Why are Republicans the "radical" party? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 25, 2024, 10:30:12 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Presidential Election Trends (Moderator: 100% pro-life no matter what)
  Why are Republicans the "radical" party? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Why are Republicans the "radical" party?  (Read 8266 times)
Snowstalker Mk. II
Snowstalker
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 20,414
Palestinian Territory, Occupied


Political Matrix
E: -7.10, S: -4.35

P P P
« on: June 25, 2011, 01:44:02 PM »

It seems like the general consensus on this forum (and among the general public to a certain extent) is that the GOP is a party of radicals under the control of such people like Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann, and Paul Ryan.  The GOP is the party of "birthers" and racists, so it appears.  The GOP wants to push granny off the cliff and end welfare forever.  Nevermind that not a single "radical conservative" holds any position of authority within the GOP House or Senate leadership.

Taken objectivley, applying these labels to Republicans seems pretty ignorant.  However, once we compare the "radical-ness" of the GOP to the Democrats assumptions like those made above become just plain stupid.

The most radical presidents in history--Andrew Jackson, Woodrow Wilson, and FDR--have all been Democrats.  The only "radical" president to be a Republican was probably Abraham Lincoln.  Let us not forget, either, that extremley radical candidates always seem to find their way into Democratic primaries--Howard Dean, Al Sharpton, Dennis Kuchinich, and Jesse Jackson.  Did I forget to mention that the Senate's only self-described "socialist" cacuses with the Democrats?

So, since its true that the Republicans are no more radical then the Democrats...why do people insist that they are?  Is the left really just that blind-sighted?  Has the liberal media pulled the wool over the eyes of most Americans?  What is it?
 

I'll give you Wilson being extreme, but more to do with his racism and less to do with his policies. FDR wasn't extreme. Jackson was a genocidal maniac, but the parties were completely different back then. Dean isn't extreme, Kucinich and Jackson are debatable, and Al Sharpton is a douche, but not extreme. And the GOP isn't filled with sane people; look at Alan Keyes, Tom Tancredo, Pat Robertson, and Ron Paul. Socialism is considered to be mainstream everywhere except America and a few right-wing dictatorships (and even they pretend to be left-wing).

And the liberal media, like most boogeymen, is something of a myth. It exists, but is too hooked on sensationalism to have as much of an impact as the propaganda machines of FOX and 99% of talk radio.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.022 seconds with 12 queries.