English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I do understand that some issues have little to no common ground, it's either one or the other. Still there are many issues that can be decided on in which both sides have a say and have some if not all of their concerns met. The Iraq war, I cannot really make a resolution to this because I don't have all the information on it, I don't get daily reports on it, but maybe there's a way to keep troops in Iraq and work to make it a more self sufficient nation, while we shorten the time of the occupation. Abortion is another one, I don't believe in abortions, but I don't agree with them being illegal. If they are banned, we'll have an increase in women dying due to back alley abortions. We can't also just have an abortion free for all, it should be regulated in a way, so what would be common ground on this issue, surely there is one. So why not put differences aside and try to work together, or is pride more of an issue than the prosperity of the Nation?

2006-08-28 04:45:52 · 14 answers · asked by Fiesty Redhead 2 in Politics & Government Politics

14 answers

Because insults and petty name-calling is easier than actually listening.

In all fairness, I do have conservative friends. I can have an articulate and respectful debate with them-I just laugh at the insanity on Y!A.

2006-08-28 04:47:15 · answer #1 · answered by Pitchow! 7 · 3 1

Your Point on abortion was interesting...
See personally I do not believe in abortion for ANY REASON! However, Your Idea of "regulating" abortions sounds good but Would NOT work.. But at 1st the Libs would let that slide .. but only at first... But then they would turn around & protest &l cry it is "descriminating or racist" to pick & choose who can have abortions.. & make it another Race/Descrimination issue.
The whole problem is Liberals CAN NOT be trusted.. They are forked tongue lil' b@$tards & ALWAYS have some wacked, immoral or un-natural Agenda!
As soon as you think you've came to a mutual agreement & met them in the middle of the road on an issue.. they will stab you in the back & use all their whiney lil' lines crying how we are soooo intolerant & unacceptant & not understanding... ect ect.

Bottom line is There are Far toooo many differences between the too Conservatives are hard set in their ways.. & Libs can't seem to leave well enough alone! They tend to want to always divide instead of unite for what is moral & naturally right.

God Bless

2006-08-28 12:02:37 · answer #2 · answered by Joeysol'lady 3 · 1 0

It's not hard at all, once they drop the labels and the name-calling, and simply address the issues.

The problem is two-fold. First, many people are more concerned with scoring points (metaphorically, and here literally) than with resolving problems. That's why mediation is much less common than is should be, and why so many legislative sessions ending being filled with nothing but rhetoric.

The second problem comes from the mindset of many of the people involved. Many are not trying to find a solution, they're trying to push their own agenda. If they don't get their way, they try to sabotage the process.

This second problem arises mainly because too many people are unwilling to be tolerant of different beliefs. They want everyone to agree with them, and to do what they want, and if they put all their efforts into trying to force people to conform to their beliefs. You mentioned one of the key examples, abortion.

Face it -- someone is going to choose. It's either going to be the individual, or it's going to be the majority (through enacted laws). The people who won't work towards a compromise are generally the ones that want to impose their moral or religious beliefs on everyone else, and to deny other people the right to make their own decisions. So, they take the absolutely rigid line that their belief is the only valid one, and force that belief on everyon else.

The only way to break past this is tolerance of differences. Learn when to let go of what you want others to do, and to allow everyone to make their own choices. Doesn't always work, but it's start.

2006-08-28 12:07:54 · answer #3 · answered by coragryph 7 · 0 2

Thats why there's 2 main political parties and countless other minor parties. There IS NO common ground for EVERYONE. That'd just be silly. Do you really want to live in a world where everyone agrees on everything? That would just be frustrating. Its nice to accept our differences.

2006-08-28 11:49:16 · answer #4 · answered by Terry Legendary 4 · 1 0

On the surface it would sound like a good idea, but "cons" of the Dumbya species have forgotten compromise, adopted "anything goes" pay to play politics where lies and bigger lies are an every day tactic as advocated by Rove, and have even resorted to criminal activity to accomplish what they have perceived as "winning"... for themselves and NOT for the USA. "We the people" are not their constituency, but rather only the "haves and have mores". Democrats are too late learning to fight the tactics of this illegally installed regime. Down with Dictator Dumbya!!!

2006-08-28 14:14:55 · answer #5 · answered by rhino9joe 5 · 0 1

The great divide began in November 2000 with Dan Rather and the MSM declaring victory before the polls were closed in Florida! Since then it has been all down hill for both sides.

2006-08-28 11:53:20 · answer #6 · answered by therandman 5 · 2 1

I think that an even bigger problem is the increased partisn divide that has made even common ground issues like national security and immigration a political football.

2006-08-28 11:52:01 · answer #7 · answered by jasonzbtzl 4 · 1 2

I guess it's just hard for us benighted idiot chickenhawk moron greedy warmongering Nazi racist bigoted Jesus-freak neocon fascists to find common ground with all those intelligent, sophisticated people who call us those names.

Because after these tolerant and love-filled people are done calling us these names, they forget to support their views with old-fashioned useless things like facts, proof, evidence, logic or reason. But only us moronic fascists need stuff like that...

2006-08-28 12:04:45 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

I'm with you sister, I think after Bush's Presidency is finished, he could retrain as an Humvee driver assigned to Baghdad. I am also sure that he would have his side-kick Rove there to paint on the doors of the Humvee, "Bring It ON!"

2006-08-28 11:52:23 · answer #9 · answered by zclifton2 6 · 0 2

my conserative is your liberal. labels and titles limit us.
I tend to think of myself as a liberal, but to some i ave pretty conserative, to others off the wall liberal.

when you actuallly talk to people you will find that neither side is all or none. and the conseratives fail to think all the way throu a situation to see all of the ramifications. the liberals tend to over think a situation.

2006-08-28 11:56:05 · answer #10 · answered by ellisd1950 3 · 1 1

fedest.com, questions and answers