Your political compass
Economic Left/Right: -2.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.82
Your political compass
Economic Left/Right: -2.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.82
I like this Poll better than the other, nice one, there are however many issues in which I had a lot of doubts, I'm sure that if I repeated this test 5 times in the space of 5 weeks, I would have 5 completely different results
Wow, I'm too lazy to take that test. ~+~
dont understand all the english , its pretty hard
I have an extremely hard time taking politicalcompass.com seriously given their own rankings of things on the site.
Hey guys, what do you get when you combine Republicans, and the Senate?
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2012959682_gophealth22.html
! I don't think you'll want to answer that.
So US policy these days amounts to "lol, we're taking back what the other party did cause they disagree with us".
The Tea Party and their ilk are springing up because American voters have to choose between a wishy washy president who seems incapable of doing what he said and a backwards Republican party led by Sarah Palin.
It's a teensy-weensy more complex than that, Artist Formally Known As Ratigan.
Enlighten me.
Well, let's start with the initial post for the time being. This sentence you wrote:
The Tea Party and their ilk are springing up because American voters have to choose between a wishy washy president who seems incapable of doing what he said and a backwards Republican party led by Sarah Palin.
is incorrect on several levels. First, Tea Partiers are springing up because it happens to be a mid-term election. A vast majority of the time, the minority party gains a considerable amount of seats. This is due to a whole set of factors that can be traced mostly to the enthusiasm gap between people who vote for Republican candidates rather than people who turn out for the Democrats. Look here for more details.
Second, Obama is pretty good at keeping his promises considering the fact that, yes, governing is far more difficult than campaigning and yes, there is one political party that has been extremely obstructionist cunts over the past two years. Remember 'Mr. Smith Goes To Washington'? Yeah, it takes 60 Senators to do shit in the Senate nowadays.
Third, the Tea Partiers have wholly embraced Sarah Palin as their backwards figurehead. Establishment Republicans fucking hate her (see: Castle, Mike).
This guy?
This guy?
Loves Sarah Palin and her Mama Grizzlies.
The Tea Party movement is made up of super-duper conservatives who were all meh about John McCain but love the super pro-life, super anti-gay marriage, super 'let's-nuke-the-turbanheads' position. If the US was in a culture war, Sarah Palin would be Xena, Warrior Conservative. Tea Partiers eat that stuff up.
That's it for starters.
(Note: I'm coming from a pro-Blue perspective. Can Obama be better? Sure. Is he wishy-washy? Fuck no. He's accomplished a ton in two years, all things considered.)
On the topic of parties I would like to share this with you all:
"The 18 percent of Americans who identify themselves as Tea Party supporters tend to be Republican, white, male, married and older than 45, according to a New York Times/CBS News poll released in April 2010. They are wealthier and better-educated than the general public." -NYTIMES
Can you source the article with a link? Not that it really matters to me. I would just prefer to read the whole article.
All government is corrupted especially ours….... fuckin illuminati.
On the topic of parties I would like to share this with you all:
"The 18 percent of Americans who identify themselves as Tea Party supporters tend to be Republican, white, male, married and older than 45, according to a New York Times/CBS News poll released in April 2010. They are wealthier and better-educated than the general public." -NYTIMES
Gonzo right wing movement supported by old people who have lots of money and social clout????
I can't believe how many stereotypes you just destroyed…
http://www.tri-cityherald.com/2010/09/22/1179303/gop-will-try-to-get-own-candidate.html
@Republican:
"This is the party of Lincoln."
Oh Republicans, you wacky old scumbags, you!
Lincoln! The unrepentant pretty-much athiest who spoke against the imperialistic tendancies of not even born neo-conservatism and literally declared and fought war against "states rights".
That's us!
Ah, but Lincoln has a good rep to him and well deserved! That's all anyone is aiming at when they associate themselves with Lincoln.
and well deserved!
Not the one he has, no.
In unrelated, though worrying news:
Ken got the labour vote for mayoral candidate in London.
Might vote for him again depending on his policies. Congestion charge & most of his first term stuff was good(though his second term was a bit of a mess).
Though I'd vote for boris again if he makes some kind of attempt to crush the train unions.
Not the one he has, no.
In unrelated, though worrying news:
For his short time in office he was plagued by a nation fighting against itself and in the aftermath he managed to keep the nation whole. There's also the abolition of slavery or at least his attempt.
And virus sabotage with state wide funding. That's the future…or present.
