View Full Version : An interesting article
What do you all think about it? (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/14/AR2010101404794.html?nav=hcmodule)
I personally think that it is refreshing to hear someone speak the truth about Palin for once.
Sasaki Kojiro
10-19-2010, 18:45
I notice "Palin is a moron" isn't listed as a myth :mellow:
Strike For The South
10-19-2010, 19:58
Palin leaves much to be disired and can basically thank a well put together face and figure for her accomplishments
Furunculus
10-19-2010, 20:09
good article.
palin herself may be a pretty face, but she has good instincts for the gop electoral meme.
Strike For The South
10-19-2010, 20:12
good article.
palin herself may be a pretty face, but she has good instincts for the gop electoral meme.
Which is nothing more than a sheep who has watched the dog for many years.
She is an utter waste of political space
Which is nothing more than a sheep who has watched the dog for many years.
She is an utter waste of political space
lol, I personally think that she is just what this country needs. If she runs for President on the GOP ticket, she has my vote.
Louis VI the Fat
10-19-2010, 21:29
Please please please let Palin be the 2012 GOP candidate. :beam: :yes:
Please please please let Palin be the 2012 GOP candidate. :beam: :yes:
Isn't it funny how concerned a Frenchman is about something he is so removed from? :beam:
lol, I certainly hope she is too. In Europe people get a very one-sided view of everything concerning American politics, but in the US I think you will find that things are different, and there is actually a lot of support for her. Who cares what a bunch Europeans think? It is an American election, and it is going to be what Americans think that decides who gets elected.
rory_20_uk
10-19-2010, 22:28
No, she's really a smart women with extensive knowledge on a diverse range of subjects...
Insular Xenophobia... yes, truly a Palin supporter.
~:smoking:
Louis VI the Fat
10-19-2010, 22:54
* digging caribou barbie *
https://img810.imageshack.us/img810/7132/politicalpicturessarahp.jpg
Rhyfelwyr
10-19-2010, 23:11
I've noticed it's more acceptable in intellectual circles (like the Backroom of course!) for people to spew all kinds of hyperbolic rubbish about right-wing candidates, while if anyone tries the same with figures from the left then suddenly it's cause their loonies.
It seems like a bit of the old champagne-socialist snobbery to me.
I've noticed it's more acceptable in intellectual circles (like the Backroom of course!) for people to spew all kinds of hyperbolic rubbish about right-wing candidates, while if anyone tries the same with figures from the left then suddenly it's cause their loonies.
It seems like a bit of the old champagne-socialist snobbery to me.
lol, the story of politics.
Louis VI the Fat
10-19-2010, 23:53
I've noticed it's more acceptable in intellectual circles (like the Backroom of course!) for people to spew all kinds of hyperbolic rubbish about right-wing candidates, while if anyone tries the same with figures from the left then suddenly it's cause their loonies.
It seems like a bit of the old champagne-socialist snobbery to me.I immediately plead guilty to being an insufferable snob, one with exquisite taste in champagne to boot. I plead not guilty on all other charges. I, for one, will happily disparage the loony left too.
https://img842.imageshack.us/img842/8427/oilbus.jpg
Problems start when either the loony left or the rabid right mistakes itself for mainstream left / right. Which is, sadly, most of the time.
PanzerJaeger
10-20-2010, 00:54
Sarah Palin was unfairly mauled by the media during the election. There were a lot of ugly undercurrents surrounding the vitriolic attention she received that highlight the Left’s fear and loathing of strong female conservative figures. She had far more administrative experience than Barry and was no more inclined to gaffes than Joe Biden. It almost became Barry versus Palin, despite the two being on opposite ends of the ticket.
That being said, since the election, she has used her new found fame to increase her own power, influence, and bank account, sometimes at the expense of the national party (Delaware for example). There are far better, less polarizing, GOP candidates on deck. A 2012 run would be unnecessarily divisive.
Strike For The South
10-20-2010, 02:01
lol, I personally think that she is just what this country needs. If she runs for President on the GOP ticket, she has my vote.
I rest my case.
