Bush Blames the Sailors

[Ben Kenobi]

radical - progressive - liberal - moderate - conservative - reactionary

And you are a political scientist, che?

The real spectrum goes like this.


Communist - Liberal - Moderate - Conservative - Fascist

Fascism is a reactionary conservatism, while Communists are radical Liberals, ie, more liberal than then Liberals.

I don't see why you have moderate listed on the conservative side of the spectrum.

[Japher]

I agree with Che that it seems the government is treating the military like sheit, but welcome to the military, eh?

My breakdown:

Che-Communist-Kid-Liberal-Sava-Moderate-Ben-Conservative-Japher-Fascist-Sloww

[rev]

Back to the "Mission Accomplished" sign:

What Bush said about the soldiers putting it up is true. Where it came from, however, is another story: The Navy asked the White House about it, the White House loved the idea and had the sign manufactured and brought on board. The soldiers put it up. Who paid for the manufacture of the sign is unclear at this point.

Bush is trying to distance himself from any association of the mission being "accomplished", especially considering that at the time of his press conference, we were one combat death away from equality before and after the aircraft carrier speech. That is, the number of combat deaths since then is now greater than the number of combat deaths until that point.

When Bush tells the press and public that it wasn't his idea to put up the sign, he's being a little misleading. What he said was true -- it wasn't his administration's idea, but his administration took the idea and made it happen, so it's not as if Bush appeared on the aircraft carrier and didn't know the sign was going to be there.

The media would be far smarter to have already found video of a speech right about that time in which Bush verbally praised the soldiers for a "mission accomplished".

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi




And you are a political scientist, che?

The real spectrum goes like this.


Communist - Liberal - Moderate - Conservative - Fascist

Fascism is a reactionary conservatism, while Communists are radical Liberals, ie, more liberal than then Liberals.

I don't see why you have moderate listed on the conservative side of the spectrum.

cause he has 6 terms instead of 5, and he is, naturally, cutting things finer on the left then on the right. Be glad he didnt introduce social democrats, democratic socialists, trotskites, or anarchists. Of course then it wouldnt be so linear either. Which i think it really isnt. I think of there as being a real difference in class base and emphasis between liberals and Social democrats, which doesnt really make one to the "left" of the other. Similarly i think fascism is something rather different than simply a very reactionary variety of conservatiism - it broke with classical european reactionary politics in its attitude to class, mass mobilization, etc.

[Combat Ingrid]

Political spectrum according to certain people:
Texan - Jackass - Future Cuban
note: the latter two may sometimes be difficult to distinguish from eachother

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
And you are a political scientist, che?

As a matter of fact, yes, I am. Trained and a practicing ametuer (as I don't get paid).

[Ben Kenobi]

Trained and a practicing ametuer (as I don't get paid).

Any comments about my critiques?

I think my spectrum works better.

Che-Communist-Kid-Liberal-Sava-Moderate-Ben-Conservative-Japher-Fascist-Sloww

Reminds me of that quote about the only things being in the middle of the road are roadkill with a yellow streak.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
I think my spectrum works better.

Of course you do.

It's not actually very accurate, however, since it ignores all sorts of people to the right of conservatism as well as people to the left of liberals who aren't communists.

[Q Classic]

this administration knows the value of visuals on telly press conferences. just look at the backdrops for any of his public appearances.

i find it hard to believe that this wasn't done by his part. knew of this before, though.

[Q Classic]

oh, and the proper political scale is this:

very wrong (leftist) -- wrong -- kinda wrong -- moderate / me -- kinda wrong -- wrong -- very wrong (rightist).

[Imran Siddiqui]

Q:

And as a political scientist myself, I say Che's dictomy is crap .

The 'spectrum' is thus:

Radical - Liberal - Moderate - Conservative - Reactionary

Progressives ARE Liberals (on the 'left' side of Liberalism though). Libertarians are Economically Reactionary and Socially Radical.

[The Templar]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Progressives ARE Liberals (on the 'left' side of Liberalism though). Libertarians are Economically Reactionary and Socially Radical.

Doh! Better get your money back on that Poli-Sci degree there Imran!

Liberals see private property as fundamental to liberalism - tis the very definition of liberalism. Progressives tend to be ambivalent to socialist on property questions.

And libertarians are not that socially radical ...

[Chemical Ollie]

The political spectrum is a broken circle, not a line. Nazis and ultracommies/anarchists meet at the very ends. That's why they hate each other so much - they are almost the same thing but at different ends.

And on the thread topic - As if Churchill would have said "Mission accomplished" on June 7 1944

[Imran Siddiqui]

Doh! Better get your money back on that Poli-Sci degree there Imran

Why should I, I'm correct.

Liberals see private property as fundamental to liberalism - tis the very definition of liberalism. Progressives tend to be ambivalent to socialist on property questions.

Depends on if you are talking about European Liberalism or American Liberalism. American Liberals, since FDRs time (the first 'American' Liberal), do not see necessarily have to see private property as fundamental. And American Progressives are more pro-private property than European Progressives (just look at the original American Progressives of Williams Jennings Bryan, Theodore Roosevelt, Robert LaFollete, and Woodrow Wilson).

And libertarians are not that socially radical ...

A group that believes in full rights based on sexual orientation and the legalization of all drugs does not sound like a moderate group to me.

[The Templar]

Originally posted by SlowwHand

http://www.salon.com/

Tell me it isn't a Radical Liberal rag.

It's not a 'radical liberal rag'

Not 'radical' because it is fairly conventional in its editorials and its reporting is objective.

Not 'liberal' - just compare it to the nation, which is liberal or to the American Prospect.

Not a 'rag' because it is exlusively a webzine

Dammit Sloww, if I have to school you again, I'm going to charge you tuition!