Posted on 11/02/2013 9:02:45 AM PDT by Republicanprofessor
1) Social media: Recently I made some pretty strong political posts on Facebook about Benghazi. Then I felt badly and was afraid to check FB in fear of what responses I would find. Why did I feel that way? My liberal friends post their memes all the time, but the conservatives are shy about expressing their opinions. We are bothered by what people will think. But why is this the case? If they are truly our “friends” on Facebook, we should be able to post what we really think and feel, right? We read our friends’ posts and even appreciate their notes about their pet issues and projects, their families and even the difficulties they have overcome in their lives.
It has been said that small minds talk about people, others talk about events and still others talk about ideas. I post about a variety of things: skiing, sunsets, teaching issues, books, travel and politics. I think that social media is the place to exchange all kinds of ideas, and we see everything on social media; funny events and family pictures and celebrity scandals all over our Facebook pages, whether we subscribe to them or not. It is certainly wonderful to begin, rekindle and maintain connections with friends old and new, to see their families grow, marry and create grandchildren. But as I tell my husband (who always complains about the emptiness of Facebook), you create your own page and your contacts with your friends. If you find the content to be dull, find more enlightened friends.
2) Political posts: can they change people’s minds? So, why is it tricky to post about politics? I think the internet has made it easier to find all kinds of angles on any event that you wish to follow, some legitimate and some fabricated. And if we read our articles or blogs only from our favorite political side, it is easy to get revved up and to post articles and memes that echo our political fervor. I much prefer posting articles to memes since one can answer and debate these ideas within articles, while memes are thrust into one’s face to propagandize, not to critically analyze.
Obama is the first president elected with internet expertise. He definitely knows how to campaign. But he is also the first president wherein the internet could be his undoing. He may tap reporter’s phones, the NSA may tap other phones and track emails, and the IRS may punish those on the wrong political side, but the internet continues to counter his statements with facts and stories that dispute the statements made by his administration. Those who fight the corruption and cronyism of his administration will not give up, just as those who disagreed with the Bush administration keep up their criticism even to the present day.
There are some issues wherein one can reasonably debate both sides: immigration is one of these and one which, I admit, I have not been closely following. But then it gets to the point where actions are either right or wrong, and sometimes one can become trapped on the “wrong” side without realizing it. For me, the president’s actions before, during and following the Benghazi attack are wrong on every level. But my liberal friends still defend him. How difficult is it to just admit that, with more information, that one’s former support of one side seems to have been the wrong thing to do, even if in doing so one is deviating from the party line? Is that even possible, or do people just blindly follow the talking points of their party without critically analyzing the events and facts? Does the internet make it easier or more difficult to change sides, to thus align our politics with our innermost values? Or do our political alliances limit us to being tied to a political party regardless of what turns out to be right or wrong? I would encourage my liberal and Democratic friends to seriously re-evaluate their support of Obama, who is not turning out to be quite the “hope and change” president they expected. How many scandals does it take to outrage the Democrats enough for them to pull support from their president, or do the ends always justify the means? It should be acceptable to change your allegiance to Obama. If the president has the military shoot citizens in an attempted coup to become dictator, would Democrats finally change their support for him then?
3) Too much stress upon “winners” and “losers?” Right or wrong, win or lose. It also occurred to me recently that perhaps our society places too much important upon “winning” and “losing” in our lives and in our politics. Ours is, or was, a competitive society where the strong survive. As I write, the Red Sox parade is occurring in Boston. Hurray for them. We live in New England, but we are barely aware of organized sports, since wins and losses (exciting as they are) are often transient, here today and gone to a different team tomorrow.
But with the recent government shutdown, it seemed that what mattered most to those in Congress and the media was who “won” the shutdown so they could blame the other party and thus benefit from their distress. Facts, purposes, rebellions did not matter. The media, already leaning toward one major party, distorted the sources of the shutdown in order to damage the other party as much as possible. If you repeat a lie often enough, people buy it as the truth. “Obama won, the Republicans lost.” Only after the mean and “racist” Republicans caved on defunding Obamacare did the Democrats begin to waiver in their support for the disastrous ACA. No credit given to the courage of those who stood for their principles. No, destroy them, and then we’ll change our minds and change the media’s approach and all will be well again.
Then you also have the loss of civility. If it is all about who wins and who loses, then you can call the losers or even those with whom you disagree any names you want. The political parties become bullies and the polarization between them becomes unworkable. Consider the names that Democrats called Republicans: racist, unhinged, legislative arsonists, people with “a bomb strapped to their chest”, blatant extortionists, hostage takers, and worse. Democrat rarely debate the facts of the issues. They desecrated Romney’s character over the summer of 2012, calling him a liar again and again. I could never discern what specific lie they were referring to. No matter about the specifics, if we call them enough names, they will lose their credibility.
The problem then is trying to work with those whose reputations you have ruined. The American public decries the loss of civility, but we love the competition (imbedded in our society) that leads to “winners” and “losers.” We complain that Congress does not work together to solve the issues of the day (deficits, unemployment, staggering taxes and debt), but would you want to work with the people who had just called you a liar and a racist? I have heard that if it is difficult to work with someone, you should look in the mirror yourself and find who is to blame.
4) Working together to solve problems: Wouldn’t it be more productive if, instead of blaming the others and calling them names, our political leaders would actually meet together and openly exchange ideas and work toward a solution? The solutions do not have to reside in either one party or the other; there must be many ideas that could be aired and brainstormed with others to find solutions that could be great but which have not occurred to anyone yet. Could the politicians let down their defensive barriers and group think paralysis long enough to solve these issues? Could they actually think of the good of the country instead of their own seats and the pork projects for their districts?
