LIBs vs. CONSERVATIVES? Why must we argue constantly?

Question

We argue about everything and both sides insist they are always right. In truth both are right and both are wrong. It takes both views in a society. I am a moderate socialist and the differences between the left and right only strengthens my belief in a socialist america. We will find common ground or else collapse. I will say we are the decendents of Europe and would be better served to pattern our practices after eurpe than to continue to pattern ourselves after Japan. We must not try to be like Asian society because of our religious beliefs, multicultural society, and our intellectual inferiority to Asians.

"intellectual inferiority to asians" is the assertion that intellectual testing proves them to be more intellegent on average than ourselves.

Answer 1

We argue because we disagree about the direction the country should go.

And the last thing we need is a socialist America. We may be the descendants of Europeans (mostly) but it doesn't mean we are Europeans. We do not need the government doing things for us we should be doing for ourselves.

And I would definitely challenge the assertion that we are intellectually inferior to Asians, especially as their societies do not teach their people how to creatively think.

Answer 2

I think it is just pathetic why we even have 'political parties' like Dems and Republicans. Why cant we just take a stand on the issues? Why is it split up in mostly two groups? Cant we just do away with parties and then one person, not on any political side, speaks of his beliefs and what is right or wrong, etc.?
This political party stuff has lead to and seems to be just all about power. Many of these stupid politicians are in it for power and money. I point mainly to the Dems because a lot of the times it seems they have no common sense or morales. I do know though that there must be a few corrupt Republicans as well.
Why must we chose one side or another when maybe one side stands a little for something we like but the other side may have more of what we believe in? Why cant it be done away with all together? I guess i just never fully understood why we have two main political parties. It never made a whole lot of sense to me

Answer 3

These days noone wants to wrong about anything. They view any compromise as showing weakness and god forbid they wouldn't want to do that. It might interfere with the next argument where it would be pointed out that they were actually wrong at one time and admitted it. People don't seem to understand is that when you point such things out in your adversary, you yourself are showing weakness in your own position if that is the best you can come up with. Common ground is the only thing that will save the Republic from eventual implosion. Our politicians must distance themselves from mouthing the party line in every instance. Otherwise we will have what we have now-continuous and unending blabber between opponents for strictly ideological reasons, the good of the nation be damned. If we could only start pulling together for once, most of us would be amazed how past accomplishments forged and built the strong and prosperous nation that we have today. The surest way to disintegration is public displays of irreconcilable differences regarding fighting a common foe and protection of our country and its citizens. As long as we are speaking with two or more voices, our enemies will seek comfort in the side that is not in power in order to further weaken our patience and resolve. "Divided we fall." Its aways worked since the dawn of civilization. It seems the only ones who fully understand and appreciate that are our enemies. Fill the void and we will prosper. Continue the humiliating diatribes against one another and we shall join other broken past civilizations in the dustbins of history-a mere footnote in the hopes and dreams of mankind.

Answer 4

First of all if the asians were so smart then why did they not build the atom bomb first Or why didnt they develop the jet engine first, or why didnt they land the first man on the moon, or why didnt they win world war 2. Europeans (Americans included) are smarter then asians. (Most of that stuff was german though....)
I think that the two are just to parrel and therefore cannot belief each others ideas. If you are proud enough of something or you beleive in something enough you defend it and you argue it. That is why they argue constantly.

Answer 5

Look you elitist whimp!
The Japanese are about the most racist society on earth. A Korean born in Japan has more restrictions than a Palestinian in Israel.

We come to this board to make our points and insult or demean anyone who does not agree.

Somewhere in Washington DC there is a Cocktail Party where Dick Cheyney and Nancy Pelosi are joking about the stupid Libs and Cons who think there is a difference. They are all one Aristocracy

Answer 6

This happens when most people don't even clearly know what they are fighting about or for.

As an 'outsider' (non-American) this is how I see the situation in Iraq at the moment. And other areas of disagreement. Please correct me if I am wrong. I have tried to be as 'unbiased' as possible. Until you guys can 'reconcile' on these 'differences, Fox News and others will continue to drive and thrive on the dissension.

1. The Republican view: We cannot leave Iraq now, if we do, there will be chaos.
1. Democratic view: We have to leave Iraq soon, because there is chaos, partly caused by our presence.

2. The Republican view: We cannot leave Iraq, until the Iraqi Government can stand by itself.
2. Democratic view: We have to set a timeline/deadline, in order to signal to the Iraqi Government that they have to take urgent and necessary steps to take charge of the situation. We can't stay in Iraq indefinitely.

3. The Republican view: We won’t talk to Iran and Syria until they stop supporting the insurgents.
3. Democratic view: We need to talk to Iraq’s neighbours in order to convince them to stop supporting the insurgents.

4. The Republican view: We won’t talk to Iran until they suspend their nuclear programme.
4. Democratic view: We don’t link Iran’s nuclear programme to the situation in Iraq, these things are not connected. In order to reach a solution in Iraq, we have to talk to Iran.

5. The Republican view: We have to fight the ‘War on Terror’ throughout the Middle East.
5. Democratic view: We have to fight the ‘War on Terror’ in Afghanistan.

6. The Republican view: ‘Islamofascists’ are animals are therefore should be exterminated. Shoot first, talk later.
6. Democratic view: ‘Islamofascists’ are people with grievances, and we have to address these grievances. In other words, talk first, and then if really necessary, shoot.

7. The Republican view: We have tried talking to Islamic Fundamentalists, and they don’t listen.
7. The Democratic view: We have done all the talking, and no listening. Now it’s time to listen.

8. Republican view: Democrats are weak on national security.
8. Democratic view: Give diplomacy a chance.

9. Republican view: Abortion is wrong.
9. Democratic view: Let the woman decide. After all, it is her body.

10. Republican view: Homosexuality is a sin in God's eyes.
10. Democratic view: If a person is gay, should he/she be treated diferently? Why?


As a non-American, I applaud the Republican’s ‘idealistic’ view, but I support the Democrats ‘pragmatic’ view.

Answer 7

because if as many cons truly signed as a lot as strive against in Iraq as declare to help the warfare, the recruitment strains for the militia should be blocks lengthy. rather, we examine that the military is having hassle filling its quotas. they have raised the age decrease two times. they have also issued a record type of waivers for previous illegal activity and medical subject matters. as well, the potential criteria were decreased and recruitment bonuses were raised. also, persons already in militia service have had repeat excursions of duty in Iraq and characteristic had the dimensions of their excursions prolonged with the intention to satisfy the present want. the folk who profess to help the warfare should be keen to strive against contained in the warfare. the massive type of human beings on Yahoo solutions who declare to help the warfare, if extrapolated to the overall public, ought to characterize a important element of the eligible public. There should be no want for the bright measures that the military has interested by the intention to enlist recruits.

Answer 8

I can probably agree that we will all be happy to stop arguing with each other and focus on your ideologies, if you prefer.

America does NOT need just one voice. That is an anti-American lie.

We have always done just fine with our federalists v. antifederalists nation, and it is why we are great.

EDIT: No, Vampire, but they are discussing the weather and travel plans, like Americans do.

Answer 9

Yes, I wonder why.

Why does Bill O'Reilly argue and make biased claims?
Why does Ann Coulter? --more importantly, wht is this accepted as news?

News should be about conveying facts, not polorization.

Answer 10

Good for you! Make your Arguments, at the Ballot Box. It's much more effective, at that time. I hope yo have a good Weekend!