I almost put this one into Philosophy and Debate

That's for sure! Some of the most caustic critics of the Left here have been people who once were very left-wing themselves ... Pim Fortuyn, former Marxist, comes to mind. The word "obsessive" does, too.

When I became old enough to register a political affiliation, I lived in West Texas where you weren't even asked: your registration was automatically stamped "Democrat". But then, by today's standards, Democrats were way further right than today's average Republican. Republicans then were viewed as the 'party of the country club crowd' where I definitely did not belong.

As a student of history, business, and politics however, over the years I came to see that many 'liberal' social policies sounded good on paper but had serious unintended consequences built in. I believed then and now that true compassion is found in modern day conservatism. And I came to understand that the majority of the really 'big money' guys were Democrats because many 'liberal' policies most benefited big business. GOP policies fit better with small business and the mostly benefitted the little guy. And I changed my party affiliation.

I still think that the GOP 'platform' is the more realistically compassionate and more fiscally sound though there are elements of it with which I strongly disagree.

I also think once the election is over these days, party platforms are out the window and the line between how the Democrats and GOP govern has become so blurred that it is difficult to tell the difference.

I'm ready for a real 'reform party' that will do it better.

Foxfyre

I really like your idea of a "reform" party but how the hell do you get it started? People have seen too many failures at starting a third party and who wants to a part of a "losing" party. It is My Opinion that any new party must be a "Centrist" party which would shuck the "far left and the far right" of each major party and bring together the best elements of both. Most of all you would need the most popular and brightest leaders of both parties to ever be successful.

Ross Perot--okay he was a nut but he was a visionary nut--almost pulled it off. If he hadn't wimped out at the last minute, he might have done it.

All we need is a Reagonesque leader to emerge with a clear vision, a clear message, and a reputation of 'unwimpism'.

But I'm an eternal optimist. I never believe anything is impossible.

I am also an eternal optimist, firmly believing the military-industrial-corporate complex will self-destruct leaving the citizens to govern for their own self-interest.

You are not an optimist-----you have a death wish. The day that happens you will only need to make one decision: Whether or not you want to keep your head and become a Muslim.

Anarchists are the ultimate optimists

Well I've been accused of many things, but anarchy has never been one of them. Until now I guess.

Not you - Dyslexia ;-)

I disagree Nimh------the ultimate optimist is an Ostrich who sticks his head in the sand hoping all bad things will go away.

Oh fine. Now I'm an anarchist AND an ostrich

I think an optimist is somebody who trusts that the future can be better than the now; that if we can do it well now we can do it better still; that God allows no poison without making an antidote a possibility.

The ultimate optimist wouldnt think there was anything to hide from, hello! ;-)

You've just taken it to the next step of "ultimate optimism"
Hello!

So, what's wrong with optimism at any level? LOL

believing that no man is wise enough to be another man's master. Each man's as good as the
next--if not a damn sight better makes me an optimist of extreme I suppose but it also sets me aside from both liberals and conservatives which I fear equally.

I believe every human as born with his/her own wonderful potential and should be afforded equal rights and opportunity, but I don't see every man's worth as equal. I do not equate a Charles Mansion and a Ghandi as having equal worth. I believe some forfeit their right to participate with the human race by virtue of their evil actions and I believe some merit extra protection or consideration by virtue of their value/ contribution to the many.

Fox, Not any different than how most societies treat their citizens except for the few.

I don't know about that C.I. I think the belief in human potential is pretty well limited to those people who value and demand freedom and a democratic method of governing. Otherwise people seem to be pretty well confined to the expectations of the class they are born into and could expect to be trapped there for life.

If that is your resignation from society-----I accept.

and that, perception, is why I fear you.