How did you come to your political beliefs/Party preference?

[soulster]

Well, it's all in the title. How did you come to your political beliefs? Is it something you learned/inherited from your family, learn from friends and environment, or was it personal experiences that influenced your political beliefs?

My family didn't really talk about politics much until I was a teenager, and I never gave it much thought until high school, but I am decidedly a proud, liberal Democrat with libertarian traits. I would say that I was mostly influenced by the world around me and how I was affected by those I interacted with as a young adult. My mother was a democrat and my father, a southern military man, went back and forth. He was hard to pin down, although I think he mostly leaned Democrat.

How about you?

[Jerry Oz]

I'm not so much a Democrat as I am anti-Republican. It just seems that so much of what they stand for is anathema to me. I don't appreciate hypocrisy [[yes, both sides are hypocrites, stay with me here...) and I am amazed at how unabashedly they run on a platform and ignore it once they get in office. For example, they had a clear majority for six years and never once attempted to make abortion illegal. It's just a talking point and rallying cry for them. What did they do when they took the presidency and Congress in 2000? They eliminated the surplus to give themselves and their rich friends a tax cut. Now, they're complaining that the current president can't cut the deficit. SMDH.

The funny thing is, I'd vote for them if I thought they'd do what they're stumping on but I know they won't because they'd never get re-elected if they did. But, at least tell the people who will be affected by cuts in the Dept. of Education [[students losing loans and grants, schools raising prices due to decreased government support), the Dept. of Transportation [[potholes and decaying infrastructure), and Health and Human Services [[reduced welfare benefits) what they're going to lose when they vote to "reduce the size of government" before they are elected. That's only fair.

Anyway, the Democrats aren't much better. In my mind, I see the Republicans selling their votes for their rich friends and Democrats selling their votes to whoever wants to buy it. I'm a big Obama fan and don't appreciate the fact that he's faced with the most obstructionist congress in the last half-century, yet tagged with the label of being divisive. The media is complicit in making everything much more dramatic and antagonistic than it should be. It's all broken and I don't think it'll ever be fixed again.

[soulster]

I read ya, Jerry, but I don't intend for this thread to be a bash thread. I just want to read about how people arrived at their political positions. That way, people won't feel defensive and not post. It will also help to avoid arguments. Well, maybe you can also post on what your opinions are too. We all like to let it out.

[bradsupremes]

I came to my political beliefs from everything around me. I grew up in a house where my mother tended to lean Republican because she grew up as a kid in house to conservative parents who both worked for NASA and the Republicans favored NASA. My father on the other hand votes strictly Democrat because they are pro-union which he is a part of one. To me, it seems like a very piss poor reason to lean to one party. I don't ever think he has ever voted in an election based on his own views of the issues. He basically votes on whatever his union tells to vote for. My extended family is very split in ideologies too. I have one uncle who was a hippie in the 60's and to this day remains a very liberal guy yet my other uncle who was only a year younger is a polar opposite and is as conservative as you can get. Everyone else falls to one side or the other.

I would say that I was somewhat conservative in high school, but college quickly changed that. I was exposed to different ideologies and experiences that one really doesn't see when they are in high school. I became more liberal in my thoughts although I would never call myself a liberal. I guess you can say that I became balanced during those four years of college. I am now a dead-center moderate and to me, it's the perfect place to be. I am pro-life, a strong supporter of gay rights, firmly believe we need to invest in clean energy [[solar, wind), I support the right to bear arms but there needs to be tougher gun laws, I support the states when it comes to laws against illegal immigration since the national government isn't doing much about it, I support the assistance of those who are struggling economically and feel it's time we start taking the hell out of corporations and the wealthy, and firmly believe in cutbacks in the way we spend our money in the military and stop giving money to foreign countries.

As for political parties, I find them to do more harm than good. That's why I'm an independent. I see Republicans as greedy, out of touch, and outdated. Democrats, in my eyes, are full of a lot of talk yet no action and try to make people believe they are in touch with Middle America when the reality is that they are in the same boat as Republicans. I just don't understand why Americans keep going back from one party to the other. Both have proven they can't do the job. Hopefully one day we will see a rise of third and fourth parties and maybe one day we will get to see a president who doesn't associate with either Democrats or Republicans. Maybe then the country will get back on track to success.

