Difference between revisions of "Talk:Bush neoconservative/archive"
(re-ordered comments and put in additional link to moved dialogue) |
|||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
==Re: Party Split== | ==Re: Party Split== | ||
As one caught in the middle, it appears to me that the Democrats are really just that far left. Everything their party does is okay, because they truly believe we should be a socialist nanny state. And while I loathe the direction the Republicans are heading, they still maintain the core issues I believe in: Less taxes (resulting in less government), right to protect myself, etc. It is more and more an issue of the lesser of two extreme evils. | As one caught in the middle, it appears to me that the Democrats are really just that far left. Everything their party does is okay, because they truly believe we should be a socialist nanny state. And while I loathe the direction the Republicans are heading, they still maintain the core issues I believe in: Less taxes (resulting in less government), right to protect myself, etc. It is more and more an issue of the lesser of two extreme evils. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ::Addendum: While I agree there is a large faction of the Republicans who are going as extreme right as the Democrats are left, not even half the Republicans in office are that far right, and that's why I'll continue to vote Republican. | ||
Revision as of 16:36, 15 September 2006
Under President Clinton, a similar list could apply to most Democrats. Does that make them "neolibs", "socialists", or is the Democrat party just really that far left?
- the US Invasion of Iraq (And Haiti, and Somalia, and Bosnia)
- President William J. Clinton
- the precedence of presidential authority over constitutional law
- the actions of the president are above the law (sexual assault, perjury, etc.)
- big government spending for political ends
Midian 12:06, 30 August 2006 (EDT)
Woozle replies
I'm not sure I am understanding some of your points above. Overall, you seem to be saying that there was a similar breakaway cabal during the Clinton years, and so there should be a similar term for them. However, during the Clinton administration there was not, as far as I am aware, such a huge gap between Democratic/liberal ideals and the actual actions of elected officials in the Democratic party (including Clinton) as there is now between Republican/conservative ideals and the actual actions of elected officials in the Republican party -- especially at the very top. If I need to spell out the details of that gap, please let me know.
[ remainder moved ]
One discussion moved
I have moved the remainder of the discussion that was here over to Talk:Bill Clinton vs. George W. Bush, because that seemed to be more the ultimate topic. --Woozle 20:04, 13 September 2006 (EDT)
Re: Party Split
As one caught in the middle, it appears to me that the Democrats are really just that far left. Everything their party does is okay, because they truly believe we should be a socialist nanny state. And while I loathe the direction the Republicans are heading, they still maintain the core issues I believe in: Less taxes (resulting in less government), right to protect myself, etc. It is more and more an issue of the lesser of two extreme evils.
- Addendum: While I agree there is a large faction of the Republicans who are going as extreme right as the Democrats are left, not even half the Republicans in office are that far right, and that's why I'll continue to vote Republican.