Sarah Palin was unfairly mauled by the media during the election. There were a lot of ugly undercurrents surrounding the vitriolic attention she received that highlight the Left’s fear and loathing of strong female conservative figures. She had far more administrative experience than Barry and was no more inclined to gaffes than Joe Biden. It almost became Barry versus Palin, despite the two being on opposite ends of the ticket.
Perhaps. I would argue that Biden despite his gaffes was in the Senate for years and therefore has the kind of clout and connections you need to get things done and Obama has a much better resume than Palin. Perhaps not on experince but on schooling alone, not that the level or quality or a school are necesarily indictive of ones inate intellegence or ones ability to wheel and deal. The gulf between Obama and Palin is to wide to be ignored.
Not to mention I feel many of the planks in Palins platform are nothing more than reactionary and require no more thought than a simple "Well that's the way it should be" or "That is how I precive it so that is how it must be"
Even though I vhemently disagree with many of Obamas policies I at least think he tries to see something from every angle and think critically.
That being said, since the election, she has used her new found fame to increase her own power, influence, and bank account, sometimes at the expense of the national party (Delaware for example). There are far better, less polarizing, GOP candidates on deck. A 2012 run would be unnecessarily divisive.
Party over people? Or do you simply feel a D would fall lockstep in with pushing in agenda that is highly detrmential?
PanzerJaeger
10-20-2010, 05:28
Perhaps. I would argue that Biden despite his gaffes was in the Senate for years and therefore has the kind of clout and connections you need to get things done and Obama has a much better resume than Palin. Perhaps not on experince but on schooling alone, not that the level or quality or a school are necesarily indictive of ones inate intellegence or ones ability to wheel and deal. The gulf between Obama and Palin is to wide to be ignored.
Not to mention I feel many of the planks in Palins platform are nothing more than reactionary and require no more thought than a simple "Well that's the way it should be" or "That is how I precive it so that is how it must be"
Even though I vhemently disagree with many of Obamas policies I at least think he tries to see something from every angle and think critically.
In many ways Palin and Obama are two sides of the same coin, as both represent what is wrong with American politics today.
Whereas Palin appeals to what you would call ‘reactionary anti-intellectualism’, Obama’s base is made up in large part by an equally ignorant and possibly more annoying force – pseudo intellectuals. These are the people that have a bachelor’s in psychology from a second tier college, read the Daily Beast at work, watch a lot of PBS and think they’re ‘informed’. A well spoken, polished candidate that exudes an air of intelligence is enough to get them to pull the lever without much more thought. Throw in the chance to relive the Civil Rights Movement without having to actually do much of anything, and it’s a pseudo intellectual wet dream in the making.
Obama was an affirmative action case at Harvard. He made his name in Chicago race baiting. In the Illinois and later US Senate he accomplished nothing of real substance. The lauded writer’s only published works consist of two ghostwritten books about being Barack Obama. As president, well, nothing really needs to be said on that front…
But into the vapid space that has become American politics, Barack Obama was the perfect feel good candidate, the magical negro (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_negro) we’ve been groomed to listen to unquestioningly. Much like Sarah Palin, he’s a pretty package with nothing in it. The economic collapse just happened to make Obama’s narrative slightly more appealing than Palin’s this time around.
That’s not to say that Palin should get a shot in 2012, not at all. There are plenty of candidates out there with real administrative experience and real legislative accomplishments. The problem is that they have a hard time making it out of the primaries.
Party over people? Or do you simply feel a D would fall lockstep in with pushing in agenda that is highly detrmential?
Chris Coons will be a liberal Democrat. Mike Castle would have been preferable. On another level, party control yields committee chairmanships, which are the real instruments of power in Washington.
Edit: Also, your Seinfeld reference is much appreciated. I'm going to have to pull out the first season dvd. :grin:
Kagemusha
10-20-2010, 08:04
I do wonder why the GOP candidates have to be "mad preacher" types these days. Is for example Colin Powell simply too old to run,or cant a more moderate Republican be a successful candidate of the party these days?
Furunculus
10-20-2010, 10:11
I've noticed it's more acceptable in intellectual circles (like the Backroom of course!) for people to spew all kinds of hyperbolic rubbish about right-wing candidates, while if anyone tries the same with figures from the left then suddenly it's cause their loonies.
