In Trump’s America; the right, not the left, are the real haters

[It Aint Necessarily So]

In Trump’s America; the right, not the left, are the real haters

Please discuss.

Agree.

Thanks for turning me on to Moyer's site. I read several other essays there apart from the one you referenced, and now have it as a tab in my browser to look at regularly.

Here are some others that might be new and appealing to you:

• Politics – FiveThirtyEight

• Dispatches From the Culture Wars -

• Home

Trump has created a renaissance in political interest for me. Once a political junkie, I finally decided that I wanted to retire as soon as possible and expatriate, which we began exploring in 2004 and did in 2009. I pretty much stopped looking at American politics after the 2006 midterms when the Democrats assumed control of both houses of Congress in what appeared to be a mandate against Bush and his wars, and the new speaker, Nancy Pelosi, declared that impeachment of Bush was off the table. Really? Not long after that, the Democrats approved every nickel Bush asked for for war. I quit caring. Or at least I tried. I wasn't able to easily break that tie, but with time, the connection waned, and my interest in watching America's spiral flight into the flame fell to near zero.

But then came Trump, which takes me back to the seventies and the Nixon years. Those were heady times. We cheered and jeered, and felt very patriotic and connected. What happened seemed to matter. America drained that swamp. "Jail to the chief!"

Since then, it's been a case of disgust and contempt alternating with malaise and indifference.

Trump changed that. The Nixon days are back, and I find myself fascinated watching this Shakespearean drama unfold. Hamlet was indecisive, Macbeth weak under the influence of an overly ambitious and ruthless wife, and Lear the fool. This president could be the central figure of another such tragedy, this time featuring hubris as the fatal flaw and cause of demise.

Wasn't it Aristotle that spoke about catharsis in drama? It will be very satisfying watching this man get his comeuppance. And I have little doubt that it is coming.

 

[Sunstone]

Agree.

Thanks for turning me on to Moyer's site. I read several other essays there apart from the one you referenced, and now have it as a tab in my browser to look at regularly.

Here are some others that might be new and appealing to you:

• Politics – FiveThirtyEight

• Dispatches From the Culture Wars -

• Home

Trump has created a renaissance in political interest for me. Once a political junkie, I finally decided that I wanted to retire as soon as possible and expatriate, which we began exploring in 2004 and did in 2009. I pretty much stopped looking at American politics after the 2006 midterms when the Democrats assumed control of both houses of Congress in what appeared to be a mandate against Bush and his wars, and the new speaker, Nancy Pelosi declared that impeachment of Bush was off the table. Really? Not long after that, the Democrats approved every nickel Bush asked for for war. I quit caring. Or at least I tried. I wasn't able to easily break that tie, but with time, I the connection waned, and my interest in watching America's spiral flight into the flame became zero.

But then came Trump, and what takes me back to the seventies and the Nixon years. Those were heady times. We cheered and jeered, and felt very patriotic and connected. What happened seemed to matter. America drained that swamp.

Since then, it's been a case of disgust and contempt alternating with malaise and indifference.

Trump changed that. The Nixon days are back, and I find myself fascinated watching this Shakespearean drama unfold. Hamlet was indecisive, Macbeth weak under the influence of an overly ambitious and ruthless wife, and Lear the fool. This president could be the central figure of another such tragedy, this time featuring hubris as the fatal flaw and cause of demise.

Wasn't it Aristotle that spoke about catharsis in drama? It will be very satisfying watching this man get his comeuppance. And I have little doubt that it is coming.

Thanks for the recommendations. I can understand your fascination with the tragedy that's unfolding. I share it to some extent.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

I'm actually quite clever as frost giants go.

Aren't you frost giants the ones that turned Christmas from a desert holiday into a North Pole holiday? Who stole the baby Jesus from the manger, the camels, Magi, and sand, and replaced them with Santa, the elves, Rudolph, Frosty, tinsel, flocking, yule logs, and Christmas lights?

 

[Kenny]

Of course the tea party supporters are going to be the angriest. It all depends on the information sources. Liberals don't hate conservatives, they think they're just uninformed and gullible. But conservatives sure do hate liberals.

I did? Somebody forgot to tell me...

I suppose that I tell you that conservatives don't hate liberals but just think they are uniformed and gullible... you wouldn't agree, would you?

How about both are caring people (understanding (since both sides have hatters, after all it was a liberal that shot the Republican in the ball game) the difference being is that they both emphasize an important aspect.

Take welfare:

"Liberals" - We must help people!

1. You can't just kick someone who is down, they need a helping hand
2. (Political statement by conservatives - "They just want to grow the government")

"Conservatives" - We must get people off of welfare

1. Let's help people but can't just let people milk the system and abuse it
2. (Political statement by liberals ' "They are haters that don't care about people")

Correct caring perspective for both sides but politicized by opponents

Middle of the road because both care... "We must help people but not let them become dependent on government so we need an exit plan"

Both are coming from a love perspective

 

[Kenny]

What on Earth does that prove? The polarization has been well documented and researched, the evidence points to there being more polarization on the Right than the Left.

You mean I can't comment on the polarized titles of a person that seems to be polarized? I guess, in a sense, the titles prove that there is a polarization assuming that is the case of the poster... but they can still prove me wrong.

 

[Kenny]

Your juvenile reasoning and shouting fails to impress me. But no doubt you'll impress an idiot or two.

A polarizing statement

 

[Revoltingest]

I did? Somebody forgot to tell me...

I suppose that I tell you that conservatives don't hate liberals but just think they are uniformed and gullible... you wouldn't agree, would you?

