Both sides are out of line

[Reaganfan]

I have had enough of the insanity. In years past, I've been seen as an extreme right-winger, but I have come to realize perhaps I'm more establishment than I thought.

On the one hand, you have the far right. The few people in a debate audience who boo a gay soldier or wish that there was almost a non-existent Government. I'm all for small Government, and I do believe like Ronald Reagan said The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.' That having been said, you have the extremists and the Ron Paul crowd who go so far as to have a complete and utter non-interventionist policy to whereas if Palestinians were executing Israelis in the streets, he would say, "Let's stay out of it" and in a way he almost come across liberal. I think this is where he gets his mega-huge youth coalition from.

Then on the other end, you have people who have their party in power, a liberal President from Chicago who by all accounts is way more like a European leader than a typical American President, and they feel betrayed by him as if he isn't liberal enough! I saw two days ago on the news the protesters in New York on Wall Street. One of them was asked who they thought should be President. He responded, "Mao Zedong". He's a communist. We were at war with them just 20 years ago for goodness sake!

It's gotten to the point to where if Reagan were running today, he wouldn't be conservative enough, and we have a liberal Democratic president who isn't liberal enough! When does it stop?

[Joe Republic]

One of them was asked who they thought should be President. He responded, "Mao Zedong". He's a communist. We were at war with them just 20 years ago for goodness sake!

In 1991 we were at war with China and its leader who died in 1976?  News to me.

[Reaganfan]

One of them was asked who they thought should be President. He responded, "Mao Zedong". He's a communist. We were at war with them just 20 years ago for goodness sake!

In 1991 we were at war with China and its leader who died in 1976?  News to me.

Communists.

[Insula Dei]

What communists exactly was the US at war with in 1991?

[© tweed]

What communists exactly was the US at war with in 1991?

the AFL-CIO.

[Reaganfan]

What communists exactly was the US at war with in 1991?

Okay, this is what I'm talking about. You're picking my statement. We were at war with Communism during the Cold War. Whether it was Vietnam or the cold war tensions with the Soviet Union. My statement 20 years ago means the Cold War. Excuse me for not being more specific about a date.

[Middle-aged Europe]

Seems like it was more of an abstract war, like the War on Drugs or the War on Poverty.

[Averroës Nix]

One reason for the trends that you complain about in your opening post is that people are increasingly likely to believe that they're entitled to their own facts.

[I Am Feeblepizza.]

you have the extremists and the Ron Paul crowd who go so far as to have a complete and utter non-interventionist policy to whereas if Palestinians were executing Israelis in the streets, he would say, "Let's stay out of it" and in a way he almost come across liberal. I think this is where he gets his mega-huge youth coalition from.

Have you heard him talk about the Federal Reserve and deregulation?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nixon_visit_to_China_1972

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia#Russian_Federation

[Bull Moose Base]

One reason for the trends that you complain about in your opening post is that people are increasingly likely to believe that they're entitled to their own facts.

For instance...

liberal President from Chicago who by all accounts is way more like a European leader than a typical American President,

[Averroës Nix]

One reason for the trends that you complain about in your opening post is that people are increasingly likely to believe that they're entitled to their own facts.

For instance...

liberal President from Chicago who by all accounts is way more like a European leader than a typical American President,

I'm glad that someone caught my meaning.

[izixs]

One reason for the trends that you complain about in your opening post is that people are increasingly likely to believe that they're entitled to their own facts.

For instance...

liberal President from Chicago who by all accounts is way more like a European leader than a typical American President,

I'm glad that someone caught my meaning.

Exactly. One can not complain about the extremes being out of touch without first making sure one's own perspective is reasonably clear of assumptions that might not be grounded in fact. From the statement there about the president being from Chicago, its being implied that that's de facto a bad thing. Yes there's corruption in Chicago land politics, but unless there's legit links made to Obama, this innuendo is but a continuation of the factless slam folks use against him. Same with the European comment. Why are European leaders bad? Aren't most of those countries our allies? Even the right wing leaders in Europe are bad because they're European? Questions like these should be asked before one makes statements like that, be you from the right, left, middle, or somewhere else.

Mr. Fan, you're complaining about the left and the right being unhappy or wanting things you feel are unreasonable. Don't just call them crazy and unreasonable, figure out why they're all about stuff you find unreasonable, and I don't just mean in terms of their lines of logic. People make irrational decisions for a reason. If a guy is pounding his chest for Paul it might not just because he's anti-war or a big fan of Ayn Rand. That's not the end of the story. Maybe he's been against war since the start and sees the President as not doing enough to fix that. Maybe his perceptions of liberty revolve around a hedonistic impulse caused by nothing in the world seeming to be getting better and thus the Randian view of self-centered philosophy is appealing. There's a reason he's about these things. Same with the protestor who'd rather have a Chinese style communist then Obama and is occupying wall street. They might of wanted the wall street reform law to be harsher and for there to of been a public option in health care reform. Similar to the randian before, they're seeing things only getting worse and so are looking for recourse of some form to get back at the institution they feel has been robbing not just the government but the entire society for years, and maybe they don't think they'll be able to afford health care, subsidies or not. These underlying issues are the one's people are caring about. Auditing the federal reserve is just a symptom.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Naso, you know a s**t about Communism.

