Where do your politics lie?

oldsaw wrote:

ignorant wrote: Liberal. Near the center, but liberal. I love winding up the "libretarians" at work. They're all about ready to retire and clearly don't have a true grasp on what they really are asking for..... Here's some questions? How are you going to get healthcare after you retire? Does the company really owe you this? What if the company needed to be more competetive and had buy you out of your retirement.... Generally, they don't know what to say at that time......

This guy: http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2009/02/dr_ezekiel_emanuel_rahms_broth.html is a bio-ethicist who, like yourself, is a proponent of nationalized health care. And, has been an advisor to Clinton and Obama on their reform agendas. The good Doctor proposes limiting health care to those who are not "productive" members of society - like retirees. Such a concept places a government program on par with the evil private sector you vilify. Be careful what you ask for.

You misinterpert me again...

The point was... Be careful what you wish for....

aircooled wrote:

93celicaGT2 wrote: ...All parties do is make sure that there's always those shiny happy people that will vote one way because Joe Blow voted the other, simply because he's "The Enemy."...

Currently yes, mostly. But parties are essentially WHAT gets people elected (in higher offices), by legitimizing the person and more importantly providing and hooking up connections to the MONEY to get elected. This is primarily why 3rd party types never get elected. A great potential for the next few elections might be to get a significant number of non-two party types in. Won't happen. Why? No money... no advertisement... no exposure...

The government should pay for all the hopefuls to be able to air a speech telling us about themselves, what they plan to do, a run down of their ideals, and their thoughts on current issues.

Air it over public TV. Watch the speech. Vote.

If you don't watch the speech or know who you're voting for, then don't vote.

The campaign money issue is another issue that makes me so mad i can't see.

Basically... screw it all. Run them all out.

Have the general public volunteer to replace their spots. Draw 1000 at random. Subject all 1000 to IQ tests. The remainder that are smarter than eggplant (probably 200 of them) get picked at random to fill the House. They will now become puppets, doing as the people tell them to do.

Not necessarily puppets to the people, but definitely not puppets to the parties or their contributors...

aircooled wrote: Not necessarily puppets to the people, but definitely not puppets to the parties or their contributors...

Either way... as long as the second is the case, that's a gigantic step in the right direction.

Puppets are fine in a democracy/republic-modeled government. But only when the puppets have the right puppetteers.

93celicaGT2 wrote:

aircooled wrote: Not necessarily puppets to the people, but definitely not puppets to the parties or their contributors...

Either way... as long as the second is the case, that's a gigantic step in the right direction. Puppets are fine in a democracy/republic-modeled government. But only when the puppets have the right puppetteers.

The PEOPLE have always been the designated puppet-masters, except way too many have delegated that responsibility to a precious few. And, too many of those who do vote simply do not pay attention or fall victim to the cult of personality.

It took the election of a charismatic public speaker who mis-interpreted his "mandate", who then turned out to be an ineffective leader and profligate spender to re-invigorate the complacent.

The voters may have learned a valuable lesson, at least temporarily.

Whoever wrote that survey, is pretty sure there is no such thing as an intelligent non-religious conservative.

SVreX wrote: Whoever wrote that survey, is pretty sure there is no such thing as an intelligent non-religious conservative.

Well, ever since Regan, Republicanism has become synonymous with Christian theocracy. Why would a party of "state's rights" want to make any more laws at the federal level than is absolutely necessary?

I think that's why the Libertarian mindset is so prevelant - it's what Republicans were 40 years ago.

Some ramblings...

Education - please fix the problem. This NCLB garbage is making kids dumber and dumber and dumber, and I know this because I taught a college class from 2006 - 2009 and still occasionally substitute for my advisor when he is at a conference. The children being left behind are the bright ones. The US is miles, make that light years, behind its peers when it comes to education. It was bad 10 years ago, its even worse now. I know this, I did all my schooling under the British education system until I came to college. But, how can you fix the system when athletes and athletic coaches make millions while top rated researchers and faculty make 1/10th their salary. When having an important last name is a gateway to a degree. The future generation is setting themselves up for failure, they have spent 18 years of their life being told how awesome they are only to come to college to find out they aren't.

Gay marriage - seriously if two people want to spent their lives in misery so be it. No one should have the right to say who can or can't get married. What next, ban interracial marriage? Marriage in itself is a sham, its nothing more than a iPhone or a iPod that you can buy at a store. Don't like it? That's cool just trade it in for the next big thing. My parents have been married for 43 years, people can't even made it 43 hours in a marriage before calling it quits. Sure, maybe 100 years ago marriage meant something but today its just another thing to do. All the cool kids are doing it.

