Radical Centrism is the only REAL hope this country has.

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: rickymouse
You may be right about this OP. Maybe the normal people should take action to bring the radical left and right in line. It is only the really mouthy ones that we need to deal with harshly. They are nuts. Now how come we do not have insane assylums for these kind of people anymore, lock them up for a year or two and feed them nothing but oatmeal and hotdogs.

You need to rethink this because you are not making any sense. Politics and public policy are not just about getting along. There are winners and there are losers. People will suffer from public policy. And people will become billionaires from public policy. The question you have to ask is how much are you willing to suffer so that billionaires can continue to live a life of obscene levels of privilege.

Some of the billionaires who made their fortunes doing this are ones that should be corrected first. You cannot discriminate because of economic status.

a reply to: dfnj2015

Lol... Really irrational. "Oh, it's got to be left/ right, black or white or it doesn't exist." See, this is exactly the type of thinking I don't get. Have yet to find anyone, even those who advocate this type of ideology, able to explain it. Care to expound? Make it logical, because frankly, it's illogical as hell.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Yes, the right AND left think it makes perfect "sense." Every reply they make to centrists exemplifies how they feel. Even though, everything points to the contrary, it makes "sense" to them.

originally posted by: SpeakerofTruth
a reply to: dfnj2015

Lol... Really irrational. "Oh, it's got to be left/ right, black or white or it doesn't exist." See, this is exactly the type of thinking I don't get. Have yet to find anyone, even those who advocate this type of ideology, able to explain it. Care to expound? Make it logical, because frankly, it's illogical as hell.

My previous posts explain it well enough. You may not agree with my opinion but it's just as rationale as yours.

originally posted by: rickymouse

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: rickymouse
You may be right about this OP. Maybe the normal people should take action to bring the radical left and right in line. It is only the really mouthy ones that we need to deal with harshly. They are nuts. Now how come we do not have insane assylums for these kind of people anymore, lock them up for a year or two and feed them nothing but oatmeal and hotdogs.

You need to rethink this because you are not making any sense. Politics and public policy are not just about getting along. There are winners and there are losers. People will suffer from public policy. And people will become billionaires from public policy. The question you have to ask is how much are you willing to suffer so that billionaires can continue to live a life of obscene levels of privilege.

Some of the billionaires who made their fortunes doing this are ones that should be corrected first. You cannot discriminate because of economic status.

All politics are local. If I don't represent my own selfish self-interests who are you suggesting I support?

originally posted by: amfirst1
a reply to: knowledgehunter0986

In reality Trump is the moderate candidate. The leftwing nutcases have gone soooo butt f*** far to the left that anyone who disagrees with them is extreme right.

That's not completely true. We do have minimum wage laws. They exist because of compromises.

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: rickymouse

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: rickymouse
You may be right about this OP. Maybe the normal people should take action to bring the radical left and right in line. It is only the really mouthy ones that we need to deal with harshly. They are nuts. Now how come we do not have insane assylums for these kind of people anymore, lock them up for a year or two and feed them nothing but oatmeal and hotdogs.

You need to rethink this because you are not making any sense. Politics and public policy are not just about getting along. There are winners and there are losers. People will suffer from public policy. And people will become billionaires from public policy. The question you have to ask is how much are you willing to suffer so that billionaires can continue to live a life of obscene levels of privilege.

Some of the billionaires who made their fortunes doing this are ones that should be corrected first. You cannot discriminate because of economic status.

All politics are local. If I don't represent my own selfish self-interests who are you suggesting I support?

Examine both sides of the issue, then do not go far right or far left and cause a disruption of civility. You can get to more people using wisdom and rationality than with chaos. The Far Left chase more people to the right than they convert. The Far right do the same thing, most people do not want to be affiliated with people who promote turmoil.

