PDA

View Full Version : Angri-Culture



Nienna
04-16-2007, 02:58 PM
This is what politics has boiled down to in modern culture: Anger. Whatever your religious persuasion, I would think we could all agree that leaving the anger out and bringing in self-control would lead to more productive political discussions.

http://www.breakpoint.org/listingarticle.asp?ID=6376

Dilloduck
04-16-2007, 03:13 PM
This is what politics has boiled down to in modern culture: Anger. Whatever your religious persuasion, I would think we could all agree that leaving the anger out and bringing in self-control would lead to more productive political discussions.

http://www.breakpoint.org/listingarticle.asp?ID=6376


Pretty much sums it up ! :clap:

Gaffer
04-16-2007, 03:24 PM
For this you can expect to be attacked. But it's an interesting find.

glockmail
04-16-2007, 04:28 PM
This is what politics has boiled down to in modern culture: Anger. .... So why do you think that is? I've got my theory.

Nuc
04-16-2007, 04:37 PM
That article is spot on. The reasons for the epidemic of anger are the outsourcing of jobs, unresolved (and unresolvable) racial issues, overcrowding, demise of the industrial base, bad infrastructure leading to traffic and poor living conditions and a stupid media. :pee: :salute:

Mr. P
04-16-2007, 04:40 PM
So why do you think that is? I've got my theory.

I haven't seen the link yet but I'll say; because the angered person has no valid or defendable position, the only recourse is anger. I'm I right?

glockmail
04-16-2007, 04:44 PM
That article is spot on. The reasons for the epidemic of anger are the outsourcing of jobs, unresolved (and unresolvable) racial issues, overcrowding, demise of the industrial base, bad infrastructure leading to traffic and poor living conditions and a stupid media. :pee: :salute:
I disagree. This all started during the Clinton Presidency, and Hillary's policy of personal destruction. The Republicans had to impeach the guy for lying, which really pissed of the far Left. Then Bush beat Gore at the polls, and the Democrats all cried foul. MoveOn.org was born. Then Bush beat Kerry, and the Dems once again cried foul. The Democrats haven't been this pissed off since they tried to secede, causing the Civil War. Now they don't have any guns so are stuck with us.

This can thus be traced all back to Hillary Clinton. And she wants to be President.

glockmail
04-16-2007, 04:45 PM
I haven't seen the link yet but I'll say; because the angered person has no valid or defendable position, the only recourse is anger. I'm I right? Basically.

manu1959
04-16-2007, 04:45 PM
given who i encounter every day...i would say the vocal minority is angry....

Nuc
04-16-2007, 04:56 PM
I disagree. This all started during the Clinton Presidency, and Hillary's policy of personal destruction. The Republicans had to impeach the guy for lying, which really pissed of the far Left. Then Bush beat Gore at the polls, and the Democrats all cried foul. MoveOn.org was born. Then Bush beat Kerry, and the Dems once again cried foul. The Democrats haven't been this pissed off since they tried to secede, causing the Civil War. Now they don't have any guns so are stuck with us.

This can thus be traced all back to Hillary Clinton. And she wants to be President.

Blaming Hillary (who I dislike) for the anger in America is simplistic and shows a lack of history.

Nuc
04-16-2007, 04:58 PM
given who i encounter every day...i would say the vocal minority is angry....

Most of the people on this board belong to the majority and there's plenty of anger here all the time. I think all segments of American society are angry. So FUCK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!:fu: :finger3: :fu: :pee: :slap:

Abbey Marie
04-16-2007, 05:25 PM
We have arrived at a point where people mistake kindness for weakness.

Dilloduck
04-16-2007, 05:40 PM
We have arrived at a point where people mistake kindness for weakness.

That and people are just scared to death about what they sense is going to happen IF _________.

Nienna
04-16-2007, 06:14 PM
I think it is part of a broader cultural phenomenon. I see it everywhere, not JUST in politics, even the way kids talk to their friends. Rudeness is in; consideration and politeness are out. It's part of the "ME" mindset, in which people more & more believe the entire world revolves around them personally, and they have no obligation to even pretend to consider another's point of view.

