Why Ultra-Conservatives Like the Sequester

[nadinbrzezinski]

So for them the sequester is not a "self-inflicted wound." It is justice. The sequester is not merely about protecting "special interests." It is about the good people who pursued their self-interest successfully, got rich, and have acted "morally" in avoiding taxes that pay for public provisions by the government.

They are not merely trying to harm their own constituents just to hurt the president politically. Yes, they think hurting the president politically is moral, and they believe that any constituents they are hurting need to become more personally responsible. They see the sequester as serving that purpose.

In short, the sequester is not just about money and political power for the Republicans in the House. It is mostly about what they see as the right direction for the country: maximal elimination of the public sphere.

In short, they have an ideology that partially, but only partially, fits what half of our population believes. Overall, it actually fits what about 20 to 30 percent of the population totally believes. Both total progressives and partial progressives don't want to see millions of folks hurt and the economy hurt as well. But thanks to Republican gerrymandering at the state level, progressives and partial progressives do not control Congress.

http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/279-82/16223-why-ultra-conservatives-like-the-sequester

This is so critical to understand. The whole article should be read as well.

[part man all 86]

1. Evil is as evil does and ultra con artists are some of the most despicable animals on the planet.

[nadinbrzezinski]

3. It is not evil, though I s'pose for hard core rightist

You and I are ammoral, so there s that.

What you call evil is a very different center in seeing the world, that s IMHO 180% of where you and I want to take the country to, and the future.

[freshwest]

2. Thanks. This is what I keep saying. They're not stupid, not ignorant, not crazy.

They won't be hurt by the Sequester, instead they will profit from it. And have been working on it or something like it for decades. Democrats, liberals and progressives keep on trashing each other over what they consider noble ideas.

We are face to face with millions who could care less. We fail to unite so they overwhelm us, again and again. As one of our European members explained how the Nazis took over Germany.

The non-fascists all argued with each other and wouldn't form a coalition so the Nazis took over legally. This is what is happening here, yet we won't unite. It's serious with those who are working to privatize and destroy the last vestiges of the social democracy we enjoyed for years.

Many will not survive in the next few decades if we don't work with the imperfect to push back. But those who are so bitterly divided now will not shed a tear when it happens because of hatred. At least that is the most negative path. We can do better than allow this to happen.

[nadinbrzezinski]

4. Oh they will be hurt.

But the argument made by Lakoff is one of personal values. The are simply 180 from yours.

[reformist2]

5. Prez Obama is doing a good job splitting ultra-crazies from pragmatic Repugs who like some gov't.

Once the Prez. breaks the Repugs in two, they're done.

[freshwest]

8. Yes, he's been very clear all along for whoever is willing to listen longer than a soundbite.

[JaneyVee]

6. Because they are masochists who vote for sadists.

[nadinbrzezinski]

7. Wrong...and this is part of the problem

If you are to change how this works you need to know thy enemy, understand it.

Lakoff goes a long way. Ann Ryan has nothing on the morality view of these people. To them all this s justice.

Why I know there is really no way to find common ground. So the choice is how you disarm them in the public sphere, which incidentally they see as amoral, the way it's evolved.

Name calling does not help, understanding, so you can get voters on your side, is. Understanding so you can disarm the language, is critical.

[freshwest]

9. ^^^This^^^