[Mars]

you know posts like "LOL STOOPID REPUBLICANS!" don't do anything but piss us off further and make it more likely you get rants like liberator's.  and locking threads because someone posts a dissenting opinion is just plain childish.

So you're saying that Liberator's views are common to all Republicans?

Because I doubt it, and I don't think that you were trying to say that.

The fact is, the problem I have with the Republican party is that some factions, I agree with a lot (the libertarian sections for instance), some are actually fiscal conservatives (they are rare, but do exist), and then there are the ones who want a theocracy in everything but name.

The stupid part is that most of these factions are utterly incompatible, but they protect each other, in the name of the Republican party. It doesn't make any sense.

It's like the Anarchists and Monarchists got together and formed a party. Just to get more power.

[Nuclear1]

American Leftie checking in.

[Mongoose]

Screw "Leftie" or "Rightie," I just call myself a "Pragmatist."  If a policy seems sensible and isn't completely stupid, I'm usually on-board.

[Mars]

Screw "Leftie" or "Rightie," I just call myself a "Pragmatist."  If a policy seems sensible and isn't completely stupid, I'm usually on-board.

"Leftie" or "rightie" is usually defined by WHAT policies you think are sensible.

[achtung]

Screw "Leftie" or "Rightie," I just call myself a "Pragmatist."  If a policy seems sensible and isn't completely stupid, I'm usually on-board.

"Leftie" or "rightie" is usually defined by WHAT policies you think are sensible.

The problem lies in the fact that people start identifying themselves with a specific group. In turn this leads to them accepting policies they might have otherwise disagreed with, or put more thought into, merely because their "team" came up with it. This is why I have a strong distaste for any form of long-term political parties.

[Mars]

I would generally agree, but I'm talking much more in terms of political science terms and much less about specific parties:

The stupid part is that most of these factions are utterly incompatible, but they protect each other, in the name of the Republican party. It doesn't make any sense.

It's like the Anarchists and Monarchists got together and formed a party. Just to get more power.

Is my general feeling on most parties, but the Republican party takes it to rather an extreme.

[karajorma]

you know posts like "LOL STOOPID REPUBLICANS!" don't do anything but piss us off further and make it more likely you get rants like liberator's.  and locking threads because someone posts a dissenting opinion is just plain childish.

Except no one is saying "LOL STOOPID REPUBLICANS!" The republicans party itself is actually quite clever. They've decided that they don't care about ****ing over the working and lower middle class in order to make more money for themselves. What is amazing is that they've managed to get those exact same people to agree that it's a very good idea.

Now Liberator is a completely different kettle of fish. When it comes to politics, he's basically like a dog who has figured out how to speak in English instead of barking. That doesn't mean he can actually express anything like a rational answer when pressed on any subject. Time and time again he has posted in this ilk and when asked to defend his position he's simply moved on to the next ill-founded assertion. I'd have just as much of a problem with him if he was a Democrat.

Now if you want to explain a different reason why poor people continue to argue against tax increases that wouldn't affect them you're more than welcome to do so. Hell, for that matter if Liberator wants to make a well reasoned argument rather than spewing rhetoric he's more than welcome to do so. What he can't do is post the sort of crap he posted earlier on.

[General Battuta]

you know posts like "LOL STOOPID REPUBLICANS!" don't do anything but piss us off further and make it more likely you get rants like liberator's.  and locking threads because someone posts a dissenting opinion is just plain childish.

I agree. This thread wasn't locked because someone posted a dissenting opinion, it was locked because Liberator posted about politics in it. That is an event which has a history of leading to terrible, stupid threads.

Nemesis' threads have gotten locked for the same reasons and he's not a Republican or conservative.

It was the opposite of childish. In fact I wouldn't mind an apology.

[Inquisitor]

I love the Beck-derived insult of "leftist"

Makes it so much easier to call me a communist. see what you did there with the -ist? classy and subtle.

[karajorma]

I agree. This thread wasn't locked because someone posted a dissenting opinion, it was locked because Liberator posted about politics in it. That is an event which has a history of leading to terrible, stupid threads.

Nemesis' threads have gotten locked for the same reasons and he's not a Republican or conservative.

It was the opposite of childish. In fact I wouldn't mind an apology.

Which is why I took took the rare step of over-ruling a moderator and reopened it. As an admin I can actually tell people not to respond to the troll (intentional or otherwise) and actually enforce it.

I can fully understand why a moderator might lock it. Although I might be tempted to split lock in your position. We shouldn't give Liberator the ability to censor any thread with an opinion he doesn't like after all.

[Nuclear1]

I love the Beck-derived insult of "leftist"

Makes it so much easier to call me a communist. see what you did there with the -ist? classy and subtle.

As I have to keep reminding my conservative friends down here in the states, communism and socialism are leftist ideologies, but not all leftist ideologies are socialism and communism.

I find it absolutely ironic though that Beck would consistently go on tirades against liberals here and still himself unwittingly support known communist ideas.

