2007-07-20 11:09:19 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Yes. The extreme left hasn't cost anyone their lives. Please correct me if I am wrong.
Other than that, both extremes are too extreme for me.
2007-07-20 11:12:34 · answer #1 · answered by Chi Guy 5 · 6⤊ 4⤋
The difference would be that the extreme left is actually guiding a party while the extreme right is a relatively small group of people that are basically without real power. I know some want to say Bush is far right but he isn't- even if I dont agree with a lot of things he does he hold a lot of liberal positions. Regardless the extremes are dangerous. Millions have died due to the naivity of the far left such as when we pulled financing of South Vietnam or when we couldnt go to Rwanda. People that cannot understand that sometimes you have to fight to stop bad people are very dangerous to all who value freedom and life. Thankfully the far right has no real power.
2007-07-20 11:16:05 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
You need to define your terms.
Not so long ago (during the Reagan and Bush I regimes), people like Cheney and Rumsfeld were referred to as "the crazies in the basement," because their positions were so out there. And now they hold some of the top positions in government.
The middle has shifted way over to the right since the "election" of Bush II.
By the same token, people on the left are now considered extremists when they hold views that are considered mainstream in the rest of the world.
For example, when you consider national health care: a normal concept all over the world, yet here, it's thought of as a plot against god-fearing americans.
dig?
2007-07-20 12:18:46 · answer #3 · answered by nombrilista 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
None at all.
Radicals and extremists are all the same, impervious to logic and so convinced that theyre they attack instead of discussing and considering other people's views.
Address to later answerer::: Nom: Bush and his people arent the rule for repubs. Yes theyre gaining support, but he got elected out of fear more and a lack of worthwhile competition. Look at his approval ratings, how can you think he is the norm when he's that unpopular?
As for national health care being seen differently here, that is more an issue of our history than any shift. We've always had a fear that any idea rooted in socialism. Its just the way this country is, we've always been fearful of too much gov't.
Most Americans are still moderate, there just isnt a party out there to represent them. Both major parties are being heavily influenced by the extremist (from an American stand point).
2007-07-20 11:11:55 · answer #4 · answered by Showtunes 6 · 5⤊ 0⤋
What's interesting (or galling, depending on where you stand in the debate) is that people will scream about the ignorant and arrogant slights of the other party but will attempt to excuse the actions of their own. But you're right. Neither side has a monopoly on that behavior.
2007-07-20 11:15:27 · answer #5 · answered by Deep Thought 5 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Actually, I think it goes a little shorter and farther than that. I see no difference between any of our current political leaders in the house or the senate. Those that are fortunate enough to have the honor to represent us are affecting those that will eventually have the honor to represent us.
Today's US political system is a giant training ground for future politicians.
Vote them out! Vote them out now!
2007-07-20 11:15:54 · answer #6 · answered by ggraves1724 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Are conceitedness and lack of awareness political ideals? I even tend to be greater forgiving of conceitedness while the guy is factually best. I even tend to be greater forgiving of lack of awareness while the guy is making an attempt to appreciate and is relatively asking a query. The political ideology is polar opposite, inspite of the incontrovertible fact that, so don't be misled via character features.
2016-11-10 00:08:53 · answer #7 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, as a Democrat, the fringes of my party annoy me just as much as the fringes of the other party...People like Cindy Sheehan, who gets mad because Congress did not cut off funds for our troops are short sighted and do not realize that we need to find a way to end the war without a huge loss of life.
2007-07-20 11:14:22 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
The right is much more arrogant right now. Power does to to you. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. We always need to be vigilant of those who are supposed to represent us.
But the right wins this contest, at this point in time, hands down.
2007-07-20 11:16:53 · answer #9 · answered by Middleclassandnotquiet 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Extreme being the operative word
2007-07-20 11:31:12 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
True!
It's a real shame that we choose sides instead of saying we are all Americans. We should be trying to do what is best for our country and it's citizens. But we are too concerned about what is politically best for our party and how to get elected or re-elected.
2007-07-20 11:14:20 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