For his short time in office he was plagued by a nation fighting against itself and in the aftermath he managed to keep the nation whole.
Right, but in context of what the the populace majority (and the Republicans in this case) believes, or says to believe, he's just 'the guy who freed the slaves', because he was so very sympathetic to their plight. That's the problem here, not what he actually did, or who he really was.
Quotes from Lincoln.
My earlier views of the unsoundness of the Christian scheme of salvation and the human origin of the scriptures, have become clearer and stronger with advancing years and I see no reason for thinking I shall ever change them.
The Bible is not my book nor Christianity my profession.
The only person who is a worse liar than a faith healer is his patient.
When the Know-Nothings get control, it [the Declaration of Independence] will read: "All men are created equal except negroes, foreigners and Catholics." When it comes to this I should prefer emigrating to some country where they make no pretense of loving liberty – to Russia, for instance, where despotism can be taken pure, and without the base alloy of hypocrisy.
And my favorite.
Allow the President to invade a neighboring nation whenever he shall deem it necessary to repel an invasion and you allow him to do so whenever he may choose to say he deems it necessary for such purpose, and you allow him to make war at pleasure….
If today he should choose to say he thinks it necessary to invade Canada to prevent the British from invading us, how could you stop him? You may say to him, "I see no probability of the British invading us," but he will say to you, "Be silent; I see it, if you don't."
I: "Mr President, I see you're not to fond of Christians and their scriptures."
A: "Meh, to each his own but I do love their apple pies."
I: "Would you prefer a dictatorship or a democracy?"
A: "A united country. Under democracy of course."
I: "Decision to go to war?"
A: "Common sense. Unanimous common sense."
I: "Mr. President, why do you wear that hat?"
A: "For a million and one tricks. This interview is over."
@Abraham:
When the Know-Nothings get control, it [the Declaration of Independence] will read: "All men are created equal except negroes, foreigners and Catholics." Well, it's good to kn-
It's good to know we're going in the right direction.
This talk of Lincoln and the like reminds me:
Aren't these nutters comparing themselves to the founding fathers, despite the fact that at best they were not only deists, but one of them, Jefferson, went ahead and cut out the pages of the Bible he didn't like (no supernatural stuff or anything anti-intellectual allowed), making it considerably lighter?
Comparing yourself to the founding fathers is inherently retarded since they were a diverse group who disagreed on a ton of fucking things. It's a meaningless statement.
Oh whoops, sorry, I'm not rich or highly educated and I'm young, guess I better bow down to the superior statistics.
@JERK:
Oh whoops, sorry, I'm not rich or highly educated and I'm young, guess I better bow down to the superior statistics.
[rant]
You wouldn't believe how many times I've been told, "Cuddles, your heart is in the right place, but you're young and you haven't experienced enough of life yet to have a big view of things"
Then that person would go back to praising Jesus for the umpteenth time while listening to a radio jock that equates Christianity with being a good conservative.
Note: I ain't trying to make a tirade against religion, I'm just pointing out the stupidity of how being young=being ignorant when people decades older than me have acquired a stubborn ignorance of how things are and have mixed up repeating the same ideas over and over with what's true (I hope I got my point across there).
Basically, they're old people who haven't learned a damned thing but thinks that they're seniority is worth something.[/rant]
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20016461-503544.html
I feel bad for you, IStBC; and any other New Yorker members. And New York.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20016461-503544.html
I feel bad for you, IStBC; and any other New Yorker members. And New York.
…. Ugh! NY State politics--don't get me started! --this year has been particularly high on the stupidity index.
the tea party doesn't have a race problem guys!!!! i swear!!
it is definitely not involved in fearful othering of vague non-whiteness!!! at all!
Sorry for using a talk show clip, but I couldn't find the vid they showcase by itself.
Probably nothing new or surprising, but I lol'd:
[hide]CmmGOgVhreo[/hide]
It's cute watching them pretend to care about the deficit, small businesses and the middle class.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20016461-503544.html
I feel bad for you, IStBC; and any other New Yorker members. And New York.
Oh my God someone call Victor, his monster's on the loose…
Oh wait, that's only a politician.
reads article
Oh wait, that's only a New York politician.
sees comment section
Maybe some readers will-
reads first comment about democrat = socialist
Fucking hell.
The bright side is the more loons like this win primaries the more they're insanity comes mainstream, the more it frightens people, the more it loses it's rebel appeal, the sooner it dies and it's disgusting and/or lazy ideals stiffen up and hack out their last breaths.
So Ed is the new Mr. Labour, what are the prognostics for the future labour party?
I think they're in the wilderness for ten years at least.
I don't believe labour really will "unite behind him", the only way you'd catch some of them behind him is to stab him in the back. Plus he has all the charisma of a steamed haddock.
Shame bananaman didn't win, that would have been entertaining at least.
I think they're in the wilderness for ten years at least.
I don't believe labour really will "unite behind him", the only way you'd catch some of them behind him is to stab him in the back. Plus he has all the charisma of a steamed haddock.
Shame bananaman didn't win, that would have been entertaining at least.
Yeah, what I thought.
Cameron too isn't too charismatic. I remember they were saying that he was like Blair, but untill now I haven't seen him approaching half of Blair's charisma.
That's true, Blair would have beaten him easily.
But Cameron lucked out when Brown decided to stab Blair in the back and screw both his party and the country.
Yeah, what I thought.
Cameron too isn't too charismatic. I remember they were saying that he was like Blair, but untill now I haven't seen him approaching half of Blair's charisma.
I doubt he would be after his fathers death, the pressure of war, economical instability, lib dem confrontation and the overall intensity of his new position.
Give him 6 months to get his bearings and I'm sure he'll return to public appearances on a more regular basis.
(which itself is a game of smiles and good PR stunts)
The government does not know the internet.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/27/us/27wiretap.html?_r=2&hp
@Dog:
"ARF!"
"What's that, boy? Hope and change?!"
"ARF!"
…
"ARF!"
"Oh. Another tennis ball."
"ARF! ARF!"
"Should've gotten the fucking beagle."
The government does not know the internet.
FUCK Obama and the meglomaniac direction he's adopting.
Where are you going to draw the line aye?
It would be nice to see the US take a step back from the international community for a while till the tension decreases.
It would be nice to see the US take a step back from the international community for a while till the tension decreases.
I have some sincere doubts that is what will happen now, or in the near future. Namely because of the idiocy that is the American right-wing and general conservatism, corporate interests dominating every aspect of our political system and its elected officials, and stuff like this:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/sep/22/gaza-flotilla-un-condemns-israeli-brutality
This is a whole other can of worms, though.
FUCK Obama and the meglomaniac direction he's adopting.
Where are you going to draw the line aye?
- US pisses of middle east
- middle east retaliate
- US invades privacy and freedom of it's own citizens in an attempt to curb inevitable collateral damage.
It would be nice to see the US take a step back from the international community for a while till the tension decreases.
Right, because it's Obama's fault we're in the Middle East. Checking facts.
I'm too tired for this but look, I don't care if you have a problem with Obama, U.S. policy, U.K. policy, or whatever kinda policy pisses you off but right now we're over in the Middle East to help maintain peace and order as much as possible. Please don't say the region will be more peaceful if we immediately just pack up and leave because that would be a load of BS. To honestly think we offer no safeguard or intermediary reasoning against violence in that region would be a false assumption.
Right now we're helping the Palestinians build and train a proper police force to maintain order in their own country. Their government want us to stay so that they can accomplish this task. Furthermore, negotiations are gearing up right now, slowly but surely, for peace talks between Israel and Palestine. Some (many?) people, obviously, are against this and already are acting out violently against citizens and government officials to spur hate and demean these peace talks. If anything, more than before American forces are needed to keep the peace talks from collapsing. Stop attempted attacks and keep officials safe. For the record, I'm not bringing up any past assumed or informed reasons why we're in the Middle East.
As for our Homeland Security keeping track of potential threats on the internet… sigh Should I bring up the Patriot Act? Honestly, would you rather have potential threats convening freely on the internet with no safeguard against them?
"Drug cartel earlier this year was stymied because smugglers used peer-to-peer software, which is difficult to intercept because it is not routed through a central hub. Agents eventually installed surveillance equipment in a suspect’s office, but that tactic was “risky,” the official said, and the delay “prevented the interception of pertinent communications."
"Moreover, according to several other officials, after the failed Times Square bombing in May, investigators discovered that the suspect, Faisal Shahzad, had been communicating with a service that lacked prebuilt interception capacity. If he had aroused suspicion beforehand, there would have been a delay before he could have been wiretapped."
