The cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan combined with the Bush-era tax cuts
for the wealthy will account for nearly half of the debt the U.S. will owe by
Trusting and giving government power to invade Iraq for no reason. Big
government going to an unfunded war with blind support is the real problem.
Heckling the President in a State of the Union Address to the nation.Walking into a JCPenny's with an AR-15 slung over your shoulder and glock
at the hip.STILL thinking invading a soverign, non-threatening Oil
rich country after being lied to by the US President and then finding no weapons
of mass destruction was still a GOOD idea.That FoxNews is too
"Liberal".....Face it -- the list of examples of
Republicans being Extreme is already Extreme in and of itself.
An error that both sides of the political spectrum make, in my opinion, is they
don't view the role of government as being primarily to govern, but rather
they view it as a blunt instrument with which to compel others to do as they
wish. The Utah State Legislature is sometimes quite notorious in this regard, in
that they occasionally pass goofy bills that have little or nothing to do with
sound government of the people in their present condition and make-up. I think
Obama is making the same mistake; it appears that he wishes not to govern the
citizens America but to remake it in his image.
Why is it that so many examples of extremism cited in the comments here consist
of telling others what they believe, but are often nothing more than a parody of
what is really believed? It would be helpful if people engaged in civil
conversation to discover what others actually believe and to find areas of
agreement.Stephen Covey called it "win-win or no deal". Nice
concept, but it will always be either "win-lose" or "no deal"
until we learn to talk with each other instead of poking each other in the eye.
Making another person lose does not make one a winner. It makes us all losers.
"Is it extreme to be pro-life..."It's not extreme. But
it won't get you votes in an election.
March 25, 2013The Tea Party Boycotts Fox News As ‘Too
Liberal’Yes -- 6am Thurs Mar 21 - 6 am Sun Mar 24All Tea Partiers are sending a 3 day messag to Fox News to "Turn
Further Right".==========Nothing says
"Extreme" is all-capital letters louder than that.Fox News
is under assault — not by the left, but by far right extremists from the
Tea Party — for being too liberal — and they are demanding more
Benghazi coverage, and more birthers. Can you say, “Off the rails
crazy?”“We need Fox to turn right,” said Hjerlied.
“We think this is a coverup and Fox is aiding and abetting it. This is the
way Hitler started taking over Germany, by managing and manipulating the news
media.”Consider that last sentence for a moment.The Tea Party is now so far to the right they consider Fox News to be like
Hitler.This is why Republicans will keep loosing, even more.
The only people less savory than republicans are Utah republicans
Extremism left and right is much the same. Salient in both are fear and hate of
the Other and detachment of reality. A sense of peril embodied in the Other
lends urgency to a strategy of attack and defeat. Concessions are considered
immoral; fraternizing with the enemy traitorous. Trust is limited, and only
certain people matter.Its popularity in Utah on the far right is
@ciNope no extremism in your post at all, very mainstream America.
How Are Republican positions considered extreme?--For
one they consider Social Security (which people have paid into their whole life)
to be a government handout.
I tend to agree with the letter writer. If you feel strongly about something,
whether Republican or Democrat, why not stand up for your core values and
beliefs? There are some things that we just shouldn't compromise on.
To "micawber" I am saying that if liberals believed in personal
responsibility that we would not have Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, or
any other social welfare program.The problem with calling somebody
an extremist is that it is subjective. From my point of view, I am not an
extremist, you are the extremist.
Extreme? Certainly elements of the Republican Party are extre me in
their views. It is not necessary to recount all the examples cited in the above
postings. However, it is only required to cite the recent Republican autopsy
presented by Republican Chairman Reince Prebius as to the significant problems
of the Republican Party in functioning at a national level. If the
"extreme" elements of the Party continue to make candidates adhere to
"extremist" views, then the Party stands to lose any and all future
elections. This will extend beyond the presidential races and come to include
senate and congressional races as the demographics in the various states
change.Texas will become a blue state within 10 years. Small states
(including Utah) may remain red, but they are insignificant in national
elections. National attitudes will sweep the nation forward and as with the
views of the 18th and 19th century disappeared, so will the "unique"
views of the extremists of the Republican Party. Of course, there will be some
who will maintain these antiquated attitudes, but they will sit off to the side
in the national discourse as obsolete and irrelevant.
Republicans can have any views they want. They can believe that the
moom is made from green cheese. They can believe that a gun in every home will
bring peace and prosperity. They can believe that marriage equality is a sin
and will harm the marriages of everyone. They can believe that gay people are
an abomination and slavery was okay because slaves got free room and board.
