I'm not particularly fond of the OP picture. Partially because I'm not quite that jaded yet to think in "slaughterhouse" terms. More like used car
salesmen and loan-shark thuggery intermixed. I'm not at all surprised that some of the bitter opponents on the House & Senate floor are really good
friends and close comrades. After all, they are co-workers. Though I wouldn't quite liken them to pro-wrestlers (though the embarrassing circus
atmosphere - regardless of whether it comes from the capitol, from the media, or from the supporters of either political ideology). I see them more in
terms of boxers who step into the ring, fight it out, and then can have a few drinks together if their friends with no hard feelings. That's their
job to debate and struggle with each other... but just because there's a lot of hate between fundamentalist liberals and fundamentalist conservatives
in the public arena - doesn't necessarily mean that's how it is on the hill. Part of politics and debate is picking allies, doing favors, and
returning those favors... and some times, you need to cross the isle to get the support or concessions you need.
But to be honest... politics seems more to me today like religion than anything. You have fundamentalist ideologues moralizing issues in left or right
"saved or damned" terms regardless of the facts - treating non-believers as heathens - and both sides preaching the way to salvation for America.
I'd love to blame the Christian Right for this, and they do influence it quite a bit, but ultimately I think the full-on "crazy" first started with
the radical counter-culture movements of the Left in the 60's and early 70's. In many ways, it could be seen that the rise of the Christian Right
was a response to that counter-culture revolution... and we may be seeing a similar revival on the Conservative side this past decade.
And I think this is dangerous in politics... because that same fundamentalist moral trumpet which bleats the battle-hymn of the hardline loyalists on
either side to conflict invites a very subversive form of corrosion to our political process... and ultimately our freedoms and liberties. There's a
reason why the Constitution both explicitly protects the freedom of religion while stating that the government cannot pass any laws or take any action
which establishes religion. Not just for the obvious protection of personal religious choice - but more subtly to promote reason and discourse, rather
than hardline fundamentalist ideologies and their trail of unyielding stupidity which too often has a history of exciting passions and turning
violent. A congress of men can debate and chart the course for a nation. Fundamentalists merely polarize, demonize, and entrench themselves. Those
elected representatives in Washington have to pander to a public which is increasingly polarized and entrenched in their political ideologies. So I
wonder how much of the betrayal one feels when seeing their elected champion (heh) cavorting and palling around with the "enemy"?
And I also wonder... how close are we to having government taken over by the "Religions of Right & Left"? In the anthropological sense, obviously.
Shouldn't we be concerned? While not directly indicative, the parallels are easy to draw. For instance, many children grow up indoctrinated into and
adopting their parent's political affiliation without really making the conscious choice themselves. Political pundits such as Limbaugh and Olbermann
preach to their congregations on the evils of the competing ideology, demonizing (slander) them and prophesying (speculation) the doom of this world
(nation) and your souls (freedoms) if you vote for the heathens. They speak their sermons (opinions) with such confidence and fire that they rally the
believers (voters) to entrench their ideologies even further out of resistance to the threat of the loony liberals or crack-pot conservatives.
Salvation from hell is only a vote away!
There is an inherent danger is abandoning your reason and humanity in favor of ideological movement, moral high grounds, and accepting beliefs - be
they left, right, or off in conspiracy land. I don't think it's some overt plot to subvert the American people so much as, especially lately, it
seems more to be the case that the public uses their already pre-existing frameworks for morality and belief (often influenced by culture and
religion) - and apply them elsewhere in their lives... such as politics. And I feel that's a poor move, though not surprising, since most Americans
tend to claim they get their morality from their religion, and the more morally polarized the "left & right" become - the harder it will be to
overcome barriers and find middleground for compromise, reason, and a stable path forward.
But I don't know. I'm just musing here. But one thing is clear... there does seem to be a strong basis for a genetic and developmental first draft
of morality pre-wired into our brains which nature provides us in anticipation of refinement with experience. Just like how the visual cortex wires
itself up for processing visual stimuli prior to and in anticipation of experience. So there is a very good basis for suggesting that the core
morality of "liberal" and "conservative" and all points in-between are intrinsic in a way to our condition... as are the vague and permeable line
between them the individual can traverse and stride between with ease. Yet while not being determinant, they do predictably form trends when expressed
within large populations which emerge from a whole composed of independent individual minds and collections of experience.
In this context, I consider the OP illustration to be startlingly wrong. However, my most prominent dislike of it comes from the brutally and
insultingly small mindedness of it. Used to illustrate a point for parody out of frustration, perhaps it's suitable - but I don't feel it's
indicative of any greater truth. When I hear comments praising it for being "right on the money", I cringe a little. Taken as an insight indicative
of reality - it seems to me to be nothing more than a simple slogan for a simple mind. Reality isn't so simple.
In reality, I think University of Virginia social psychologist Jonathan Haidt is more or less on the right track (though it's fairly soft science,
mind you) in his analysis of the real difference between liberals and conservatives.
Abstract: People are selfish, yet morally motivated. Morality is universal, yet culturally variable. Such apparent contradictions are dissolving as
research from many disciplines converges on a few shared principles, including the importance of moral intuitions, the socially functional (rather
than truth-seeking) nature of moral thinking, and the coevolution of moral minds with cultural practices and institutions that create diverse moral
communities. I propose a fourth principle to guide future research: Morality is about more than harm and fairness. More research is needed on the
collective and religious parts of the moral domain, such as loyalty, authority, and spiritual purity.