It's a simple definition of what it means to be "left" and what it means to be "right"

Left: Change the status quo

Right: Keep the status quo the same

If you want to see a single payer healthcare administration then you would be a leftists. If you want to continue to allow for-profit healthcare to drive everyone into abject poverty then you are a right winger. That's about as simple as you can get.

originally posted by: rickymouse

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: rickymouse

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: rickymouse
You may be right about this OP. Maybe the normal people should take action to bring the radical left and right in line. It is only the really mouthy ones that we need to deal with harshly. They are nuts. Now how come we do not have insane assylums for these kind of people anymore, lock them up for a year or two and feed them nothing but oatmeal and hotdogs.

You need to rethink this because you are not making any sense. Politics and public policy are not just about getting along. There are winners and there are losers. People will suffer from public policy. And people will become billionaires from public policy. The question you have to ask is how much are you willing to suffer so that billionaires can continue to live a life of obscene levels of privilege.

Some of the billionaires who made their fortunes doing this are ones that should be corrected first. You cannot discriminate because of economic status.

All politics are local. If I don't represent my own selfish self-interests who are you suggesting I support?

Examine both sides of the issue, then do not go far right or far left and cause a disruption of civility. You can get to more people using wisdom and rationality than with chaos. The Far Left chase more people to the right than they convert. The Far right do the same thing, most people do not want to be affiliated with people who promote turmoil.

This is kind of gibberish. Politics are not about feelings. Either you have public policies that favor the working class or you have public policies that favor the billionaires. There is no in between on this. Wealth inequality is at all time highs in this country. It's not because taxes are too high. What good is it to have any laws against monopolies if they are never enforced? All corporations are too big to fail at this point whatever that means.

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: rickymouse

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: rickymouse

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: rickymouse
You may be right about this OP. Maybe the normal people should take action to bring the radical left and right in line. It is only the really mouthy ones that we need to deal with harshly. They are nuts. Now how come we do not have insane assylums for these kind of people anymore, lock them up for a year or two and feed them nothing but oatmeal and hotdogs.

You need to rethink this because you are not making any sense. Politics and public policy are not just about getting along. There are winners and there are losers. People will suffer from public policy. And people will become billionaires from public policy. The question you have to ask is how much are you willing to suffer so that billionaires can continue to live a life of obscene levels of privilege.

Some of the billionaires who made their fortunes doing this are ones that should be corrected first. You cannot discriminate because of economic status.

All politics are local. If I don't represent my own selfish self-interests who are you suggesting I support?

Examine both sides of the issue, then do not go far right or far left and cause a disruption of civility. You can get to more people using wisdom and rationality than with chaos. The Far Left chase more people to the right than they convert. The Far right do the same thing, most people do not want to be affiliated with people who promote turmoil.

This is kind of gibberish. Politics are not about feelings.

WOW... Are you living under a rock or that removed from reality? The left and right argue from an emotional stance continuously. Then you're going to say something like this? OK.

a reply to: dfnj2015

As far as changing the status quo is concerned, the only thing that remotely has a chance of doing that is a move away from the false right/left paradigm. What do you think has held up the status quo for so long? Oh, just the right. Gotcha...
I don't, but I have heard the same replies time and time again. So, in that sense, I "gotcha."

a reply to: starwarsisreal

Yeah, see, that's really the crux. Neither the left or right like the center, so, it's easier for them to pretend it's not there than to listen to any rationality that comes from it.

a reply to: SpeakerofTruth

The left/right paradigm is only false if you look at it from a position of duality. The political spectrum is actually more of a gradient graph than an either/or decision. Saying that the political left and the political right don't exist is foolish, since no one in their right mind would agree that a conservative and a liberal have the same political goals. So clearly there is a difference here. But that is only 100% true for the political extremes.

The thing is that political opinions (like most everything on this planet) exist on a bell curve. This bell curve makes the differences between the two political ideologies appear to be the same since most people fall under the moderate label with both conservative and liberal views.

