found at the reupublican convention

[princealbertofb]

A difference in sensibilities, Genz. (Maybe due to the fact that you haven't been to the States?)

Sometimes, America (the "beacon of democracy") worries me... Honestly. There are a lot of things that don't "compute" in my mind with what it does as a nation, and what it proclaims to be (to the world).

I think people sometimes need to be reminded of Hitler / Stalin / Pol Pot / etc.

I did not say Mitt Romney was Hitler. Like other dictators of this world, Adolf Hitler represents a danger that people can now identify. Before WW II it might have been Gengis Khan or some of the Roman rulers, but all that is in the too distant past.

Note that I use the word MAY a lot... What has happened before MIGHT happen again, but not necessarily. It's good to be aware and not blind.

[Genersis]

A difference in sensibilities, Genz. (Maybe due to the fact that you haven't been to the States?)

Sometimes, America (the "beacon of democracy") worries me... Honestly. There are a lot of things that don't "compute" in my mind with what it does as a nation, and what it proclaims to be (to the world).

I think people sometimes need to be reminded of Hitler / Stalin / Pol Pot / etc.

I did not say Mitt Romney was Hitler. Like other dictators of this world, Adolf Hitler represents a danger that people can now identify. Before WW II it might have been Gengis Khan or some of the Roman rulers, but all that is in the too distant past.

Note that I use the word MAY a lot... What has happened before MIGHT happen again, but not necessarily. It's good to be aware and not blind.

No i haven't been to the US properly.(I'm pretty sure Disney World doesn't count :tongue

Nah, those are just a few things i've picked up debating on US politics over the last year(and politics in general).mile:

Yes it important to remember those "colourful" characters from political history; what is unfortunate is that it seems most people on the political right think fascism, Nazism, and any kind of totalitarian/authoritarianism are left wing ideologies.

And it also seems some people on the left believe conservatism/religious conservatism always leads to fascism. Which is closer to reality than the above, but still relies heavily on a political slippery slope.

What i'm trying to say is, referencing to these figures from the past has lost its usefulness in discussion due to...well...the nature of politics.
Doing such is saved for hyperbole nowadays, and if it's not used in that manner, it tends to be assumed as such by people who disagree with whatever was said.

I just thought pointing such out may be helpful.mile:

[princealbertofb]

Maybe I'm used to hyperbole? Maybe it's the measure of how concerned I am... or maybe I'm just a scaremonger...? Thanks for your posts, Genz. I amended my 'wake up, America' call by putting question marks instead. A suggestion.

[Genersis]

Maybe I'm used to hyperbole? Maybe it's the measure of how concerned I am... or maybe I'm just a scaremonger...? Thanks for your posts, Genz. I amended my 'wake up, America' call by putting question marks instead. A suggestion.

A scaremonger? No, hardly. You haven't mentioned the holocaust yet.
There's no fault on your part, though it seems perhaps i'm too hasty to point out political discloser etiquette.:redface:

As for the "wake up" thing.
I think it's a pet peeve of mine, having it thrown at me so often. So sorry if i came off aggressive.

[Blue]

Here (Living in the southern USA) and talking to people around here, income doesn't seem to make much difference, nor political party affiliation, outside of a handful of hardliners.

Everyone agrees Obama will try to take out guns away and, at the least succeed in making firearms, parts, ammunition and, reloading supplies double to triple in price. The upper class (gentry and nouveau riche) don't like that on principle and because most are sportsmen that do hunt and/or collect firearms, the middle class folks hate it because it's one more step toward making them poor, and the poor rely on hunting for a good portion of their meat, meat they could not afford to buy.

We all agree that Obama is the reason there are no jobs and four local business have gone under in the last year is because of Obama. All but to poor on welfare want the jobs and businesses back, the welfare recipients want more welfare but, they won't vote because they figure they will be the bottom of the pecking order no matter who is elected and, because Romney will win our state anyway, so not worth wasting the time or the gas to go vote.

We all agree that Obama will raise our costs to eat, cool and power our homes. Most rely on wood at least partially for heat, propane or electricity for cooking and, electricity for the rest. Our co-op burns coal to produce that electricity, and Obama wants to stop that but the alternatives cost three to four times as much so, our bills would go up.

W all agree Obama would further restrict logging and paper production and, in a town who's largest employer is a paper mill and, the second largest a logging company, third a lumber mill, that can't happen, more people will be out of work if it does.

We agree that Obamacare has got to go. The sentiment is "If they can force us to buy insurance, then what's stopping them from forcing us to buy broccoli too?" In other words it's the first step toward the government taking away out free choice and forcing us to do what they think is good for us as individuals, even though they don't know us and, have never even met us.

Where we disagree is on LGBT issues and abortion, and that is a religious divide. Even then, we agree that if a same sex couple has built a home, shared finances and such for years and, one of them dies, the other should have the same rights to survivor's Social Security, the home, the accounts, and making medical decisions as a spouse would. And we agree that if the same sex couple splits up instead and, only one of them was working, the working one should support the non working one until that one gets a job.

Where we disagree is over getting married and raising kids, and that is based old, erroneous beliefs on their part. The nay sayers think kids will mimic their parents and, that sexuality is entirely a learned thing. Gay parents will raise gay kids, to them if a straight child is gay, it's because the child was too rebellious and decided to be gay to spite his/her parents, or the parents were bad parents that abused the child sexually so, the child learned to be gay that way.

Yeah the rest of us that disagree know better but, there I don't have a leg to stand on. Even though I know it's inborn and not a choice, I was abused, so can't be an example of the happy hetero parented child still being gay none of the eight LGBT in this area come from that ideal home. Children of broken homes, abused either by parents or by an ex spouse, or have metal health issues which the fundamentalists claim is the explanation.

So, though I know it varies in other areas, I also know that there are a lot of areas that are not much different and, will vote for Romney, even though that means giving in on a few things, it's a win on the big picture and spoof or not, that paper reflects how a lot of people feel.