[soulster]

I have modified my purpose for this thread to allow what people think about things.

As I stated before, I am a liberal Democrat, and probably always will be. There were times I have swayed in the other direction but always came back to what I am comfortable with.

I believe it is the right for a woman to have an abortion, no questions asked.

I am not pro-gay rights, but pro-HUMAN rights, in that I believe all legal adults, of sound mind, regardless of race, color, religion, creed, sexual preference or orientation, all have equal rights under the Constitution of the United States. That means everyone is entitled to the pursuit of happiness, and that includes marriage.

I am pro-gun, but believe we should have restrictions on who should be allowed to own one.

I believe in education and a strong military. I am very pro-union.

I believe we need to act on immigration now and quit dicking around about it. Secure the borders, but give the illegals who are here a path to citizenship. Don't keep talking about it, do it! I also fully support the Dream act. States should not be allowed to create their own immigration laws that supercede federal ones, and cause people to be profiled and treated harshly.

I believe the drug laws in our country should be reviewed and revised, along with other criminal statues that allow our court system to lock up petty drug offenders instead of providing help to get them off the substances.

I believe prostitution should be legalized, controlled, and regulated. Pot, and certain other drugs should be decriminalized.

I believe the Supreme court is slanted too far to the right, and it's members should not have lifetime membership. I believe there should be term-limits for all congressional members.

Religion should have no place in government. The separation of government and state should be respected.

Health care for all is a right, and a necessity to help maintain a healthy population.

[Doug-Morgan]

I'm a combination of ingredients, a little like an Anacin tablet. My folks were Republican, but open minded to the point that dad had some Johnson/Romney bumper stickers made up for the '64 election. And remember, a 60's Michigan/North Eastern Republican was a more liberal Republican than what we have now. I guess you could describe them as Bill Millican/Nelson Rockefeller Republicans. The one BIG thing my parents taught me was to look fully at both sides of an issue, a trick that a lot of people have forgotten.

When the tribulations of the civil rights/anti-war movements came along, I took part out of a sense of "social justice", but did not really fall for the "revolution", taking a more pragmatic view of the political world. So that's where I am now, a pragmatic liberal Democrat who will [[in reality) vote for nearly anyone I agree with, without regard to party.

As to political philosophy, I probably could be described as a Rolling Stones kind of guy. That is, "You can't always get what you waht, but if you try sometimes, you might find, you get what you need." I get a little tired of politicians of both parties who are inclined to throw out the baby with the bathwater. Senator Maria Cantwell [[D-Wa) threatened to scuttle the banking bill a couple of years ago because it didn't contain a provision she wanted. I'm a supporter of Ms. Cantwell, but shot off an e-mail that said pretty much "Vote for the damn bill. It's OK as it sits. Not great, but OK and pulling your support would leave us with nothing." I wish more politicians would realise that you can't have everything.

[Jerry Oz]

I read ya, Jerry, but I don't intend for this thread to be a bash thread. I just want to read about how people arrived at their political positions. That way, people won't feel defensive and not post. It will also help to avoid arguments. Well, maybe you can also post on what your opinions are too. We all like to let it out.

Wow, I didn't realize I was ranting. The funny thing about all of it is the fact that I'm personally very conservative, both fiscally and socially. The thing that swings me more toward Democrat than Republican is the fact that I don't want anyone imposing their beliefs on me, so the whole "moral majority" influence from the early '90s was a major turn off. I think both sides go overboard regarding social issues. Whereas I don't think we can spend our way to a prosperous society, I also feel that neither side is truly "conservative" from a fiscal standpoint. If we had a Republican congress and president, they'd spend their way to re-election just like Democrats will. I wish there was a party for moderates.

[soulster]

Whereas I don't think we can spend our way to a prosperous society, I also feel that neither side is truly "conservative" from a fiscal standpoint.

By the same, I don't think we cut our way to economic prosperity by hurting the working class and the poor, while giving the wealthy "job creators" more tax cuts that will not go to actually creating jobs.