Privacy - it is an illusion, I get it Big Brother is watching me. In fact watching this post probably. But, unless you are some kind of monster no one should have the right to pry into your personal lives and track what you do. So please, quit watching every move I make.

A couple of comments. If you ask most intelligent people out there in the right way, I believe you'd find that they'd want more freedom than they currently have, so the slight to libertarian that our results have shown may be more than just testing bias, although I agree, some of the questions seem pretty obvious. Keep in mind that the website has sections for every ideology, with authors writing for each section honestly declaring their bias in the header - which is fantastic, by the way.

The other thing to note is this. Most people miss the fact that this chart can move - it isn't tethered. I consider the constitution valid, which some people do not. As such, I would inherently put the constitution at the center of the chart - and my viewpoints would vary from that - but that isn't how the test is laid out. I ended up nearly pure libertarian because that's how far we've come from the original intents of the constitution. If the constitution is at the center, a pure libertarian is basically borderline anarchy - which I am not for. Just an interesting thought I wanted to add.

-Brian

This test places me as a libertarian leaning slightly toward the liberal side.

It doesn't quite make sense to me, as I had thought that libertarians were a party that leaned on the conservative side, but were seperate from the Republican party.

Much like the Green party is still liberal even though they're not members of the Democratic party.

ReverendDexter wrote:

SVreX wrote: Whoever wrote that survey, is pretty sure there is no such thing as an intelligent non-religious conservative.

Well, ever since Regan, Republicanism has become synonymous with Christian theocracy.

Even if that were true, the survey didn't use the word Republican. Neither did I.

Conservative. And yes, there is such a thing as a Conservative Democrat (though I haven't seen one in a while.)

True Conservatives may or may not be Christians. I know A LOT of liberal Christians, and quite a few Conservative Atheists.

According to the survey, I'm directly on the line between Liberal and Libertarian. I would agree with that, though I tend to think of myself as an open-minded, moderate liberal. Some highlights of my political views:

Free speech: Censorship is bullE36 M3. <<< LOL

Guns: I do not choose to own or carry a weapon, but I'm not opposed to ownership. Why anyone would carry a gun on a daily basis is beyond me, but hunting, collecting, and shooting for sport are fine by me, as long as you're not a nutter.

Gay marriage: Let them get married. And no, don't just give it a different name. If they love eachother, and they choose to get married, it's a beautiful thing. In fact, i think the details of marriage should be left to the particular society, culture, or religion it's being performed in. The government should simply acknowledge the union, and assign equal rights to all married couples.

Foreign policy: I think we should keep to ourselves. We're biting off way more than we can (or should) chew. Lending a portion of our military to humanitarian efforts is fine, through something like the UN, but there should be a limit. I'm happy to help out my neighbor, but I'm not going to leave my family at home and live in his house for a year until he's back on his feet. But yeah, sure I'll give him a lift to his AA meetings once in a while.

Health care: Universal. If Wal-Mart can offer the lowest prices through their enormous purchasing power, why can't the government do the same? Private health coverage is insanely expensive, especially for a young jerk like me struggling with student loan payments. I think a healthy country is worth paying for. And even though I, or my grandmother would be reaping the benefits now, when I finally break into that $1mil/year tax bracket, I'm happy to pay into a communis...communi.....communal system that helps others.

And speaking of taxes....I have no problem with progressive taxation. Distribution of wealth is ok with me. There are people in absolute E36 M3 situations beyond their control, and it is inhumane for me to ignore that in order to buy a ski house in Lake Tahoe. Ask me someday when I'm making more than my measly $35K, and I hope my answer is the same, but I guess I'll never know until I make it there.

Religion: Let's keep it free to practice whatever we like. But don't you dare try to force your beliefs on me, either directly, or by worming them into legislation. Personally, my interest in religion only goes as far as my fascination with it's absurdity, but I'm sure not going to stop you from doing what you do.

Libertarian a little to the right.

Don't think it's accurate with the available answers.

Government porgrams such as wellfare only incourage people to not contribute to society. The more strain they(People on wellfare) put on the system the more they are rewarded. Wellfare should be a temporary program that the size of the check decreases on a monthly basis. Have a kid while on wellfare, lose benefits. Right now there is no reason for people to get off well fare and contribute to society when they can sit at home and collect a check, have a kid get more money. There is nothing to deter people from living their whole life off the government. Also less government programs the less taxes we would need.

