<p>
</p>
<p>Yes. Absolutely. Anyone who argues otherwise is out-of-touch and dreaming.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yeah, because Osama Bin Laden planned and orchestrated 9/11 from Saudi Arabia. Have you been following any news over the past decade or so?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The Saudis hate Bin Laden almost as much as we do. And he hates them back. That’s why he has been forced to operate out of Afghanistan and Pakistan rather than his own home country. Not all Saudis are created equal.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Why? To who?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Sure. Do you think that there are conservatives that oppose gay rights and legality of abortion for religious reasons? Do you think there are conservatives that consider Obama to be a socialist Muslim? Do you think there are conservatives that think Palin is great? What do you think about Islam and (since I forgot to include it the first time) gun control?</p>
<p>Libertarianism is great</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There are conservatives that believe all sorts of kooky (and false) stuff about Obama, just like there are liberals and anarchists who believe that Dubya was behind 9/11. The world is full of stupid people, and unfortunately they happen to find solace all across the political spectrum. There are conservatives that think Palin is great, sure. There are liberals that think Olbermann is great. Don’t see a problem with either one; people are entitled to their own opinions.</p>
<p>I have no problem with Islam, although I think Islamic terrorism is the biggest security crisis facing our nation today. As far as gun control goes, I’m pro-second amendment, and don’t think the government should infringe upon an individual’s right to own firearms if they are sane and not a felon.</p>
<p>Edit: Forgot to respond to your first question. Yes, there are Conservatives who are against gay marriage and abortion because they believe that the Bible is against such behavior. So what? People are gonna believe what they want to. I happen to think homosexuality is a sin, but so are a lot of things that I do regularly (drink, premarital sex, etc) so I’m in no position to tell anyone else how to live their life.</p>
<p>Fact check fail, as per usual. Osama bin Laden didn’t plan 9/11 from Iraq, either. Saddam Hussein wanted nothing to do with Islamists - he was a secular tyrant and militant Islam was a threat to his own power base.</p>
<p>There is not one shred of credible evidence linking Saddam to 9/11, and every alleged “OMG WMD” claim has been proven to be blatant lies made up for propaganda purposes. No WMDs have ever been found.</p>
<p>Or did you really think we forgot?</p>
<p>Iraq and Afghanistan are humanitarian disasters on epic scales, with flimsy puppet governments that will fold up like an umbrella when the last American troops leave, a-la the Fall of Saigon. Get ready for the iconic helicopter evacuations.</p>
<p>You guys should read the book, Brainwashed, by Ben Shapiro. He writes about how our college education system “indoctrinates America’s youth.” He wrote it while he was a student at UCLA. I thought it was very interesting. </p>
<p>Here’s a link to an interview with him:
[Brainwashed:</a> An Interview with Ben Shapiro - News - Students For Academic Freedom](<a href=“http://www.studentsforacademicfreedom.org/news/555/BenShapirofpageinterview051304.htm]Brainwashed:”>http://www.studentsforacademicfreedom.org/news/555/BenShapirofpageinterview051304.htm)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>How do you think the quantities compare between “Obama is a socialist” and 9/11 conspiracy theorists (who happen to be liberal)?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Do you think that the fact that one is a comparison and the other is a professional entertainer at all compromises the comparison? Or is a reflection on the sets of people that like them?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The viewpoint is what it is. I guess the question is whether it’s held by a significant chunk of the Republican base, especially as compared to, say, the idea among Democrats that all wages should be equal.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Hard to take an interview seriously when the first question is Why do you think the Left is so totalitarian?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Reading fail, per usual. I don’t think that I mentioned Iraq once. Try again.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Looks like you really have your hopes up, Osama.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’d say they are probably roughly equal, with the edge probably going to the Obama/socialist crowd.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not at all. Both use inflammatory rhetoric to gain popular support for their own personal gain. Palin isn’t an elected official any more; she is an Olbermann with better ratings and a speaking circuit. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Why does the proportion matter? I’d say that being pro-life is pretty much standard operating procedure for the GOP.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It matters if the argument is that the Republican party panders to radical right views more than the Democratic party panders to radical left views. From what I can tell you kind of forming an equivalency by bringing up fringe left views in the Democratic party when others attack fringe right views in the Republican party. You can only form an equivalency if they truely are equal, so the question of number is relevant. </p>
