Should religion have a place in politics

[Eon]

No, it's not happening - but as a European I find it scary that you think Bush is centrist with a left wobble. That's totally frightening and it makes me wonder what sort of things a "Good rightwing candidate" would do in office!

 

[Didasko]

No, it's not happening - but as a European I find it scary that you think Bush is centrist with a left wobble. That's totally frightening and it makes me wonder what sort of things a "Good rightwing candidate" would do in office!

I'd be interested to know what you think makes President Bush a right winger.

It can't be the war, because conservatives definitely do not hold a monopoly on war. There have been plenty of liberals who started or escalated wars.

It can't be his social agenda because spending has increased in that area since he took office.

It can't be the size of government because that has grown during his presidency.

It can't be a minority issue because he has surrounded himself with more minorities than any president I can remember.

It can't be government spending because he is outspending the liberals.

It can't be the fact that he is a Christian because he has not done much of anything while in office that has furthered the Christian agenda.

Now I will answer your question.

A good right wing candidate would:

Drastically reduce government spending

Radically reduce the size of government

Put a stop to illegal imigration

Nominate constitutionalist judges

Stand up to the liberal establishment instead of caving to it

Keep America's military strong

If I took the time that list would be a lot longer but it is a start. Of course we would have to clean house in the senate also for that to take place. To many RINOs in there you know

 

[Eon]

He has:

Instigated widespread tax cuts aimed at boosting the wealth of the wealthy.
Constantly acted in support of corporate interests.
Enacted police state legislation - the PATRIOT act.
Persued isolationist foreign policy
Increased government spending primarily in the areas of defence and intelligence (and I use the words ironically)
Overseen dubious elections at home through the use of family connections - both times.
Repealed the Automatic Weapons ban.


Sounds right wing (US standards) to me.

 

[Avesther]

Sounds like to me that President Bush is walking a fine line between the two partisan extremes. Either that will make people happy or tick them off. I think people are choosing to be ticked off.

Instigated widespread tax cuts aimed at boosting the wealth of the wealthy.

How do you aim tax costs to boost the wealth of the wealthy? The truth is, the wealthy will generate more wealth if they choose to. They don't rely on the government to do it for them. Only the left wing thinkers beleive that the government makes wealth for the wealthy.

 

[Arkanjel]

He has:

Instigated widespread tax cuts aimed at boosting the wealth of the wealthy.
Constantly acted in support of corporate interests.
Enacted police state legislation - the PATRIOT act.
Persued isolationist foreign policy
Increased government spending primarily in the areas of defence and intelligence (and I use the words ironically)
Overseen dubious elections at home through the use of family connections - both times.
Repealed the Automatic Weapons ban.


Sounds right wing (US standards) to me.

You forgot the little part about starting 2 wars, both of which are still being fought with no end in sight. Not that that is purely a right wing thing, but it just didnt make your list.

 

[Avesther]

You forgot the little part about starting 2 wars, both of which are still being fought with no end in sight. Not that that is purely a right wing thing, but it just didnt make your list.

Which two wars did President George Bush start? All wars have a history, the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts did not start with George Bush.

 

[Arkanjel]

Which two wars did President George Bush start? All wars have a history, the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts did not start with George Bush.

Yes I stand corrected on at least one of those wars. The conflict in Afghanistan was originally between the Russians and the Afghan's, we just kinda swooped in and cleaned it up. Originally tho we werent directly involved as we are now, we were just doing things from the side. The war in Iraq, at least the current one really started with the Desert Storm. What we are doing now is really a continuation of what should have been finished then. Before we moved in in 2003 we were just doing bombing runs to keep the "no fly zones" free of anti-aircraft emplacements. So i guess I should have said he re-started one war and jumped into the middle of another.

 

[Gandhi]

U can't blame him for Afghanistan, america was attacked and the government of afghan was hideing the main suspect. If he didn't go in to afghan he would of lost more support. It was the right thing to do.
And I was for the war in Iraq in the beginning, they had WMDs and they had to be stopped. And I thought the people were treated unfairly. But the only thing the war in Iraq has done is make more people turn against them.

 

[Arkanjel]

U can't blame him for Afghanistan, america was attacked and the government of afghan was hideing the main suspect. If he didn't go in to afghan he would of lost more support. It was the right thing to do.
And I was for the war in Iraq in the beginning, they had WMDs and they had to be stopped. And I thought the people were treated unfairly. But the only thing the war in Iraq has done is make more people turn against them.

You do make valid points Gandhi. All in all my stance is that all this stuff happens for a reason and it will all work out in the end. Politics can be a VERY divisive issue and what I believe might not be what someone else believes. Im not the best at portraying my political beliefs in a PC sorta way so I usually come across in a bad light, so I try not express them very often.

