If you are a supporter of the extreme left, please tell me a little bit about your platform and why you support the issues that you support. Wait no fair googling. I want an honest response! Hatred for the President is not a reason to devote your life to one party or the other, he is only in office for a couple more years. Please site the important platforms in your party and tell me why you support them.
2006-09-05 04:59:40 · 10 answers · asked by fire_side_2003 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Evidently some people don't understand the word's political platform. Well that only lends to my earlier statement about being "misinformed".
Signed- Respectfully Sunshine
2006-09-05 05:03:56 · update #1
The hard left was for nation-building until Bush invaded Iraq (even though Bush was the 3rd consecutive president to attack Iraq).
The hard left was for prescription drugs for the elderly until Bush passed the Medicare prescription drug plan (and shut up when the Washington Post said the elderly love the plan)
The hard left was for defending free speech, sexual choices, womens rights until Muslim terrorists decided that they would murder us over cartoons, women without head coverings and "honor killings"
The hard left was against sexual harassment until 3 women (all big-time Democrats) were abused by Bill Clinton; 1) Juanita Broaddrick went on national tv to say he raped her (no small feat and very brave) 2) Kathleen Willey was a Democratic fundraiser said she was groped in the White House 3) Monica Lewinsky was a lowly intern who became a plaything and cigar humidor for the Perverted Sex Offender-in-Chief.
Ah, the hard left. Full of contradictions and hypocrasies!!
2006-09-05 05:10:37 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
"Hatred for the President is not a reason to devote your life to one party or the other..."
Is that why the Republicans treated Clinton with such respect?
Your question is to vague. How do you define the "far left" or "extreme left"? Is that any democrat? Is anyone who disagrees with your position or with the war in Iraq "misinformed"? The opposite is also true. There are a lot of people who support Bush simply because he is a republican.
2006-09-05 05:31:31 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Most members of both sides are misinformed. The far left and the far right. Their only agenda is to hate the other side, with or without reason. That is their only political platform too. Rationale and logic doesn't apply. What one group supports the other group opposes. So there.
2006-09-05 05:10:59 · answer #3 · answered by worldneverchanges 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
a million. particular, blacks of African descent might desire to not carry the priesthood until 1978. yet, we don't understand why. There has in no way been an stable reason given. The Comp. history of the Church isn't not an stable church rfile, it became written with the help of B. H. Roberts, not the church leaders as an entire. not something interior the e book of Mormon talks approximately BLACKS of AFRICAN descent through fact this became interior the location of critical u . s . a . of america. And the verse in Moses talks with regard to the seed of Cain and we are able to basically assume this implies blacks, even though it has ntohign to do with the priesthood. 2. God did not end plural marriage plenty as He excused teh church from it fairly is practice. It became through fact the government became AGGRESIVELY attempting to end it, with the help of disenfranchising teh church, taking many of the real sources, alongside with the temples, and putting many of the adult males, extraordinarily the leaders, the two in detention center or they went into hiding. 3. particular, we do vicarious baptisms, yet human beings are in simple terms as loose to reject that baptism as they have been whilst they have been alive. i became even taught that people who DID reject it right here won't settle for tat risk, that it fairly is basically for people who died in lack of expertise.
2016-11-24 22:50:10 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Your question shows your own lack of knowledge concerning politics..you ask the question as if the"far left' is one particular party. I assume that you are thinking of the Democratic party..if so it is you my dear who are mis-informed..because the members of that party are not all "left" or "far left" it would do many of them well to be more left-wing...When Bill Clinton was pres. the Right did everything they could to get him out.......WHEN CLINTON LIED ...NO ONE DIED.....the BUSH/chaney lies are killing people every day...people from the right and the left need to unite and work to end the unjust, immoral war in Iraq.
2006-09-05 05:14:44 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
when the far left gets its self serving news from what seem like credible sources, what would you expect? case in point..just look at how reuters is trying to change the publics perception about what happened in Lebannon. The far left just lo-o-o-oves these images to serve their "platform"
http://www.zombietime.com/reuters_photo_fraud/
Further far left PC whitewashing of the Islamic Fascism from our press goes on and on..take these for example...
1994 A Muslim Named Rashid Baz shoots at a van filled with Hasidic boys, on the Brooklyn bridge murdering one of them. FBI calls it "Road Rage". March 1, 1994
1997 At Empire State Building; Ali Abu Kamal shoots at tourists, kills one and wounds six before killing himself, Mayor Giuliani informs the public "he had many enemies in his mind".Feb 24,1997
1999 Egypt Air flight 990's co-pilot crashes plane killing all 217 people on board, officials post no link to terrorism, even though the co-pilot is heard on black box tape exclaiming "I rely on Allah" 11 times as he crashed the plane, later documents are seized from his apt. showing contact with an extremist group.- Oct 1999
2002 Los Angeles Airport; Hesham Mohamed Ali Hadayet shoots and kills 2 people, FBI begrudgingly admits this as a terrorist act after evidence reveals it to be. July 4, 2002
the Guardian reported in London: ''French youths fired at police and burned over 300 cars last night as towns around Paris experienced their worst night of violence in a week of urban unrest.''
''French youths,'' huh? You mean Pierre and Jacques and Marcel and Alphonse? Granted that most of the "youths" are technically citizens of the French Republic, it doesn't take much time in les banlieus of Paris to discover that the rioters do not think of their primary identity as ''French'': They're young men from North Africa growing ever more estranged from the broader community with each passing year and wedded ever more intensely to an assertive Muslim identity more implacable than anything you're likely to find in the Middle East.
2006-09-05 05:12:20 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Certain members of every platform have formed their opinion without rational though, based purely on emotional rhetoric.
The problem with your question is that if someone can rationally explain their position, then by definition they are not one of the radical extremists on either the right or the left.
2006-09-05 05:02:59 · answer #7 · answered by coragryph 7 · 8⤊ 1⤋
Asking a liberal not to hate Bush is like asking them to stop breathing. Asking them what their plan for the future is is like asking them to start thinking. Neither of these things are going to happen any time soon.
2006-09-05 05:06:49 · answer #8 · answered by Rich E 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Because they are angry people who aren't sure why and the easiest outlet is to Bush bash.
2006-09-05 05:06:27 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
We want Bush out!
The world has spoken sunshine! :) ..
Humanity has spoken.
2006-09-05 05:02:09 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