[arrr&bee]

Hey,if it's party and they got some good hooch then i'm votin for it!

[Jerry Oz]

By the same, I don't think we cut our way to economic prosperity by hurting the working class and the poor, while giving the wealthy "job creators" more tax cuts that will not go to actually creating jobs.

I agree 100%. People voting because of some misinformation regarding smaller government will find themselves in for a surprise after the fall. What will be cut? Education? Fewer grants and student loans [[more money out of mom and dad's bank accounts). Transportation? Potholes and decaying infrastructure. At some point, the roads will need to be fixed, translating into higher state or local taxes. Health and Human Services? Combine less money to local clinics with the intended repeal of the Affordable Care Act and watch the price of insurance and medical care for those of us who have it skyrocket. Pick your poison, then vote for what works for you.

As for the 1% are "job creators", it seems that they would be creating jobs with the money they currently have if that's what it takes. A lot of them, like Warren Buffett, will quickly sign on to higher taxes if the middle class is taxed less because there would be more buying from the middle class and subsequently, more money made by those at the top. The reason it's so difficult to push this through congress is the new millionaires in their decorated halls don't want to be taxed more, not because the billionaires are that much opposed to it.

[stephanie]

I became a Democrat because it seemed like they were happy people and cared. Republicans were mean, judgemental, and always talking about people leaning too much on the government. I know that people perceived Dems as being too far towards the left because of the Vietnam war and things like that but I do believe in conservativism. I really dont like parties and would like to consider myself an independent but I cant see any moderate or any far right Republicans who seem like they can turn this country around.

[robb_k]

I came to my political beliefs in my early life when seeing bullies bullying weaker kids and seeing people take advantage of other people. I am, basically, an anarchist, who understands that anarchy is bad for good people. I have seen almost all governments hurt the common people. But I know that governments are necessary, because without them, conditions are even worse. I abhor dictatorships. But, the so-called "democratic" governments in the Western culture leave a LOT to be desired. USA to me is a "dictatorship" of the media, controlled by big money. Canada is a fair piece better at responding to the people's needs [[as are the governments in Western Europe). But they have a lot of flaws, and are also mainly also controlled by big money [[just being a little more humane). Socialist governments have problems with incentive to work hard, and covering cost of producing for people who don't produce. ALL governments in all systems have the problem of leadership, as even honest, people, who genuinely want to help all people in a fair way, would have to compromise their morals to get anything accomplished. For the most part, anyone who gets high enough in the political system is someone who WANTS to rule over people [[control other people). That type of person is NOT looking out for the interests of ALL his nation's people. He or she is generally looking out for his/her own interest. "Democracy" can only work with small groups [[maybe up to a couple hundred). In USA, I would be an anarchist, as, in my estimation, no existing political party [[that has any chance to win more than a handful of local elections) represents the people. In Canada [[and The Netherlands, as well), I am a liberal on human rights issues, and a mild conservative on fiscal policy.

[ralpht]

I was raised in a blue collar, pro union family. Solid Democrats through the entire extended family. My father worked for Ford most of his working years and retired from that company at age 59. He always gave Ford Motor Company the credit for a long retirement and loyally always bought Ford products until the day he died. Out of respect, I carry the tradition forward and only drive Fords.

By the way, great thread.

[soulster]

I came to my political beliefs in my early life when seeing bullies bullying weaker kids and seeing people take advantage of other people. I am, basically, an anarchist, who understands that anarchy is bad for good people.

here in the U.S., those who call themselves "anarchists" tend to Libertarians, and Libertarians tend to line themselves up with the republican party, even though they deny they have anything in common. Even the so-called moderates usually lean more toward the republican party/conservatives than they realize. They all tend to call liberals extreme. Maybe in their eyes they are, but I have never met an extreme liberal! I've met and know a lot of conservatives so far to the right that they may as well be fascists.

[soulster]

I was raised in a blue collar, pro union family. Solid Democrats through the entire extended family. My father worked for Ford most of his working years and retired from that company at age 59. He always gave Ford Motor Company the credit for a long retirement and loyally always bought Ford products until the day he died. Out of respect, I carry the tradition forward and only drive Fords.