 

[Eon]

Let me see if I can write Tax cuts to generate wealth for the wealthy in a way that's less open to sophistry.

He had a tax refund where the richer you were the more money you got back. Not just in terms of people who paid twice as much tax got twice as much rebate either.

 

[Gandhi]

You do make valid points Gandhi. All in all my stance is that all this stuff happens for a reason and it will all work out in the end. Politics can be a VERY divisive issue and what I believe might not be what someone else believes. Im not the best at portraying my political beliefs in a PC sorta way so I usually come across in a bad light, so I try not express them very often.

Yea I used to love discussing politics before, but with having friends coming from many different backrounds it usually doesn't end well.

 

[Avesther]

Let me see if I can write Tax cuts to generate wealth for the wealthy in a way that's less open to sophistry.

He had a tax refund where the richer you were the more money you got back. Not just in terms of people who paid twice as much tax got twice as much rebate either.

I dont' know what it is like in the USA, but in Canada, generally speaking, the top 2% of income earners pay over 50% of the tax collected. I'm sure in the USA its pretty much the same, I'm sure in the UK its pretty much the same as well.

My simple logic states, that any tax releif should benefit these people the most.

 

[Gandhi]

I know thats how it is in california since I remember seeing on tv how actors loose 50% of their salary to taxes.

 

[Didasko]

Instigated widespread tax cuts aimed at boosting the wealth of the wealthy.

Yes tax cuts do boost the wealth of the wealthy and there is nothing wrong with that. All the tax increases of the last 20 years or more have been aimed at the wealthy as well.

I am a public school teacher. My family lives off my income alone. I work a second job to make ends meet. I would not consider myself to be wealthy by western standards President Bush's tax cut was AWESOME for me. It was THE BEST tax cut for families in the lower middle class in modern history.

Constantly acted in support of corporate interests.

I would have to agree with you here.

Enacted police state legislation - the PATRIOT act.

yup...thats not a conservative (conservative = small government and less government control) thing, it helps to prove he leans left.

Persued isolationist foriegn policy.

Absolutely false. President Bush has mixed us up in more foriegn matters than you can shake a stick at. Economically, politically, and militarily!

Just because he does not bow to the will of foriegn powers does not make him an isolationist.

Increased government spending primarily in the areas of defence and intelligence (and I use the words ironically)

Yes he has increased spending in these areas, but you are wrong when you say primarily in these areas. Discretionary spending has skyrocketed as well. President Bush is a big spender in ALL areas.

Overseen dubious elections at home through the use of family connections - both times.

LOL...I can tell you watch the news on the big networks

Repealed the Automatic Weapons ban.

uumm..Automatic Weapons have been, are, and will be banned in this country for a long while. Not sure where you picked up this propaganda.

 

[Eon]

Bush allowed a firearms ban dealing with automatic weapons to expire, didn't he?

The Elections have been dubious. I don't say fixed or twisted, but come on... Have you looked into the AutoPoll machine scandal?

As regarding strong central government - that's a right wing thing where I come from. Left wing governements devolve powers to more local and regional assemblies.

By the way - bombing a country is not "interacting with it". Bush has ridden roughshod over Nato and UN relationships that America had been cultivating.

 

[Didasko]

Bush allowed a firearms ban dealing with automatic weapons to expire, didn't he?

No

The Elections have been dubious. I don't say fixed or twisted, but come on... Have you looked into the AutoPoll machine scandal?

There were so many scandals it was sickening. But as many from the left as the right. This has nothing to do with being right wing or left.

As regarding strong central government - that's a right wing thing where I come from. Left wing governements devolve powers to more local and regional assemblies.

Must be different there. In America the republican party has traditionally been for smaller federal government and more local control...that is changing though. The republicans in power now in the white house and congress have turned on their own party.

By the way - bombing a country is not "interacting with it". Bush has ridden roughshod over Nato and UN relationships that America had been cultivating.

I don't remember using the words 'interacting with it' in my other posts...could be wrong though

Yes President Bush did exert his right as the leader of a sovereign nation to do what he thought best to protect his country. This made a lot of leaders of other nations angry and stepped on the toes of the UN. Sometimes you have to do what you feel is right whether it is popular or not. That is one of the few thing that I respect President Bush for.

As for isolationist...nah

 

[Gandhi]

Bush allowed a firearms ban dealing with automatic weapons to expire, didn't he?

He did let it expire if I remember.

 

[Didasko]

He did let it expire if I remember.

It was not a ban on automatic weapons that expired. It was a ban on the size of clip you could have in a semi-auto firearm. There is a huge difference between the two.

 

[Gandhi]

sry my bad

 

[Didasko]

Thanks to all the veterans out there that have helped to keep this country free, so I can continue to mix religion with politics