They can believe that Barack Obama is not an American because he was
"born" in Kenya and not in Hawaii while Tea Party darling Ted Cruz was
actually born in Canada (not a part of the United States although many assume it
is). They can believe that pigs fly and a woman's right to choose is not
their right. They can believe that they are better than Democrats and do
everything they can to sabotage the president when he/she isn't a
Republican. They can work to make the wealthy more wealthy while telling the
less wealthy that it is God's will that the wealthy be better off than the
moochers and leeches who get Social Security, Medicaid, and Medicare.It doesn't make them right.
@Red Shirt:You can say we shouldn't have Social Security,
Medicaire and Medicaid. Or, you can say you are not an extremist. You
can't say both.
It's like reading; "The Paranoid Style in American Politics"
by American historian Richard J. Hofstadter all over again...
Halach HuinicThe implication that there was a connection between Jared
Loughner and Republicans is Chris Matthewesque EXTREMISM at its most hateful.
Follwing the same logic; Any leftist willing to engage in such bigotry deserves
to be lumped in with "open minded and tolerant" Charles Manson
I couldn't agree more with the comments of Irony Guy.Either
everyone matters or no one matters.
When I hear the constant tirade of the Republican right against our federal
government and against President Obama personally, I wonder how different that
is from how Anthony Kuck describes the mental state of his close friend, Jared
Loughner?"I know he has some crazy thoughts where he ... just
believes the government is corrupt, and he has all these assumptions on things,
that he doesn't really know what he's talking about. He just seemed
to have some kind of ... hate for government."Now some may
excuse this drumbeat of virulence as righteous indignation. However, to me this
is the worrisome side of extremism that I find so threatening.
OK, writer, so your positions are not extreme or extreem or x-stream. Fine.
They're still fraught with nasty consequences. The difference between
liberal and conservative is clear: "We're in this together" versus
"You're on your own, Pal."
I see most of the posters here come from the Chris Matthews school of tolerance:
I.E engage in some prophylactic bigotry and call everyone who disagrees with
you a racist/extremist in an attempt to put them on the defensive and hope no
one notices your own extremism (i.e. no limitations on abortion in the
Democratic platform; stage managing a phony tea party incident in hopes of
provoking antagonism, and when it doesn’t happen - call them racist
anyhow; spend thousands of dollars to attend a Catholic university so you can
claim you are a victim when they don’t pay for your $10 birth control -
then claim there is a war on women – to divert attention from your own war
on rational thought, etc. etc.)Trouble is: Matthews (et al) is a
complete absolute total jokeGorbechov callign Reagan an extremist -
really says more about Gorbechov than ReaganThe letter writer should
be proud of his point; as illustrated by the hysteria it evokes from left-wing
It is funny to see the liberals ranting about their favorite talking points
between Repbulicans and Democrats. The fact is that the policies that most of
the Republicans that are currently in office have are not that different than
the Democrats.With most of the comments here it is like watching a
Marxist debate a Fabian Socialist about why the Fabian's views are so
extreme.To "Open Minded Mormon" you realize that
liberals/progressives do not advocate for personal responsibility. That is how
we ended up with SS, Medicare, Medicaid, Obamacare, and the countless social
welfare programs in the first place. Your ilk believe that you shouldn't
have to pay the consequences for their mistakes.
More examples of the GOP being extreme...The poor, sick and the
elderly can all be denied Healthcare due to pre-existing conditions.The earth is only 6,000 years old.That Blastula is a human
being.That Corporations are "people".Climate
Change is Hoax.47% of the U.S. population is stereotyped as a bunch
of lazy free loaders.That the 2nd amendment allows for criminals and
the mentally insane to have unlimited access to weapons.That Racial
Profiling is OK.That a woman who is "legitimately raped" has
ways of naturally reversing her pregnancy.That LGBTs can be
categorized as sub-human or sub-citizens. [I recall the GOP spending years
saying - "Equal Rights, Not Special Rights"? So, what say you now?]
Because most listen to Limbaugh yell and spit venom daily.
It is extreme to refer to taxes as "forced charity." Taxes are not
charity. They are they way we fund necessary government functions, such as
defense, infrastructure, air and water quality, the judicial system, and taking
care of the elderly, disabled, and disadvantaged. Because we have been unwilling
to tax at a sufficient level to pay for what both parties agree are necessary
expenditures, we have growing debt.But if Kim Skinner is of the
opinion that we should leave all these government functions to "volunteer
charity," we will soon have a vulnerable, crumbling, polluted, crime-ridden,
and destitute society, because, as been shown by study after study, those who
reap the greatest rewards from our economic system are actually the least
charitable. Volunteer charity can't even keep up with what government is
unable to do.
