+5

You do understand we need both: a conservative party that seeks stability and retribution; and progressive party that seeks change and redemption. Without both we condense into autocracy or dissolve into anarchy. Each party takes its turn and leads into the future. Today we seek retribution, tomorrow we seek redemption, and America succeeds only when our citizens are diligent to ensure that each player takes a turn.

So I guess I should take a minute to define what I mean by: Retribution and Redemption. Maybe not the best word choices. By retribution I mean redress, fixing what went wrong by undoing it and going back to the old way of doing things. By redemption I mean restitution, fixing what went wrong by providing future relief.

67%Agree33%Disagree
VicZincs avatar
Share
8 27

I'm a middle kind of girl. I see the positive side in the political parties in my country, which is why I'm a moderate. I believe both are necessary to live in a democracy, not just one.

Sofias avatar Sofia Agree +4Reply

We need balance and intellegence. Without checks and balances we ARE doomed.

Carlas avatar Carla Agree +3Reply

Yes, Vic, we do need both.

Prolonged one-party rule leads first to corruption, then to disaster.

Your definition of the parties are incorrect! Republicans aren't looking for retribution. We're looking for smaller, less intrusive government, lower taxes, stronger military, Constitutional principles, a judicial system that doesn't write law from the bench.

Progressives can defend themselves here. The soon to be dispatched progressive administration has so damaged the democrat party, it may be a generation or more for it to recover. Perhaps that is Obama's legacy.

Budwicks avatar Budwick Disagree +1Reply
@Budwick Your definition of the parties are incorrect! Republicans aren't looking for retribution. We're looking for...

You would know.

Sounds like you are happy with everything that transpired the last 8 years and won't seek to punish anyone involved. No need for retribution, just move forward.

@VicZinc You would know. Sounds like you are happy with everything that transpired the last 8 years and won't seek to...

Sounds like I'm happy with the last 8 years? Your self imposed ignorance is astounding.

Budwicks avatar Budwick Disagree 0Reply
@Budwick Sounds like I'm happy with the last 8 years? Your self imposed ignorance is astounding.

So you are not happy? I guess you want to assign blame and restore (retribute) the system.

@VicZinc So you are not happy? I guess you want to assign blame and restore (retribute) the system.

Again, Your self imposed ignorance is astounding.

Your definition of the parties are incorrect! Republicans aren't looking for retribution. We're looking for smaller, less intrusive government, lower taxes, stronger military, Constitutional principles, a judicial system that doesn't write law from the bench.

Budwicks avatar Budwick Disagree 0Reply
@Budwick Again, Your self imposed ignorance is astounding. Your definition of the parties are incorrect! Republicans...

Glad to hear that.

So the conservative party doesn't want stability and doesn't want retribution. Check.

No need to go after evil doers. Check.

@VicZinc Glad to hear that. So the conservative party doesn't want stability and doesn't want retribution. Check. No need...

Stability is one of the many benefits derived from conservative policy.

Law enforcement takes care of evil doers. Maybe that's what you're getting at with your obsession with retribution.

Budwicks avatar Budwick Disagree 0Reply
@Budwick Stability is one of the many benefits derived from conservative policy. Law enforcement takes care of evil...

Hardly an obsession, just an observation, one that apparently rubbed you the wrong way.

@VicZinc Hardly an obsession, just an observation, one that apparently rubbed you the wrong way.

Not at all Vic. It's just that hooking the retribution wagon up to republicans is so phucking stupid - I was hoping to keep you from making a fool of yourself.

Unfortunately, you got out ahead of me on this one.

Budwicks avatar Budwick Disagree 0Reply

I take a spiritual attitude. God commanded His people not to create a central government. There have been empires with no central government and they all did very well. After they created one, they collapsed or were conquered.

How about more than two...? Or would that be too diversive?

And thank you for not writing a novella on post topic.

@VicZinc Two is all. More is ok

Are you mad? Impatient? Am I driving you crazy?

Good. My work here is done. Lol...

@Sukiesnow Are you mad? Impatient? Am I driving you crazy? Good. My work here is done. Lol...

Not at all.

The number is not really important, it is the pull of opposites that makes it work.

@VicZinc Not at all. The number is not really important, it is the pull of opposites that makes it work.

So...3 is a good number in our family. I have sisters with 3 children. It seems to work extremely well. Okay...parts were awkward.

But still. Even when they were "Mistakes" the third party (accidental) completed the Family.

Comment?

Nope. We do not need "retribution", especially when our own citizens will be murdered.

Trishs avatar Trish Disagree 0Reply
Anonymous