It seems like a bit of the old champagne-socialist snobbery to me.
that has always been the case.
the amusing aside is the visceral fury and loathing that some in the right (thatcher) generate in some of the left (pinter), when the most that happens in reverse in my opinion of british politics is benign contempt. maybe that is what infuriates them; the fact that we really don't care............?
rory_20_uk
10-20-2010, 10:24
I can muster some real loathing of the far Left mainly as their actions cause severe damage to the UK / England.
Europe as a whole is waking up to the realisation than the Left ideals were never really affordable and inconveniently creditors aren't prepared to pay for ever. This includes both the massive spend on providing not merely a "welfare net", but more like a "welfare double-springed mattress with Egyptian cotton sheets" and the wars that were fought mainly for Utopian ideals - spreading Democracy into some of the most resistant places on the planet... :dizzy2:
This in turn has forced many of the savage cuts that now befall our nation. I think and have said that the Armed Forces need a decent Strategic Defense review and consequent rebalancing. Personally I believe that we would be better served with an Marine Corps structure that is concerned with the sea and pushing a short distance in-land. But this should not be based merely on what little we can afford as apparently spending more on people doing nothing with no prospect of returns on investment is more of a sacred cow...
~:smoking:
Well....I guess that explains why Obama is gonna be on Mythbusters!
I hope they use a LOT of explosives to test this....preferably with the real Palin there. :P
P.S. - and anyway...Palin is SOOOO last week....bring on the anti-masturbation witch!
Ironside
10-20-2010, 13:42
I do wonder why the GOP candidates have to be "mad preacher" types these days. Is for example Colin Powell simply too old to run,or cant a more moderate Republican be a successful candidate of the party these days?
From what I've gathered, there's been a weak economic development in the US the last decade (both for the people and the state). This is blamed on the political parties (Bush in particular obviously) and since both parties are uacceptable, they lack popularity.
Thus you get a movement that searches for what the see as the lost essence of the US, while combining it with their own ideas, becoming radical conservatives (they quickly want back a golden age that never existed the way they percieve it).
Being the US, "a person of the people"(=lots of anti-intellectualism) gets even more important, since they are different from the political establishment. And to be fair they even got a few. But I think they missed the part of "a person of the people" meaning someone who understands the "average American", not being one (you usually want someone better to run important stuff).
It isn't getting better of the science (eeevil) vs religion (gooood) battle they play out. The US got a lot more religious politics on average as well.
So you'll end up with people who says taxes bad! (golden age, no matter that they're the lowest in 60 years (http://www.upi.com/Business_News/2010/05/11/US-tax-burden-at-lowest-point-in-years/UPI-74091273594893/)), federal state evil! (golden age+taxes) and religious rule good! (their own adding).
I doubt the current movement would work 2000 or 2020, even if some of it have existed for a long time in the US.
Palin is enjoying riding a popularity wave that she won't control. It will crash someday, hopefully not with the country in it.
Strike For The South
10-20-2010, 16:22
In many ways Palin and Obama are two sides of the same coin, as both represent what is wrong with American politics today.
Whereas Palin appeals to what you would call ‘reactionary anti-intellectualism’, Obama’s base is made up in large part by an equally ignorant and possibly more annoying force – pseudo intellectuals. These are the people that have a bachelor’s in psychology from a second tier college, read the Daily Beast at work, watch a lot of PBS and think they’re ‘informed’. A well spoken, polished candidate that exudes an air of intelligence is enough to get them to pull the lever without much more thought. Throw in the chance to relive the Civil Rights Movement without having to actually do much of anything, and it’s a pseudo intellectual wet dream in the making.
Obama was an affirmative action case at Harvard. He made his name in Chicago race baiting. In the Illinois and later US Senate he accomplished nothing of real substance. The lauded writer’s only published works consist of two ghostwritten books about being Barack Obama. As president, well, nothing really needs to be said on that front…
But into the vapid space that has become American politics, Barack Obama was the perfect feel good candidate, the magical negro (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_negro) we’ve been groomed to listen to unquestioningly. Much like Sarah Palin, he’s a pretty package with nothing in it. The economic collapse just happened to make Obama’s narrative slightly more appealing than Palin’s this time around.