How or why are positions held by Republicans considered extreme?Is
it extreme to be pro-life, [only when it doesn’t allow for rape,
incest, health and life of the woman, and viability of the fetus – as the
GOP platform now stands.]to favor agency, personal accountability,
[ I’m being forced to pay for Corporate Welfare and Wars I
don’t support] the Second Amendment and voluntary charity
versus forced charity? [BackGround Checks are common sense, and do not
threaten the 2nd amendment, and General Welfare is not the same as charity.]Is it extreme to oppose government waste, fraud and burdensome debt? [Get back to me when the GOP has figured out how to pay $3 Trillion wasted in
the Middle East]BTW – I did a quick search Deseret News search
on “Kim Skinner”. It reveals someone who submits letters to the
Editor ... dare I say, EXTREMELY often.
I have no idea where we got the idea that the GOP was insensitive, self-serving,
and radical..."There are 47 percent of the people who will vote
for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with
him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who
believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that
they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it. ... My
job is not to worry about those people. I'll never convince them they
should take personal responsibility and care for their lives."or"Corporations are people my friend!"or"I like being able to fire people."or "the single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama
to be a one-term president."Not to mention all the hateful
comments made against women and minorities...
Extreme is:Refusing to raise the debt ceiling--(essentially telling
our creditors we aren't going to pay the bill), something that has been
routinely done since at least 1940--18 times during Reagan's presidency and
7 times under G.W. Bush.Granting personhood to the unborn, 14th
amendment rights, and prohibiting abortion in all circumstances.Filibustering non-controversial judicial nominations.Teaching
creationism as a science subject in schoolsIgnoring the vast
scientific consensus on climate change.Believing U.S. citizens need
to be armed to fight against the govt.Believing that 47% of
Americans who don't owe federal income tax are lazy, n'er-do-wells
Good response ECR..let me just add a couple of little details. If you want to
be believe that any abortion is evil then by all means don't have an
abortion. However when the law clearly allows for abortions in some
circustances, and public opinion supports such a law, to try and inact policies
that define a newly fertilized egg as a person is extreme. If you
believe that private organizations with defined memberships can solve socieities
welfare needs, then by all means contribute to your hearts content. However to
define the position that society as a whole has a responsibility to all of its
members welfare, as forced charity is extreme.I could go on but you
get the point.
When your positions are so far to the right that Reagan looks like a moderate,
than yes, you are a little extreme. When you are so far right that Reagan looks
like a Liberal, you are very extreme. When you think Fox News is a
Liberal media source, than yes - you are incredibly extreme. Do
these things apply to the entirety of the Republican Party? Of course not. And
those who disagree with these positions are the ones within the party calling it
out for being too extreme - and this letter writer shows the response they
receive. Yes - part of the Republican Party is very extreme. And if you really think everyone who thinks the Republican Party needs
to change is a Liberal or a Democrat, not only are you an extreme party, you are
also a very small party.
One more poor, gullible soul who has been completely fooled by the GOP.
I think the Republican Party should hold onto their views with both hands and
never give in but then again I am a democrat.
So Andrew McDonald owes Kim Skinner a debt of graditude. While Andrew
appartently failed to articulate why he thinks Republicans are extreme, Kim does
a good job of illustrating why that is true."Is it extreme to be
pro-life" - No. That's why many Democrats are pro-life. And please
don't tell me that no Republican has ever had an abortion."to favor agency" unless you're making a chouice about your own
body or who you will marry"personal accountability" becuase
no liberal Democrat ever supported himself"the Second
Amendment" - Please read Justice Scalia's opinion in District of
Columbia vs. Heller"voluntary charity" except for giving tax
breaks to the already wealthy"Is it extreme to oppose government
waste" except at the Pentagon"fraud and burdensome debt"
the debt was tripled during the 80's when who was in the White House?And just reading the last paragraph one can see why Andrew thinks
Republicans are being "dangerously extreme, mean-spirited, bellicose and of
fear-mongering." When Republicans claim their platform is made up of
"righteous principles" and Democrat's positions are
"socialism" I think we can see where Andrew got his idea.
How did that 8 years of Bushco sit with ya'? I'm guessing as a proud
Republican, George and Dick are without blame. Spending trillions and borrowing
hundreds of billions from China was "necessary, right? Our infrastructure
could have used a big boost with the trillions wasted during the Bushco Reign of
Terror, but that would just be "socialism", right?
When you say "Trusting and giving the government complete power to dictate
all walks of life and acquiescence to socialism is what will cause the demise of
our country", you are engaging in the same kind of rhetorical excess you
accuse Andrew McDonald of. Most Republicans are not bellicose fear-mongers. Most
Democrats don't support giving the government complete power or
acquiescence to socialism. And, frankly, suggesting that there is widespread
support for complete government control and socialism sounds a little extreme to