TnT wrote:
You demonstrated with your response, the very point of the article I
posted though. You had been asking me to provide some support for my
position, I posted, you responded with a cursory "nice", made no other
comment about my position, and laid your egg on me. Now if I play the
game, it is my turn to lay another egg, and then it is your turn.....

Egg? I don't think so....I was showing you an article that supported another
(and not diametrically opposed) point of view.

Egg..., by this I mean you have your POV, and I have mine, and we can
each find support, not that there is anything wrong with that, just
that I prefer the discussion you offer, and I accept. Egg throwing can
get messy!!!

Now we get to discuss what
the articles said. Yours said that the dems are suffering an identity crisis
and need to reorganize if they want to play ball. No argument there...but
then that's not your point. Your point is that the sweeping success of Bush
and the republicans demonstrates a huge shift in the countries morals and
values to the right (or at least, a clear demonstration of the stance that
had already existed).

Negatory, I no where suggested that there has been a hugh shift to the
right, but that they won this round, a squeaker yes, but they did win,
and the sooner the Dems acknowledge this, and learn to play according
to the new game plan, the better for everyone involved.


My point is that this is not so, and that you are being far too smug about the election results.

Yes I was being smug, about winning, and it did feel good. Now we all
get to go back to work, and see if we can work together! As far as I
know, we are all still on the same team. Politics is a very strange
game!



The shift was actually closer to 3% to the right, which closely matched the
increase in the fundamentalist vote.

I spent 4 years in Israel, and their political system has some interesting
aspects which were suddenly mirrored by our last election. The Knesset, the
Israeli house of congress, is composed of representatives of all the major
political parties, with seats allocated by percent of the popular vote.
Whichever party is in control of the Prime Ministership has to scab together
enough support from the Knesset seats to hold greater than 50%
support...that's what they refer to as 'forming a government'. Inevitably,
however, the major players end up splitting the seats with their traditional
allies until there is a 49-49 split. Then, this small ultraconservative
minority party who holds out until the end, and that holds 3 little seats,
finds themselves in an incredibly powerful position....whichever side they
choose to go with ends up with the majority. They know exactly where they
stand, and it is very influential, and they use it incessantly.

Although they represent only a 3% slice of the population, they are very
outspoken about how Israel is an ultraconservative country, because their
ultraconservative agenda comes to play in practically all the major
issues. Of course, absolutely everybody on both sides is learning to despise
them, because they insist on pushing their agenda over the interests of the
other 98%, but you have to admit that they have clout, as irritating as it
is invalid.

Yes, your Bush won the election.

The riverman finally said it, let the world hear. Bravo! That is still
too smug, isn't it? Sorry!!


Yes, the Conservative Right has found
itself influential because of various reasons. Yes the Democrats are finding
themselves disenfranchised and unorganized. No, the US has not suddenly
shifted far to the right, and to claim that these election results reflects
the opinions and morals of the majority of America is quite self-serving and
inaccurate. And with that in mind, the Republicans are quite well-warned to
consider their Liberal Democratic countrymen, as there are quite a few of
us....practically the same amount, by last count, and we are finding the
republicans smug alienation of us and our issues very disenfranchising. And
as the Senate Majority leader of Tennessee (R) said: you pass the same
people going down as you did coming up

Again well said riverman, I have no problem with what you have said
here, and indeed the elevator can go down real fast. Let the CFRs take
heed!!!!!!


And what does any of this have to do with Bush's horrific environmental
policy?

Well it has everything, if the CFRs had not won, the DUDs would have
won! Then we would have been talking about they're plans for the
environment, instead of President Bush's. But that is nor reality, and
we are hear to deal with reality. BTW definition, DUD -
Disenfranchised, unorganized, Dems.

--riverman

Thankyou for the discussion, we are in amazing agreement. But I would
like to go back up in your post and examine your discussion of the
Knesset.

I have nothing to disagee with you on here either, I am not personally
informed of the nature of the Knesset, except by the noble institution
of higher education called the public news media, or as some call it,
the boob tube. So, at least for this discussion I am more than willing
to accept your description, and as far as I know would not be in
disagreement with the media observations.

Concerning the American political scene, I have heard that it is
deeply divided to which I totally disagree. I figure, there are about
75-80% in the great center, with shadings this way or that, but
generally very similar, and with common concerns. Around the fringes,
are your ultras... whatever their particular issue is.

Now, if you take this pie, and cut it in half, you will find half on
one side and half on the other, but that does not mean that you have
apple pie on one side, and peach on the other. We are much more
homogenous than that.


The politician game is to attract enough of the fringe to form a
coalition government on his side, and all he needs, is 271 electoral
votes. Oviously there are areas of difference, but if he wants to
survive, he still has to listen to the majority, and not just the
fringe.

You mentioned the 3% Ultra orthodox, which holds such sway, which in
Israel, a religious country, is not a surprise. Here though, I don't
believe that the fundementalist are such a force. If than for no other
reason, they are as fickle as any other voter, and more than a lot.
They can change sides because they get ticked off over a indiscreet
act, Nixson's swearing, or lack of acting, Carter's ineptness. Nixson
was a Quaker?? Carter, was a born again Christian, but they jumped
ship for an actor from the den of iniquity, Hollywood. When you figure
that one out, let me know. Then there were a bunch that identified
with Clinton, because he was a Christian, and did they get their pants
embarassed off. So they swung back to the other side, and supported
Bush. If I were Bush, I would sure be careful!!!!! It all sounds like
shaky ground to build a legacy on.


There are all kinds of issues swirling around in an election. One side
takes a stand, to bait the other, and pretty soon you have this hubbub
going on, and it may not even be around an issue that is important to
either side. But you would never know from the noise. In the mean
time, important issues lay lanquid on the table, crying for attention,
and no one is listening! Politics is indeed strange. I really don't
think that the missing explosives was a significant political issue,
or stem cells, or even gay marriage. It was to some, the vocal, but
not to the majority in the center. So many of these special interest
appeal to a particular fringe. It would seem to me, if you could find
the center, ignore the fringe, appeal to the true majority, you could
win without scraping up the crumbs. There is nothing more sniveling
than a crumb scraper.

The coup of the CFR, is that there are Christians throughout the pie.
They are not just on the fringe, or easily identified because they
wear a certain hat or gown. Granted, there are some out there like
that, but most are nondescript. The biggest mistake is to identify all
the same, as Fundementalist. In fact by so doing, you perpetuate the
myth. The myth is our strength. You give us the power of the 3%.

Not that all Christians are fundementalist, but when someone speaks
disparaging of one, or Lord help you a bunch, there is a whole lot
more that will come swarming to their aid. After awhile the swarm
achieves critical mass where they are coming faster than they are
falling away, and so it grows. The solution is to certainly not
continue making disparaging remarks. That just feeds the reaction.

Now, I am a Christian, but I am not a Fundementalist. Do I believe in
certain fundementals yes, but you would have a hard time finding many
fundementalist that would feel comfortable setting down to a cup of
coffee. And certainly by the end, they would be very uncomfortable.

So, you want to get together for a cup of coffee?

Thats for another discussion. Respectfully Tinkerntom, aka
Knesisknosis
Life, Live it!