Weird things happen in Iowa

Ragman · Dec 29, 2011

greg334 said:
This morning I'm reading about the endorsments for the candidates and how some are trying to 'sway' Bachmann out of the race so Santorum can have more support. While I'm reading the article, an interesting pullquote popped up - Santorum would vote for Paul if he wins the GOP nomination. I understand his point, he is going to go for the ABO candidate but it is odd that he would say something after garnering support from the kook fringe religious right and having more religious righter asking Bachmann to leave the stage. Maybe those in the religious right are fuming after that comment and we will see his retraction sometime in the next few days.

Now this comes on the heels of learning that Ron Paul has a new supporter - Bachmanns Iowa campaign manager. I know that's old news but maybe this is the shape of things to come?

The whole group of candidates remind me of a famous family.

greg334 · Dec 29, 2011

Actually removing Ron Paul out of the picture, that looks like the republic field of candidates.

ntimevan · Dec 29, 2011

HEY don't insult the munsters like that. I kind of liked that show.

I live in IOWA and I could careless about the political B.S. . I think they're all OVERPAID and care more about themselves than straighten out this countrys MESS. Whew got that off my chest now I'm good for another 4 years.

greg334 · Dec 29, 2011

ah... that's the cast of the Addams family.

RLENT · Dec 29, 2011

AMonger said:
Well, I'm one of them. As much as I see the need for the radical left's votes, I'm having trouble imagining them as allies.

You'll not get it from the very radical left - just as you'll not get it from the very radical right .... at least not until they have been persuaded out of their misguided ideological extremism .....

Form and build coalitions based on mutual interest and common cause, with those who are not at the extremes of the political spectrums .

The solution, initially at least, lies in prevailing upon those in non-radical middle, so that one might enlist reinforcements to the cause.

Part of avoiding the trap that is used to enslave, is to recognize that all people are individuals - they do not fall neatly into two monolithic, diametrically-opposed political/philosophical camps.

That's the trick that the establishment, ideologues, and the MSM try to get everyone to buy into (for their own self-interested reasons) Really, it is in no ones best interest, being so prevailed upon, to do so.

Remember: United we stand, divided we fall ....

AMonger said:
It's the same issue as what would happen if society collapses and we have to put it back together;

It's the same issue we have to deal with on a daily basis - just to live with one another

AMonger said:
how do you work with someone who believes some have a right to Other People's Money,

Educate them out of it.

AMonger said:
or don't believe in limited government with only their enumerated powers,

Educate them out of it.

AMonger said:
or don't respect the rights protected by the Bill of Rights?

Educate them out of it.

Possibly one of the best ways to do it - and one which, I admittedly practice far too little - is by asking questions .... which invites someone to look .... and then make up their own minds for themselves .....

To be able to do it well is a real trick.

Engaging in rhetorical slamfests, while great fun and perhaps entertaining to some (including those who engage it themselves

), are probably not the way to convince most if done in any other manner than gently .....

That's not to say that such don't have some usefulness - sometimes one faces those who one may feel (rightly or wrongly) that they will never convince or win over - in such instances, such battles may serve a purpose, if only in causing those on the sidelines to look at things in a new or different way.

It's a war of ideas, and the weapons are one's ability to make an rational and reasoned argument to another ..... or the ability to get someone else, on their own determinism, to make it with themselves ...

AMonger said:
I don't know how to work with someone like that. They're my enemy, not my ally.

Then make them your ally - not your enemy.

But before you do, look to those that are sitting on the fence or minimally in the other camp, who can be enlisted in the cause due to mutual interests. Strength in numbers.

AMonger said:
Btw, when I say that, it's not out of love for war, just human rights and the Bill thereof.

Fair enough

BTW, just to clarify things here, lest some misunderstand anything I write with any reference to religion, or those who claim to be adherents:

I am not anti-religion, anti-Christian, nor "anti" other brand or flavor. I support anyone's right to hold and practice a faith - provided that faith, when practiced, infringes no one else's human rights and liberty.

I think religion, generally, is a good thing ..... but like many things, it might be best consumed in moderation - and if one is inclined to forego that wisdom, they would be well served to remember that just like the rest of us, they themselves are still human ..... despite whomever they think they have sitting in the co-pilot seat .....

Zealots and fanatics, no matter the flavor or brand, tend, unfortunately, to reflect badly on the religion. Generally speaking, the horrors committed in the name of religion are not committed by those who are moderates.

Religions - all of them (from what I know, and from my perspective) - contain accumulations and distillations of wisdom. They are source of solace, inspiration, and strength to many, which is entirely understandable, and in my book, generally a good thing.

That they get used by some for the commission and justification of evil against one's fellows is perhaps one of the greatest of all the tragedies of man's history.