Jack Fate
New Member
I'm sure that to a far lefty, the TP does appear to be extreme. I suggest you attend a TP and find out for yourself. That's what I do when I want to find out the truth. I find out for myself.
more brutal teabaggers
- Thread starter feff f
- Start date
i know, clinton and all his peeps were screaming about 911. bush should have listened a couple months into office.
bedspirit
Active Member
Goddamn it. I'm probably to the right of you on a host of things. I don't think you understand this left/right thing very well. They are extreme because of where they are placed on the political spectrum. Read that dumbass article you posted more carefully. He said that extreme is:
Now, I'll ask you again. Where is the tea party on the political spectrum. I would say they are on the end because I know of no other group in America, maybe even the world, that is further to the "right" than they are. Can you name one group further right? If you can actually think of one, then explain to me what makes them further to the right.
I'm not implying that they are bad or good. I'm saying that they are, by your articles' definition, extreme.
bedspirit
Active Member
Dude, one of us is way too baked right now.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
and you deride lefties for blaming bush when you turn and point at clinton?
LOL!
this was given to bush after the guy that delivered it warned him to take it seriously, and bush just replied "good job covering your ass" or something to that effect.
yet you blame the guy not even sitting at the white house receiving these memos.
LOL!
edit: and since when is 8 months just 'a couple months'?
yet another LOL
i bet you a dollar that the "well known activist" is a teabagger from arizona dressed up as a well known activist from madison.
thats my theory and i am sticking to it.
Jack Fate
New Member
I read the article and I find nothing "extreme" in it. I don't find anything "extreme" about the TP. Would you provide an example of what you find "extreme" in the TP? Thanks.
bedspirit
Active Member
I don't know how to explain it to you any clearer. The Tea party is ideologically far right. They are further right than any other group. That is what makes them extreme. That is how the article defines extreme. If there were other political parties that were further to the right, than you could attempt to make an argument that they were centrist, but there are no other groups further right. Just as a communist would be extreme left, the tea party is extreme right. Everyone else is in between.
The reason the article is so ridiculous is because it gives you a definition of what extreme is. The Tea Party, by his own definition, is clearly extreme, but then he tries to argue that they are centrist based on a few polls showing the popularity of their position. He argues that because they believe in freedom, and polls show the majority of Americans believe in freedom, than they all must be tea partiers, and that would make the tea party centrist. Even if that wasn't retarded, it wouldn't matter. He defined extreme as being on the edge of the political spectrum, which they are, regardless of their popularity.
I think you know exactly what I'm talking about and you're playing dumb. That's cool, it really just a matter of semantics and doesn't matter at all.
Jack Fate
New Member
Seems to me you're the one playing dumb. I simply asked you for ONE example of extremism in the TP platform and you have yet to give me one. The writer gives you the platform of the TP and what they stand for. I am asking you to be specific and simply show me which part of the TP platform you find to be extreme. Thanks.
bedspirit
Active Member
I am being specific!!!!!!!!!!!!! You don't get it! Here is a very simple graph of the political spectrum:
any ideology that lies on the edges of that spectrum is extreme according to the article. You see that dot labeled "Friedman"? That is about where the Tea Party would be. That is why they are extreme. I am not saying that is necessarily a bad thing. I personally am not a fan of neoliberalism. I think it fails for the same reason that communism fails, it's a mathematical theory that doesn't include corruption in the equation. When that system is corrupted, it can have devastating, unforeseen consequences (just like communism).
far right? what is their position on abortion? see, they dont have one.
thats kind of the point? duhhh
yes just a very simple graph.....hahahahahahahahahahI am being specific!!!!!!!!!!!!! You don't get it! Here is a very simple graph of the political spectrum:
any ideology that lies on the edges of that spectrum is extreme according to the article. You see that dot labeled "Friedman"? That is about where the Tea Party would be. That is why they are extreme. I am not saying that is necessarily a bad thing. I personally am not a fan of neoliberalism. I think it fails for the same reason that communism fails, it's a mathematical theory that doesn't include corruption in the equation. When that system is corrupted, it can have devastating, unforeseen consequences (just like communism).
so simple, did you get that in 2nd or 4th grade keynesian theory? i have seen it offered in both grades. anyway......yes, its all fucking bullshit.
keynesian is bullshit. but thatnks to so 35 years ago. we did that already....nitwits
bedspirit
Active Member
I was under the impression that they were against abortion. A quick google search didn't reveal much. A ny times article claims that they don't take a stand on it, but some other articles point out that all elected tea partiers are against it. Doesn't matter to me. It's a social issue. On the graph I posted, I'm not sure where that would lie. I guess it depends on whether or not you consider it to be murder.
I don't calculate social issues on the left/right deal because I feel they're mostly wedge issues. I think of left/right in terms of economic policy. On the economy, you don't get further right than the tea party.
bedspirit
Active Member
What are you talking about? I just pulled a graph out of google images. I wanted to keep it simple because that dude didn't seem to know what the fuck I was referring to. I assumed he wasn't familiar with it.
This spectrum is pretty standard, I'm not sure which part you find to be bullshit. Stalin obviously a communist and repressive on personal freedoms is in the upper left hand corner as he should be. Thatcher is on the far right, as she should be. I'm not sure why she is so high on the authoritarian end of the spectrum, I would have placed her closer to the center, but maybe there are things about her I don't know. I don't know what your deal with Keynes is, but he would probably be about halfway between the left portion and the center of the graph. remember that he wasn't a full blown communist. He believed in a mixture of government/private enterprise.
bedspirit
Active Member
Your graph has the same effect on me. I can't quite figure out what it's measuring. On the one I posted, the left/right line is a measure of government involvement in business, while the authoritarian/libertarian line is a measure of individual freedoms. So for instance, Ron Paul would be in the bottom right corner. he believes in the maximum amount of individual freedom and he believes in no government involvement in business.Oh I seee what the problem is, Libertarian is not on here properly, and its missing quite a bit, a bit bias or deceptive, the way its layed out, that would probably be the only thing Id change, Id flip it upside down also, I like something like this a little better
View attachment 1789211
In yours, what's the difference between a conservative and a libertarian? In mine, a conservative would be above the center line (more laws limiting your social behavior) and a libertarian would be below the line.
EDIT.........
ok, nevermind. I have to tilt my head to make sense of it. I majored in math so I'm used to seeing the axis going up/down left/right rather than at a 45 degree angle.
deprave
New Member
yea the graph you posted is wrong, sure mine is a lot more simple but the one you post - example libertarian and the word anarchism should change places, among other things, your graph makes libertarians look like something they arent, the person who drew it has a wrong opinion of libertarianism it looks like a liberal drew it, it also makes no sense to include stalin, gandi, and hitler like that, not even sure they should be within this spectrum.
Jack Fate
New Member
All I am asking for is ONE example from the platform of the Tea Party that YOU believe is extreme. You obviously don't even know what the Tea Party Platform consists of. Here is a link to the Platform of the Tea Party. Now show me something from this that you find "EXTREME". Thanks.I am being specific!!!!!!!!!!!!! You don't get it! Here is a very simple graph of the political spectrum:
any ideology that lies on the edges of that spectrum is extreme according to the article. You see that dot labeled "Friedman"? That is about where the Tea Party would be. That is why they are extreme. I am not saying that is necessarily a bad thing. I personally am not a fan of neoliberalism. I think it fails for the same reason that communism fails, it's a mathematical theory that doesn't include corruption in the equation. When that system is corrupted, it can have devastating, unforeseen consequences (just like communism).
http://www.teaparty-platform.com/