While both letters are meant as a joke, the fact remains that the nation as it stands is ungovernable. No matter who is in office, the other side is going to resent being governed by them. So why not have an amicable divorce and let both sides be happy.
Not if they're really well subjugated, which is what they want the government to do to them already. Hell, it'd be their dream come true.
So, I either get bibles and "Judeo-Christian values" ( ), or I have to live with the hardcore liberals? What the fuck kind of choice is that? I reject those options.
I particularly like the fact that 57.23% of the stats in the 2nd piece were drawn directly from the writer's ass.
Personally, you can have both the Bible-thumping, war-mongering greedy capitalists AND the socialist, peace-loving, enviromentalist hippies and kindly... ....leave me the fuck alone! The lunatic extremes of both sides have done their fair share of fucking up this country over the last few decades, and they can all fuck off and die as far as I'm concerned.
Maybe you can have your own microstate in the middle. On the upside, you'll be able to smoke pot legally. On the downside, if you ever venture outside your front gate, you'll be shot for being an illegal immigrant.
What you guys are not realizing is that the politicians aren't pulling this country apart. It's the pundits and talk show hosts who get paid to rile people up. If you could turn off the tv or radio for 10 minutes and actually listen to someone with an opposing viewpoint, you'd find we all have much more in common than we don't. But, then, how on Earth will on political party beat the other one if the masses aren't chomping at the bit?
The liberal one amuses me. I get about halfway down it--shortly before the author just starts makin' stuff up--and I'm not seeing any problems with their proposal. Oh, there are some issues. I mean, Washington only wound up a blue state in 2006 through voter fraud. And Oregon is largely blue in Portland and Eugene. But the truly cute idea is that somehow businesses and entrepreneurs and anchored geographically. It's so amusing to see liberals try to understand business.
I think you're giving the politicians too much credit here. They're "paid" too rile people up as well. Not as directly but there are plenty of examples to cite where they make their livings off keeping their supporters fired up and on the warpaths against their "evil" opponents. And a lot of times it turns out to be to just distract from their own ineptitude.
Yes. No. Politicians are more divisive now than they have been at any time in our history. They have an equal share in the blame when it comes to shit-stirring.
The notion of your government being determined by your geography instead of whoever earns your loyalty was old 1000 years ago, when the medieval Icelanders got rid of it. It was a pity everyone since has failed to copy their example. I'd hope (if there were even a snowball's chance in hell of it happening), that if the country breaks up, it would be on that model.
I also think both letters are extremely telling, in that neither side is in favor of free trade, and the only reason it's tolerated is because the Constitution prohibits internal tariffs.
That's true. But, once they get in office, they're all the same. The politicians aren't really on different sides, they all have the same goal. The reason they "pretend" to have different ideologies is because as long as we're fighting each other, we aren't looking close enough at what they are doing.