How about both are caring people (understanding (since both sides have hatters, after all it was a liberal that shot the Republican in the ball game) the difference being is that they both emphasize an important aspect.

Take welfare:

"Liberals" - We must help people!

1. You can't just kick someone who is down, they need a helping hand
2. (Political statement by conservatives - "They just want to grow the government")

"Conservatives" - We must get people off of welfare

1. Let's help people but can't just let people milk the system and abuse it
2. (Political statement by liberals ' "They are haters that don't care about people")

Correct caring perspective for both sides but politicized by opponents

Middle of the road because both care... "We must help people but not let them become dependent on government so we need an exit plan"

Both are coming from a love perspective

Some people sure do like to tell us what we mean, think, believe, feel & do.
Try to correct'm.....& it turns out that we're liars too.
Go figger.

 

[Kenny]

Some people sure do like to tell us what we mean, think, believe, feel & do.
Try to correct'm.....& it turns out that we're liars too.
Go figger.

It seems that some people want to polarize our positions without even asking what we believe and want to do.

 

[Revoltingest]

It seems that some people want to polarize our positions without even asking what we believe and want to do.

Too many see others as stereotypes.
It's the illiberal liberal syndrome.

Note to me liberal buds....it only applies to some.

 

[Yerda]

In Trump’s America; the right, not the left, are the real haters

Please discuss.

I'm suspicious when I'm told what I want to hear.

I think the article correctly identifies media outlets who spout and encourage hate and the link between consuming hateful media and being hateful. It doesn't seem to deal with the never ending stream of self styled progressive people willing to scream in the faces of anyone who disagrees with them until they stop speaking. All the twitter mobbing of people who express non-pc opinions inevitably followed by campaigns to have the speaker sacked. The deplatformings of perfectly reasonable people.

There's more to this than the right generates all the hate.

 

[Jeremiahcp]

You mean I can't comment on the polarized titles of a person that seems to be polarized? I guess, in a sense, the titles prove that there is a polarization assuming that is the case of the poster... but they can still prove me wrong.

"You mean I can't comment on the polarized titles of a person that seems to be polarized?"

Well clearly you can, as you did. Any other pointless worthless rhetoric that you would care to share?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

The alt-right trolls are even attacking the forthcoming Star Trek TV show because not enough white males are featured. For Alt-Right Trolls, “Star Trek: Discovery” Is an Unsafe Space

ZOMGZZ!Z!!Z!!! Kirk kissed a black girl!

 

[YmirGF]

ZOMGZZ!Z!!Z!!! Kirk kissed a black girl!

That's a pretty gender insensitive comment. We are talking about a cis-gender African-American person. Kirk's borderline sexual assault is just showing your typical Alpha-male taking advantage of his white privilege.

 

[Kenny]

"You mean I can't comment on the polarized titles of a person that seems to be polarized?"

Well clearly you can, as you did. Any other pointless worthless rhetoric that you would care to share?

Another pointless worthless statement

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I'm suspicious when I'm told what I want to hear.

I don't want to read it, because if Dems and Libs aren't willing to realize and learn from their mistakes, it could put Trump in office again. I also don't like reading it, because liberal political correctness does irritate and annoy people, it does erode at free speech, it comes off as hateful (especially when being "enforced"), and it helped empower Trump. Sure, the right is the one trying to strip civil rights and liberties, push dangerous procedures that do not deserve to be called therapy, and has the blood of suicide victims on its hands. But bull**** like the recent Portland burrito shop incident cannot be ignored, and such liberal hatred must be called out rather than brushed aside and pretending it doesn't happen/exist.

 

[Revoltingest]

That's a pretty gender insensitive comment. We are talking about a cis-gender African-American person. Kirk's borderline sexual assault is just showing your typical Alpha-male taking advantage of his white privilege.

In that scene, Kirk was being assaulted by those mind controlling aliens.
Victim blamer!

 

[Jeremiahcp]

Too many see others as stereotypes.
It's the illiberal liberal syndrome.

Note to me liberal buds....it only applies to some.

"Too many see others as stereotypes.
It's the illiberal liberal syndrome."

Way to stereotype people, really nice hypocrisy.

 

[Revoltingest]

"Too many see others as stereotypes.
It's the illiberal liberal syndrome."

Way to stereotype people, really nice hypocrisy.

Fool! Dunderhead! Nincompoop! Scalawag! Biffysniffer!
Note the limited application (which you dishonestly failed to quote).

 

[Jeremiahcp]

Fool! Dunderhead! Nincompoop! Scalawag! Biffysniffer!
Note the limited application (which you dishonestly failed to quote).

I quoted your entire post, as I always do. Calling me dishonest is just low; I set up my post in that manner for that exact reason, so nothing is left out, and people can read the entire content of what you said, as well as the part I was responding to. You may not like me, but I am one of the most honest individuals you'll ever meet. That was just low, man, really low.

 

[Revoltingest]

I quoted your entire post, as I always do. Calling me dishonest is just low; I set up my post in that manner for that exact reason, so nothing is left out, and people can read the entire content of what you said, as well as the part I was responding to. You may not like me, but I am one of the most honest individuals you'll ever meet. That was just low, man, really low.

Did I call you dishonest? I spoke of a specific act.
Your leaving out my disclaimer did change my meaning.
I generally find your inferences to be very different from my intent,
but I don't think this is due to deceit, but rather a reading dysfunction.

When quoting someone, it's good form to post the entire relevant text.
It's OK to leave out portions, so long as the meaning clearly remains.