Schwarzenegger: ‘Extreme Right Wing’ Of Republican Party Has Litmus Test That ‘Doesn’t Allow Compromise’

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jerry_Miah
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
No, we are not talking relative positions. If you scroll up and read, you will see we are talking about standards relating to the last few decades and western democracies in general.
Scrolling up is not going to find any hard fast objective criteria for left, right and center. Whomever set the criteria would be setting it based on their own perspective.
 
Scrolling up is not going to find any hard fast objective criteria for left, right and center. Whomever set the criteria would be setting it based on their own perspective.
No, we are setting it by criteria based on standard definitions relating to the contemporary world politics and the last few decades. Scrolling up will indeed provide you with info about this so it doesn’t have to be repeated.
 
If you look more carefully, you will see this was in reply to JimR-OCDS, who was the one who said the GOP has been ruined by the extreme right wingers. Take it up with him. The rest of your questions, and your debunked claim that the Dems have an extreme leftist agenda, can also be answered by reading the thread.
Nice dodge, Jerry Miah. JimR-OCDS claimed that the extreme right ruined the GOP. He gave no reason or evidence for his assertion. You agreed with him. Why do you think the GOP has been ruined by the right? Or are you not able to back up the claims you agree are true?

As for the Democrats’ extreme left agenda. You don’t understand two things: one is the leftist secular agenda which seeks to bring down the institutions of our traditional judeo-christian culture family, marriage and church. Redefine marriage so that it means whatever anyone wants it to mean, and therefore nothing. Replace the Church and God as the source of truth with the all-knowing, all providing state (ever heard of the Julia ad?). In short, its the brave new world of the liberal/left secular state, embraced by most Democrats atleast at the national level. Second, you don’t understand incrementalism - the slow, methodical approach to transforming our country from a constitutional republic to that of a modern socialist cradle to grave welfare state “social democracy.” It is a process that has taken years. A huge piece of that agenda is the passing of Obamacare - which included the HHS mandate, as you know. Its incremental because if the left to tried to pass its agenda all at once they would be humiliated at the next election, more than usual because America isn’t a left or even liberal country but a center/right country. Don’t feel bad, most Democrat/liberals on these threads either don’t understand these two points or they ignore them. My goal here isn’t really to convince you of anything, but rather to provide a counter viewpoint for those lurkers and other posters here who are following these threads.

Ishii
 
Nice dodge, Jerry Miah. JimR-OCDS claimed that the extreme right ruined the GOP. He gave no reason or evidence for his assertion. You agreed with him. Why do you think the GOP has been ruined by the right? Or are you not able to back up the claims you agree are true?

As for the Democrats’ extreme left agenda. You don’t understand two things: one is the leftist secular agenda which seeks to bring down the institutions of our traditional judeo-christian culture family, marriage and church. Redefine marriage so that it means whatever anyone wants it to mean, and therefore nothing. Replace the Church and God as the source of truth with the all-knowing, all providing state (ever heard of the Julia ad?). In short, its the brave new world of the liberal/left secular state, embraced by most Democrats atleast at the national level. Second, you don’t understand incrementalism - the slow, methodical approach to transforming our country from a constitutional republic to that of a modern socialist cradle to grave welfare state “social democracy.” It is a process that has taken years. A huge piece of that agenda is the passing of Obamacare - which included the HHS mandate, as you know. Its incremental because if the left to tried to pass its agenda all at once they would be humiliated at the next election, more than usual because America isn’t a left or even liberal country but a center/right country. Don’t feel bad, most Democrat/liberals on these threads either don’t understand these two points or they ignore them. My goal here isn’t really to convince you of anything, but rather to provide a counter viewpoint for those lurkers and other posters here who are following these threads.

Ishii
You’re wrong, Jim and I both listed plenty of reasons. Try forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=9280127&postcount=137
or search on Jim’s, I don’t have the time.

Essentially it sounds like you would be most comfortable in a theocracy, and so of course our society and government seems “extreme left” to you by that standpoint.
 
You’re wrong, Jim and I both listed plenty of reasons. Try forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=9280127&postcount=137
or search on Jim’s, I don’t have the time.
Its not that you don’t have the time, its that you don’t have an argument. Who knows what Barry Goldwater or any Democrat would have countenanced had their been a terrorist attack on New York at the time. You have no idea so its a stupid point. Pre-emptive war? You mean as opposed to the Bay of Pigs invasion or the Gulf of Tonkin incident and subsequent Vietnam war? Which Republican authorized those actions? Oh, that’s right, it wasn’t Bush in the 2000’s, it was under Democrats during the 1960’s.
Essentially it sounds like you would be most comfortable in a theocracy, and so of course our society and government seems “extreme left” to you by that standpoint.
Ha. When you engage in ad hominem name-calling like “you’re a theocrat!” you’re basically admitting that you have nothing of substance to say. Lame.

Ishii
 
Its not that you don’t have the time, its that you don’t have an argument. Who knows what Barry Goldwater or any Democrat would have countenanced had their been a terrorist attack on New York at the time. You have no idea so its a stupid point. Pre-emptive war? You mean as opposed to the Bay of Pigs invasion or the Gulf of Tonkin incident and subsequent Vietnam war? Which Republican authorized those actions? Oh, that’s right, it wasn’t Bush in the 2000’s, it was under Democrats during the 1960’s.

Ha. When you engage in ad hominem name-calling like “you’re a theocrat!” you’re basically admitting that you have nothing of substance to say. Lame.

Ishii
If you’re just going to say “stupid” and try to pretend I called you names when simply said that it sounds like you would be most comfortable in a theocracy, then it will be hard to have a real discussion with you. Why not start by reading Schwarzenegger’s essay about why he feels the extreme right wing is wrecking the GOP, and get back to me after that?
 
Maybe not as much economically as other countries (i.e we have no socialist party)
Actually we do. I’m not sure how many state ballots they appear on though. They’ve been on mine before. Not sure if they will be this yr. I’m not voting for them and I’m not advocating anyone vote for them. I’m only including the link for proof that there is such a thing. But if you go to their site and click “campaign clearing house” you’ll even see pics of their 2012 POTUS and VPOTUS candidates. Maybe you didn’t know about them though because our 2 major parties are the center/center left Democratic Party and the generally far right extreme Republicans of today. And they control a lot of the ballot access and requirements to participate in debates and so forth.

socialistparty-usa.org/
 
As much as we might abhor abortion, being in favor of it as a legal option it is not a far-left position by any means. It is legal by Supreme Court decision and it is a norm throughout western democracies. It is not at all “extreme left”.

Gay marriage. This is progressive-left but not extreme.

Euthanasia… Sorry but you’ll have to catch me up on that. What extreme position do Democrats push on that? I would be surprised there is anything beside the usual fake outrage

“hostility to religious institutions”… Please.

Sorry, there is not a “extreme left” issue in this list. Extreme left is actual Communism, is advocacy of nationalization (not the same as the bailouts in response to the crisis), is anarchism/Maoism. These simply do not exist in US national politics, which has consistently moved to the right in the last 30 years. Even the Socialist Party hasn’t made inroads.

As a reasonable person, I am sure you can see that the Democratic Party is centrist by any contemporary standard.
I must be more reasonable and centrist than even I realized. 👍
 
If you’re just going to say “stupid” and try to pretend I called you names when simply said that it sounds like you would be most comfortable in a theocracy, then it will be hard to have a real discussion with you. Why not start by reading Schwarzenegger’s essay about why he feels the extreme right wing is wrecking the GOP, and get back to me after that?
How about starting by explaining why you think the right “ruined” the GOP. Then when you’re done, explain why you called me a theocrat.

Ishii
 
As much as we might abhor abortion, being in favor of it as a legal option it is not a far-left position by any means. It is legal by Supreme Court decision and*** it is a norm throughout western democracies***. It is not at all “extreme left”.
.
So if something becomes a norm, then it ceases being extreme left? So if a majority accepted the ideology of Rick Santorum, then it would cease being “far right” ? Just trying to understand your logic - please explain without calling me names, if you can.

Ishii
 
Actually the winner-take-all aspect isn’t written in stone. Currently Maine and Nebraska split their electoral votes.
Yes, and I read that California has considered the same thing (which would be a game changer).
But at the same time several states are passing laws to commit their electors to the national popular winner – supposedly to avoid another Bush-Gore scenario.
 
YOu know what they say, you cannot be reasonable with people who refuse to use reason.
 
Yes, and I read that California has considered the same thing (which would be a game changer).
But at the same time several states are passing laws to commit their electors to the national popular winner – supposedly to avoid another Bush-Gore scenario.
The only thing I would have about the national popular winner is that it usually takes a few days to count every single vote in the country. In a close election then it may take weeks of recounts and money to determine same. (It’s still a wonder to me how in this electronic age we don’t have instant election counts like we do with Dancing with the Stars or American Idol.) Supposedly one of the remedies left to the SCOTUS in 2000 was to split the Florida ballot, since there was little dispute as to voting in almost all counties other than Miami-Dade. But SCOTUS chose to stop the counting and give Bush all the electoral votes.
 
If you have a problem with these persons in that you need a shorthand term, do you have a problem as well with the Church when She claims them to be Catholic?
When I read the term CINO I do not assume the person is not Catholic. I assume they are Catholic only rejecting Church authority. The pedantic nature of this rabbit hole is amazing to me.
 
**Originally Posted by didymus **
Yes, and I read that California has considered the same thing (which would be a game changer).
But at the same time several states are passing laws to commit their electors to the national popular winner – supposedly to avoid another Bush-Gore scenario.
What states have done that? Is it legal?
 
I’ve always been in favor of “Never try to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and it annoys the pig”.
There was a guy named Dave Severn that I heard that from on a talk called “Pigs Don’t Know Pigs Stink”
 
Politics is the art of compromise.

The Tea Party members of congress, nearly shut down the government, and brought our bond rating to junk bond status.

Whether you like it or not, the government still has to run, and part of that is providing for the safety and welfare of society, not just supporting the military and big corporate business.

Even Boehner was put into a corner after his compromise with the administration was thrown back in his face by the Tea Party members.

Like it or not, Social Security and Medicaid are here to stay.

Like it or not, roads and bridges must be repaired.

Like it or not, if we don’t help our kids get an education, we’ll end up as a 3rd world nation where only the rich will be educated and in control of every part of our lives.

Yes, when Nancy Pelosi was speaker, she and her peers went on a spending spree that even Obama tried to stop, but not having the political clout, failed.

However, he did manage to keep us out of a great depression, that is a unarguable fact.

If Mitt Romney becomes president with the current legislature, he’ll be hamstrung and will fail just as bad if not worse than Obama. Romney is an expert in working with the opposition party, but the Tea Party members are an opposition that even he won’t be successful with, because of their narrow minded ideological beliefs.

OH, and Romney would won the GOP nomination back in 2007, if not for the Religious right which controlled the GOP, and rejected him because he’s a Mormon.

Yes, the GOP has been ruined by the extreme right wing Tea Party members, who haven’t a clue on how to run government.

Jim
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top