• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

America IS shifting farther Left - Seems to be a permanent shift

Dragonfly said:
Nope. 100% subjective, and means absolutely zilch to anyone else.
Click to expand...

It is an opinion based on personal experience and it means absolutely zilch to you.

I'd bet you a gazillion dollars there was a vast majority of "old folks" in the 40's and 50's saying that "America was doomed" and that the "good old days were lost to all this newfangled modern nonsense".
Click to expand...

You would lose that bet.

Besides, I'm sure there's a piss load of people who rather hated, despised, feared, and loathed living in the early 1940's. Assuming they lived through it. All the WW2 and stuff.
Click to expand...

Nobody that I ever met. WWII was popular and well supported by the public. You are talking about events. I am talking about society, social mores, and attitudes.
 
Cyrylek said:
Some things get worse, other things get better - from a libertarian perspective.
On the other hand, we have historically low crime
Click to expand...

I don't believe this at all.

I believe there is a propensity for each new administration whether it be Federal or local to "present" a better picture than actually exists.
Voters don't care WHO cheated and fudged the numbers last in some instances, they just care who says things are wonderful NOW.
This has actually been proven time and time again. Broward County Florid for example. Crime statistics were "adjusted".
Sheriff's New Figures Show Crime Rise Of 69% - tribunedigital-sunsentinel

In this case they were adjusted because prior Sheriff administrations used shady methods to hide actual crime stats.
This is a huge national problem and occurs from East to West, North to South.

I sincerely believe the current administration has done everything it can to manipulate crime statistics on a national level mostly for political reasons. And I don't say Mr. Obama is the only President to do this. I think it's politically motivated and spans all political inclinations.

Given the dramatic increase in illegal immigrants, it flies in the face of common sense to accept that there has been a decrease in crime on a national level.
Regardless of statistics, crime seems to be closer to an all time high rather than a historical low.
On the other hand, the proliferation of personal gun ownership might be credited for any reduction in crime.
 
NoLeftNoRight said:
I don't believe this at all.

I believe there is a propensity for each new administration whether it be Federal or local to "present" a better picture than actually exists.
Voters don't care WHO cheated and fudged the numbers last in some instances, they just care who says things are wonderful NOW.
This has actually been proven time and time again. Broward County Florid for example. Crime statistics were "adjusted".
Sheriff's New Figures Show Crime Rise Of 69% - tribunedigital-sunsentinel

In this case they were adjusted because prior Sheriff administrations used shady methods to hide actual crime stats.
This is a huge national problem and occurs from East to West, North to South.

I sincerely believe the current administration has done everything it can to manipulate crime statistics on a national level mostly for political reasons. And I don't say Mr. Obama is the only President to do this. I think it's politically motivated and spans all political inclinations.

Given the dramatic increase in illegal immigrants, it flies in the face of common sense to accept that there has been a decrease in crime on a national level.
Regardless of statistics, crime seems to be closer to an all time high rather than a historical low.
On the other hand, the proliferation of personal gun ownership might be credited for any reduction in crime.
Click to expand...


So, don't bother you with facts, you will substitute your opinions for the evidence! LOL.....:roll:

Let's say that every administration does try to minimize the crime stats - plausible. What is it that makes police agencies, FBI, etc. so much more effective now than they were 20 years ago?
 
i'm good with the nation becoming more liberal.

i'm solidly against the nation moving to the left, though.

i'm all about individual rights and equality under the law....I hate authoritarianism, though
 
Cephus said:
And the 60s saw the rise of liberalism. Coincidence? I think not.
Click to expand...

Right! FDR was a conservative, we should have stayed with his policies. Nixon was a GD librul. Damn him going to China and starting the EPA.
 
iguanaman said:
Right! FDR was a conservative, we should have stayed with his policies. Nixon was a GD librul. Damn him going to China.
Click to expand...

The rise of social liberalism, including the anti-war effort, civil rights, etc. Sorry people have to spell it all out to you.
 
Cephus said:
The rise of social liberalism, including the anti-war effort, civil rights, etc. Sorry people have to spell it all out to you.
Click to expand...

