Moderator: Community Team
No.Simon Viavant wrote:would would any other democrat elected to the presidency be?
I said "no" to the question If Obama's a rabid liberal extremist would any other demoract elected to the presidency be.Simon Viavant wrote:what?
Mr_Adams wrote:You, sir, are an idiot.
Timminz wrote:By that logic, you eat babies.
Obama is so far left he makes hillary look like a republican.thegreekdog wrote:Oh, okay. That makes more sense now. I would say it depends on a lot of factors, the biggest of which is who the candidate is and what his or her particular views are. I would say President Clinton and Hillary Clinton are more conservative than President Obama, as examples. Another factor would include whether the term liberal is applied on a general basis or on a more directed basis (i.e. liberal socially or liberal fiscally).
Presumably you're looking to get an answer from some semi-whacko Republican here, so maybe I should just stop posting. Additionally, note that I'm operating under your assumption that Obama is a rabid liberal extremist.
It's all comparative. Compared to me, he's center-right on social issues and left-left on fiscal issues. On the social side, he seems to be trying to stay away from the gay marriage issue (which makes him a social conservative). On the fiscal side, he seems to think that the federal government is the solution to our problems (which makes him a fiscal liberal). Is he a far left liberal extremist in toto? Nah... Compared to Josef Stalin, he's liberal on social issues and conservative on fiscal issues.Simon Viavant wrote:I'd just seen a lot of posts here from people about how Obama is a far left liberal extremist. You're one of the more reasonable ones. On the other hand, I've seen a couple liberal people here saying he's center-right, which also isn't true. He's center-left.
You also have to take current affairs into account. Right now, I think pretty much everyone, even staunch conservatives, recognize that the only entity that CAN really fix things is the government. The argument is over how much involvement and the form, not "if" the government needs to be involved.thegreekdog wrote:It's all comparative. Compared to me, he's center-right on social issues and left-left on fiscal issues. On the social side, he seems to be trying to stay away from the gay marriage issue (which makes him a social conservative). On the fiscal side, he seems to think that the federal government is the solution to our problems (which makes him a fiscal liberal). Is he a far left liberal extremist in toto? Nah... Compared to Josef Stalin, he's liberal on social issues and conservative on fiscal issues.Simon Viavant wrote:I'd just seen a lot of posts here from people about how Obama is a far left liberal extremist. You're one of the more reasonable ones. On the other hand, I've seen a couple liberal people here saying he's center-right, which also isn't true. He's center-left.
Yeah, that's part of my issue with the Republicans. Call my an arch-conservative (for fiscal purposes), but I'm against virtually all of this stuff (whether it works or not, we'll see). For my purposes, the government does not need to be involved except on a very basic level.PLAYER57832 wrote:You also have to take current affairs into account. Right now, I think pretty much everyone, even staunch conservatives, recognize that the only entity that CAN really fix things is the government. The argument is over how much involvement and the form, not "if" the government needs to be involved.
This is what I'm talking about.bedub1 wrote:Obama is so far left he makes hillary look like a republican.thegreekdog wrote:Oh, okay. That makes more sense now. I would say it depends on a lot of factors, the biggest of which is who the candidate is and what his or her particular views are. I would say President Clinton and Hillary Clinton are more conservative than President Obama, as examples. Another factor would include whether the term liberal is applied on a general basis or on a more directed basis (i.e. liberal socially or liberal fiscally).
Presumably you're looking to get an answer from some semi-whacko Republican here, so maybe I should just stop posting. Additionally, note that I'm operating under your assumption that Obama is a rabid liberal extremist.
Meh... President Bush wasn't really a fiscal conservative, although he pretended to be.oVo wrote:Actually I think he's what's left after the leadership of a self proclaimed religious conservative
who let his bulls graze in the china shop for the previous eight years.
Exactly.oVo wrote:
Thing is, I do not think LIBERAL is a dirty word.
... A 51% government stake in America's largest automotive manufacturer is extremely "rabid" liberal, sorry.PLAYER57832 wrote:Exactly.oVo wrote:
Thing is, I do not think LIBERAL is a dirty word.
And conservative shouldn't be either, except it does seem now that what's called conservative is too often very far right conservative and often in the social and corporation -friendly spectrum (only), which I do find distasteful. I think this is a miscaracterization of conservative.
bedub1 wrote:Obama is so far left he makes hillary look like a republican.thegreekdog wrote:Oh, okay. That makes more sense now. I would say it depends on a lot of factors, the biggest of which is who the candidate is and what his or her particular views are. I would say President Clinton and Hillary Clinton are more conservative than President Obama, as examples. Another factor would include whether the term liberal is applied on a general basis or on a more directed basis (i.e. liberal socially or liberal fiscally).
Presumably you're looking to get an answer from some semi-whacko Republican here, so maybe I should just stop posting. Additionally, note that I'm operating under your assumption that Obama is a rabid liberal extremist.
Wrong, its actually supporting the companies.Nobunaga wrote:... A 51% government stake in America's largest automotive manufacturer is extremely "rabid" liberal, sorry.PLAYER57832 wrote:Exactly.oVo wrote:
Thing is, I do not think LIBERAL is a dirty word.
And conservative shouldn't be either, except it does seem now that what's called conservative is too often very far right conservative and often in the social and corporation -friendly spectrum (only), which I do find distasteful. I think this is a miscaracterization of conservative.
...
... Yeah, so long as the Fed can run it. It's like Venezufreakinwela.PLAYER57832 wrote:Wrong, its actually supporting the companies.Nobunaga wrote:... A 51% government stake in America's largest automotive manufacturer is extremely "rabid" liberal, sorry.PLAYER57832 wrote:Exactly.oVo wrote:
Thing is, I do not think LIBERAL is a dirty word.
And conservative shouldn't be either, except it does seem now that what's called conservative is too often very far right conservative and often in the social and corporation -friendly spectrum (only), which I do find distasteful. I think this is a miscaracterization of conservative.
...
but allowing the companies to dictate the terms of loans, not regulating the securities industries is definitely rightist.
I seriously doubt that. Stephen Harper is considerably more right socially, and even fiscally, in my opinion, than most of the Democrats (I'm Canadian too).Timminz wrote:You Americans are cute. You think the Dem's on the far left?! You should look at Canada. On average, we're quite a centrist population, but even our Prime Minister (the right-end of our political spectrum), is further to the left than most democrats.