By the way, great thread.

I was wondering if I should "go there" politically, as this is an election year, tensions are running high on every issue, and the country couldn't be more divided.

BTW, we've always had bad luck with Fords. I came from a long line of GM owners. I've always bought GM cars. Except, my father drove all Chrysler. Yuck! One of my sisters now drives a VW. She'll never make that mistake again!

[Jerry Oz]

As to robb_k's comments, I have long believed that representative government only works for a limited number of people. With more than 300 million Americans, it's impossible for one person to be elected and effect change or have a voice in national politics. This has been building for awhile, but the beltway meltdowns are the natural result of this.

I cannot tolerate the commercials with prospective congresspeople talking about what they'll do for me when they get to Washington. The fact is that to have one of their 20 platform promises met, they have to find 19 coalitions and sell out the other 19 promises. Everybody has an agenda: to get re-elected in two years. Consequently, they have to do just enough for their constituents, usually by way of directing work their way with maneuvering and pork belly politics.

This thing is broken permanently. There are two solutions that I can see. The first is to break the country up into three regions, so that representative government is a reality again. There would be three separate congresses and they would only create laws that affect their regions. Their budgets would be apportioned based upon their populations, so if one region was quite happy with a conservative mindset and lost or gained citizenry based upon success or failure of the economy, it would have a larger or smaller budget to deal with.

The other solution is to have a singular, charismatic personality run for president that 90% of the people fell strongly behind. That might sound good until the day after the election when we wake up and realize that we just elected the anti-Christ.

[robb_k]

As to robb_k's comments, I have long believed that representative government only works for a limited number of people. With more than 300 million Americans, it's impossible for one person to be elected and effect change or have a voice in national politics. This has been building for awhile, but the beltway meltdowns are the natural result of this.

I cannot tolerate the commercials with prospective congresspeople talking about what they'll do for me when they get to Washington. The fact is that to have one of their 20 platform promises met, they have to find 19 coalitions and sell out the other 19 promises. Everybody has an agenda: to get re-elected in two years. Consequently, they have to do just enough for their constituents, usually by way of directing work their way with maneuvering and pork belly politics.

This thing is broken permanently. There are two solutions that I can see. The first is to break the country up into three regions, so that representative government is a reality again. There would be three separate congresses and they would only create laws that affect their regions. Their budgets would be apportioned based upon their populations, so if one region was quite happy with a conservative mindset and lost or gained citizenry based upon success or failure of the economy, it would have a larger or smaller budget to deal with.

The other solution is to have a singular, charismatic personality run for president that 90% of the people fell strongly behind. That might sound good until the day after the election when we wake up and realize that we just elected the anti-Christ.

Isn't this what happened after Hitler had all his political opposition thrown into prison or killed?more than 90 % of The Germans were behind him while he was winning wars and stealing other countries' resources.

There is no good answer to this problem. there are way too many people for this planet to handle, and, unfortunately, too many to have true representative government. All we can do as a mass o f population is try to be as educated as possible as to what is going on, and keep as many different people as possible in positions of control and power [[as checks upon each other), and also rise up as a group to stop individuals and small groups from leading us the wrong way. -Not an easy task.

[Jerry Oz]

Truly a difficult task. Made all the more so because most people, in my opinion, don't care. That's why the negative attack ads work so effectively. To find out that candidate A made such an outrageous comment and was not called to task for it should result in concerned citizens fact checking it for accuracy and context. But they [[we) swallow it and let it go unchallenged because we are told what to believe by talking heads, 72-point headlines, and voices from the radio [[the new "idiot box"; who saw that one coming?).

[soulster]

The other solution is to have a singular, charismatic personality run for president that 90% of the people fell strongly behind. That might sound good until the day after the election when we wake up and realize that we just elected the anti-Christ.

And, the same people who don't think they can be fooled will be the ones who are most fooled!