Abbey Marie
04-16-2007, 06:16 PM
I think it is part of a broader cultural phenomenon. I see it everywhere, not JUST in politics, even the way kids talk to their friends. Rudeness is in; consideration and politeness are out. It's part of the "ME" mindset, in which people more & more believe the entire world revolves around them personally, and they have no obligation to even pretend to consider another's point of view.

Do you think it is more prevalent in certain parts of the country?

Nienna
04-16-2007, 06:19 PM
Do you think it is more prevalent in certain parts of the country?


LOL! I would have no way of knowing, since I don't get out much! ;)

But maybe others have a perspective on this. Although, I do have to say, on my travels to the suburbs, it seems like, the closer you get to the cities, the ruder & more selfish people get. Just my observation.

Abbey Marie
04-16-2007, 06:23 PM
LOL! I would have no way of knowing, since I don't get out much! ;)

But maybe others have a perspective on this. Although, I do have to say, on my travels to the suburbs, it seems like, the closer you get to the cities, the ruder & more selfish people get. Just my observation.

It's easier to seem rude in the city, since the pace is quicker, and everyone is hurrying somewhere. Also vying for cabs, limited seats on the subway, etc. I was thinking more north vs. south, east vs. west.

I don't get to visit the south much, but it had a rep for being more polite.

A dear friend of mine swears the NE is the rudest part of the country.

glockmail
04-16-2007, 08:11 PM
Blaming Hillary (who I dislike) for the anger in America is simplistic and shows a lack of history.
Except I gave you a logical train of reason that you ignore.

glockmail
04-16-2007, 08:12 PM
LOL! I would have no way of knowing, since I don't get out much! ;)

But maybe others have a perspective on this. Although, I do have to say, on my travels to the suburbs, it seems like, the closer you get to the cities, the ruder & more selfish people get. Just my observation. The closer you get to the city, the more Democrats. Suppose there is a correlation?

Hugh Lincoln
04-16-2007, 08:33 PM
That article is spot on. The reasons for the epidemic of anger are the outsourcing of jobs, unresolved (and unresolvable) racial issues, overcrowding, demise of the industrial base, bad infrastructure leading to traffic and poor living conditions and a stupid media. :pee: :salute:

Spot on! I can't think of much you missed.


It's easier to seem rude in the city, since the pace is quicker, and everyone is hurrying somewhere. Also vying for cabs, limited seats on the subway, etc. I was thinking more north vs. south, east vs. west.

I don't get to visit the south much, but it had a rep for being more polite.

A dear friend of mine swears the NE is the rudest part of the country.


Sure, lived in NYC seven years, it's pretty frickin' brutal. I think so much of it has to do with the fact that under the Diversity Dictatorship, nobody can understand anyone else and lots of mistrust builds. I mean, walk into any store these days, and nobody speaks English! Call the "help line," and it's India! Walk up to the black lady behind the counter, and she shoots hate darts at you with her eyes. Who's out walking around? Not white folks anymore, just tons of scrunchy little Hispanics all chattering away in Spanish. How's this make us feel more comfortable? It's like we're aliens in our own land.

Nuc
04-17-2007, 03:05 AM
Except I gave you a logical train of reason that you ignore.

Well Hillary may cause a lot of anger in America, but it's just silly to say she causes all of it or most of it. Bush causes more anger than Hillary. The roots of most of the anger in America go back WAAAAAAAAY before Hillary.

avatar4321
04-17-2007, 03:21 AM
So why do you think that is? I've got my theory.

