Question for you one sided people!?

Question

Do you believe that the people on the far left and the far right are benefical to our country! I don't!! I see them as close minded jerks who only want the country and the rest of the world to fit their ideas of perfect with no room for the opinions of others. They attack they other side and do nothing but spread opposition and hate throughout the country. I strongly belive that all politicans must find a middle ground on all the issues for them to be solved. I know easier said then done but nothing will be solved in this country as long as people are trying to push their insane ideaology on the rest of us through governmental power. What do you think!

Yes itr is good to have possible solutions to our problems concerned. But yo will never get anywhere in life without an open mind and understanding the fact that your way of doing things could be the wrong way to go!

No, being in the middle in my opinion is not being on the fence about everything. It's about taking all views into consideration and working with the oter side to reach and agreeable solution that would incorporate boths sides answers to the problem without completely overiding the other!

All good answers, except for Bert T. He sounds a little insulting!

Answer 1

I have to answer that "Yes and no".

No, in that all of this political infighting and name-calling cannot be good for our country. All that does is show a divided front to our enemies, and they exploit whichever one best fits their idea of what they want to happen.

Yes, in that we absolutely need both sides of the political spectrum to make America great. We would absolutely not want our country to run full-tilt conservative, because that would be close to fascist. We also wouldn't want it run full-tilt liberal, because that would be close to communism.

There are definitely moonbat extremists on both sides of the political isle, and they do seem to make the most noise. Hopefully, the real nuts will stay in the minority, and most will not make it into our Federal Government.

When you're here and other places on the Internet, you can do your part by being the voice of reason among the loonies. Most of the time it probably won't matter, but sometimes it might.

Good question!

Answer 2

You are correct, to a point. If you look at the history of the United States, particularly during the first 100 years or so, and the writing of the Constitution, you will see numerous compromises that allowed the country to more forward. The best example is the bicameral congress, one house based on two votes for individual states (Senate) so that small states with small population still had a voice, and one house based on population (House of Representatives) so that majority vote still matters. If the framers of the Constitution hadn't compromised, we wouldn’t have gotten past the Articles of Confederation, and we wouldn't have a method to pass legislation that allowed compromises. Although many of the compromises were based on dealing with slavery, they did allow the country to continue to move forward. Without these compromises, it is doubtful we would have had the monetary power for the Louisiana Purchase.

The down side of the compromises is watered down legislation. Before the Civil Rights act of 1964, there were other laws for civil rights, but they accomplished little to nothing, because they were laws for appearance only. They were compromises to make the politicians look like they were working for race equality. But they did little to that end. But in fairness, they got the ball rolling, so later we could have Civil Rights Act of 1964.

But I also agree with other people, that without a political spectrum, where is the middle ground? The goal should be a compromise that benefits the most people, so compromises are necessary. But you find politicians taking the most extreme position, so that when the compromise is suggested it is closer to their position.

Answer 3

You have a bunch of nincompoop talk show host who have convinced people that they must be on one side of the fence or the other. The problem with that is that you must go along with all the bad ideas on your side as well as the good ideas.
People keep asking, Where are the moderates. They ask that looking for reasonable solutions to the quagmire that liberals and conservatives have created.
Moderates have the ability to pick out the good ideas and say to heck with the bad ideas.

Answer 4

Well, if everyone were moderates, then we'd have a tough time getting anything done in this country. Everybody would be on the fence about every issue. I think people on the far left and right bring good views to the table

Answer 5

I tend to agree with you. The 'middle ground you speak of is not always a good thing. The Missouri Compromise and Dred Scott found a 'middle ground' that ended up tearing our country apart.

That is the same with abortion. I am socially liberal, but I am against abortion. I will never be able to treat a pro-abortionist as my equal, no more then I can treat a racist or a male (or female) chauvinist. All people are equal including the unborn. They should not be deprived of their due process rights. Even though they might not yet be citizens because they have not been born, they are at least citizens jus sanguinis.

I, for one, will never compromise my beliefs.

Answer 6

I'm glad there was finally a question in there at the end. What do I think?