Taxes- I like the idea of a flat sales tax. No way around it no matter how you make your money ie: under the table, cash, etc. The more you spend the more you're taxed. Which would lead to those who are able to spend more being taxed more. No more of people being payed cash and not having to pay taxes.

Gun Control- It's none of the governtment's business what kind of gun or how many I own. There should be some control ie: convicted felons and those determined to mentally incompetent should not be allowed to own guns.

Health Care- It's not a right it a privilege. Those that can afford insurance get health care, those that can't either find a way or go without. Or make big bussiness pay for all the strain the put on the system by making cigarettes that cause people to have respiratory problems and then fill ER's every time the weather changes. Why do people on medicaid have better insurance than those who chose to work and be a productive menber of society. The only government control I would like to see is that if you have insurance you're covered. No insurance companies denying claims because a procedure will cost too much. There are risks when you run a business, sometimes you're in the red, sometimes you're in the black. That's just life.

Religion- Believe what you want. There is no place for religion in government. Only Aetheist should hold government postions that way one's beliefs are not used to decide whats right for the people. Churches should pay taxes just like everyone else, no breaks. They are businesses just like anyone else they have a product they are trying to sell for a profit.

Let's get back tp the good ole days of the constitution, we the people, and a smaller government. What we have now doesn't seem to be working.

Good answers folks - I truly enjoy reading these - especially the rationale behind those with whom I disagree.

Ditto.

I'm actually very surprised by the result. I often Joke that my politics when viewed from all 1st world/developed nation point of view makes me right of center with a libertarian leaning in some areas, which means from a U.S. point of view I'm a raving pinko liberal. Well bugger me if this didn't pin me as a right of center centerist even though I and most other people consider me a very strong liberal. I think the questionnaire is basically flawed for a couple of reasons. First there are too few questions, second whoever wrote the questions is obviously coming from a very right wing position forcing me to shy away from one answer to another due to wording.

My basic beliefs can be summed up as follows starting with the hot button issues.

1. 100% for Universal health care, preferably government administered, if not I'll accept mandatory universal private with no exclusions.
2. 100% for Gay marriage. There is a separation of church and state, the government should have nothing to do with peoples private lives.
3. 100% for Abortion rights. It's nothing to do with the government what a woman does with her body, again there is a separation of church and state
4. Absolutely for gun rights and ownership. But, there needs to be background checks for criminals/mental instability etc. Also Guns need to stay out of public buildings etc.
5. Foreign Policy - Military. We need a strong Federally led military for many reasons not just defense, also peace keeper, deterrent, technology driver. We were 100% right to go into Afghanistan and should have finished the job and not got sidetracked. We should never have gone in to Iraq even if the lies about WMD's had been accurate.
6. Foreign policy - other. We do have a moral responsibility to play on the world stage. That doesn't mean our own Jihad to wipe out terrorists. It means working with all nations on security in all parts of the world. It also means taking a leadership role in climate change. It doesn't mean rolling over and giving up our powers to any form of world government.
7. Social security. Should be protects 100%. The government should not be allowed to use SS taxes for anything else. No Increase in retirement age or reduction of benefits
8. Corporate oversight and Bailouts. While I don't like what happened over the last 2 years I strongly believe it was necessary and has allowed us to weather a very bad recession rather than all out depression. There obviously needs to be stronger government regulation in various areas of business and finance.

As the OP said, this thread is intended to be about posting your beliefs and results not getting into a debate. So that's what I've done and I'm not going to getting into a pissing match.

Adrian for President!!!

EastCoastMojo wrote: Adrian for President!!!

yup..

He aligns with what I believe...

Wow, thanks guys. I tend to stay out of most of the political threads as they get my blood pressure so high and there seems to be an increasing amount of division on the board, but this one really interested me.

MrMook wrote: Health care: Universal. If Wal-Mart can offer the lowest prices through their enormous purchasing power, why can't the government do the same? Private health coverage is insanely expensive, especially for a young jerk like me struggling with student loan payments. I think a healthy country is worth paying for. And even though I, or my grandmother would be reaping the benefits now, when I finally break into that $1mil/year tax bracket, I'm happy to pay into a communis...communi.....communal system that helps others.

I paid $90 a month when I was a contractor, girlfriend is a hair stylist and pays $88 a month. I'm 27 she is 24, hardly expensive. It's where people's priorities lie.

I actually pay more for my portion of health care coverage now that I have benefits through work, and the company is picking up 2/3-3/4 of the cost.

Sorry, just had to respond to that.

1st Amendment- I have a journalism degree, obviously it's one of the most important things we have.

Health Care - Do we need reform? Yes. Is letting a horribly ineffecient entity with no track record of meeting budgets, time tables, etc, run the vehicle that is responsible for our health and well-being? Not just no, but hell no.