Because there are certain political activists that make money of making sure people are angry at each other. They are trying to divide the country against each other. Otherwise they would lose power and money.

avatar4321
04-17-2007, 03:22 AM
I disagree. This all started during the Clinton Presidency, and Hillary's policy of personal destruction. The Republicans had to impeach the guy for lying, which really pissed of the far Left. Then Bush beat Gore at the polls, and the Democrats all cried foul. MoveOn.org was born. Then Bush beat Kerry, and the Dems once again cried foul. The Democrats haven't been this pissed off since they tried to secede, causing the Civil War. Now they don't have any guns so are stuck with us.

This can thus be traced all back to Hillary Clinton. And she wants to be President.

Glock, this started long before that.

glockmail
04-17-2007, 10:29 AM
Well Hillary may cause a lot of anger in America, but it's just silly to say she causes all of it or most of it. Bush causes more anger than Hillary. The roots of most of the anger in America go back WAAAAAAAAY before Hillary. Bush causes anger among Libs because their policy personal destruction, popularized by Hillary, hasn't been able to touch him. It ain't Bush's fault, it's Clinton's.

glockmail
04-17-2007, 10:31 AM
Because there are certain political activists that make money of making sure people are angry at each other. They are trying to divide the country against each other. Otherwise they would lose power and money.

Good theory. No doubt accounts for some of it.


Glock, this started long before that.

But Hillary popularized the policy of personal destruction in contemporary times. I choose to blame her.

Birdzeye
04-17-2007, 11:00 AM
Well Hillary may cause a lot of anger in America, but it's just silly to say she causes all of it or most of it. Bush causes more anger than Hillary. The roots of most of the anger in America go back WAAAAAAAAY before Hillary.

Agreed. I was a college student during the Vietnam war, and the kids were mighty angry about that war. And that was pre-Hillary.

Birdzeye
04-17-2007, 11:08 AM
I've been on this planet long enough to have figured out - at least intellectually - that it's not the being angry that's a problem; it's how you deal with it.

It's understandable that people get angry over things. When you are cheated, ripped off, treated badly, etc., anger is a normal reaction. You can wallow in that anger and hurt yourself, or you can find a way of dealing with it constructively. It's easier said than done.

Politicians and political activists, however, are always trying to manipulate us for their own ends. Sometimes it's in their best interests to have us angry, and they'll do everything they can to nurture that anger.

glockmail
04-17-2007, 11:35 AM
Agreed. I was a college student during the Vietnam war, and the kids were mighty angry about that war. And that was pre-Hillary. But they didn't have the money of George Soros or the influence of the Liberal media.

Gaffer
04-17-2007, 11:37 AM
But they didn't have the money of George Soros or the influence of the Liberal media.

It was the liberal media that stirred them up to begin with. The liberal media has been controling the anger since the 60's.

Birdzeye
04-17-2007, 11:42 AM
But they didn't have the money of George Soros or the influence of the Liberal media.


It was the liberal media that stirred them up to begin with. The liberal media has been controling the anger since the 60's.

I'm trying reeeeeeeely hard not to get angry right now. :coffee:

glockmail
04-17-2007, 11:46 AM
It was the liberal media that stirred them up to begin with. The liberal media has been controling the anger since the 60's. Sure, but back then you didn't have the anger in the political arena. Enter Hillary Clinton. And there was no deep pocket bent on destruction of Conservatism: enter George Soros. The fact that the media has not changed that much reinforces my assertion that Hillary is to blame.

glockmail
04-17-2007, 11:47 AM
I'm trying reeeeeeeely hard not to get angry right now. :coffee: I always find that taking my shotgun outside and blasting way at occupied bird's nests makes me feel calmer. :poke:

Gunny
04-17-2007, 11:51 AM
Agreed. I was a college student during the Vietnam war, and the kids were mighty angry about that war. And that was pre-Hillary.

You could have a valid point as far as the current wave of political anger is concerned. Political anger ebbs and flows. Aaron Burr kill Alexander Hamilton in a duel over political differences, and it has led to one Civil War.