That’s not to say that Palin should get a shot in 2012, not at all. There are plenty of candidates out there with real administrative experience and real legislative accomplishments. The problem is that they have a hard time making it out of the primaries.
I do not disagree that the left is immune to this sort of anti-intellectuialism, the right has simply been able to mobilize there locksteppers in much better fashion. Of course with men like Alan Grayson they may be quickly learning how to invigorate the base.
My major problem with Palin is that she has a world view and makes facts suit it. Now of course this is true with all of us to an extent as everyone from time to time just KNOWS they are right even when all the evidence clearly says they are not. However, Palin has made this an art form which has infected the GOP. Harkening back to the good ol days that never were, assuming that good ol fashioned Americans just need to take power back and everything will be ok.
What she and many others of course fail to realize is that "common" folk with there "down home" sensibilties have NEVER been on the forefront of human progress, not even with the ideas they hold dear.
This is not to say the common man should not have a voice but it is most frustrating to ask someone why taxes should be lowered and hear the answer "because we ain't commies" (The reverse can also be said about the Ds)
Holding politicial ideals is good and only useful if you can comptently and consicesly explain them. Otherwise you add nothing to the process. Palin is literaly the emboidiment of this
Aside from the fact that she holds social ideals which I completely and utterly despise, I simply think we deserve better. Same with my feelings toward Obama
Chris Coons will be a liberal Democrat. Mike Castle would have been preferable. On another level, party control yields committee chairmanships, which are the real instruments of power in Washington.
Edit: Also, your Seinfeld reference is much appreciated. I'm going to have to pull out the first season dvd. :grin:
Fair points
Who cares what a bunch Europeans think? It is an American election, and it is going to be what Americans think that decides who gets elected.
1) Link gets posted on an international forums.
2) non-American replies with his view of the situation
3) American replies "we don't care about your view"
To me, this situation seems a a bit bizarre. Fragony, the next time you post something about Islam and Europe, shall we disregard anything non-Europeans say, too?
gaelic cowboy
10-20-2010, 18:20
1) Link gets posted on an international forums.
2) non-American replies with his view of the situation
3) American replies "we don't care about your view"
To me, this situation seems a a bit bizarre. Fragony, the next time you post something about Islam and Europe, shall we disregard anything non-Europeans say, too?
Plus when your country effectively elects the Padishah Emperor ruler of the Known Universe every four years it kind is all our business.
He's no mere padishah! He's the shahanshah!
gaelic cowboy
10-20-2010, 19:19
He's no mere padishah! He's the shahanshah!
Lies Lies begone powindah facedancer no doubt sent by the Bene Gesserit witches the Padishah Emperor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Padishah_Emperor) through his C.H.O.A.M. contracts keeps the spice flowing Bi-la kaifa
Megas Methuselah
10-20-2010, 21:37
Isn't it funny how concerned a Frenchman is about something he is so removed from? :beam:
lol, I certainly hope she is too. In Europe people get a very one-sided view of everything concerning American politics, but in the US I think you will find that things are different, and there is actually a lot of support for her. Who cares what a bunch Europeans think? It is an American election, and it is going to be what Americans think that decides who gets elected.
Sadly, Amerika rules the world, so we all have some interest in who exactly is our emperor. When Obama was elected, I hit the bars that night in celebration and skipped classes the next day, lol.
Rhyfelwyr
10-20-2010, 21:57
I can muster some real loathing of the far Left mainly as their actions cause severe damage to the UK / England.
Europe as a whole is waking up to the realisation than the Left ideals were never really affordable and inconveniently creditors aren't prepared to pay for ever. This includes both the massive spend on providing not merely a "welfare net", but more like a "welfare double-springed mattress with Egyptian cotton sheets" and the wars that were fought mainly for Utopian ideals - spreading Democracy into some of the most resistant places on the planet...
In fairness, the centre is more guilty of this, the only parties to really oppose it are the far-left/far-right ones.