[MP-Ryan]

I find it absolutely ironic though that Beck would consistently go on tirades against liberals here and still himself unwittingly support known communist ideas.

It's not all that ironic.  Beck is in the business of making money.  He doesn't really care how.  The more he rants, the more he rakes in.  So long as his rant is at least partially coherent (or coherent to the Fox News crowd), it doesn't matter what he says - the people who religiously follow him (if you'll pardon the allusion) don't appear to be have the education or critical thinking ability to figure out that he ideologically makes no sense.

[Mongoose]

Screw "Leftie" or "Rightie," I just call myself a "Pragmatist."  If a policy seems sensible and isn't completely stupid, I'm usually on-board.

"Leftie" or "rightie" is usually defined by WHAT policies you think are sensible.

The problem lies in the fact that people start identifying themselves with a specific group. In turn this leads to them accepting policies they might have otherwise disagreed with, or put more thought into, merely because their "team" came up with it. This is why I have a strong distaste for any form of long-term political parties.

Pretty much this exactly.  Going by the general platforms of both parties, I'm somewhere smack-dab in the middle of them.  I like the general idea of fiscal conservatism, but I think that having some degree of national healthcare system makes a lot of sense too.  There are one or two areas of social conservatism I'm on board with, but most of the others I either don't give a fig about either way or consider bat**** insane.  I'm all for mitigating climate change, too.  Since I can't pigeonhole myself into either of the loosely-defined coalitions we call "parties," I just stick with "Pragmatist" and be done with it.

[General Battuta]

Most Americans cannot reliably place themselves or the parties on a left/right spectrum along with their various positions. In any given election the voters generally have trouble doing the same thing with the candidates.

The electorate is (probably) a lot less polarized than you'd believe.

[TopAce]

Most Americans cannot reliably place themselves or the parties on a left/right spectrum along with their various positions. In any given election the voters generally have trouble doing the same thing with the candidates.

That's a welcome feature in a healthy democracy. Perfectly predictable elections are no real elections. That means that either party must botcher up very seriously to make elections sensible again.

[General Battuta]

Most Americans cannot reliably place themselves or the parties on a left/right spectrum along with their various positions. In any given election the voters generally have trouble doing the same thing with the candidates.

That's a welcome feature in a healthy democracy. Perfectly predictable elections are no real elections. That means that either party must botcher up very seriously to make elections sensible again.

wat

Elections are still completely predictable. In fact political scientists generally call them months in advance. All that you really need to have is data about the economy and wartime/peacetime status. Campaigns don't matter mch.

And it's a very unwelcome feature that voters don't know what the candidates are advocating or what they believe in.

[BengalTiger]

(or coherent to the Fox News crowd)

That's quite a big crowd you're writing about.

In January 2010, Public Policy Polling reported that Fox News was the most trusted television news channel in the country with 49% of respondents stating they trust Fox News.[38][39] Fox also scored the lowest level of distrust with only 37%, and was the only channel to score a net positive in that regard, with a +12%. CNN scored second in the poll with 39% of those polled stating that they trusted the news channel, and 41% stating distrust, a -2% net score.[40]

And about the topic- what sucks in the US is that there's only 2 big parties. That doesn't give much of a choice on which one to vote for.

[Nuclear1]

That's quite a big crowd you're writing about.

Fox might have a lot of viewers, but that doesn't mean those viewers are smart.

In fact, I recall a study that came out just this month that says the average Fox News viewer is actually less politically-educated than their MSNBC counterparts.

[Canna_Bis]

And about the topic- what sucks in the US is that there's only 2 big parties. That doesn't give much of a choice on which one to vote for.

We have it worse. Poland has a lot of parties, but since the fall of communism only tne names changed. Everything is the same. The Solidarity's (Lech Walesa's) ideals were wasted to some mafia-like "politicians"... The only thing that has changes since the "deastructon" of communism is the name of a party.

You're pretty lucky tkat you have only two. At least you know who is who.  A lot of our society  listen to what a priest (If you vote for Kwasniewski you commit a sin!!!) is saying.

The Catholic Church in Poland doesn't pay taxes, customs etc... But every Polish citizen have to pay a church tax. Google for the "return of the Catholics' Church Property"... At least you're not the European Catholic Iran...

Edit:

Sorry 4 my English... I'm not a native speaker.

Edit2:

One of our most prominent church figures, who made the vovs of poverty is driving a Maybach and has a private university...

[Nemesis6]

The Catholic Church in Poland doesn't pay taxes, customs etc... But every Polish citizen have to pay a church tax. Google for the "return of the Catholics' Church Property"... At least you're not the European Catholic Iran...

It's a little different here in Denmark, but not much. We have Church Tax, too. There is, however, no standardized way of getting out of it. Once you're baptised, you're automatically signed up to pay what should be a Church Tax at around 0.84% of your yearly income, paying every month. So, there's a Danish website that has a standardized form that you can just fill out and send to them. That should get the bloodsuckers permanently off my back, so I gotta get that done.