The late 60's anti-authority counter-culture could very-well have laid the foundation for all the anger now. I'm trying to imagine how Watergate would have been handled if the current of past few Congresses handled it. IIRC, it was a criminal act that was handled in a professional manner. Of course, that's on the edge of my political awareness, so I could be off. But I don't remember the 3-ring circuses we've seen revolving around partisan accusations the past 25-30 years.

avatar4321
04-17-2007, 12:00 PM
You could have a valid point as far as the current wave of political anger is concerned. Political anger ebbs and flows. Aaron Burr kill Alexander Hamilton in a duel over political differences, and it has led to one Civil War.

The late 60's anti-authority counter-culture could very-well have laid the foundation for all the anger now. I'm trying to imagine how Watergate would have been handled if the current of past few Congresses handled it. IIRC, it was a criminal act that was handled in a professional manner. Of course, that's on the edge of my political awareness, so I could be off. But I don't remember the 3-ring circuses we've seen revolving around partisan accusations the past 25-30 years.

I agree. i largely blame the 60s counter culture movement. because it seems the anger starts mostly with them.

glockmail
04-17-2007, 12:09 PM
.... I'm trying to imagine how Watergate would have been handled if the current of past few Congresses handled it. ..... Watergate was no different than other more recent GOP screw ups, with the Dems and media pounding the issue to death. The difference is that Watergate was a real screw up and Nixon was a real crook. Now we have Hillary inspired Liberal frothing over incorrect testimony, all because she's a closet dyke, and her husband would rather have a fat chick then her.

Gaffer
04-17-2007, 12:10 PM
I agree. i largely blame the 60s counter culture movement. because it seems the anger starts mostly with them.

I do too, and soros is now financing them. He intends to be the top commie eventually.

Birdzeye
04-17-2007, 12:35 PM
I do too, and soros is now financing them. He intends to be the top commie eventually.

It's not like the righties don't have their own sugar daddy: Scaife practically bankrolled the whole get-Clinton campaign.

You want to talk about anger and hatred? Some people were (and apparently still are) so consumed by their hatred of Clinton that I wonder which pharmaceutical company is profiting from the sale of blood pressure medication to them.

Gunny
04-17-2007, 12:56 PM
Watergate was no different than other more recent GOP screw ups, with the Dems and media pounding the issue to death. The difference is that Watergate was a real screw up and Nixon was a real crook. Now we have Hillary inspired Liberal frothing over incorrect testimony, all because she's a closet dyke, and her husband would rather have a fat chick then her.

I don't really disagree that the liberals are witch hunting, but that's exactly what I saw of Monicagate. A phenominal waste of time, effort and money that accomplished nothing and deflected Congress's attention from real issues ... like doing its job.

I don't agree with either side doing this crap. I want the ones who have brains, regardless of party affiliation, to get their shit together and get back to the job of running this Nation and addressing the real issues that confront us instead of riding some political teeter-totter spending all their time attacking one another.

Baron Von Esslingen
04-17-2007, 02:11 PM
This is what politics has boiled down to in modern culture: Anger. Whatever your religious persuasion, I would think we could all agree that leaving the anger out and bringing in self-control would lead to more productive political discussions.

http://www.breakpoint.org/listingarticle.asp?ID=6376

"A bee in the mouth" indeed. Thank you for a great post.

glockmail
04-17-2007, 07:09 PM
I don't really disagree that the liberals are witch hunting, but that's exactly what I saw of Monicagate. A phenominal waste of time, effort and money that accomplished nothing and deflected Congress's attention from real issues ... like doing its job.

I don't agree with either side doing this crap. I want the ones who have brains, regardless of party affiliation, to get their shit together and get back to the job of running this Nation and addressing the real issues that confront us instead of riding some political teeter-totter spending all their time attacking one another. How quickly you forget that Clinton was investigated for a whole host of shenanigans. Monicagate had DNA evidence so Ken Starr went with that. Based on the tendancy for Congress to look the other way when a Democrat is involved I'd say it was his only choice.

Also I don't mind Congress sniping at each other. Its good clean fun and it keeps them out of my wallet and my business.