I think, we need to end the hypocracy in American Government.

I think we need to elect leaders who automatically give up 10,000 votes (or a 1,000 or a 100,000 whatever) each time they give a speech about what they're "against", rather than what they support, unless it's a problem they themselves suffer from. In other words, no more teetotallers outlawing drinking, for example.
I think we need to have our Presidential candidates put one million dollars in escrow for every campaign promise they make, every "plank in their platform". Whichever promise they don't subsequently keep, they forfeit the million. I understand about gridlock in Congress and they lose the cash if they dont at least try. Some things I do not want to hear in the next election:

ANYTHING which fosters divide in this country. No more references to "black americans, white amercians, gay americans, tall americans", etc. You're either an American or you're not. Make your decision.
ANYTHING having to do with selloing fear of any kind in this country. The current administration has done little for domestic security in 6 years, so they shouldn't be able to say they have. Same goes for the opposition.
Anyone who makes a statement about other political parties whether to their detriment or their benefit, is considered to be "Under Oath" in a court of law, so they better be able to back what they say.No more press secretaries coming out after to "clarify" what the candidate just said. If he or she cannot articulate their ideas correctly, they have no business running for high office.This will seriously cut down on phrases and epithets which are "null word", i.e., they sound harsh but mean nothing. One candidate years ago accused his opponent' wife of being a "thespian" (which she was- she had acted in a few stage plays), rural voters were horrified, the man wasn't elected.

We also need to get rid of the "one pulse over 18, one vote" mentality in this country. A 19 year old moron (I use this a medical term, not an insult) can vote, but a 15 yea rold genius cannot? This makes no sense and is one of the reasons the Ohio state legislature was able to pass a " pi = 3" law years ago. When you go to the polls, before you can vote, you have to solve a math problem or write an essay or something to prove you are smart enough to be given the repsonsibility to vote. If a 6 year old kid can solve the problem, he should be allowed to vote. Morons who cannot solve the problem will either never try to vote again (out of embarrassment) or they will go back to school to get their education on.

We need to get rid of corporate campaign financing. Each (and I mean ALL candidates who can get the petititons signed to get on the ballot, not just the "popular" ones) candidate gets a set amount of money. It cannot be matched, added to or divided up in any way. How well they do with that money will tell the American people whether they can be trusted with a budget or not. I also suggest a series of elections, designed to winnow out the candidates one by one, "Survivor" style, but the voting may be done quarterly, not weekly (or whatever is decided). Whoever is voted FOR gets more compaign money for the next round, whoever is, in effect, voted off, leaves the arena. I believe the people should be allowed to vote for a candidate after any public debate between candidates. Anyone contributing to a candidate agrees to full disclosure of their finances.

Answer 7

Middle Ground = Moving Israel to the USA

Maybe Texas since they love Bush so much

Americans would gladly give up millions of acres and homes so Jews would have a real home

Maybe the governement should just take the land too

Answer 8

I totally agree,everybody doesn't think alike and share the same interests.It is,however,extremely difficult to arrive at a plan that will please everybody and will benefit the whole mankind.I do think that presently you are correct.The whole country and the world are against what is going on but yet nothing is being done to curve this opposition by the individual(s) who are responsible for causing it.

Answer 9

The middle of the road is paved with indecisiveness and weakness. The middle of the road doesn't make America strong, it makes America...well, nothing. Considering the moderates don't have their minds made up about anything, America too will not have an answer for any problem

Answer 10

Nope Scott there is not something like that. If there ought to were the kind of aspect on moon it ought to were a kind of sunshine around the moon at the same time as one ought to seem at it interior the evening because of being a habitat section. Even Earth glows at the same time as evening is there after we seem from outer area. there remains no answer that a thanks to keep up existence on moon. apart from moon has extra not appropriate environment to have existence mandatory gases like oxygen. One won't be able to continuously save donning masks there. also, at the same time as there is day on Moon, Temperature crosses one hundred degree C, And in evening drops to larger than one hundred ranges C. there is no habitat on Moon now, yet there should be quickly in coming 50-seventy 5 years.