Like mentioned above, when I didn't have health insurance I bought it. Same with the self-employed girlfriend, can't attend an Auto-X this month because you bought a health insurance policy, too bad, deal with it. Life is tough and you have make hard decisions and sacrifices.

For the record, I grew up in a poor family (read, I grew up in a trailer park after my parents were divorced at a young age). So I went to college, got an education, was willing to take risks to change my career, moving to another town, taking a pay cut and losing benefits.

Gay marriage - Yup, no problem. Gov't should not be legislating morality.

Abortion - I don't think I could have the girlfriend get one if she got preggers, but keep it legal that way it can happen in a safe, secure enviornment. We will ignore the philosophical issues that the Dems/Repubs espouse with their contradictory views on life.

Guns - Agree. We should have them and there should be some regulation as far as criminals/etc.

Drugs/Prohibition - Legalize and tax the ever loving crap out of them. We only need to look at prohibition to see how well making a desired substance illegal worked. And provides ENORMOUS sums of money to criminal organizations.

Foreign Policy - I'd like to see us take care of our own first. We have millions of starving/needy people here, yet we send unbelievable sums of money to welfare states like Saudi Arabia and "friends" like Israel.

Social Security - Since the gov't can't leave it alone, give me back my money and let me save/invest as I SEE FIT. If I decide I'd rather take the extra money and make payments on a Mercedez, when I'm old and on the street, I have no one to blame but myself.

Bailouts - Hated them, but not sure what else could have happened considering the situations. But as usual it was hastily thrown together, poorly guided, and inefficently managed. Just like everything the gov't gets it's hands on.

I'm just completely sick and tired of the lack personal responsibility in this country now-a-days. And from people of my generation and younger.

Adrian_Thompson wrote: 2. 100% for Gay marriage. There is a separation of church and state, the government should have nothing to do with peoples private lives.

I'll just say I'm for no marriage. The state has no business whatsover legislating relationships. Get it out of the tax code and the legal system. Divorce? No such thing... no legal marriage. Kids? Regular civil court can handle custody arguments if people cannot arbitrate amongst themselves.

Adrian_Thompson wrote: 3. 100% for Abortion rights. It's nothing to do with the government what a woman does with her body, again there is a separation of church and state

Same as #2. If you have a tumor, a cycst, a polyp... a small living organism wreaking havoc on your system... an ugly nose or saggy belly you can choose to do something about it. I see no difference here and any/all moral arguments need not apply. Your body, your problem or blessing however you see it.

Adrian_Thompson wrote: 4. Absolutely for gun rights and ownership. But, there needs to be background checks for criminals/mental instability etc. Also Guns need to stay out of public buildings etc.

Agree. No felons, habitual drug/drunkards and mandatory training to carry in public (not to own). The only license you need is a certificate you completed training.

Adrian_Thompson wrote: 7. Social security. Should be protects 100%. The government should not be allowed to use SS taxes for anything else. No Increase in retirement age or reduction of benefits

They have demonstrated again and again that they cannot. Give me my money back.

Adrian_Thompson wrote: 8. Corporate oversight and Bailouts. While I don't like what happened over the last 2 years I strongly believe it was necessary and has allowed us to weather a very bad recession rather than all out depression. There obviously needs to be stronger government regulation in various areas of business and finance.

I grudgingly have to agree. While I do not believe in subsidizing failure I do not want my quality of life in the E36 M3ter either so I'll just say that it worked this time and any policy put in place should allow them to fail before they get too big for it.

Adrian_Thompson wrote: As the OP said, this thread is intended to be about posting your beliefs and results not getting into a debate. So that's what I've done and I'm not going to getting into a pissing match.

Same here. No beefs I was just using you as a talking point.

I'll add one more in our unofficial poll... get rid of the tax exemption for religious institutions. Any clown with a good story and a crowd of magical thinkers gets a free ride? That massive granite structure on 600 acres pays less toward the community that I do? F**k that. Everybody swims in the pool - everybody pays to swim.

OK, here is another test, which is likely more accurate:

http://www.politicalcompass.org/test

Still a little strange on some of the questions, but at least the general layout is much better. Here is a breakdown of some famous people (btw Bush is shown in another chart near Thatcher):

Aside from some of the questions having no satisfactory answer ( a neutral option) the questions had no obvious bias so I'll agree that was a better test. I'm close to Gandhi so I'll figure that as better company than Hitler or Stalin.

GPS, you and I seem to agree on just about everything.

Even share teh same first name.