Again you fail. FDR was the creator of Social Security, the largest and most liked "socialist" liberal program ever created. When we added Medicare and the Civil Rights act in the 60's we were just continuing to complete FDR's New Bill of Rights. The further we strayed from his course the worse off we have become. That began in earnest with the Reagan tax cuts and the supply side nonsense in the 1980's.

We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. “Necessitous men are not free men.”[3] People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made.
In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed.
Among these are:
The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;
The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;
The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;
The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;
The right of every family to a decent home;
The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;
The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;
The right to a good education.
All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.
America's own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for all our citizens. For unless there is security here at home there cannot be lasting peace in the world.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Bill_of_Rights
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Cephus said:
The rise of social liberalism, including the anti-war effort, civil rights, etc. Sorry people have to spell it all out to you.
Click to expand...

I'm curious how you see those as bad things.
 
No party has a lock on the future of government. People live and vote for what is happening now.
 
JasperL said:
I'm curious how you see those as bad things.
Click to expand...

I didn't say they were good or bad things, only that it was the start of the rise of liberalism in America.
 
Cephus said:
I didn't say they were good or bad things, only that it was the start of the rise of liberalism in America.
Click to expand...

#43:

FMW: I agree. It was at its best in the 40's and 50's. The 60's saw the beginning of the societal decline.

Cephus: And the 60s saw the rise of liberalism. Coincidence? I think not.
Click to expand...

I guess I understood societal decline as a result of the rise of liberalism as a bad thing.
 
JasperL said:
I guess I understood societal decline as a result of the rise of liberalism as a bad thing.
Click to expand...

I didn't say those particular things were good or bad, only that they were the start. Come on, stop trying to stuff words into my mouth that I never said. Give honesty and integrity a shot.
 
iguanaman said:
Again you fail. FDR was the creator of Social Security, the largest and most liked "socialist" liberal program ever created. When we added Medicare and the Civil Rights act in the 60's we were just continuing to complete FDR's New Bill of Rights. The further we strayed from his course the worse off we have become. That began in earnest with the Reagan tax cuts and the supply side nonsense in the 1980's.
Click to expand...

You forgot to include the 'right' to confiscate other people's earning to pay for it all.
 
NoLeftNoRight said:
I would like to understand what you meant by this?
When I say "Universally" accepted, I didn't mean "everyone" accepted it or followed it....I meant that American society AS A WHOLE knew it was part of our culture and few challenged things such as the 10 commandments in a courthouse or "In God We Trust" on currency. Today these things are openly challenged. That is what I meant.
Click to expand...

God on currency?
How in Hell is that a good thing unless the currency IS your god?
The paper currency that gets used to make political bribes or organized crime payoffs (am I repeating myself?), gets stuffed in the butt-crack of a drug addicted stripper or left on the mattress of a hooker, or gets rolled up to snort a rail of coke (80% of all paper money has cocaine residue on it) or used to purchase weapons on the black market?
This is where God's name should be featured?
Our filthy lucre is the very LAST place we should imprint the name of God, if you believe in that sort of thing.
And it wasn't there until 1954, when it was ordained by an extremist right wing Congress headed up by "Tailgunner" Joe McCarthy.
The Founding Fathers didn't put GOD on their paper money, probably because they understood that stamping "GOD" on the coin of the Earthly Kingdom was a slap in the face to any sensible believer.

Openly challenged? Are you implying that to openly challenge a religious belief is a crime, or should be?
Iran and Saudi Arabia are looking pretty good this time of year, perhaps you should be living in a theocracy.
I'll challenge any damn thing I want, including your Sky Daddy, the one that's on your money.
And it doesn't have a damn thing to do with liberalism, it has to do with your rights ending where mine begin.
 
JasperL said:
So, don't bother you with facts, you will substitute your opinions for the evidence! LOL.....:roll:
Let's say that every administration does try to minimize the crime stats - plausible. What is it that makes police agencies, FBI, etc. so much more effective now than they were 20 years ago?
Click to expand...

