it be reasonable to threaten war against Russia over the Ukraine crisis? I don't think so. Would it be reasonable to shut down the U.S. Government over a disagreement on fiscal policy? I don't think so.

 

In the end, moderates can disagree on policy but most people perceive their positions as reasonable. 

0 Kudos
1,898 Views
6
Report
Honored Social Butterfly


@CriticalThinking wrote:

 A moderate is someone who reads up on the issues and takes what I would consider a reasonable position. 

 


But even with a reasonable position isn't agreed on by both sides.

Honored Social Butterfly

Once again, I disagree with Tex. Two people can have different opinions on an issue while MOST people would agree both people are taking a reasonable and moderate position. Tex is confusing disagreements with being reasonable.

 

Let's use the Ukraine crisis as an example. Tex may think we should place sanctions on Russia while I might think that's a bad idea. But even though we disagree, both positions are reasonable and moderate.

 

However, if someone thinks we should go to war with Russia over the Ukraine, most people would not consider such a position moderate or reasonable. They would consider it radical or extremist.

Honored Social Butterfly


@CriticalThinking wrote:

 Tex is confusing disagreements with being reasonable.

 


So is one persons opinion overruling another?  Is that being reasonable?  Is someone who cannot accept another person's opinion being moderate or conservative?  Already from KidBoy's original post ranting against the left, we have seen a divergence of opinions over the spectrum.   And it seems like the original post, most have been driven by bias and personalities. 

 

I have no doubt that some posts have been driven by personal bias against another.  Interesting lesson in life.

 

Honored Social Butterfly

Tex is bringing up side issues which deflects us away from the subject matter.

 

The point of my argument is very basic. Two or more people can completely disagree on a political issue but most people can view their positions as reasonable and moderate. And that's my definition of a Moderate, someone who takes positions the majority of Americans pereceive as reasonable, even if they disagree.

Honored Social Butterfly


@CriticalThinking wrote:

Tex is bringing up side issues which is confusing the subject matter for him.


Are you sure?  I am aware of the subject matter, and I'm aware that you are pretty well dogmatic as always in your opinions.  And what makes you more right than myself?

 

Can a person consider themselves a moderate when they have held extreme views that are leftist or conservative?   Can you say that you have been neither?

 

Now this has turned into an idiotic discussion. 

Honored Social Butterfly

As I stated before, Tex is bringing up various side issues which muddy the discussion. If he thinks this is a stupid topic then maybe he should refrain from commenting again.

 

For me, the definition of a politcial moderate is not clear cut but we can make some generalizations which most of us can agree upon. Two people can honestly disagree on how to resolve an issue but others can and will perceive both of them as being reasonable and moderate. I will refer back to the Ukraine crisis as an example.

 

Two people can completely disagree on whether we should impose economic sanctions on Russia and most of us will say both of them are taking a moderate postion. 

 

However, if someone takes a position that an incursion into the Ukraine by some radical elements means we should go to war with Russia, he/she would NOT be perceived as a moderate by most reasonable Americans.

Honored Social Butterfly


@Roxanna35 wrote:

@CriticalThinking wrote:

RK asked a good question, " how do we distinguish between leftists and moderates and everything else??"

 

Unfortunately members like KidBoy define anyone who agrees with any Obama policy as a left wing liberal. Of course intelligent people realize that isn't true. Anyway, back to RK's question. Here are some suggestions:

 

  • A moderate is someone who understands the differences between FACTS and OPINIONS.
  • A moderate in this forum would be someone who agrees with Obama on some issues and disagrees with him on others.
  • A moderate is someone who isn't always cheering for Obama policies under all conditions. For example, I'm in favor of the ACA but realize it has several components which need to be modified or eliminated.
  • A moderate is someone who takes a position most people would consider normal and reasonable, even if we disagree with that position.


Now I have a question for you, How many in this Message Board will agree with your definition of what is a Moderate? I am pessimistic about the what you may find. but curious nevertheless.


I would question the last definition.  I would believe that a moderate would be one that neither side agrees with, but the position is in the middle.  There are many opinions on both sides that I don't agree with.

2,444 Views
33
Report
Honored Social Butterfly

When did you ever disagree with any of Obama`s policy? This puts you in the far left .  You even went against the majority of military people when you said Bergdahl was not a traitor and deserter.Surprising for a career military man. Yet you even condemn a marine in Mexico for mistakenly driving into Mexico and now feels the Government has abandoned him. Perhaps you should try staying in a hostile territory with a desert climate in full dress uniform while all around you have bandanas and white shirts.

0 Kudos
930 Views
1
Report
Honored Social Butterfly


@easyed598 wrote:

When did you ever disagree with any of Obama`s policy? This puts you in the far left .  You even went against the majority of military people when you said Bergdahl was not a traitor and deserter.Surprising for a career military man. Yet you even condemn a marine in Mexico for mistakenly driving into Mexico and now feels the Government has abandoned him. Perhaps you should try staying in a hostile territory with a desert climate in full dress uniform while all around you have bandanas and white shirts.


Oh, you've been in hostile territory, and you consider fatigues and OD green tee shirts as full dress uniform?  What army did you serve in?   You been there?  What do you know about being in a hostile area?

 

And as far as military men, which ones?  Those who are no longer in the military, one with an under other than honorable discharge?  No it's not surprising for a career military retiree.  I believe a person is innocent until proven guilty.  How many investigative reports have you read?  What is your experience in the military that you know how I should believe as having military experience?  From those pictures of his platoon, I gather that they were undisciplined, no leadership and pretty well unorganized. 

 

That Marine wasn't on duty, and should have been watching where he was going.  What was he doing with those guns in his vehicle?  In the capacity he was involved in, the government considers him as another citizen and doesn't have an obligation to go extra for him.

 

Easyed, you know nothing of what the military is like, in spite.  You should have tried it.

Honored Social Butterfly


@TxGrandpa2 wrote:

@Roxanna35 wrote:

@CriticalThinking wrote:

RK asked a good question, " how do we distinguish between leftists and moderates and everything else??"

 

Unfortunately members like KidBoy define anyone who agrees with any Obama policy as a left wing liberal. Of course intelligent people realize that isn't true. Anyway, back to RK's question. Here are some suggestions:

 

  • A moderate is someone who understands the differences between FACTS and OPINIONS.
  • A moderate in this forum would be someone who agrees with Obama on some issues and disagrees with him on others.
  • A moderate is someone who isn't always cheering for Obama policies under all conditions. For example, I'm in favor of the ACA but realize it has several components which need to be modified or eliminated.
  • A moderate is someone who takes a position most people would consider normal and reasonable, even if we disagree with that position.


Now I have a question for you, How many in this Message Board will agree with your definition of what is a Moderate? I am pessimistic about the what you may find. but curious nevertheless.


I would question the last definition.  I would believe that a moderate would be one that neither side agrees with, but the position is in the middle.  There are many opinions on both sides that I don't agree with.


In my opinion both definitions have some validity. A moderate will have some opinions that both sides think is reasonable and will have some that neither side will accept.

0 Kudos
1,114 Views
0
Report
cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Users
Announcements

Does AARP donate to political parties or endorse candidates?

AARP is strictly non-partisan and always has been. We never endorse or donate to candidates, political parties or political action committees.

Learn more.

AARP Members Only Games

Play members only games, like FIll Ins, Lumeno, 2048 and a collaborative, multiplayer Let's Crossword.

Play Now
AARP Members Only Games Logos
AARP Rewards

Solve Crosswords. Earn Rewards. Activate AARP Rewards to earn points for games, quizzes and videos. Redeem for deals and discounts.

Get started with AARP Rewards now!
/html/assets/Rewards-program-badge-355x224.png