Meneldil
10-20-2010, 23:37
Europe as a whole is waking up to the realisation than the Left ideals were never really affordable and inconveniently creditors aren't prepared to pay for ever. This includes both the massive spend on providing not merely a "welfare net", but more like a "welfare double-springed mattress with Egyptian cotton sheets" and the wars that were fought mainly for Utopian ideals - spreading Democracy into some of the most resistant places on the planet... :dizzy2:
Can I have what you're smoking? The "left ideals" worked fine for 30 years, until the oil crisis. National debts started to explode after that, and after the Regatcher era, when the liberal right succesfully brainwashed the rest of the world into thinking that "rich people shouldn't be taxed, because you know, they help the economy and stuff" (among other BS).
The kind of revisionism you're presenting as facts is sickening.
As for the recent democracy-spreading wars, they weren't started by European nanny states, last time I checked. The overwhelming majority of the european public opinion has shown herself to be against jingoism and war in general.
Rhyfelwyr
10-21-2010, 00:37
the liberal right succesfully brainwashed the rest of the world into thinking that "rich people shouldn't be taxed, because you know, they help the economy and stuff" (among other BS).
It's not BS it's simple maths, unless they invest their money overseas. Heh, I guess if you prevented that and made the nation rather than the world the sphere for the free market, you could have an ideology of 'National Capitalism'. lol, you could seriously troll some lefties with that.
We do need to money of wealthier people to circulate round the economy. Though it could also be circulated through if after taxation, the fact that taxation tends to decrease efficiency means it's better not to. The problem then is that without taxation and regulation the nature of the market system means the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, and so you tax to prevent that happening. Maybe there should be some forumula to determine the most efficient balance.
And so rather than one absolute being right, it seems the middle-ground is best. Not that the middle-ground is best because being the middle-ground is somehow a virtue in itself, I don't understand that line of thought (see my sig!).
gaelic cowboy
10-21-2010, 00:47
The recent economic mess makes me think those old testament guys were on to summit about usury
Rhyfelwyr
10-21-2010, 01:07
Ha! It seems National Capitalism has already been thought of:
http://www.stormfront.org/forum/t541046/
I guess it might be an interesting concept if they removed all the racial rubbish (so in other words purely the economic model).
Crazed Rabbit
10-21-2010, 04:07
Speaking of Sarah Palin: (http://perfunction.typepad.com/perfunction/2010/10/historic-illiteracy-idiot-sarah-palin-party-like-its-1773-after-the-election.html)
http://www.allamericanblogger.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/Palin-Schools-the-Libs.jpg
:laugh4:
CR
Megas Methuselah
10-21-2010, 08:32
Lol.
gaelic cowboy
10-21-2010, 18:07
I don't understand why everyone bigs up the Boston tea Party twas just a crowd of greedy tea importers making sure Indian tea did not supplant there own more expensive Dutch tea.
Tellos Athenaios
10-21-2010, 18:30
I thought the Dutch tea was preferred and at first cheaper (because of fewer taxes levied on Dutch tea all in all, than on British tea); then when the Crown and company decided to cut cost of tea by cutting out the middleman (i.e. the American tea importer, the American merchant) through shipping & reselling tea more directly some Americans understandably did not look forward to losing their businesses and made their protests known?
The Stranger
10-21-2010, 19:17
I've noticed it's more acceptable in intellectual circles (like the Backroom of course!) for people to spew all kinds of hyperbolic rubbish about right-wing candidates, while if anyone tries the same with figures from the left then suddenly it's cause their loonies.
It seems like a bit of the old champagne-socialist snobbery to me.
i thought only right wing socialists drink champagne... left wings drink vodka
Sasaki Kojiro
10-21-2010, 21:31
The tea party is a handy as a symbol of the protracted struggle against various illegitimate taxes and restrictions. I don't think even the British thought the policy which led to it was good, they just didn't want to lose face.
Of course, it's trendy to try and dismiss the arguments made be the colonists as being "in their self interest", for some mind boggling reason. I guess when the customs commissioners were playing fast and loose with the law and seizing boats on trumped up charges it was just the merchants being "greedy" :rolleyes:
Tellos Athenaios
10-21-2010, 23:08
The tea party is a handy as a symbol of the protracted struggle against various illegitimate taxes and restrictions. I don't think even the British thought the policy which led to it was good, they just didn't want to lose face.
