# Politics of Fear



## Gooseguy10 (Oct 10, 2006)

To me it is sad to see that our elections have been down graded so much on both sides to include name calling and scare tactics. Either the politicians think the electorate are a bunch of idiots or we really are a bunch of idiots for believing this crap that is spewed out both in the media and places such as this message board.

No matter who is elected, rest assured the sky is not falling. Trust from past experiences that change won't ruin our country. Before you start totally bashing my post, which I am sure will happen, don't worry I am still an "American" b.c of I am voting for McCain. Why you ask? Tick, Tick, Tick....b.c I would rather have a beer on the tailgate of my pickup with him than Obama. People can vote for whoever they want, for whatever reason they want to....it has been happening for 200 plus years and we are still here. :beer:

Finally does anyone see the irony in the claims that people are un-American for simply disagreeing with someon based on a view? To me that doesn't sound democratic, it almost sounds socialistic?


----------



## JustAnotherDog (Oct 16, 2005)

I would happily join you on the tailgate for a cold one.

Just a minute while I find my blinders. They should be around her somewhere, my friend sent them from Australia where he received them from a friend in Great Britain. 
http://shock.military.com/Shock/videos.do?displayContent=177117&page=1&wh=wh
(Just in case you missed it)

Nothing personal, someone has to keep watch.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Gooseguy10, I don't understand why people get so upset about hearing negative things. What if they are true? For myself I want to know the good things about each candidate and the bad things. If a doctor prescribes a drug for you will you take it without reading the side affects? When you buy a new vehicle do you want to know if there has been some known failures of their brake system?

I am discouraged every time I hear someone say they don't like the negativity. To me it sounds like their tolerance has no limits. I know that's not true, and I am sure they draw the line at murder, but not knowing where they draw the line is what is bothersome.

Keep in mind gooseguy10 that most people who preach tolerance (politicians, media etc) are people hiding something. They are not simply the kind people they try portray themselves as. In my life time I have watched attitudes change, and that attitude alone endangers us. I remember an old country song that said something like "if you don't stand for something you will fall for anything". Not approving of specific actions is standing for something. Today to many people are proud of standing for nothing.

I'm not trying to tear you apart gooseguy10, I am just trying to get you to think about these things. When no one is looking for trouble it would be foolish to tear them apart. Actually read my words and see what you think. I just removed one of my signature lines and I did save it but I don't know where right now. It was something like:
"Tolerance of the lowest ethical standards for the sake of unity demeans us all". I guess I would ask you to have at least as much tolerance for those who expose dishonorable behavior as those who commit dishonorable behavior. There should be more tolerance for the person who goes to the police than the criminal who accosts your neighbor.


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

the truth is hard on the politically correct, they dont want the facts if they are uncomfortable facts.

So they denigrate the messenger, because these facts don't fit into their PC world view.

High standards for picking a president though, who is more fun to drink beer with, fairly typical of the political acumen in the US.

I bet Bill Clinton would be a lot of fun in a tittie bar :roll:


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> I bet Bill Clinton would be a lot of fun in a tittie bar


And Barney Franks wouldn't be.


----------



## JustAnotherDog (Oct 16, 2005)

> And Barney Franks wouldn't be.


I don't care who you are, that there's funny!


----------



## Gooseguy10 (Oct 10, 2006)

Plainsman said:


> Gooseguy10, I don't understand why people get so upset about hearing negative things. What if they are true? For myself I want to know the good things about each candidate and the bad things. If a doctor prescribes a drug for you will you take it without reading the side affects? When you buy a new vehicle do you want to know if there has been some known failures of their brake system?
> 
> I am discouraged every time I hear someone say they don't like the negativity. To me it sounds like their tolerance has no limits. I know that's not true, and I am sure they draw the line at murder, but not knowing where they draw the line is what is bothersome.
> 
> ...


I have no problem with varying opinions. In fact I just finished a lecture about the ideals of majority rule with minority rights in my college American History class. I also realize that not every opinion is going to be positive.

However, I will stand by my thoughts about how elections have gone down the toilet. There are some real big issues at stake, that will need some cooperation from many different stake holders. The elections are no longer an exchange of ideas based on quality information. They are about who is the bigger a-hole. And to prove who is a bigger a-hole, people attempt to scare the living hell out of Americans with completely biased information.

Re: drug companies and buying a car analogy. I agree it is important to gain valueable information. However, what if car makers and drug companies used the same advertising tactics as political parties. Scare and blame based on totally biased information. How would you find accurate information? The fact is as consumers (and as a society) we don't accept such shotty practices in those sectors, then why do we put up with it in politics?

Sit back and look the claims these political ads are making. They are complete garbage filled messages with half truths and scare tactics. It would be laughable, if it were not so incredibly sad.
:eyeroll:


----------



## JustAnotherDog (Oct 16, 2005)

I have yet to buy a car that will affect my quality of life as this presidential election will. (when I was younger I might have thought so) I believe exposing the dishonesty of a person's hidden past is not negativity. In fact that is the only explanation he has given is "negativity."

So until there is proper transparency in our candidates, I don't see change coming. There was a time when we could depend on the network news, but when one of the network boys actually talks about a candidate with "I get shivers down my leg when I hear him speak" something is wrong.

No apologies from me.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

I'm happy you didn't take this personal. I would like your opinion on some more points I would like to make.



> There are some real big issues at stake, that will need some cooperation from many different stake holders.