<p>I don’t understand why you don’t just agree with others that radical right views are silly and the Republican party should be ashamed of pandering to them, given that you don’t believe in them. I think you’d agree that your party (presumably you are a Republican) would be better off without birthers & the lot.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Then you admit that you have no rational argument for the trillions of dollars spent and hundreds of thousands of lives lost in Iraq?</p>
<p>Actually, Cuse0507, nevermind, I can see how it can be frustrating for people to mischaracterize your party. </p>
<p>I still don’t see how pointing to 9/11 conspiracy theorists (not all of whom associate with the Democratic party by the way–I can see how extreme right people, Tim McVeigh, Waco dudes, etc… would follow such ‘theories’) helps anything or absolves people for having moronic opinions.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Why do you think that Obama is an elitist? Is being an elitist a bad thing? If you look past the ‘common man’ rhetoric of the Republican party, a lot of their policies, which I presume you agree with, benefit rich people over poor people. That’s pretty elitist. Do you dislike those as well?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Radical views are silly regardless of whether they are liberal or conservative. Why should the right be the only side that has to condemn them?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I, like many people (including many Democratic members of Congress) was in favor of the Iraq war initially because I believed that they had WMDs and were trying to illegally build/develop their program, which would have put our country in grave danger. It turns out that viewpoint was wrong, but we didn’t discover this until after the invasion. Still, I’m of the mindset that if you break something, you buy it. We broke Iraq, so we have to fix it, and that has been the challenge.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I was merely providing an example of an extremist view that some on the left have to prove that both sides have their nuts. Leftists certainly have other extremist fringes, however (socialists, communists, and anarchists, for example). Not trying to paint all liberals with a broad brush, but it is important to acknowledge that both sides have people that they aren’t proud of.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think that most politicians are elitist. What set Obama apart was his refusal to compromise initially; his view was the only one that he would accept when he had control of both the House and the Senate. As far as policies go, which Republican policies do you believe benefit the rich people over poor people?</p>
<p>Tax cuts for the rich? The entire concept of trickle-down economics?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>They don’t have to be, but bringing up truthers when people condemn Republicans for having birthers is totally irrelevant. Why bring it up?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It is totally irrelevant to the conversion about one group of people with unpopular or dispised views that another group too holds despised views. The existence of the second group doesn’t justify the first group.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>To my mind, one of the most egregious is that Republicans are for the repeal of the estate tax. Granted, I think a lot of rich people through clever accounting get out of paying a lot of the tax, but still. How can a Republican politician say with a straight face to poor and middle class people that he is working to make America a meritocracy and yet directly encourage the entrenchment of wealth in elite families? It’s amazing how they’ve been able to sell this to people.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>How is it irrelevant? Would you prefer people to bring up communists or socialists instead?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m merely claiming that both sides have their loons. I don’t know why Liberals should have their loons ignored while Conservatives have to have their loons in the spotlight. What is so hard about acknowledging that both sides have nutjobs?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So a person works hard all their life, is able to earn enough to provide for their children, grandchildren, and extended family when they pass, and the government thinks that taking 50% of what this person has accumulated (and already paid taxes on once) is fair. Double taxation for starters. I don’t understand the hatred for the rich that many liberals have; for the most part, they worked hard to earn their money and they deserve to be able to hold onto it.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>How about tax cuts for everyone? Or the Fair Tax?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If non-sequitors are your thing, I’d prefer you to start talking about the NFL playoffs whenever people criticize birthers. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I do acknowledge that there are both fringe left views and right views, but I don’t see how pointing out the other everytime someone criticizes one group is a productive use of time.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I guess we’ll have to disagree. The rich man is dead. He can no longer enjoy his wealth. His children do not earn his inheritance by virtue of being born to a rich man. I didn’t think that this was a contentious viewpoint and nor I can be convinced to think otherwise. Being against the repeal of the inheritance tax isn’t hatred of the rich, by the way.</p>
<p>In any case, you’d have to admit that the repeal of the inheritance tax benefits the wealthy over the poor regardless of whether you think that it is just or not.</p>