More than one contributor has said lately that all we mostly do here is push our own political ideas, is this true?
It is not surprising that we talk politics but is it even near excursively?
OLO is also Australian politics and we are bound to see others thoughts in print but too much politics?
It is true that we each have a point of view even a side we are welded to but I have seen such people take their own side to task here too.
Just maybe we talk as much about other things as we do politics and just maybe some are unimpressed that we have different views than theirs.
I believe the old fashioned idea we should not talk religion or politics is so we may not learn the truth.

Dear Belly,

I was always taught not to discuss
three things with other people,
religion, politics, and sport.
They were considered to be contentious
subjects.

I was also taught - don't rock the boat.

Did I listen to those teachings?

Of course not.

I find that discussing various topics is the
way you broaden your own outlook,
you learn and grow.

Many times I've been convinced I was
right in my way of thinking - only
to be presented by someone else's
different outlook that challenged my
point of view and made me re-think
what I had orginally been so sure of.

And now I'm no longer so sure of anything
at all. Perhaps it a sign of maturity -
I don't know.

Or maybe its simply that as I grow older,
I am beginning to realize just how little
I actually know.

As for pushing my own political wheelbarrow ?
Well when you do that, you've got to be
careful not to lose the only wheel that it has.

There are powerful agendas behind events and people that are rarely if ever brought to light or questioned. Most people do not question their subscription to ideology enough and are not interested in logic or reason. Instead they are ruled by their agendas far more than they care to admit..in fact they are imprisoned by them.

In light of steel's above post (which "on the surface" seems reasoned), I invite everyone to go to steel's last post on page 4 of the topic "Censors Win Out".

There, he launches a "political" attack based on his "political dogma".

Here's some charming ummmm..... "non"-political quotes from him:

"you are heavily socialist"

"you have deceitful intentions driven by greed for yourself and the agenda of those you closely support and parrot"

"you are picking your slogans off the scrapheap of your ideological agenda"

"Is it a socialist view of childhood"

"They (photographed nude kids) were spared psychological pain of societal abuse and our PB Rudd's disgusting attacks"

I really, really love this next one:

"It is actually you philips who are attacking and abusing children for your private fascist, socialist agenda"

Well, in light of steel's above words, maybe he should begin to question "HIS"........"subscription to ideology" (his words), and drop "HIS" political "agenda" (his word). Then he won't be "imprisoned by them" (his words).

After reading steel's post on this topic, and then coming upon his almost 100% politicised rant on the Censor topic (and elsewhere too), one has to wonder if coming on this site is just a game he plays to fill the void of an otherwise empty existence.

It comes down to the truth.

Such as

the 2001 election was not held as per the constitution

Citizenship is illegal, and not a federal responsibility

The Labor party and unions have hidden child sexual assualts and abuse.

Now my dad told me not to become a shop steward and he should have told me not to get into politics.

That way i could have been as ignorant as everybody else,

But Hey

Sometimes we have to stand up for what is right, and against those who in government tell us what to do, instead of them listening to their communities and acting as they should.

Look at NSW labor and unions, They hate the premeir, but

Suck up to Rudd and Combet, both who are supporting the power sell off.

So if you lot can talk truth things would be better for discussion.

"Truth" is good.

But the trouble with that is that one person's truth can be, and often is, another person's untruth.

For example, a Roman Catholic may believe he knows the truth about God..........but try selling that "truth" to a Jew (and vice versa).

Another example: John Howard believed he "truthfully" knew the way ahead for Australia. The trouble with that was, Kevin Rudd also knew the "truth" in that regard. One man's truth is another man's untruth.

Politics, religion, sport, art, music, fashion.....the list is endless, are NOT based on "truth". They are based on "opinion" and "belief".

"Truth" only applies to things that can be proven. For example, nobody can deny that 4+4=8: That equation stands separate from belief and opinion.