Of course, it's trendy to try and dismiss the arguments made be the colonists as being "in their self interest", for some mind boggling reason. I guess when the customs commissioners were playing fast and loose with the law and seizing boats on trumped up charges it was just the merchants being "greedy" :rolleyes:
Well to be fair it's not like the American colonists didn't know about “smuggling” or indeed didn't make dodging taxes and tariffs their raison d'être.
Sasaki Kojiro
10-21-2010, 23:33
illegitimate taxes and tariffs ~D
Furunculus
10-26-2010, 16:57
pat buchanon declares the coalition to be a tea-party petri-dish that will succeed or fail before the US can get to try the remedy:
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/benedictbrogan/100060914/uh-oh-tea-party-embraces-david-cameron/
Seamus Fermanagh
10-26-2010, 19:43
Palin seemed vibrant and "true-blue" conservative to a lot of the GOPers who were wincing as they applauded their nominee John McCain.
Did the media lambast her? Yeppers. Did Palin blow the Couric interview? Bet your bippie.
Right now, she's demagoging -- always the easiest political stance. Be for the "salt of the earth" and against the Ivy-league elitists. Simple theme, no need for a lot of substance. Add in a little of what some label the MILF factor, and you can see an easy appeal.
15 months from now, with a year under GOP house leadership, and some of the penduluum will be swinging back to the Dems. Since I personally believe that Obama will again turn out the college and African-descent voters in numbers nearly as strong as in '08, I would be happy to let Sarah have the nom -- so she can Goldwater for us. That'll set the stage for a more serious candidate with many of her values but fewer of her warts.
a completely inoffensive name
10-26-2010, 20:54
Palin seemed vibrant and "true-blue" conservative to a lot of the GOPers who were wincing as they applauded their nominee John McCain.
Did the media lambast her? Yeppers. Did Palin blow the Couric interview? Bet your bippie.
Right now, she's demagoging -- always the easiest political stance. Be for the "salt of the earth" and against the Ivy-league elitists. Simple theme, no need for a lot of substance. Add in a little of what some label the MILF factor, and you can see an easy appeal.
15 months from now, with a year under GOP house leadership, and some of the penduluum will be swinging back to the Dems. Since I personally believe that Obama will again turn out the college and African-descent voters in numbers nearly as strong as in '08, I would be happy to let Sarah have the nom -- so she can Goldwater for us. That'll set the stage for a more serious candidate with many of her values but fewer of her warts.
She has no values. She touts talking points like a good parrot.
Tellos Athenaios
10-26-2010, 21:53
pat buchanon declares the coalition to be a tea-party petri-dish that will succeed or fail before the US can get to try the remedy:
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/benedictbrogan/100060914/uh-oh-tea-party-embraces-david-cameron/
Well Cameron doesn't want to be, or at least has the good political sense to politely decline his tea cup full of hemlock. ~;)
Louis VI the Fat
10-26-2010, 22:46
Cameron? Cameron is right - the British conservatives and the Tea Party are not ideological allies.
The ideological allies of the Tea Party in Europe are the English Defense League, the Dutch PVV ('Fragony'), and the Swedish Democrats (Shubimi?). These are the face of the new populist right, with some differences because of national sentiments.
Furunculus
10-27-2010, 08:41
understand core stated principles and read the article, rather than letting wind to more overblown rhetoric; the tea party ambition of low(er) taxes and small(er) government is being achieved first in Britain, therefore the coalition is a petri-dish for tea-party ambitions.
no claim about cameron being right-wing in a domestic context as a result of tea-party endorsement can be construed from the article.
Rhyfelwyr
10-27-2010, 13:25
The ideological allies of the Tea Party in Europe are the English Defense League, the Dutch PVV ('Fragony'), and the Swedish Democrats (Shubimi?). These are the face of the new populist right, with some differences because of national sentiments.
The EDL and Swedish Democrats at least (not sure about PVV) are national socialists, couldn't be further from the Tea Party if they tried.
