So you agree with the author of the article, that Jim Robinson should stake out certain set FR viewpoints on certain issues.
Diversity? I see no strength in a group of "conservative" people with a varity of different opinions or views on a specific issue.
You don't think a variety of viewpoints, backgrounds, faiths, expertise, interests and passions is good for ideas to the solutions for problems? Have you ever noticed the makeup of think tanks? Groupthink with tunnel vision, the start and end of which is limited to the sides of a finite box, does not a viable solution make.
I have always believed that like minded individuals get things done. While the diverse crowd are all giving their different views and opinions, the crises destroys them and their country. I don't buy into the diversity thing.
Your second sentence describes the conditions under which this country has always faces crises. Those crises haven't destroyed us yet. The way human beings work is to fight among themselves until a generally approved solution begins to form. That's the way it was, the way it is and the way it will always be. The ideal you describe held sway in the late Soviet Union, and they crashed.
I agree with you on the imigration disaster. Not only am I about drastically stopping illegal immigration, I'm about stopping legal immigration for a span of years to the population stabilize.
And, like I mentioned, a generally approved solution to stop it is currently forming. It may not be fast enough, because that group of likeminded individuals you mentioned started the loose immigration policies on purpose years ago and are still like minded in forcing it to its third world conclusion now.
But, the rant is about FreeRepublic. FR is nowhere near making national policy, except that policy makers read it for the diversity of ideas. It may be reasonable to speculate that if Jim were to set up set FR policies, those very folks would stop reading it.
So you agree with the author of the article, that Jim Robinson should stake out certain set FR viewpoints on certain issues. Yes I agree with the author. And it's to late, as the FR already takes positions on certain issues, like rolling back decades of govenment largesse.
You don't think a variety of viewpoints, backgrounds, faiths, expertise, interests and passions is good for ideas to the solutions for problems? Have you ever noticed the makeup of think tanks? Groupthink with tunnel vision, the start and end of which is limited to the sides of a finite box, does not a viable solution make.</>
When if comes to politics, view points are fine. But that has been clouded by hundreds with special interest viewpoints, where many have now put thier special interest before our country and constitution.
Your second sentence describes the conditions under which this country has always faces crises. Those crises haven't destroyed us yet. The way human beings work is to fight among themselves until a generally approved solution begins to form.
The problem is that half the country is quietly asleep or watching soccer games, and are quite content.
That's the way it was, the way it is and the way it will always be. The ideal you describe held sway in the late Soviet Union, and they crashed.
Yes they did, and so can we.
I agree with you on the imigration disaster. Not only am I about drastically stopping illegal immigration, I'm about stopping legal immigration for a span of years to the population stabilize.
I agree.
And, like I mentioned, a generally approved solution to stop it is currently forming.
And what is that?
It may not be fast enough, because that group of likeminded individuals you mentioned started the loose immigration policies on purpose years ago and are still like minded in forcing it to its third world conclusion now.
Yes, there are usually two sides to every story. That group was wrong, as were the Soviets that you mentioned.
But, the rant is about FreeRepublic. FR is nowhere near making national policy, except that policy makers read it for the diversity of ideas.
That's speculation on your part. They may read it for laughs too. And that's speculation on my part.
It may be reasonable to speculate that if Jim were to set up set FR policies, those very folks would stop reading it.
It may also be unreasonable to think that. As many from the socialist left and policy makers, already believe, and for good reason, that the FR stands to the right of them. It's no secret.
I have never frowned upon any one or any group for standing up for what it believes, and putting it in writing.
Do you really feel that if Jim Robinson announced how he felt, or what his position was on five specific issues, that the roof would come crashing down? What is the real fear here?
Again, different views and diversity are fine to a certain extent, but unfortunatly all this diversity has been clouded by mountains of special interest, that put these interest before our country and our people.