KMA-628

I would like to try something here regarding this alleged "common ground" so many of us refer to.

Where does this mysterious inhabitant live? Do we know? We talk about it, but do we really have any clue as to the areas that could be considered "common ground"?

In order to keep this discussion from going into left-field, I want to place some boundaries. Please try as hard as you can to stay within the boundaries.

I know that there a hundred different ways to describe ourselves, but to make it simple, let's stay with the generic "liberal" and "conservative" monikers. I know some of us want to sound eclectic and use fancy names to portray our positions, but in the long-run, most of us fall on one side or the other. So, to keep this from spiraling out of control, can we use these two terms?

Now, for many of us, we pretty much know where the others fall. I'll admit to being surprised every now and then, but for the most part, I think a lot of our positions are predictable.

My question is this:

Can you think of an area where you, for the most part, agree with the other side? Can you think of more than one? Or, are you so deeply entrenched in your own idealogies that there is absolutely nothing the other side can say or do that would appeal to you?

Are you willing to concede a little of your side and accept a little of the other side in order to actually find a solution to some of our problems, or is it more important to you to stand your ground and not give an inch? I'll admit, that on some issues, I feel that way as well. I am hoping, however, that by just finding a little bit of common ground, I may start the trend of looking for common ground (in myself at least). If you look for it, there is a good chance you can find it.

Basically, this is like the old pre-election thread, "say something nice about the other side's candidate", just not specific to a person's political beliefs, but rather the beliefs held by a side as a whole.

I'll start.

I am very conservative and I have no problems whatsoever associating myself with the Republican party, however:

1) I disagree with most Republicans on abortion. While I abhor abortion in principle, I do not agree with making it illegal. To me it is a cause-effect problem, with abortion being the effect. Rather than talk about doing away with abortion, I would rather see us do things that would make abortion irrelevant--in other words, deal with the cause, not the effect.

What I concede: As much as I hate abortion, I would concede to keeping it legal, as long as we work on ways of minimizing it.

How I benefit: Rather than fight about it, our combined efforts could significantly lower the amount of abortions that take place--that benefits all of us and would be much more effective than abortion protests and the like.

2) In regards to social programs, I do side with many Democrats in that some social programs are needed. However, like my abortion position, I think it is cause-effect as well. I would rather us work on ways to make social programs unnecessary rather than expand them and make them even more bloated. I think we spend too much time on the effect and, once again, ignore the cause.

What I concede: I would minimize my oppostion to social programs and "big government" in order to see us work together to make social programs and "big government" less needed in our society. In other words, I would agree to keeping/expanding some programs if given the chance to see some of my own programs implemented.

How I benefit: The hope would be that some ideas would work so well that the number of people recieving "social benefits" would decrease. Ultimately, we would all win. The liberals get to keep many of their programs and the conservatives would get the chance to see some of their programs have a chance to succeed. Right now, both sides fight so much that many plans and ideas never get a "real" chance to prosper (i.e. tax cuts--they have never been given a chance to actually create economic benefits because, in order for them to work, spending must be kept in check)

3) Universal healthcare. In many ways, I completely disagree with the very concept of Universal Healthcare, but, for one reason alone, I would consider it: Money. Our government has this nasty habit of thinking that throwing money at a problem helps solve it, healthcare is one such example. Our gov't spends more per person than any other country in the world, yet we still have millions of Americans uninsured--that makes no sense to me. If there was a healthcare plan proposed, that provided healthcare for all Americans, with no change in the quality of service, for less money than we are spending now, I would support it. Other countries do it, so I don't see why we can't. Hell, I would even agree with it if the proposed plan cost the same as we are paying per person now because we all know that per-person number will go up every year.

What I concede: My oppposition to universal healthcare which is founded in my deep-seated belief in private enterprise and non-government involvement.

How I benefit: Maybe nothing personally, but, if we can do it for less money than we spend per-person now, thana different goal of mine would be achieved. Meanwhile, liberals would get one of the things they have been asking for with great ferver.


Since we will never get anywhere by just pointing out how the other side is full o' shit (which I am guilty of as well), I thought this might give us a better understanding as to how we may be alike in many ways. Maybe the polarizing issues turn out to be less important than the ones we can find common ground.

Put a little effort into it and, who knows, we might all learn something.

And remember, you have to give up a little bit of ground to achieve common ground. Right now, we are all on opposite sides of the field pointing fingers at each other, getting nowhere. Unless we equally agree to give up a little, we won't be able to gain anything.

Side note: It would be interesting if we see themes emerge. Than take that theme and devote a specific thread to it and see if a "plan" could be developed that would have greater appeal than current "plans".

__________________
Before you criticize someone, you need to walk a mile in their shoes. That way, if they get angry at you.......you're a mile away.......and they're barefoot.