Louis VI the Fat
10-27-2010, 15:00
understand core stated principles and read the article, rather than letting wind to more overblown rhetoric; the tea party ambition of low(er) taxes and small(er) government is being achieved first in Britain, therefore the coalition is a petri-dish for tea-party ambitions.
no claim about cameron being right-wing in a domestic context as a result of tea-party endorsement can be construed from the article.Don't blame me, blame Cameron, who paraphrases my words in the very article:
[Cameron:]“How shall I put this? We seem to have drifted apart… there is an element of American conservatism that is headed in a very culture war direction, which is just different. There are differences with the American right.”
That's Cameron's verdict about the tea party.
There may be a passing resemblance in the current Tory budgetary policy and some of the demands of the Tea Party, but in the final analysis, the Tea Party is not about fiscal responsibility, it is about a continuation of culture wars through different means, the way Europe's new populist right is also not about traditional conservatism. (On the continent, the new hardright is surprisingly socialist)
They all - the new hardright - operate on the enormous gap between the mainstream right and the fascist right. They all believe they live in a repressive socialist state. Fragony's rants about the left are much more akin to the Tea Party's ramblings about Obama's socialist take-over than either realises.
The British ally of the Tea Party movement is the EDL:
The English Defence League (http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/english-defence-league), a far-right grouping aimed at combating the "Islamification" of British cities, has developed strong links with the American Tea Party movement (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/tea-party-movement).
An Observer investigation has established that the EDL has made contact with anti-jihad groups within the Tea Party organisation and has invited a senior US rabbi and Tea Party activist to London this month. Rabbi Nachum Shifren, a regular speaker at Tea Party conventions, will speak about Sharia law and also discuss funding issues.
The league has also developed links with Pamela Geller, who was influential in the protests against plans to build an Islamic cultural centre near Ground Zero.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/oct/10/english-defence-league-tea-party
Ironside
10-28-2010, 08:29
The EDL and Swedish Democrats at least (not sure about PVV) are national socialists, couldn't be further from the Tea Party if they tried.
SD and the Tea Party do have some simularities.
Both gets a lot of voters from people who feel disenfranchised from the mainstream politics. They both strive to regain the "nation's lost values", while also striving to define these lost values. They both dislike the state/overstate, except when it comes to enforcing their own social values (they both want stronger church-goverment interactions for example). Hostile to illegal immigrants/asylum seekers.
Both are radical social conservatives.
You're right that they wouldn't survive 5 minutes if they switched places, but Luis does have a point that they are at least part of the equivalent of eachother.
On a related note, SD are really trying to clean up their act nowadays. Mainly economic populism and the odd quirky formulations that you'll need to have red their older stuff or/and add together from several pages to see what they really mean. Except the things I've mentioned above that is still very visible.
Edit:
Not main issues, but for comparision.
Anybody knows the general crime policy from Tea Party members?
SD is a harder punishments party
And average male/female membership and leader composition compared to mainstream US? Is Palin representative or an outlier?
SD got heavy male dominance in both.
Rhyfelwyr
10-28-2010, 10:40
Don't get me wrong I agree the Tea Party/EDL/SD are very similar on social issues, but their approach to the economy is very different.
Ironside
10-28-2010, 11:36
Don't get me wrong I agree the Tea Party/EDL/SD are very similar on social issues, but their approach to the economy is very different.
True, but I think that has more to do with the "true American is libertarian" and the "true Swede is a Socialdemokrat" than a heavy consideration of the economic policy.
Or to put it differently, the economic policy of the party is much more dependant on the nation's history than the economic ideological foundation.
It might be simply a coincidence, even if it fits the search for the "true [nationality]" tendency they have.
True, but I think that has more to do with the "true American is libertarian" and the "true Swede is a Socialdemokrat" than a heavy consideration of the economic policy.
Or to put it differently, the economic policy of the party is much more dependant on the nation's history than the economic ideological foundation.
It might be simply a coincidence, even if it fits the search for the "true [nationality]" tendency they have.
lol, it is not a social club. It is a group of people organized around a uniting principle: smaller government, less taxes. That IS the Tea Party.
Louis VI the Fat
10-28-2010, 14:28
lol, it is not a social club. It is a group of people organized around a uniting principle: smaller government, less taxes. That IS the Tea Party.America is bipartisan, as is the UK for the most part. In countries with proportional representation such as Sweden and the Netherlands, political groups are organised around political parties. THere are lots of them. In the UK, and especially the US, both having just two main parties, political groups focus on driving the agenda and pulling either one major party into their direction.