In case you missed post number 59....
http://www.debatepolitics.com/redirect-to/?redirect=http%3A%2F%2Farticles.sun-sentinel.com%2F2004-04-24%2Fnews%2F0404240216_1_crime-wave-crime-statistics-sheriff-ken-jenne
 
NoLeftNoRight said:
Liberal / Progressive values are making major inroads in nearly every aspect of American life. If you are left leaning, you probably feel pretty good about Americas current direction.


But what about the changes the Left will make to our economic system? QUOTE]

I was reading what you were saying and thinking well feel pretty good about the social direction perhaps. But in every poll of is the direction of the country going in the right direction or wrong its been consistently 35-45% in favor of wrong track.
One social issue is important to this slice of people another to another slice of people but what is important to all are economic issues which tops the polls pretty much ever time of what is most important.
So you did follow that up with what about the economic system.

While some major social changes have happened we haven't really accomplished much economically. Opinion on what Hillary will do ( more of the same imo ) or Bernie ( well intentioned but disastrous again imo ) varies of course from person to person.
on the other side its a roll of the dice.
We all need to remember that economic issues don't get solved without congress doing it. presidents cant do it themselves. so whatever you want you cant just re-elect the same old same old.
Click to expand...
 
Checkerboard Strangler said:
God on currency?
How in Hell is that a good thing unless the currency IS your god?
The paper currency that gets used to make political bribes or organized crime payoffs (am I repeating myself?), gets stuffed in the butt-crack of a drug addicted stripper or left on the mattress of a hooker, or gets rolled up to snort a rail of coke (80% of all paper money has cocaine residue on it) or used to purchase weapons on the black market?
This is where God's name should be featured?
Our filthy lucre is the very LAST place we should imprint the name of God, if you believe in that sort of thing.
And it wasn't there until 1954, when it was ordained by an extremist right wing Congress headed up by "Tailgunner" Joe McCarthy.
The Founding Fathers didn't put GOD on their paper money, probably because they understood that stamping "GOD" on the coin of the Earthly Kingdom was a slap in the face to any sensible believer.

Openly challenged? Are you implying that to openly challenge a religious belief is a crime, or should be?
Iran and Saudi Arabia are looking pretty good this time of year, perhaps you should be living in a theocracy.
I'll challenge any damn thing I want, including your Sky Daddy, the one that's on your money.
And it doesn't have a damn thing to do with liberalism, it has to do with your rights ending where mine begin.
Click to expand...

Wow....I see I touched someone's "atheist" nerve. THAT was...hmmmm...."interesting" lol
Where did I SAY it was a good OR bad thing? I simply stated the FACT that that's the way it had been.

You are making a Walmart sized shopping cart full of errors in your assumptions.
Perhaps you just needed to yell at me. Fine. Knock yourself out.
 
SocialD said:
I was reading what you were saying and thinking well feel pretty good about the social direction perhaps. But in every poll of is the direction of the country going in the right direction or wrong its been consistently 35-45% in favor of wrong track.
One social issue is important to this slice of people another to another slice of people but what is important to all are economic issues which tops the polls pretty much ever time of what is most important.
So you did follow that up with what about the economic system.

While some major social changes have happened we haven't really accomplished much economically. Opinion on what Hillary will do ( more of the same imo ) or Bernie ( well intentioned but disastrous again imo ) varies of course from person to person.
on the other side its a roll of the dice.
We all need to remember that economic issues don't get solved without congress doing it. presidents cant do it themselves. so whatever you want you cant just re-elect the same old same old.
Click to expand...

Thanks. Just a few points.....
I agree the polls do show that.

I see one of the "major economic accomplishments" as the amount of debt being put on the American people. There's an aire of disenfranchisement in Washington apparently between the lives of ordinary working people and those who spend the money in DC.

As far as economic issues not getting resoved w/o Congress.....I see a disturbing inclination towards the branches of our government towards collusion. In a way in my lifetime I don't recall. An example would be the SCOTUS, legislating from the bench (along with a ton of Federal judges) rather than doing their job and interpreting the law as written and enforcing it as written.

Could be in years past I wasn't paying as much attention.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom