Swaying centrist Unite!

[Exiled Master]

This is the thread for people left of center and right of center. Feel like your views aren't represented by your politicians? Did you think that two totally different people should have been running in '04? I see myself as right of center, just barely Republican.

[FeloniousMonk]

http://lp.org/

[uknesvuinng]

http://lp.org/

I scored Conservative Libertarian on the "World's Smallest Political Quiz". Do I get to be a "Swaying Centrist" anyway?

[Exiled Master]

I scored Conservative Libertarian on the "World's Smallest Political Quiz". Do I get to be a "Swaying Centrist" anyway?

Yeah, just don't take the isolationist stick-our-collective-heads-in-the-sand type. That sort of policy is pretty dangerous. Case in point: WWII

[uknesvuinng]

Yeah, just don't take the isolationist stick-our-collective-heads-in-the-sand type. That sort of policy is pretty dangerous. Case in point: WWII

I take a more of the "stop playing world police" stance. I don't like war, but I'll support it when it's necessary.

[buckner]

I scored Libertarian on that test lol

[Exiled Master]

WTF? I scored liberal on that test. Took it again and I got centrist. I think the latter was more accurate, because I thought about it more. You know what's hillarious? Neoliberalism and neoconservativism: nearly the same thing.

[Matt G]

I consider myself a centrist liberal. Which basically means I don't go round flashing crosses at people. Right wing nutters mainly flash crosses at people outside their country and/or Islam of homosexuals. Left wing nutters flash crosses at the US or corporations. I think Al Queda are psychos but that's nowhere near the same scale.

Bottom line, as long as I don't feel you're pointing a virtual gun to my or my friend's heads 9/10 I consider what you do none of my business.

[BigGator5]

This is the thread for people left of center and right of center. Feel like your views aren't represented by your politicians? Did you think that two totally different people should have been running in '04? I see myself as right of center, just barely Republican.

I'm a Moderate Republican.

I would have voted for Joe Lieberman, if he had ran. I agreed when he said that going to war with Iraq was the right thing to do at the time, but I have to agree Bush has handle post-war Iraq badly.

[rarocks24]

I'd say I'm moderately conservative.

[aAnubiSs]

Granted I'm not from the US but I got, what I expected:

ACCORDING TO YOUR ANSWERS,

The political description that
fits you best is...

.

LIBERTARIAN

LIBERTARIANS support maximum liberty in both personal and
economic matters. They advocate a much smaller government; one
that is limited to protecting individuals from coercion and violence.
Libertarians tend to embrace individual responsibility, oppose
government bureaucracy and taxes, promote private charity, tolerate
diverse lifestyles, support the free market, and defend civil liberties.

[Exiled Master]

I'm a Moderate Republican.

I would have voted for Joe Lieberman, if he had ran. I agreed when he said that going to war with Iraq was the right thing to do at the time, but I have to agree Bush has handle post-war Iraq badly.

Joe Liberman is Jack Thompson to the negative third power. So instead of being Satan he's a kind of imp. He blames violence on videogames.

[Darth Buddha]

Some of you claiming to be "moderates" ought to look at the definition of "moderate Republican" when I was still a member of the party: i.e. before the fundamentalist-neoimperialists took over in the 90's.
What is a moderate Republican?

The moderate Republican view is inconsitent with today's neo-Republicans. Consider...

A passion for civil liberties;

Not consistent with holding American citizens for months on end without charge or judicial review just because the executive has labelled them an "enemy combatant."

A disdain for conformity and suspicion of authority;

Not consistent with the neo-con hue and cry "If you aren't with us then you are helping the terrorists."

A belief that the Constitution is a living, breathing document with timeless values that must be made relevant in a modern age;

Not consistent with the so called "strict interpretationalists" who are in reality just conservative activist judges.

A commitment to protect the environment and not engage in mindless exploitation of the nation's natural beauty.

Not consistent with an administration that is in bed with the oil interests and allows big oil to consult with the VP in secrecy but excludes environmental experts.

A strong belief that diversity -- gender, racial, social, sexual, ethnic, and religious -- should be celebrated because it gives the United States moral strength. Diversity -- in the long-term, encourages respect, understanding, and a greater sense of community;

Not consistent with the gay-bashing that erupted over gay marriage OR the administration's support of a so called "protection of marriage amendment" to put discrimination BACK into the Constition for the first time.

A commitment to fiscal prudence and limited government;

Inconsistent with an administration that engages in record spending, deficits, and tax cuts all at the same time.

A recognition that government does have a basic social responsibility to help those in need;

Inconsistent with a party that has cut social services to finance tax cuts for millionaires.

A belief that the nation does have international responsibilities;

Not consistent with imperialist misadventures justified by fraudulent proofs.

A belief that God and religion have a very important place in America -- at the dinner table and in churches, temples, and mosques. But it should never be used by politicians to advance a narrow moral agenda;

Inconsistent with a party that seeks to force the nation to "acknowledge" that this is a "Christian Nation" via false history when in reality it was founded by non-Christian deists. Not consistent with the latest attempt to impose stealth creationism into public schools via so-called "intelligent design." Not consistent with railing against "Happy Holidays" vs. "Merry Christmas" in a country where substantial Jewish and Islamic minorities do not share the holidy but have others of their own.

A belief that the national government should be used in a limited manner to advance the common good;

As opposed to the good of megacorporations, the megarich, and the fundamentalist religious intolerants who seem to be the beneficiaries of the current administraion.

A commitment never to put party above country;

This one is self evident.

A responsibility to publicly criticize those who call themselves Republican when the situation merits. Moderate/Progressives have a duty to vote against the party line when it doesn't serve the greater good. Doing so doesn't make them less Republican; it demonstrates that they have the honor, political courage, and intellectual honesty to put nation above party.

I've seen only seven Senators and no Representatives among the Republican party who fit this description.

These ideas and more to be found at the excellent site I linked at the start of my post are contrasted to show that today's Republicans are in no way moderate, and many of those who claim they are "moderate" are in fact merely not quite fascist enough for the rabid, monolithicly dogmatic and philosophically incestuous fringe that currently dominates the party.

[Exiled Master]

Some of you claiming to be "moderates" ought to look at the definition of "moderate Republican" when I was still a member of the party: i.e. before the fundamentalist-neoimperialists took over in the 90's.
What is a moderate Republican?

The moderate Republican view is inconsitent with today's neo-Republicans. Consider...


Not consistent with holding American citizens for months on end without charge or judicial review just because the executive has labelled them an "enemy combatant."


Not consistent with the neo-con hue and cry "If you aren't with us then you are helping the terrorists."


Not consistent with the so called "strict interpretationalists" who are in reality just conservative activist judges.


Not consistent with an administration that is in bed with the oil interests and allows big oil to consult with the VP in secrecy but excludes environmental experts.


Not consistent with the gay-bashing that erupted over gay marriage OR the administration's support of a so called "protection of marriage amendment" to put discrimination BACK into the Constition for the first time.


Inconsistent with an administration that engages in record spending, deficits, and tax cuts all at the same time.


Inconsistent with a party that has cut social services to finance tax cuts for millionaires.


Not consistent with imperialist misadventures justified by fraudulent proofs.


Inconsistent with a party that seeks to force the nation to "acknowledge" that this is a "Christian Nation" via false history when in reality it was founded by non-Christian deists. Not consistent with the latest attempt to impose stealth creationism into public schools via so-called "intelligent design." Not consistent with railing against "Happy Holidays" vs. "Merry Christmas" in a country where substantial Jewish and Islamic minorities do not share the holidy but have others of their own.


As opposed to the good of megacorporations, the megarich, and the fundamentalist religious intolerants who seem to be the beneficiaries of the current administraion.


This one is self evident.


I've seen only seven Senators and no Representatives among the Republican party who fit this description.

These ideas and more to be found at the excellent site I linked at the start of my post are contrasted to show that today's Republicans are in no way moderate, and many of those who claim they are "moderate" are in fact merely not quite fascist enough for the rabid, monolithicly dogmatic and philosophically incestuous fringe that currently dominates the party.

Yup, we live in a really screwy political enviroment. Speaking of which, a while back, I developed a new political spectrum that used 3 dimensions. It's an equilateral triangle and each corner is labeled. The corners are Enviroment, Individual, Economy. I'll come back with some Excel charts to explain.

[Darth Buddha]

Yup, we live in a really screwy political enviroment. Speaking of which, a while back, I developed a new political spectrum that used 3 dimensions. It's an equilateral triangle and each corner is labeled. The corners are Enviroment, Individual, Economy. I'll come back with some Excel charts to explain.

Interesting... I look forward to it.

I've tended to see things on a variety of scales: Conservative vs. Liberal, Libertarian vs. Populist, Authoritarian vs. Anarchist, and Capitalist vs. Socialist. I'm personally in the middle on every scale if you average me out... though I cherry pick issues quite often. That's what "Moderate Republican" used to mean to me: a liberal heart but a hard nosed logical head. For a true "moderate" dogma doesn't dicate policy, pragmatism dictates policy.