I agree, but sometimes you have to decide if you want to cooperate, or hold your ground. If it is simply opinion you can negotiate, but if the very fiber of who you are is challenged then cooperation becomes harder.



> The elections are no longer an exchange of ideas based on quality information. They are about who is the bigger a-hole. And to prove who is a bigger a-hole, people attempt to scare the living hell out of Americans with completely biased information.


That is a big part of it isn't it? That is reality though. Most often it's two a-holes running against each other and I can only remember voting for who I dislike least. The lesser of two evils if you will. However, if that's how we get to the truth I guess that's how we get to the truth.



> Scare and blame based on totally biased information. How would you find accurate information? The fact is as consumers (and as a society) we don't accept such shotty practices in those sectors, then why do we put up with it in politics?


That would be nice, but most politicians really don't tell us what they really want. That's when their opponent starts telling us what the other person really wants. Then it becomes a battle of credibility. When that happens they each start undermining the others credibility. You may hear on this form people complaining about their credibility being damaged. No one held a gun to their head and made them post bs, they did it of their own free will. The way to retain credibility is to never hate an opponent so much you exaggerate. Never present something as entirely fact unless you personally know it is. Never take someone else word as gospel, unless your talking to Jesus himself.

How would you find accurate information? I guess that's up to us. Depending on how serious you are will determine how hard you look for the truth. That's a responsibility that all Americans should take serious. As of late to many vote their wallet and not their freedom. We could loose at both ends of that spectrum.



> Sit back and look the claims these political ads are making. They are complete garbage filled messages with half truths and scare tactics. It would be laughable, if it were not so incredibly sad.


Half truths? I'm happy to see that you're an optimist.  I do hope I can change your mind a little on this negativity thing. Thanks for giving me a chance anyway.


----------



## Gooseguy10 (Oct 10, 2006)

Plainsman said:


> I'm happy you didn't take this personal. I would like your opinion on some more points I would like to make.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


No worries about having a different opinion. I don't take it personally. How ironic is it that there is more civility on the politics board than then the duck forum :beer:

I don't have a ton of time but as far as having to pick the best of two evils in an election is a result of how our campaigns have gone down the toilet. In my opinion many of the candidates that are running are not terrible people but by the time the media, ads, and people with agendas get done with them, we are left with the percpetion that every candidate is garbage.

Another take on this is that if you believe we are left with less than desirable candidates it is b.c quality candidates would not put themselves or their families through the muck just to get elected. Therefore we do not get the best possible candidates.

Either way, it is sad that every election so many people have the belief that we are picking who is the lesser of two evil rather than the best candidate for the job.


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

Gooseguy10 said:


> Another take on this is that if you believe we are left with less than desirable candidates it is b.c quality candidates would not put themselves or their families through the muck just to get elected. Therefore we do not get the best possible candidates.


Precisely.

I'll never run for office given the current media climate.

My family life is private, and thus I will never allow that to be taken from me by some shmuck trying to get kudo points for digging up some sensationalist story. Nor will I have others judge my personal life as a measuring stick of my worthiness to hold political office.

It isn't worth my personal lifestyle and beliefs be compromised. I"ll use monetary influence to enable change. It is the American way right now, and even though I hate the system for allowing it, I refuse to personally step into an arena and sacrifice my privacy to the media.

Something has to give. The media needs reining in. All media. Families, personal hobbies, non political activities, all need legislating to be off limits to political figures. period.

My :2cents:


----------



## JustAnotherDog (Oct 16, 2005)

> Another take on this is that if you believe we are left with less than desirable candidates it is b.c quality candidates would not put themselves or their families through the muck just to get elected. Therefore we do not get the best possible candidates.


Shout this from the mountaintop.

Should be a disclaimer before every newscast.

:thumb:


----------



## laddybug3 (Oct 28, 2008)

I think sometimes that people go to the extreme :evil: . Has anyone ever played telephone, or continue the story as kids? I remember both. The truth can become a lie and the lie can become the truth. I cannot stand the news that much because of some of the stories. My solution is turning it off go fishing or hunting. I do watch the news sometimes. I do not like politics that much. It is hard to know for sure which is telling the truth. I do not like both candidates that much. Both scare me but still one of them will be president. I heard one of the future VP say that he or she wanted to ban books. I cannot believe this! If we ban books then we might as well ban ourselves. An American person :******: or non-American person :******: wrote a book. That is as burning books :******: . We all just have to deal with bad news, fear, war :sniper: , and ban books. After all, it seems humankind is just that way. Sorry for the randomness of this post, these are just rants. I do not mean to offend anyone who may read this.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

JustAnotherDog said:


> > Another take on this is that if you believe we are left with less than desirable candidates it is b.c quality candidates would not put themselves or their families through the muck just to get elected. Therefore we do not get the best possible candidates.
> 
> 
> Shout this from the mountaintop.
> ...


 ditto :thumb:


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> I heard one of the future VP say that he or she wanted to ban books.


You may have even read that on here, but I have good news for you, it didn't happen. That's a good example of what Gooseguy10 was talking about. I would never have known it was bs if I didn't watch FOX News. After watching FOX I felt better and searched for more evidence. I went to also bias factcheck.com and they refuted a half dozen half baked rumors including the book burning story.


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

R y a n said:


> Gooseguy10 said:
> 
> 
> > Another take on this is that if you believe we are left with less than desirable candidates it is b.c quality candidates would not put themselves or their families through the muck just to get elected. Therefore we do not get the best possible candidates.
> ...


 you sure do relish posting phony personal stuff about Palin


----------