The difference in political organisation is not an ideological, or even conscious decision.
gaelic cowboy
10-28-2010, 14:29
lol, it is not a social club. It is a group of people organized around a uniting principle: smaller government, less taxes. That IS the Tea Party.
How in gods name is that even possibly to have a "Small Government" if you demand that your country maintain Hyperpower status with a nation of over 300/350 million
lol, it is not a social club. It is a group of people organized around a uniting principle: smaller government, less taxes. That IS the Tea Party.
Unfortunately, the Tea Party also has a very significant aspect of social conservatism at its core. If the Tea Party movement ignored religion and social issues and focued only on governmental and economic reform, I would be seriously tempted to support them. However, their very vocal social conservatism pretty much prevents me from ever siding with them. Such a stance is an automatic veto for me in an election; many others feel the same way. As it stands, the Tea Party is a reincarnation of the Moral Majority with a larger focus on economics.
Furunculus
10-28-2010, 14:56
In the UK, and especially the US, both having just two main parties, political groups focus on driving the agenda and pulling either one major party into their direction.
yup, it is an excellent mechanism to ensure representation in a plurality electoral system.
the lib-dems perform the same function on a larger and more permanent scale.
America is bipartisan, as is the UK for the most part. In countries with proportional representation such as Sweden and the Netherlands, political groups are organised around political parties. THere are lots of them. In the UK, and especially the US, both having just two main parties, political groups focus on driving the agenda and pulling either one major party into their direction.
The difference in political organisation is not an ideological, or even conscious decision.
Of course they are mostly conservative (as smaller government and less taxes is a conservative idea), but there are lots of Democrats and Independents who attend Tea Parties (I personally know some). Yes, some of them are pushing a social conservative agenda, but what brings people together at the core of the Tea Party is the need to reign in government and lower taxes.
True, but I think that has more to do with the "true American is libertarian" and the "true Swede is a Socialdemokrat" than a heavy consideration of the economic policy.
This statement is completely false because economy is at the core of it, and no aspect of the Tea Party is more important that cutting taxes and reigning in government spending.
Strike For The South
10-28-2010, 16:14
lol, it is not a social club. It is a group of people organized around a uniting principle: smaller government, less taxes. That IS the Tea Party.
Except for the fact it isn't.
The tea party is nothing more than a guise to fire up the republican base.
It may have started as that but people like Palidino, O'donnel, and Angle have hijacked it and turned into harkening back to the good ol days. These peoples social positions make me want to vomit. They have no respect for the law or ethics. These people wouldn't know hands off government if it took a dump on there chest.
It's all just buisness as usual because anything else makes the populace as a whole uneasy
SSDD
a completely inoffensive name
10-29-2010, 02:07
Of course they are mostly conservative (as smaller government and less taxes is a conservative idea), but there are lots of Democrats and Independents who attend Tea Parties (I personally know some). Yes, some of them are pushing a social conservative agenda, but what brings people together at the core of the Tea Party is the need to reign in government and lower taxes.
small government and less taxes is not a conservative idea. When those liberal revolutionaries put together a Constitution with a Bill of Rights that limited government from infringing upon certain unalienable rights, they put forth a limited government from those found in Europe where monarchs and parliaments wielding unlimited power upon the populace.
Also, it is not limited government they want, it's government limited to what they want it to do. Which includes an expansive military-industry complex larger then any other countries military (in terms of budget).
Megas Methuselah
10-29-2010, 02:48
How in gods name is that even possibly to have a "Small Government" if you demand that your country maintain Hyperpower status with a nation of over 300/350 million
lmao who cares, let them pay the price in blood & ignorance, and let us reap the profits from the pax amerikana. poor bastards.
lmao who cares, let them pay the price in blood & ignorance, and let us reap the profits from the pax amerikana. poor bastards.
lol, you are really messed up man. ~;)
Crazed Rabbit
10-29-2010, 06:35
This statement is completely false because economy is at the core of it, and no aspect of the Tea Party is more important that cutting taxes and reigning in government spending.
Except military spending, of course.
CR
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.