[soulster]

Truly a difficult task. Made all the more so because most people, in my opinion, don't care. That's why the negative attack ads work so effectively. To find out that candidate A made such an outrageous comment and was not called to task for it should result in concerned citizens fact checking it for accuracy and context. But they [[we) swallow it and let it go unchallenged because we are told what to believe by talking heads, 72-point headlines, and voices from the radio [[the new "idiot box"; who saw that one coming?).

I think it's more that people know everything is lies, and they figure there is no point in addressing them. but, they always forget that there are just enough people out there who do believe the lies, and don't have the intelligence to know the difference. They are filled with so much hate, anger, and mistrust that they will believe just anything that supports their belief system. That is why Democrats in West Virginia actually voted for convict Keith Judd, Inmate Number 11593-051 in their hatred of Obama. Of course, taken in context, West Virginia has an overwhelmingly White population, and the state leans overwhelmingly conservative republican. And, the voters who voted for the convict were old.

[splanky]

I came to my beliefs by living. I believe the rich will always exploit the poor, racism will always exist, both interacial and
inTRAracial, and no form of government will change that. BTW, soulster, I also believe prostitution would be fairer legalised but only because I believe that if a person owns something outright then they have the right to sell, rent or
give it away as they please. That, for me includes their own body. I do, however, disagree with you on it being regulated. I don't believe the government should be involved in every transaction between citizens nor recieve revenue
from every exchange. And I certainly don't want G-men in folks hotel rooms counting stokes!...
I believe much of the world is in a permanent state of disarray and that there is little or nothing I can do about most of
it so I'm just trying to enjoy and entertain myself as much as I can while I'm still topside. Or, as the song goes:
I'm gonna live until I die...

[soulster]

I came to my beliefs by living. I believe the rich will always exploit the poor, racism will always exist, both interacial and
inTRAracial, and no form of government will change that. BTW, soulster, I also believe prostitution would be fairer legalised but only because I believe that if a person owns something outright then they have the right to sell, rent or
give it away as they please. That, for me includes their own body. I do, however, disagree with you on it being regulated. I don't believe the government should be involved in every transaction between citizens nor recieve revenue
from every exchange. And I certainly don't want G-men in folks hotel rooms counting stokes!...
I believe much of the world is in a permanent state of disarray and that there is little or nothing I can do about most of
it so I'm just trying to enjoy and entertain myself as much as I can while I'm still topside. Or, as the song goes:
I'm gonna live until I die...

Heh! When I say regulation, I mean laws that will help ensure the safety and health of the parties involved, and reduce the chances for abuse.

[splanky]

My bad, soulster! I misunderstood you. I remember being overseas in the military and the asphault technicians were
required to carry up to date VD cards to prove they were regularly checked up. I can live with that....

[soulster]

My bad, soulster! I misunderstood you. I remember being overseas in the military and the asphault technicians were
required to carry up to date VD cards to prove they were regularly checked up. I can live with that....

We want to be safe now. There's enough gutter snipe out there!

[Jerry Oz]

My bad, soulster! I misunderstood you. I remember being overseas in the military and the asphault technicians were required to carry up to date VD cards to prove they were regularly checked up. I can live with that....

You couldn't regulate it, though. If someone doesn't have a medical cert, there's nothing to keep them from trading their wares at a discount and there'd be no shortage of guys lined up to buy it. In the end, you cannot regulate some things like drugs or prostitution, so you keep them illegal.

[soulster]

You couldn't regulate it, though. If someone doesn't have a medical cert, there's nothing to keep them from trading their wares at a discount and there'd be no shortage of guys lined up to buy it. In the end, you cannot regulate some things like drugs or prostitution, so you keep them illegal.

No, you get the illegal ones off the street. As a pavement provider, if you want business, you get tested annually for HIV and other diseases, you get licensed, and you practice in save areas/ways. If you were a customer, which one would you pick, the clean women, or the the high-risk chick?

[Jerry Oz]

No, you get the illegal ones off the street. As a pavement provider, if you want business, you get tested annually for HIV and other diseases, you get licensed, and you practice in save areas/ways. If you were a customer, which one would you pick, the clean women, or the the high-risk chick?

If we could get them off the street, we wouldn't be having the discussion! Back to square one.