[Wonkish1]

Naso, you know a s**t about Communism.

I'm assuming you mean "you don't know s**t about communism"?

I will say one thing I do love Polish politics. In Poland I vote for 1 party and if I lost, I wouldn't be to bothered because the other party isn't that bad either. I'm personally more of a fan of Civic Platform myself.

But the one thing I don't get is why the 2 largest parties(which are pretty similar) aren't just a coalition government. It seems like the reason they aren't is more personal than political, right?

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

I have had enough of the insanity...

don't be so hard on yourself...we all love you, Mikey.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

I have had enough of the insanity. In years past, I've been seen as an extreme right-winger, but I have come to realize perhaps I'm more establishment than I thought.

On the one hand, you have the far right. The few people in a debate audience who boo a gay soldier or wish that there was almost a non-existent Government. I'm all for small Government, and I do believe like Ronald Reagan said The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.' That having been said, you have the extremists and the Ron Paul crowd who go so far as to have a complete and utter non-interventionist policy to whereas if Palestinians were executing Israelis in the streets, he would say, "Let's stay out of it" and in a way he almost come across liberal. I think this is where he gets his mega-huge youth coalition from.

Then on the other end, you have people who have their party in power, a liberal President from Chicago who by all accounts is way more like a European leader than a typical American President, and they feel betrayed by him as if he isn't liberal enough! I saw two days ago on the news the protesters in New York on Wall Street. One of them was asked who they thought should be President. He responded, "Mao Zedong". He's a communist. We were at war with them just 20 years ago for goodness sake!

It's gotten to the point to where if Reagan were running today, he wouldn't be conservative enough, and we have a liberal Democratic president who isn't liberal enough! When does it stop?

The bold part is a pretty conservative idea actually. Its Liberal to be interventionalist. And why should we care anyway?

[courts]

I have had enough of the insanity. In years past, I've been seen as an extreme right-winger, but I have come to realize perhaps I'm more establishment than I thought.

On the one hand, you have the far right. The few people in a debate audience who boo a gay soldier or wish that there was almost a non-existent Government. I'm all for small Government, and I do believe like Ronald Reagan said The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.' That having been said, you have the extremists and the Ron Paul crowd who go so far as to have a complete and utter non-interventionist policy to whereas if Palestinians were executing Israelis in the streets, he would say, "Let's stay out of it" and in a way he almost come across liberal. I think this is where he gets his mega-huge youth coalition from.

Then on the other end, you have people who have their party in power, a liberal President from Chicago who by all accounts is way more like a European leader than a typical American President, and they feel betrayed by him as if he isn't liberal enough! I saw two days ago on the news the protesters in New York on Wall Street. One of them was asked who they thought should be President. He responded, "Mao Zedong". He's a communist. We were at war with them just 20 years ago for goodness sake!

It's gotten to the point to where if Reagan were running today, he wouldn't be conservative enough, and we have a liberal Democratic president who isn't liberal enough! When does it stop?

The bold part is a pretty conservative idea actually. Its Liberal to be interventionalist. And why should we care anyway?

Because Naso is a typical RINO schmendrick.. Well not RINO by now since they've infested your party, but you get the idea. The idea of 'almost non-existent government' (by which he means constitutionally authorized government) gives him the vapors, never mind that.

[phk]

I have had enough of the insanity. In years past, I've been seen as an extreme right-winger, but I have come to realize perhaps I'm more establishment than I thought.

On the one hand, you have the far right. The few people in a debate audience who boo a gay soldier or wish that there was almost a non-existent Government. I'm all for small Government, and I do believe like Ronald Reagan said The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.' That having been said, you have the extremists and the Ron Paul crowd who go so far as to have a complete and utter non-interventionist policy to whereas if Palestinians were executing Israelis in the streets, he would say, "Let's stay out of it" and in a way he almost come across liberal. I think this is where he gets his mega-huge youth coalition from.

Then on the other end, you have people who have their party in power, a liberal President from Chicago who by all accounts is way more like a European leader than a typical American President, and they feel betrayed by him as if he isn't liberal enough! I saw two days ago on the news the protesters in New York on Wall Street. One of them was asked who they thought should be President. He responded, "Mao Zedong". He's a communist. We were at war with them just 20 years ago for goodness sake!

It's gotten to the point to where if Reagan were running today, he wouldn't be conservative enough, and we have a liberal Democratic president who isn't liberal enough! When does it stop?

The bold part is a pretty conservative idea actually. Its Liberal to be interventionalist. And why should we care anyway?

Because Naso is a typical RINO schmendrick.. Well not RINO by now since they've infested your party, but you get the idea. The idea of 'almost non-existent government' (by which he means constitutionally authorized government) gives him the vapors, never mind that.

[All Along The Watchtower]

Naso 2012

Start the write-in today.