Here are two ideas for beginning this process or cooperation and reducing the national debt: my dream, admittedly naïve as it is, would be to ensure that each congressman and senator eliminated at least one pork barrel project in their district, thus saving tax paying dollars for everyone and reducing the debt. We could also institute a 10% cut across the entire national budget as the first step in reducing that national debt. My hope would be that good managers could eliminate what must be at least 10% of waste across the board. Politicians would meet and consider the best solutions to the problems apart from their own district’s benefit. They would be receptive to facts and ideas on the other side of the aisle, because neither side has a monopoly on truth. And they would be guided by facts, not feelings. Much of the best intentioned legislation has turned out to be a disaster because it was not thought-through carefully enough. Politicians should be free to admit their errors and work toward a solution. It should not be too hard. They are adults, are they not?
Perhaps if the people of the U.S. become fed-up enough, they will indeed elect a new set of representatives and a new third of the Senate. Perhaps we need a new crowd of fresh faces to begin the respect, courage, honesty and hard work that should characterize our political parties as well as the nation itself. Ours is a particularly unique nation and it should be able to recover from the intense hatred and dysfunction that this partisanship has created.
Nov. 2, 2013
Excellent question. I’ll be using this in the future.
I post political cartoons and links to interesting articles on MY FB page ALL the time.
Yes, I have been “un-friended” by acquaintances and family members!
My own sister found my posts “repugnant” and demanded that I not post such information because it appeared on her news feed. I informed her that I will continue to post what I choose on MY OWN PAGE and she could choose to read them or not - that’s when she deleted her FB account Wah-wah.
I have a meme that I post from time to time on FB.
It says, “I don’t post political memes to convince those who disagree with me. I post them so those that agree with me know they are not alone.”
The Left is lost. I had 2 people message me after the 2012 elections and tell me that my opinion about the election was “over the top” and “harsh.” One of the things I said is my tagline. One person completely left FB (and I think I was the reason for her departure). I blocked the other one - our friendship is no longer what it once was.
After the 2012 election, I culled my FB list. Libs are out. When it all hits the fan, I don’t need them in my life. Things are going to get bad enough without those dead weights. And since they are directly responsible for electing the instruments of our destruction, it’s just better for my mental health not to see or hear them.
I often wish FR had a “like” button, because I would use it on your post!
I post links often on FB and many of my links come from FR. Some of my family and friends are liberal and they post from that slant. If I find something they post offensive I can remove from my feed.
One time I dropped someone from FB was because the husband of a niece posted something so offensive to my Christian faith that it was required as a matter of personal dignity and as an example to my teens/young adults of what should not be tolerated. I ended up also deleting my niece for about a year or two until she and her husband became a little more tolerant and sensitive to our family values. I didn’t ask my kids to do likewise as they needed to think through this ‘lesson’ but I did explain why I did it.
These values were the same ones she was raised with before her divorce and remarriage. Basically I stood my moral ground. By doing so I know I have encouraged other friends to also post from a conservative and republican standpoint and this perspective is very important for the younger people to read.
nope
You have my condolences. I remember living behind enemy lines, but it's been so long ago that I hardly remember what that's like.
In my personal life, I'm my own man. I own a business, so I'm not forced to work alongside people I have fundamental disagreements with, for the sake of my very survival.
I don't create personal associations with those who are opposed to the Framer's vision of America. I may work for liberals from time to time, but it's all business, and I don't have to suffer their idiotic world views.
“I don’t post political memes to convince those who disagree with me. I post them so those that agree with me know they are not alone.”
May I have permission to use your comment on my FB page? I LIKE it!
No problem. Feel free to disseminate widely. :D
If they will watch it, learn and not flip out against you there is hope for them. They truly just aren't informed and may welcome an explanation and new understanding of why certain things have happened in our country.
If they get angry then there wouldn't be much point in anything else. They are committed Marxist/socialist/liberals and will not ever be convinced.
(I believe there is a spiritual problem that causes Marxist/liberals to be blind to the truth, and until that spiritual problem is corrected they CANNOT see the truth... JMHO)
Frequently and falsely attributed (by liberals) to Eleanor Roosevelt. Who said it? I remember my dad teaching that us to us as kids and have always remembered it with fondness. He despised Roosevelt so doubt he would have quoted Eleanor Roosevelt unless unknowingly, but he never mentioned where he heard it.
The only way to solve the national debt is to limit spending to a percentage of our gross incomes or the GDP. Say 10%.
I’m so glad you posted this. In regards to what my liberal friends and acquaintances post, I find myself seeing at least a small percentage of them in a very different light - a light which I do not like at all. It’s disheartening, as these are people I’ve known for a great many years. I don’t want to see them essentially for who they are (and my take is far from the tolerant benevolence with which they see themselves), because it’s unhealthy for me to have toxicity in my life from my circle of friends.
>There is reverse McCarthy-ism out there, no doubt.<
Oh, yes, yes there is. There is much talk of lynch mobs by the other side, yet while we might gripe about them, they actively wish for “those Tea Party racists” to come to great harm.
Friends are NOT friends on FB. I’ve learned that the hard way!
It can be an unpleasant shock.
When I post something the slightest bit controversial I always preface it with "I could be wrong but......." and end it with "......IMHO, of course."
Social media is useful to separate the true progressives from the Dem Talking Points crowd who will contort themselves to defend Obama. True progressives will call Obama out on stuff like war, NSA snooping. At least they are not hypocrits.
I can’t stand it today!! The libs are posting about the Benghazi Hoax book, and the lies and sloppy thinking in the articles about the book and their posts are driving me crazy.
I guess I should realize how desperate they are all becoming to believe, and even publish, such crap.
Thanks for letting me vent!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.