Thank God, I'm not a customer. But if I'm that hard up for a good time, I guess my pick would depend on how much money I have that night. Roll the dice and pick a winner...

[soulster]

If we could get them off the street, we wouldn't be having the discussion! Back to square one.

Well, they can be on the internet, in an office building, or at the Bunny Ranch. You know what I mean!

Thank God, I'm not a customer. But if I'm that hard up for a good time, I guess my pick would depend on how much money I have that night. Roll the dice and pick a winner...

See, if it were legal, you could have advertising and customer reviews.

Some people need sex. Nothing wrong with it, unless you have moral, religious, or ethical issues with it. You know, prostitution used to be legal in this country until the religious types got it banned.

[Jerry Oz]

I'm not moralizing. But, even with alcohol and a whole slew of illegal drugs available, people still find newer, riskier, ever more deadly ways to get high. People do not follow scripts for this sort of thing, no matter how you try to make it safer. With a whole slew of legal, clean, certified-by-the-health-department 'tutes available, some people will still prefer the danger and sleeze of the cheaper, edgier substitute. It's just who we are.

[splanky]

I meant to mention this the other day...What a lot of people don't seem to realise is that prostitution
is already legal in many places. You just can't identify it by that name. Women have to call themselves
"escort" or advertise that they do "bodywork" which is how it goes in NYC...

[Jerry Oz]

Craig's List, Facebook, and numerous spam technology have taken this well beyond street corner hustling. If you get caught buying it on the street, you must be desperate or new to town. To be honest, anything that is illegal can be had cheaper and easier in this day and age than ever before.

[roger]

I meant to mention this the other day...What a lot of people don't seem to realise is that prostitution
is already legal in many places. You just can't identify it by that name. Women have to call themselves
"escort" or advertise that they do "bodywork" which is how it goes in NYC...

That sounds very similar to the situation in England Splanky. Here prostitution is not illegal but cerain activities surrounding it are .. notably "soliciting for business in public" [[streetwalking) and "living off immoral earnings" [[pimping) .. though they still go on. Most local newspapers have sections where "visiting services" and "massage parlours" are advertised. These operate on the fringes of the law and occasionally the police crack-down on them.

In some parts of continental Europe brothels are totally legalised .. indeed the "Red Light District" in Amsterdam, Holland is quite a tourist attraction .. here scantily clad ladies sit in large windows overlooking the streets and canals awaiting "visitors" .. when the "visitors" arrive they are let in and the curtains [[drapes) are drawn across the window until the "visitor" leaves. All of this takes place in a well advertised collection of streets in the old, historic, part of the city.

http://www.amsterdam.info/red-light-district/

Roger

[robb_k]

Yes, and that, and the drugs in Vondelpark, and the "Coffee Houses" in Amsterdam give foreigners around The World quite a different impression of The Netherlands than what the remainder of the country is like.

But, yes, legalised, regulated, health-inspected prostitution would be preferable to the illegal un-regulated, "criminal status" variety. Same with marijuana use.

[soulster]

That sounds very similar to the situation in England Splanky. Here prostitution is not illegal but cerain activities surrounding it are .. notably "soliciting for business in public" [[streetwalking) and "living off immoral earnings" [[pimping) .. though they still go on. Most local newspapers have sections where "visiting services" and "massage parlours" are advertised. These operate on the fringes of the law and occasionally the police crack-down on them.

But, while technically, massage parlors and escorts are legal, and many legit, they are cover terms for illegal prostitution. Just because they exist does not mean they are legal fronts. They are vulnerable to raids.

And, I know I mentioned prostitution as one of the things I believe in, but I really do not wish for this thread to become that.

[jobeterob]

Hopefully no one learned any political beliefs from this nut!


http://www.cnn.com/video/?hpt=hp_t2#...r-gay-rant.cnn

[soulster]

I kind of wonder if all these religious people are so against gays because they are maybe gay themselves.

[jobeterob]

Some of them! A pretty standard response I think. And I'm sure there is a name for the syndrome.

[soulster]

Yeah. A lot of these politicians and preachers who legislate and preach so hard against homosexuality have indeed been outed as gay when the pressure mounts.