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

I very much consider myself a fanatical right winger though a few issues I would side with the left on (like the death penalty oddly enough) but in looking around here for the last year and seeing the extremism that exists on both sides I have to ask extremist of both sides:

What if the other side was correct (notice I didn't say right). I mean what if the other side had the answer to a political issue and it was a good answer for the majority of people or even all the people? Could you support that answer after it came from the other side? Or does your political blinders hit you and you discount it simply because of "who" is for it?

2007-09-04 14:41:11 · 17 answers · asked by netjr 6 in Politics & Government Politics

17 answers

Iraq could be converted to a safe haven Disneyland and there would be those who consider that conflict a failure. Everyone's mind is made up already on many issues, we just come here to vent.

2007-09-04 14:45:37 · answer #1 · answered by Action 4 · 0 0

I'm ex-fanatical. Strangely enough, it was when I lived with someone (equally fanatic) from the other side that I was most crazy. Now, I'm much more pragmatic about the whole thing and would definately not have political blinders. However, in my fanatical days (which I look on fondly), it was hard always because I (and many on here) appreciate the debate and discussion that can happen. We think best when we think openly, I think. Now encouraging debate in the fanatical cohort I was with was as bad as being a member of the other side. It was not simply that they did not agree with the other side, they didn't want to hear from the other side at all. It was and is sad, but when you are on the front lines in your mind, you cannot afford to let them get a single point. It really is a war and you are in the trenches.

I think it does lead to political blinders and the worst part is there is a huge and substantial herd mentality that stiffles free discussion. We do need to sit back sometimes and just say, what really is the best thing to do? It helps us, it checks us and makes sure we are actually authentic in our perspectives.

2007-09-04 21:52:31 · answer #2 · answered by C.S. 5 · 1 0

First of all I agree with you! I think the only solution is to have a generalized test that that you have to pass before you vote! I can't tell you the number of young Adults I have discussed politics with that are unbelievably misinformed! they will vote the ticket straight across no matter the issues! You would also be surprised to know the majority of Democrats that vote the ticket do so because there parents are Democrat and have little if no knowledge of ether Party!

2007-09-04 23:17:09 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Well, I'm left generally but I could agree with someone on the right. I think Ron Paul has some good ideas, although you could argue that they seem good to me because they reflect my political beliefs. But I see your point: people on all sides let their staunch and unwavering beliefs control their every move. That's just the passion of politics, and many politicians of every stripe like to take advantage of this for political gain. Divide and conquer is a classic example.

2007-09-04 21:53:34 · answer #4 · answered by tiko 4 · 1 0

I consider myself a "Free Thinking American." Which means I am open minded. I'm all for any politician regardless of political label, race or creed who has the heart and constitution within their self to stand up for "We The People" on issues that effect ALL Americans, and who promotes the United States of America Globally as a firm, positive and integral nation who accepts and respects the diversity of all other peoples, and their cultures and governments. I'll vote for anyone who has my great, great grand kids best interests in mind ... not one who sells America down the river nor one who pollutes ANY river!

2007-09-04 22:23:09 · answer #5 · answered by pickle head 6 · 0 0

Of course I could support an answer that came from the other side, if it was a good answer that would solve problems without creating a lot of/any other problems.
I'm sort of in the middle though, I'm a Libertarian and only support good ideas no matter who they come from.

2007-09-04 21:46:54 · answer #6 · answered by Starieberry 4 · 1 0

I'm pretty liberal, but i always respect an honest man. I like Arlen Specter even if he's a Republican. Let's just say honesty trumps politics for me. If a candidate doesn't suit my main views, but has an honest approach according to his values (and at least conforms to some of my values) I will like him. But at this poiunt a Republican would have to exhibit a fantastic degree of honesty for me to believe in him.

But I gave up TV over a year ago and no longer fret over all the crap that people from Fox spout. i feel outside of it and a bit free

2007-09-04 22:03:38 · answer #7 · answered by Ford Prefect 7 · 1 0

I support correct answers whomever they come from.

I actually listen to the other side and weigh what they say. I even find myself accepting their propaganda until I realize that they skip entirely the Clinton years when speaking of Iraq. Those weren't lollipops Ol' Billy boy was lobbing into Iraq. It seems that the left has a serious double standard that I just can't overlook.

A Republican in scandal draws cries of throw the bum out from the Democrats yet when it is one of theirs, such as Jefferson, they seem to not even notice that he committed a crime.

2007-09-04 22:00:54 · answer #8 · answered by Locutus1of1 5 · 0 1

I don't vote party lines. If I think an idea is good I get behind it. That said Socialism is never the correct answer and I therefore very rarely side with the so called left because they are really just Socialists with a new name.

2007-09-04 21:48:13 · answer #9 · answered by Ethan M 5 · 1 1

Yes I do confess to being a fanatic of sorts, my fantasy is to get our troop's ie: our son's and daughter's, father's and mother's, ect, ect, ect, ect, ect, ect, the he11 out of Iraq, "ASAP" PERIOD, "because" they ( the Iraqi's ) don't deserve another drop of blood spilled on their behalf, WHY? Never have they EVER shown our brave troop's any affiliation whatsoever, and yet, the Iraqi's continue to favour the Iranian regime whom I might add, have without very much resistance whatsoever managed to infiltrate and take over their parliament, police and military, hence my reluctance to play act the babysitting role for much longer, stand up and be counted I say to the Iraqi's, let us here your voices, because your day's are numbered, we, ie; the west will not be your unconditional doormats.


Edit: Al- Qeada = The newly organised Iraqi FREEDOM fighter's, every picture paint's a story, let em be!

2007-09-04 22:04:36 · answer #10 · answered by ~Celtic~Saltire~ 5 · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers