I share your sentiments, I will not take part in this blog again. It’s unfortunate that one person is allowed to run off the rest of us but GM’s tactics are no different than those of evironmentalist, merely more crude. Also unfortunate is the fact that I agree with him on the issues.

The first articles I read on the subject of green RVing were, I thought, interesting and provactive, giving some new ideas worth considering. So, I read them and welcomed some bits here and there. I am NOT anti-environment, just anti-environazis. I, like most RVers, conserve where I can and save where I can. But, I will not support the destruction of our way of life in support of ‘feel good’ extremists driven by emotion rather than science and truth.

This type of leftist rant offered by Bob does not belong in RV.NET. If I want politics, I’ll chose my own sources, not just swallow the propaganda.

Very dissappointed,

Hal

Bob, Sorry, but this is my last post on this blog. I simply cannot participate alongside some of the personal gutter-level rot coming from a few of the boors who’ve responded to what should have been an argument of ideas. This last one – from GM – is the last straw…but not the only one. His is one of the best examples of an angry, unfocused, crude, emotionally uncontrolled, intellectually immature, educationally-stunted, language error-filled rant that one could possibly imagine.

Count me out, if this is how a dissenting opinion and a critique of ideas is going to turn out. I’m “outa here”. Guys like that, hiding in the anonymity of the internet, simply waste my time and offer me nothing whatsoever that is useful.

Good luck.

—————————————————————————————

A.W.
wow…. you know your going to miss us.

one angry, unfocused, crude, emotionally uncontrolled, intellectually immature, educationally-stunted, language error-filled rant (your participals are dripping again) Of course its easy for your to say

I’m “outa here”. Guys like that, hiding in the anonymity of the internet, simply waste my time and offer me nothing whatsoever that is useful. — LOL A.W.

In reading Bob’s reply to you.. I find he is stating his facts that he based his opinion on. To which I reply…. how long to convert over… if at all. In the current news about OB .. seems he is coming to grips with reality and while a pipe dream its going to take years to achieve. I doubt if the powers to be will allow it.

Similar things happened with the solar “off the grid ” powered homes. As soon as they started to get popular (green) The power generation co. put a stop to it by so many road blocks that one never would get ahead. They don’t want you to make things better and take their money. (look for elect rates to increase for a long list of effective reasions)

I recently heard RL on the EIB go through the same thing we said. You feel good about helping your country and go buy a EV car. No problem the fact that your making all that gas mileage and trying to save money…. only makes the price of oil go up per gallon. So where is the savings? and now your ride is a go kart instead of your SUV. Its their money….. they will get it one way or the other and you will pay.

Bob about the only thing I can see is going to nuc power. Here we not only save oil burning (most are Nat Gas right now .. from one public seervice company to the other that has you in check) but also the fact that the trees don’t have to work so hard because were not burning oxygen. Now the electric cars make sense. Nuc energy can be renewable source also. Breeders have shown that. But, will the current power co’s allow it? Not unless they have something to gain by doing so. (They tell the politican what to do.. not the other way around… do you see airlines decrease its fuel useage? Look at what it takes to get just one jet across the country in fuel.. and their are hourly flights )

I am all for effecency. Waist not want not. But, most of the orginal article still says …. We’re going to have to change. Why not tell the environazis to show us the way with practical advancements and not just regulations to force us into submission.

I for one enjoyed the thanksgiving week. Put lots of miles on the RV. Which economically is more practical to US than maybe to the environmentalist. Then again do I care? All they can seem to do is take toys away and get rich while doing it.

From my point of view… The real reasion that this country is in such depression is because no one can make anything here anymore. They look to the housing industry as a main contrubitor to the economics of the country… Instead they should be looking to the manufacture of goods and services. Something the environmentalnazi’s seem to have forgotten is the basic building block of the economic engine. If no one builds anything how is someone supposed to buy anything. Most seem to think the freebies and handouts are going to do the trick but … nothing is free in the world… thus who is going to pay for it? Well we see the time for a change OB saying that he wants to tax the rich and give it to the poor.. good idea…. bad thinking… as the rich are the ones who made things, hired the guys and gals to build his products… who then could buy things with the money they earned. Now take that away and what do you have… exactly what we have today. The Demo’s it seems, have used the environmental issues to force businesses off shore… closing factories…. and the rich take their money and go home. And the loser in the end is…. You make no money building houses if the people can’t afford to buy it because they don’t have a job. And who gives them that job? Yet the Demo’s draw big pay, make the rules…. that strangly exempt them… and then pat themselves on the back with degrees and honors that we all should be in awe with. Hmmmm…..

By the way Bob.. you might want to examine boxers and finklestines husbands income. They worked as a team to get the surplus navy land and made millions building condos out in the SFO bay. Just a little self interest there? That after they claimed the environmental conservation. I think Abe said it best. You can fool most of the people all of the time when you impress upon them that your right and they are wrong. However Mark twain said it best… when in doubt tell the truth. Something that most don’t like to do these days.

Were stuck with the antics and ravings that the new admin is starting. One thing for sure… he has 4 years to prove he can do a better job than the other guy. Time will tell all… if he was a good choice…. my hopes are high but my practical side says… tighten your seat belt and hold on to your wallet…

Oh and AW… before I finish… one slap deserves another… I commend you sir for your blissful mirror discription of yourself… one angry, unfocused, crude, emotionally disturbed uncontrolled, intellectually immature, educationally-stunted, language error-filled ranting … non factual dude.

did I leave anything out AW ? oh ya don’t let the door hit … well you know the saying. LOL

Count me out, if this is how a dissenting opinion and a critique of ideas is going to turn out. I’m “outa here”. Guys like that, hiding in the anonymity of the internet, simply waste my time and offer me nothing whatsoever that is useful.

Good luck.

To the blog, my appologies, (hmmm fred you missed on that one looser) GM is not a professional bully, he’s a amateur bully and a deeply troubled masochist.

His name-calling, vocabulary and spelling is proof that he is still living in his elementary school years. That of course, also reveals his mental age.

This coward is suffering badly from a narcissistic complex. His hero is the Marquis de Sade. (again with the spelling error fred.. you should talk.. hmmm) Should we ask how many times a week he beats his wife?

His flag says “Dont (grammar error) tread on me”, while everyone else’s flag says Love Thy Neighbor.

He asks, “are we having fun yet?” That’s like asking “Is my knife in your back as painful as I hope it is.”

GM is “the guardian of the camp” – as in the Death Camp, Auschwitz.
___________________________________________________________

fred…. I fart in your direction to give you that fresh breath of air your used to.

A lot of the others who say they know y ou personally claim that y our mental handicap is one where your known as the person experiencing a Dissociative Fugue having recently suffered the reappearance of an event or person representing your earlier life trauma, the emergence of an armoring or defensive personality seems to be for you, a logical apprehension of the situation.

Therefore, the terminology fugue state may carry a slight linguistic distinction from Dissociative Fugue, the former implying a greater degree of motion in your case. For the purposes of this posting then, a fugue state would occur while one is acting out a Dissociative Fugue.

This is in your case defines as:

* your sudden, unexpected travel away from home or one’s customary place of habitat, with inability to recall one’s past,

* Confusion about personal identity, or the assumption of a new identity, and

* Significant distress or mental impairment.

I don’t know your problem but you clearly are looking for a fight that you really don’t want to get into with me looser. Somehow you think that your always right BMOS and that your in control… well bud.. dream on. Most have identified you as the sniveling whining boneheaded idiot you really are. You and the Nancy pol, no on 8 people, we are going to tell you because were better than the rest, have a lot in common.. You stink like the stuff you spew out… from your bad breath one can tell you’re a potty mouth. Socialistically incline? … You clearly have a mental problem. To which no one wants you around… your weird dude… I suggest you seriously go seek immediate medical physic help and step away from the keyboard. You can’t hide it dude . Dude your have either been out in the sun too long or locked in the closet past your prime. And don’t blame your mother for your being. You are who you are by your own making.

As we said most people who try to save the resources by giving up what they have and try to conserve…. only get ripped off by the same government which suggested that they help save it for the future generations. (check it out most states and the feds are now talking razing the price of fuel back up by increasing taxes on it!!!!! not allowing it to come back down in price because you conserved.

What is starting to happen now is that with the conservation of energy, the companies… are having to recover the lost funds. Thus, they are going to raise the rates of the goods they sell. The government also needing more money now that the conservation effort is effective then also looks at the there lost revenue. They are then also going to raises the taxes on the product you used to use freely.

So now in effect you have cut back on the energy you consume driving… your nice car. You are driving a go-kart with little or no accessories and yet you’re now paying more for less. Nice way to rip off the consumer. But, think of all the people that were put out of work, which used to be your friends. The company that used to give them the jobs, had to let them go as they too had to cutback on the overhead to make ends meet… these people then had to give up their houses because they didn’t have a job anymore… This then caused the bank to have a shortfall and so they too had to close branches and shut down the freebies that they extended to you. They then don’t loan the farmers who feed you the money to buy the seed, the business’ that would hire more are out of luck because the bank can’t loan money they don’t have… so joblessness rises… All this because bonehead Fred decided that he wanted to be a good boy and tell you to cut back for the good of the earth and future generations.

So not wanting to be un-politically correct you followed his way of thinking… ops big time… you know how it hurts your to think now fred… so why do you keep being masatisticaly incline? For fred, self-injury is not the main problem; it is a symptom. So what could his main problem be? Some reasons for Freds’ self-injury other than parental abuse are also linked to his childhood. For instance, cutting can be linked to a lack of handling during infancy (Strong, 1998). It can also be caused by body alienation resulting from childhood illness and/or surgery . It is difficult to determine the intent of Freds’ self-injurious act because sometimes fred doesn’t know why he/ she did something. At best, the Fred can give a reason after he or she cut. This given reason is subject to memory distortions and therefore may not be very accurate. I.e he doesn’t know of which he speaks…

You know Instead, if you kept using what you were none of this would have changed. But then old Bonehead Fred would not have anything to do because you didn’t listen to him. (Its ok fred they will eventually let you know how screwed up you thoughts really are when it starts effecting them) you would not feel good that you tried to help conserve the original resource and/or help the government like you were told you should want to.

Has it happened before.. yes .. look at the Nat Gas, Electric, water and heating oil. Some of those people back east were asked to cutback on the usage of oil. Feeling that they wanted to do something good they did… They then froze because the mandatory reduction the next month cut them back even more. All this while the people, like fred, who didn’t cut back and used what they wanted lived just a little bit colder when the mandatory reduction came around.

Same thing with the gas/oil and the environmental nazi movement to tell you that you have to conserve or else we will run out… wrong.. According to the resource management people there is more oil than air on earth. (Now fred won’t believe it but if he can keep from hitting his head on the computer screen for a while he might be able to tickle the keys (instead of his… nose) and find the figures anyone else can.

Bob… As to the comment that toyota and the others lead the sales in the us currently… look in the parking lot at work… most are better built vehicles from the good old USA. (Only the toy’s and other junk cars had obama/no on 8 stickers on them) Besides I don’t see many toy cars towing 5th wheels or trailers or hauling campers down the road around.. They just don’t seem to have the pony’s to make the grade… least one try for long.

I had to recently chuckle when toyota said their PU could out pull anything in its class (1/2 t pu) To which the add was removed from TV quickly after ford pointed out that their 1/2 T could not only out pull toy but made better gas mileage too. Why didn’t ford say this at the products marketing… well most US trucks have a reserve.. Knowing that people like of Fred their are going to overload it and abuse it anyway… they then said.. well we designed it to really pull this much more… nice to always have the reserve. On the Internet ford showed from the testing grounds in Az that the frame on toy was not as good as they said either.. Again they proved that the current ford truck could outperform and outlast the junk made off shore. Toy quickly pull their adds on TV. (if you wondered where they went… grin)

Now old bonehead fred their who bought a toyota with his disability welfare food stamp check… thinks everyone should have one… but, shall we look at the effect he caused?

Smelly fred took money that he was paid here in this country and gave it to a off shore company that didn’t pay any taxes nor did they hire any US labor to make it here in this country (yes I know they have a plant in the south east but were hyper theory here)

so he took his fraudulent obtained disability welfare check and spent it on an off shore country’s vehicle product… he got a good deal.. But was it for the country? … seem he basically put several people out of work that made US pu’s. They lost their job because of this…reduction in sales revenue… (for our country.. theirs is gaining) which then caused the government to have to fork out more money to support them while they look for a new job outside the automotive industry. Fred basically put them out on the street also because they couldn’t afford to pay the mortgage on the house… the bank.. Well you know the rest of the story… all because smelly fred bought a toy truck that he later found out didn’t haul the camper… crashed around the corner and found he couldn’t sue the manufacture because they didn’t tell him it wasn’t that good… after all they are not from this country so to sue. .. he would have to go their… and they would laugh at him like he is here… so fred now whines about not being able to have equality and enjoyment like the others do out at the river camping. He now wants the government to help him attain his rightful level and place in the camping community….. He wants more money…

Money you and I have to make up in taxes and fee’s. So in reality all that money he fraudulently got and gave.. which came from all of us who worked for ours… basically left the country to make them rich and us poor’er with thousands out of work that used to supply us with the goods we needed and had extra for the good social life we enjoyed camping together. But, they too had to tighten their belt… and so the camping industry loses another good customer… all because of fred .

Don’t think so .. take a look at the RV industry. With the fact that the environmental nazi’s don’t look with favor on people who are not politically correct in buying large vehicles which could tow, carry or have for pure enjoyment… it puts the manufacturers out of work… it puts the campgrounds out of business and it then has the trickle down effect back to the economy. All because bonehead fred convinced you he was right… May I suggest… to save the economy and have a better life you instead ignore fred and enjoy your RV and the industry it provides.

Both Dilfey and Fred are working together to make this blog continue on .. they are laughing at the reactions they are getting… I think most of us take it serious while they dink around with feelings and innuendoes… thus without an apology from them for their degradation…we have no further concerns… we will stop here.. and suggest to others that they too ignore the two of them .. Eventually they will go away when shun’ed and ignored enough. Its part of their demented and sick psychological make up . I am only sorry that Bobs wife is related to the rv society. I feel that she makes contribution unlike bob and fred here. I am sure she is saying about now.. is there a good divorcé attorney in the house?

“Well, it seems that Bob decided it was allright to print my private email between me and him.” (I’m sorry about that. I, apparently, thought that it was all part of the blog discussion and that you had just forgotten to missed posting your comments on the blog. That’s why I mentioned to you that I had gone ahead and posted them there. When I make personal comments to you directly instead of on the blog, it is only because I feel that it is not in the general interests of the readers, and more a personal conversation with you–which, by the way, I enjoy the stimulation of) I will resist the urge to share with you all what he said to me privately (It’s OK if you want to share my emails to you.).
“‘idiot’ article he wrote.” (That is uncalled for in this discussion. Note that as a blogger on RV.net I have the right to delete any comment that I don’t feel is suitabIe. I have never done this (except for spam advertisement comments).

it’s the writer of the article who positioned the article with clear, biased, and prejudiced political references that are anything but bi-lateral,” (Instead of making broad statements, point out exactly what words you find biased and prejudiced. The article is not political, but merely on energy policy and electric vehicles.)

“He could have written an article that might have provided some thoughtful points on change in our society without promoting his cheap political biases.” (Again, the article was on the future of energy policy and electric vehicles, but i would be glad to write “points on change” in another blog. And “cheap political biases” (You ask me to stick to the facts, how is that statement sticking to the facts instead of undefined sweeping rhetoric?)
” He obviously took a considered controversial position with the words in his article” (What was controversial? I’ll be glad to explain my views. Again, this was not a political article, only on energy policy and EVs.)
But with all that said, we–and probably many of the others that “disagree” with me–are on the same page for considering mileage-efficient vehicles and energy saving personal habits. And let’s all stay there at least, as we work out our “perceived” differences. A last note. My brother-in-law is a just left-of-center conservative republican and at lunch the other day commented that with all the fighting and arguing back and forth, conservatives against liberals, if we just clearly defined what we believed, we might find that we are not as separated as we think we are, and that maybe the means and not the end result are where we differ, in which case if we talked rationally our differences could reach a center point. I agree.
Lastly, you AW are above your last statement that my comments are: “thoughtless political bias that Dilfey put into his article in the first place. For that, we all expect an apology.”

“according to what you say, you haven’t begun to understand there are strong, strong preferences beyond the NOCAL Boxer/Waxman orientation. And beyond that, Pelosi, Dingell, and some others who are beyond your one-note energy agenda.” (If you could relax with the inflammatory rhetoric ["haven't begun to understand" and "one-note energy policy"] this conversation might have more appeal to the general reader.
“So if you want to create a right/wrong conversation based on the last vote, here is something to think about, based on millions of votes: According to millions and millions of people, you are wrong on energy usage, wrong on your political choices, wrong about drilling, wrong on economics. Millions of smart, thoughtful, educated people said that.” (OK. Tell me what I said that the millions and millions disagree with–specifically.)
“Your “facts” are unsupported. You haven’t been responsive to requests to defend your opinons and you haven’t presented any kind of convincing argument…and this is your blog, where you are expected to do so here in order to be persuasive with your viewpoint.” (OK. Let me try again:
Fact #1: Henry Waxman unseated Rep. Dingle as chair of the House Energy and Commerce Committee.
Fact #2: Barbara Boxer is chairwoman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee.
Fact #3: Both are ardent environmentalists and advocates of alternative sources of energy and a reduction of fossil fuels.
Fact #4: President-elect Obama is an advocate of the same.
Fact #5: The current administration has had less of an interest than the incoming administration in reduction of fossil fuels and the pursuit of clean energy.
Fact #6: Rep. Dingle was instrumental in influencing the EPA’s action in preventing CA from enacting more stringent fuel economy standards than federal ones.
Pick which numbers (or anything else I said) that you specifically consider biased, or not factual and I will provide supporting documentation.
“Maybe you should just leave the political angle alone. It hasn’t worked very well so far.” (As I’ve said before, this was not a political article. It was on the future of energy policy and electric vehicles. What exact words that I wrote do you [or any others] consider political?)
“please give us your supporting facts, then you can ask us for ours.” (I don’t know what specific supporting facts you want. Tell me. I will gladly supply them.)
“there is a ton of factual information that refutes every unsupported claim that you make on energy, (Let me guess: Is it “with also a supportive House and Senate behind him, we may finally see a much quicker move to renewables and restraints on global warming than from the reluctant, anti-environmental former government.” If that is it, tell me and I will supply the documentation.) politicians, (Which politicians did I make unsupported claim about?) fuel use, fuel discovery, (I didn’t mention “fuel discovery”) alternate energy usage (again, specifically what “unsupported claim.” I’m not going to go through my blog and supply proof for everything until I know what you are talking about.) , and so on, including exploration in Alaska, the Gulf of Mexico, the Outer Continental shelf in California, Florida, Virginia and Gulf States.” (I didn’t mention any of those points.
“Your arguments so far have been lightweight.” (I didn’t put forth any arguments, only statements of what changes are happening and will happen and how those changes will affect energy and EVs.)
“When you write back this time, please include specific, documented references to your claims, (again, I ask, what claims? If AW won’t tell me, will some of the others? I still don’t know what I claimed that is not generally already known.) to my comments that you challengs and to specific requests for which detail you are seeking (which I have done at length). Your unsupported opinons don’t matter to me. Just facts, please. And please describe what you will do for us to “come together in the middle” as you requested.” (I didn’t claim that I will do something to bring us together in the middle. I asked your thoughts on how we might do this. But since you asked, one might be to look at others opinions with an open mind and try to see their point of view, and not just claim that those you disagree with are wrong or are “idiot” points of view.

His name-calling, vocabulary and spelling is proof that he is still living in his elementary school years. That of course, also reveals his mental age.

This coward is suffering badly from a narcissistic complex. His hero is the Marquis de Sade. Should we ask how many times a week he beats his wife?

His flag says “Dont tread on me”, while everyone else’s flag says Love Thy Neighbor.

He asks, “are we having fun yet?” That’s like asking “Is my knife in your back as painful as I hope it is.”

GM is “the guardian of the camp” – as in the Death Camp, Auschwitz.

Here are all of his responses so far…Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2008 10:55:40 -0800
From: bobdifley@gmail.com
To: jawaw@msn.com
Subject: Re: [blog.rv.net] Comment: “Just as with Dirty Diapers, Change is Coming”

AW – I sent you the last reply before scrolling down and finding the rest of your comments. My reply is more lengthy on the blog than the one I sent to you. I would welcome you to come back in and be more specific with your comments. This is a conversation, not an argument. l apologize if my feathers got a little ruffed, but I was taken aback by the massive negative response to my blog, and re-read it to try to understand why and still don’t. But you’re right about the “mega-ditto head comment.” After I made it I told my wife what I had said and that I regretted it. Lelsson learned, If if get my feathers ruffed, I need to take a step back, take a deep breath, re-read what set me off, try to figure out why the person said it, than make a reasoned response. I would like to think my readers would do the same. And as you can see, they often don’t. Again, thanks for your input and your comments. Bob

On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 5:10 PM, Blog Admin wrote:

New comment on your post #2913 “Just as with Dirty Diapers, Change is Coming”
Author : A.W.Walker (IP: 71.164.224.193 , pool-71-164-224-193.dllstx.fios.verizon.net)
E-mail : jawaw@msn.com
URL :
Whois : http://ws.arin.net/cgi-bin/whois.pl?queryinput=71.164.224.193
Comment:
Actually Jim,
None of the comments here “jumped immediately to a Liberal vs Conservative battle” as you put it. If you read closely, it’s the writer of the article who positioned the article with clear, biased, and prejudiced political references that are anything but bi-lateral, and that’s why the comments came out with so much energy to object to that tack.

That, sir is what is so unfortunate.

He could have written an article that might have provided some thoughtful points on change in our society without promoting his cheap political biases. That’s what most of the comments refer to, sir. He obviously took a considered controversial position with the words in his article…what would you expect the responses would be?

Personally, over the past three or four years, I’ve looked at any number of toad choices, including the Smart car, Mini-Cooper, Hybrids, and a number of electric four-wheel vehicles, not to mention two-wheel electric and combustion engined vehicles. Like others on this post, I’ve wrung my hands over how my driving habits could change to improve my MPGs. And how I could economically provide energy to my rig and be more eco-friendly in places I visit. I get it. Many others do too.

Like you, most of us just don’t like the kind of thoughtless political bias that Dilfey put into his article in the first place. For that, we all expect an apology.

So the coaching point is this: If you live among a bunch of like-thinking people, unless you really, really challenge that thinking, very soon you believe that that is the predominant thinking of everyone. And then you fall into the Abilene Paradox.

Bob, according to what you say, you haven’t begun to understand there are strong, strong preferences beyond the NOCAL Boxer/Waxman orientation. And beyond that, Pelosi, Dingell, and some others who are beyond your one-note energy agenda. So if you want to create a right/wrong conversation based on the last vote, here is something to think about, based on millions of votes: According to millions and millions of people, you are wrong on energy usage, wrong on your political choices, wrong about drilling, wrong on economics. Millions of smart, thoughtful, educated people said that.

Your “facts” are unsupported. You haven’t been responsive to requests to defend your opinons and you haven’t presented any kind of convincing argument…and this is your blog, where you are expected to do so here in order to be persuasive with your viewpoint.

Maybe you should just leave the political angle alone. It hasn’t worked very well so far.

If you want to challenge this well-documented factual absolute regarding the doubt of your arguments, please give us your supporting facts, then you can ask us for ours. There is no problem that there is a ton of factual information that refutes every unsupported claim that you make on energy, politicians, fuel use, fuel discovery, alternate energy usage, and so on, including exploration in Alaska, the Gulf of Mexico, the Outer Continental shelf in California, Florida, Virginia and Gulf States. Your arguments so far have been lightweight.

When you write back this time, please include specific, documented references to your claims, to my comments that you challengs and to specific requests for which detail you are seeking. Your unsupported opinons don’t matter to me. Just facts, please. And please describe what you will do for us to “come together in the middle” as you requested. Thanks.

In my opinion, the statements about Waxman and Boxer (I didn’t mention Pelosi) that I made were factual statements supporting the wide-spread opinion that energy policy would change–moving more toward alternative sources of energy and away from fossil fuels–with the new government. Do you–or does anyone else–have an argument with that statement?. You bring politics into the discussion when you express opinions on the character of those people and what you think they will do over the course of the new administration. This is not a political article. It is about energy policy and the future of electric vehicles.
Now I’m curious, though. The reaction I got on this blog post surprised me. I know that attitudes on political issues vary around the country and with the areas we all live in. I live in Northern California. Yes, a blue state, and in a very liberal part of the state. Even our Republican governor is accused by the “further to the right” of being liberal. However, most of the folk in the state, and especially so in NoCal, think more along the way I do than along what seems to be the opinions of many of the responders to this blog. Does that make us wrong? If so, than half the country must be wrong, since more left of center people were elected than right of center. Maybe this is just my impression, but it seems that those on the right are more set in their opinions and the way government works and what they should do (conservative) than on the left that would like to see changes and improvements to the status quo. (progressive, ie liberal). Is that a wrong impression?
But back to my curiosity, I would like to know where the home base is of those who disagree with me and of those who agree. And secondly, do most of the folk that live where you live feel as you do? Third. How do we all come together in the middle and get done what needs to be done in the best interests of everyone? Your comments, please.