Spot on. There is always a third side to a coin, but many only consider the two. And when the two sides of a ruling coin seek only power, they will
strip you of yours in order to justify their own. Much like, say a rehabilitation center referring to its patients as consumers on all brochures,
forms, posters on the wall, etc. A consumer is a mindless feeding machine. Pretty odd to label someone this way if you are trying to get them off
their feeding habits. But not odd at all if you are greedily justifying your own existence.
To stereotype in the interest of clarity, the left could be considered the worst aspects of womanhood, seeking to control absolutely everything in
order to be the queen bee, viewing all others as children. It desires to turn people into infants in order to justify its power. The drama of a
The right could be considered the worst aspects of manhood. Competition, but no sense of fairness. Ruthless domination. It is no fair game, but one
which seeks to feed the legacy alphas in a parasitic dynamic. The thing is, these are no true alphas at all, as they merely feed on an illusory,
deceptive social contract.
The third thing this makes can be personified as a megalomaniacal, androgynous goat masquerading as the divine. The bad shephard leading the sheep to
the slaughter. Men and women at war feeds this beast. The beast and the whore are a feedback loop circling around the center of this Baphomet-like
being. Men are ruthless beast to dominate a whore. Women are whores in order to make this beast an amusing pet. This dynamic is a ridiculous
downward spiral. This thing that existed deep in the minds of humanity is now dissolving into nothingness, as it weakens the more it is exposed.
Baphomet, what Baphomet? Why don't we just love each other. This AT (absolute terror) field is a lie sold by the exploiters.
Very good depiction of the ludicrousness of our supposedly democratic system of " Free Choice ".
Especially when our freedom of choice is limited only to those CFR sponsored and approved (spelled owned) Democrats and Republicans.
Andrew Jackson said in 1836 “If the American people only understood the rank injustice of our money and banking system – there would be a
revolution before morning”. This was said 173 years ago ! The unfortunate irony behind it is that we could wake up tomorrow morning and see it
Leonard E. Read, the founder of the Foundation for Economic Education in 1946, used to say that Americans live in a country in which various levels of
government extract over 40% of their productivity, yet they call this system freedom. "They don’t know the difference between freedom and
So, all in all , I do not pay much attention to national politics, or waste much time with it. Politics always reflects the understanding or the lack
thereof of the voters, and the voters cannot tell the difference between freedom and coercion. Worse: they are unwilling to surrender coercion for
Just look, for example at what the "Patriot Act" brought us as far as our freedoms are concerned.
I have been a strong opponent of the left/right bickering here at ATS as it is a waste of good internet bandwidth and server space for mere cyber mud
Especially here at ATS, who's motto is to "Deny Ignorance" , and where the perceived goal here is to learn and think for ourselves and not to
necessarily mindlessly buy, hook, line and sinker that, that the MSM is attempting to brainwash us with.
For example, several years ago...in 2005...
George Bush must have been delighted to learn from a recent Washington Post-ABC News poll that 56 percent of Americans still think Iraq had weapons of
mass destruction before the start of the war, while six in 10 said they believe Iraq provided direct support to the al-Qaida terrorist network —
notions that have long since been thoroughly debunked by everyone from the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee to both of Bush's handpicked weapons
inspectors, Charles Duelfer and David Kay.
This demonstrates the coercive nature of the MSM....as well as the dumbing down of Americans.
And in conclusion and Just to stir the conspiracy theory pot a bit, since this is a conspiracy website, in acase you didn't already know, Katie
Couric, the CBS evening news anchor is even a CFR member....
and who do you think she takes her orders from ??
Originally posted by Alaskan Man
ha i almost fell for the troll's
gotta love the edit button
Why are you claiming we are trolls? Because we disagree with you?
This is also a problem with some people. Just because we disagree doesn't mean we are trolls. this just shows you have no basis for your
EVERYONE has their political ideologies, and the so called "middle road' is not always the "truth" or "the road that will solve all
The Republican form of government the forefathers of this nation stated should be the only form of government guaranteed to every state is not exactly
what the REpublican party has been transformed too.
There have been too many people who were on the left side of politics and who have infiltrated the Republican party, and there are too many
Republicans in power who have succumbed to corruption, but this doesn't taint the Republican form of government which the forefathers of the United
States agreed should be the only one guaranteed to every state.
When in doubt return to your roots, instead of presenting some "leftist middle of the road idea" to be the one that will solve everything"...
This is the same empty promises that President Obama gave. Some people claim he is the same as Bush, and even though Pres Bush implemented some laws
which should have never been implemented it has been Obama, and his leftist administration who have implemented more Socialist programs than any other
U.S. president including Woodrow Wilson, the Democrat who signed away, and gave the future of our nation to the Socialist elite bankers.
Originally posted by CharlesMartel
The left side should have a conveyor belt, but otherwise it is pretty accurate.
The cartoon is kind gratuitous in its desire to receive all the praise from the entire political spectrum for its attempt to distill our
dissatisfaction with our government. But it actually doesn't make sense. I think it means to point out that Republicans and Democrats are,
politically, essentially the same (i.e., the machinations and output of the two parties are indistinguishable, many believe).
The left/right spectrum, though, is reality. People love to claim they're independent, but few are. You're either left or right ... you just are.
There are concrete issues with concrete standings that reveal this (like your view on government's core roles, abortion, social services, progressive
policies, etc.). Most people are ignorant of or lack interest in identifying the issues and how they feel on them in order to reveal to themselves
whether they are right or left. Instead they use family, friends and political TV/radio celebrities to tell them what they are. But right and left,
despite being indicated so in this cartoon, are definitely not identical.
I thought the above post was funny because it completely epitomizes the actual intent of the cartoon: to ridicule the relentlessness and baselessness
of D/R bickering. It's a fantasy.
This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.