> The "shudras" IOW. However by being conservative they vote against > their own best interests. And at that not all of these kinds of > workers are conservatives either. Some just like to work with their > hands. You're right, but i'll have to interject that in all the manual labor type jobs i've had, the reliable laborers who can actually handle the work and carry the weight tend more towards conservative thinking from what i've seen. The people who show up late, hide when there's work to be done, don't pitch in with their co-workers, i've noticed they tend more towards blaming government and wall street for their problems more so than their counterparts who are too busy getting the work done.
I was watching Chris Mathews' special on the "new right" and a > lot of the "new right" has it wrong thinking that their best bet are the > Republicans. Why not just start some third parties instead? I'm all about 3rd parties. Unfortunately America is an egotistical society, and the ego follows titles, labels, and basically what is most popular, as opposed to wisdom or intelligence. It's going to take a few more generations of education and open-mindedness to pass through this phase. If that's too hard for people to live with then they need to learn that this life is only a lifetime among many thousands we will live in human form while we go through this cycle of birth and death. No need to make a big deal out of the temporary difficulties of making a living. No they > listen to Limbaugh, Beck and Hannity letting them do their thinking for > them. Mathews didn't have right either as I see nothing wrong with > shaking things up a bit and yes government has gotten too big and yes > the Constitution has been trampled on. Trouble is the teabaggers keep > going after government and not the people behind the curtain. Instead > of protest outside the White House they need to protest outside Wall > Street. I don't know enough about economics to make a statement on that. However I will say Wall Street never would've gotten where it is if it weren't for the igorance of Americans in the first place. We're the ones who fell for all that stupid mortgage bullshit in the 90's. We're the dumbasses who get charge cards at every department store (walmart, sears, target, etc...). We're the ones who purchase vehicles to impress others rather than get to work. But instead we want to blame Wall Street. We can't blame a drug dealer any more than we can blame the drug addict for failing to listen to the advice of their teachers and parents to not do drugs. Every religion in the world, whether you like religion or not, warns us of not becoming materially obsessed, but we just don't listen. My overall point here is that if you're going to be a weak human being, you're going to get exploited no matter what. If wall street doesn't exploit you, someone or something else will. > I see it more as tugging on the rope to pull it more into balance. > The right outnumbers the left but that has always been the case so the > left has to out-think the right. And the right fails to realize that a > "we" society includes everybody including the "me" folks. I don't know if the right outnumbers the left. It definitely does in the midwest (Iowa, Nebraska, Idaho, Utah, etc...). But the really high population areas are tending more towards liberal thinking, like California, New York, and most other states with high populations. Since 1992 when Clinton was elected it's been that way. I don't count GWB's terms as president being due to conservative voting. That's because Clinton pissed everyone off with his Monica Lewinsky case, and also GWB barely won his election anyway. If it weren't for Clinton's shindigs, Al Gore would've been president. The only reason John Kerry didn't defeat GWB is because Kerry has his foot permanently placed in his mouth. I think Obama was unstoppable this election simply because America is primarily liberal. I admit there are other factors of course though. > When I bought this house rents at apartments in the area had soared. > People were out hunting for houses because their rent payment was as > about as much as a house payment. Many were sold a rosy picture of the > future and that didn't happen. They sort of got swindled instead. > Somewhere on the old VCR and D-VHS tapes I have are probably finance ads > from the early 00's I ought to put together and post of YouTube to show > how the public was being swindled. And money hungry mortgage brokers > didn't help either. People were sold the notion of borrowing. Most > people I know underwater in their home is due to using their home on an > ATM. If they hadn't done that they probably wouldn't have had a problem > covering jus the mortgage payment. Again, I think this goes back to what I was saying earlier. If you're dumb enough to let someone else tell you how you can enjoy a super nice home, even though you clearly don't have a super nice income, you deserve what you get. I remember when I turned 18 my family tried to convince me to get a credit card, you know......to get things you wouldn't be able to get without one. I never got one till I was 27. I never understood the concept of enjoy now and pay later. My overall point all together is that the American "enjoy now, pay later" concept is what's destroying us, and it is the conservative natured people that actually have the strength to pay first and enjoy later. Also, don't confuse conservative natured with conservative in terms of politics or voting, there is a difference. seekliberation