But at the same time, colors also exist on a gradient. Add a bit of a color on a marginal basis and eventually you'll have a brand new color. If at the same time you take a bit of the first color away, you'll eventually be left with just the second color. Add enough blue to red and you'll have purple. Take the red away and eventually you'll just have blue. But at no time do people ever say those colors are the same thing.

If anything, we don't make enough political distinctions between ideologies in this country, but it should go without saying that the political left and political right certainly do exist. Even among the elite. The Koch brothers don't fund liberal causes and Soros doesn't fund conservative ones.

What if I told you Trump is a radical centrist?

Was Perot a radical centrist? He seemed to be painted as such.

Here is Perot's thoughts on NAFTA and immigration
"Today, foreign professional workers can enter the US labor market, but only “temporarily” & only if an employer gets a certification that a qualified US worker cannot be found. Also, the existing US immigration laws place a numerical limit on the number of temporary workers. Put another way, American workers have priority for American jobs.
NAFA radically alters this entire concept. Under NAFTA, Mexican and Canadian workers in 63 designated categories may be hired in the US, even if qualified American workers are available.
Under NAFTA, Mexican and Canadian entrepreneurs will be able to provide US drug stores with pharmacists, hotels with managers, and so on. As a result, hundreds of thousands of professional American workers are going to be put under intense pressure to cut their wages and benefits. [Lower-skilled workers] are going to lose their jobs to low-paid foreign contract workers. While no one was watching, US NAFTA negotiators radically revised the nation’s immigration laws."

It's like he could see the future. It's like Trump copypasted that.

a reply to: jellyrev

Perot's political ideology was measured against the political beliefs of his time. As are Trump's. Labeling Trump a centrist because you can find political overlap between him and Perot is a weak comparison. By that same token I could call Reagan a liberal or Obama a conservative.

Trump is for all intents and purposes currently a conservative. That may have been different in the past, but his entire political message is 100% conservative at this point in his lifetime. Saying otherwise is just dishonest.

originally posted by: dfnj2015
Here's the problem in this country. There are people who think corporations have too much power and they mostly vote for Democrats (even though the Democrats are so beyond corruption and graft they might as well not exist as a party). And then there are people who think government has too much power and they generally vote for Republicans.

So there you have it. Are the corporations more evil? Or is government more evil?

I tend to lean towards thinking corporations have way too much power in 2017. I hope the pendulum swings back at some point. It's not that I believe in government. It's just that government is the only force powerful enough to fight corporation power and greed.

Sounds good on paper. But hows that been working out so far?

originally posted by: seeker1963
a reply to: SpeakerofTruth


How about just following the Constitution?


Simple as that!

That is rich seeing as we have Trump supporters on ATS on a thread demanding the media be censored and journalists face criminal charges.


And yes yes yes the left can be just as bad before you deflect with the typical canned response.

I just call out bull# where i see it be it in the democrat or republican camp.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Define centrist immigration policy to me? As following the previous law is currently radical.

a reply to: crazyewok

Hey, lets give multinational megaconglomerate corporations the legal status of each being a "person" (under corporate law), give corporations more legal rights than humans, allow the Two Party's and the corporate media to merge as one ala fascism, allow all of the above to commit war crimes even to the point of bordering on genocide, and give them all a free pass every other year when they go overthrow another government somewhere, militarily invade some place else, all the while perpetually electioneering our democracy into dust while selling it out to globalism.

Sounds like a good plan to me! Anyone second the notion?

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Freedom of speech is freedom of speech.

It is a fundamental roght. Trump has, you have have and journalists have it.
You can not use the government punish one for what they say or write.

What you can do it use the free market and refuse to buy newspapers or watch certain new channels and put them out of buisness.

Now the politicians that created the proposals for war and the intelligence agents that cooked up lies to support those wars? Throw them in prison or execute them for treason sure!

But you can punish a jounlist for publishing there own opinion or articles. That is censoring free speech.
If you want to stop fake new you just need to stop buying it!