Well damn, I'm glad people of all sorts can talk freely about anything on peer-to-peer networks without ever having to fear themselves being busted. Why? Oh, because we don't want the government in our business. Now, this is true. I like my privacy. I also like my safety and believe it or not, the safety of others. It's impossible to police the entire internet but if we can give some advantage to the authorities to help them keep track of dangerous activities and information being passed around on the world wide web then I don't see the problem.
And it seems a right-wing coalition has been formed in the Netherlands. After 1/3 of a year we have another government.
I give it another 1/3 of a year before it falls miserably.
Outerspec.
You act as if my post shouldered the Iraq and Afghan war entirely on Obama , despite it obviously being aimed the bill quoted above. And yeah I do think Obama is a complete tosser.
A - The bill (invasion of privacy)
B - His continuous support of a corrupt war.
Secondly you start wittering on about our role to fix these countries. Do I need to remind you that practically all violence in these regions are caused by invading their country, stealing their main resources, plunging it into the dark ages, innocent civilians dying left right & centre. And finally by removing the only leadership they had without having any fucking clue how to restore it.
This is only slightly redeemed by the fact that after all this time we are making some form of progress in re-establishing stability with police and army training.
It pisses me off the way people brush aside the fact that every day our freedom is being curbed and monitored more and more as a consequence of an illegal war.
Bush should stand trial.
Outerspec.
You act as if my post shouldered the Iraq and Afghan war entirely on Obama , despite it obviously being aimed the bill quoted above. And yeah I do think Obama is a complete tosser.
A - The bill (invasion of privacy)
B - His continuous support of a corrupt war.Secondly you start wittering on about our role to fix these countries. Do I need to remind you that practically all violence in these regions are caused by invading their country, stealing their main resources, plunging it into the dark ages, innocent civilians dying left right & centre. And finally by removing the only leadership they had without having any fucking clue how to restore it.
This is only slightly redeemed by the fact that after all this time we are making some form of progress in re-establishing stability with police and army training.
It pisses me off the way people brush aside the fact that every day our freedom is being curbed and monitored more and more as a consequence of an illegal war.
Bush should stand trial.
No, your post wasn't claiming the entire fault of the Iraq and Afghanistan war was on Obama's shoulder, nor was my post correcting you on that. Instead all I pointed out was that Obama did not start this war, he's just been handed gloves to a shitty problem and he's trying to fix it. Secondly I was pointing out why we're over there now. Your "corrupt war" that he's supporting right now is more of a war to help the regions strengthen themselves.
Really, I could have sworn I said I don't care how you feel about Obama. I don't agree with half the things he does but I don't blind myself to the good he does too. Which relates back to that bill. People always complain about invasion of privacy to help protect themselves. This is good, we all have rights and we should use them freely. Until asshole terrorists use those rights to talk privately amongst themselves and are now protected because people didn't want the government in on their internet business. Yay~! Why should we help the government keep up-to-date on security measures for this country? For any country? This is a global problem of course. Even pedophiles just chatting away freely on the global internet unmonitored.
You're talking about brushing facts of freedom aside. Ok, but you're also talking about brshing facts of safety aside. If you're reasonable and can accept one then you must accept the other. It's a give and take situation. Not just give, give, give. Give me freedom and screw you for worrying about my safety.
Eh, I could go on and on about irritating shit like that.
In most countries, foreign policy is the same whatever the party in charge. The same with the USA. Obama didn't drastically change his foreign policy. The real question isn't the war in Iraq or Afghanistan, the real question is the presence of US troops in every damn country in the middle east and the countries who don't want an American base (Syria, Iran, Lybia) are considered Rogue states.
It's all about control. Imagine The Chinese or Saudis having a military base in the US. How would you feel?
In most countries, foreign policy is the same whatever the party in charge. The same with the USA. Obama didn't drastically change his foreign policy. The real question isn't the war in Iraq or Afghanistan, the real question is the presence of US troops in every damn country in the middle east and the countries who don't want an American base (Syria, Iran, Lybia) are considered Rogue states.
It's all about control. Imagine The Chinese or Saudis having a military base in the US. How would you feel?
I'd feel a little invaded, maybe even threatened or offended but honestly I'm not completely sure on how'd I feel since I've never had to experience it. I do think America needs to stop trying to police the entire world with militaristic power for selfish reasons, but as one of the leading influential nations in this world America does have a duty of setting examples for other nations. Also helping other nations when in need even if it means using military force. For example helping developing nations with their economy and infrastructure or a country that can't defend itself from foreign invaders or attack.