The USA is divided and there is no easy way out

So very wrong. You make a huge and unwarranted jump. Nowhere have I ever posted or even hinted that "the only way to get rid of the people you disagree with is a civil war".

Modern Conservatism is really classical liberalism, which means it holds the individual above the state, and prizes individual freedom. Conservatives want to be left alone, and take essentially a live and let live attitude.

Its the "progressives" who are pushing their beliefs on everyone else. Look at what they do to people who disagree with the prog ideology. Kavanaugh is the perfect example of progs trying to destroy a person for no reason other than he is not a prog.

Only a total fool wants a civil war.

But I suspect you know all of this and are just trying to dodge the blame.

 

AS little as possible. Trump intended to cut them free entirely. Trump is ONLY leaning on them to satisfy demand.

 

So you do understand the Commander in Chief is fighting against Russia and sanctioning them...

I'm glad you were able to admit this truth

 

There are instances, where FRIENDS must act against one another, but orchestrate it to be of least impact. The President is not the only decider.

 

I think its important, and something I mysel;f struggle with. A persons vote is NOT who they are. Voting is a complicated thing. Especially in this era where we are either voting for the lesser of two evils, or we are voting for someone not because we like them, but more as a vote against the "other guy".

Lots of people vote for many reasons, and those reasons can be complicated. It doesnt mean that is who they are.


And everyone on both sides need to stop being such hypocrites. We need to stop the political double standards, and the whole "well you guys did something crummy so I don't care if my guy does something crummy" crap.

 

You realize that our last 3 presidents have been best buddies with Russia, right?

 

Buddies, is a longshot. I too feel some kindness for Gorbechov.

 

Obama really loved Russia. Want to see a video

 

It seems to me that part of the challenge when seeking to define or label things, rests on a reliance the definitions remain static. As people are want to change meanings and definitions to suit an end, those definitions rarely stay in place.

Socialism is one of those labels. We can look up the word, review it's meaning and impact in history, but does that apply today?

Does "socialist" apply when people suggest the government become involved in coordinating the building a national highway network, or does that suggestion merely reflect an informed decision based on who would be best suited to oversee the work?

Someone who identifies as a socialist would claim this government oversight is evidence of socialism and argue for more.

Interesting times, and I assume society will become more nuanced in how it absorbs information, and how it communicates with each other in this instantaneous age. That alone, I believe, will lower the flame below the tea kettle.

 

The tribal mindset is status quo. Our country is like any political forum. The clear majority of people want to embrace their side of the aisle and keep excoriating the other. It’s not about common ground or compromise, it’s about digging ones heels in waiting for the chance at a majority rule in the government. Our elected reps have realized that it’s better not to negotiate and pass any legislation. It’s more effective to use it against the opposition every two years to see who the public pulls the lever for.

#absurd

 

Its funny, no conservative ideal lines up with Putin or Russia, but the left keeps claiming Putin wanted Trump. Maybe because Hillary would be on the verge of attacking Putin because the Progressives, backed the "rebels" in Syria and Putin backs Syria. Syria is a major pass through for Russia and their oil production. Keeping Syria out of the hand of Iran and Saudi keeps Russian oil flowing. So maybe Putin wanted Trump as POTUS to keep the two countries from going to war?

 

I think you summed it up really well. And yes, I am most certainly a cup is half full type.

You're thoughts from the "pessimistic side" cover it very well. As I see it, society, as it has before, is transitioning under the latest breakthroughs in technology. And yes, I agree, the media, struggling to survive during this transition, is adopting strategies that "sell newspapers". After all, they exist simply to provide avenues for advertisers to peddle their wares. The content is secondary to the audience volume from which they drive revenue. As such, there is little altruism in that endeavor, although they will claim it drives them.

So, division it is. For now, IMO.

In my experience, a thoughtful and respectful blend of what was once understood to liberal, and conservative, results in rational and well reasoned solutions.

I once had a member of a governing board, having just retired, tell me I would probably be relieved his liberal view of things would no longer have to be dealt with. I told him the good governance of the board depends on the wisdom of someone like himself, and would be less without him.

I would never want to be surrounded by sycophants who agree with every idea. The diversity of thought and action is what built this country!

As I have written, we'll figure out how to interact in this new day. And we'll figure out individually, what role the media will be allowed to play.

Perhaps when that day comes, we can all laugh at each others ideas in a friendly way, rather than view them as acts of war.

 

And I don't pretend to be the voice of all conservatives. I am representative of conservatism.

You can argue there are degrees of conservatism and "progressivism", but at no point do they overlap and that's the root cause of the current situation.

Many times it actually is "us versus them" and this is one of those times. That's reality.

"progressives" are working to block Kavanaugh, they admit it openly. Even before a nominee was revealed, some even stated that they would oppose any nominee from Trump.

Progs often fail to implement their agenda in the electoral process and the legislative process, so they tend to resort to the judicial. That's why they want activist prog judges.

 

So, sanctions on Russia, sanctions on China from buying from Russia is "timid"?

 

Well the US is unique, and modern states are unique, so there are a lot of things that they bring that could change things in the future. The issue though isn't about guns and combat experience, it's the gradual grinding away of our institutions and traditions so that there isn't anything to fight for. California is already the utopian leftist dream achieved, via demographic transformation of the electorate. No shots fired, and they wouldn't have done any good anyway. When it comes to violence, the left has the whip hand on that anyway. They've no problem attacking people in the streets and there doesn't seem to be much that can be done about it.

 

I'm glad I am wrong, I wasn't sure which is why I asked the question. Thank you for clarifying that.

I would love to believe that conservatives just want to "be left alone, and take essentially a live and let live attitude", but their actions tell a different story. Where was that live and let live attitude when the gay community wanted the right to get married? Where is it when women want the right to have abortions. Where is it when it comes to drugs? Talk about pushing their beliefs and everyone else... and then you conservatives think that when progressives take a stand and say enough is enough that it is a civil war.

I'm sensing more than a little hypocrisy here.

 

How can you compromise with people who think the other side are evil racists and Nazi's?

 

And you are wrong. Almost no person sees the world in absolute binary (such as right/wrong) terms. In fact, such people are dysfunctional and have a mental illness called cognitive distortion.

Really? So rape and murder are not absolutely wrong? Of course they are, in fact they are by definition. So its not at all hard to find things which are clearly wrong, its exceptionally easy.

"I see them as an outgrowth of a common ideal that disagrees on things like how much power the Federal Government should have" - You state it and then ignore it.

"progressives" want a general expansion of government, not a small expansion or a tweak here or there but an across the board growth. Conservatives believe the govt is already far too powerful and want it reined in across the board.

One wants more and will not be satisfied with anything less. The other wants less and will not be satisfied with anything else. There is no middle ground.

LOL, that's fantasy. Words reflect reality, not the other way around.

True, some "progressives" refuse to support any nominee from Trump. But no "progressives" are willing to give a Trump nominee a fair hearing, those progs are simply pretending to be fair.

Kavanaugh has support because he believes original intent.

progs want judicial activist judges because progs want to abolish the Constitution and are taking an indirect and incremental approach to it. Conservatives support the Constitution and should strongly reject activist judges.