Originally posted by sasquatch672Actually, SQ, I think your choices are between corruption, crushing deficits, and overbearing moralists ... and corruption, crushing deficits, and overbearing immoralists.
Yes, it was a question. Who are these people? Are these the people I voted with twice? I know it's not the voice of the Democratic Party, but are these the values of the Democratic Party? My choices are between corruption, crushing deficits, and overbearing moralists and these people?
But you are free to choose none of the above and vote Libertarian.
Originally posted by sasquatch672As an outsider looking in I wonder why anyone would allow their thoughts on abortion to reflect their wider political opinions.
Yes, it was a question. Who are these people? Are these the people I voted with twice? I know it's not the voice of the Democratic Party, but are these the values of the Democratic Party? My choices are between corruption, crushing deficits, and overbearing moralists and these people?
Abortion seems such a hot topic over there. In the UK there are planty of people who do not agree with the abortion law but they accept it.
In the UK we too suffer from a lack of distiction between our major parties. However there is a perception that labour has higher taxes but looks after societies disadvantaged better. Whereas conservative is the party of low taxation, small government and encourages the individual to look after themself.
The future political battleground should be Freedom: censorship and civil liberties in a time where governments want more control under the premiss of protecting us from terrorism.
Originally posted by sasquatch672I tend to be somewhere between "liberal" and libertarian; i.e. I believe in maximum social freedom and a balance between "socialistic" and "free market" economics. Thus, I am not far from the "left". I went to school in Berkeley and some of the people in the Bay Area are wackos, I agree. These guys despise the Democrats as much as the Republicans. They aren't the body of the Democratic party.
I'm going to have to censor this post because of the new forum posting rules. For any unseemly verbosities, I apologize in advance.
There was recently a pro-life march in San Francisco that numbered 15,000 participants. Along the parade route, "pro-choice" - I don't know what you would call these people - protesters held a counter-rally. These pe ...[text shortened]... een-year-old with 36B's and a trust fund. Been nice knowing you.
They are almost the left's equivalent to the racist, creationist, Rush Limbaugh loving white trash of the right.
Originally posted by sasquatch672I believe in America, as in the U.K, there are no parties opposed to the exploitation of social capital for profit, and while that is the case we can assume that there is no real choice to be made. If there is a point to choosing between these two parties, explain John Kerrys policy statement when questioned that : 'I will not nescessarily follow any different policies to those being persued at present, but be sure your'e gonna see a different style of politics from me...'
Yes, it was a question. Who are these people? Are these the people I voted with twice? I know it's not the voice of the Democratic Party, but are these the values of the Democratic Party? My choices are between corruption, crushing deficits, and overbearing moralists and these people?
What do you think is meant by this statement? I refer you to my earlier post - the root of all evil...
There is no 'political left' in the U.S.
what I find hardest to come to terms with in american politics is that during the civil war it was the republicans that championed freeing the slaves and that by the early 1880's all the confederate states had returned to the fold of democratic state government, a style of government that actually had championed the rights of farmers to maintain their southern way of life regardless of whether that meant exploiting black people as slaves.
flip forward 100 years and the democrats become the champions of civil rights and the kennedy's and especially the Massachusetts branch of the party start propogating a line of fairness in society and liberal values that would make you believe that somehow they had made the mould on this score.
its actually bleakly funny in an absurd monty pythonesque sort of way to see republicans go all apoplectic at the thought that democrats somehow seem to hold the high moral ground in social issues and that the gop are generally portrayed as just a grimy money laundering lobbyists' machine.
While my stance on abortion is evidently not with the right wing, it is at least bewildering to hear of the left wing demands, relative to minors obtaining abortions without parental consent.
According to the thinking, an invasive, potentially life-altering procedure is every females right, but innoculous dental work is still the domain of the guardians of those under age 18. Fuzzy.
Originally posted by FreakyKBHI wouldn't know from experience, but at 15 I would rather have told my mum I had a cavity than that she was a grandmother.
While my stance on abortion is evidently not with the right wing, it is at least bewildering to hear of the left wing demands, relative to minors obtaining abortions without parental consent.
According to the thinking, an invasive, potentially life-altering procedure is every females right, but innoculous dental work is still the domain of the guardians of those under age 18. Fuzzy.
Originally posted by AmauroteYou mean like Teddy Krazi-zinsky? The unibomber loved and adored by all lefties and environmental whacko's the world over?
I don't think I would equate the theoretical violence of a few poor, quaintly bellicose banners on the Left with the actual, real and more-than-just-a-little-bit-cranky violence of the sort of right-wing fanatic who sends letterbombs to computer shops and shoots doctors outside clinics.
Or didn't you notice he was (Scuze Me... IS) one of you?