US Politics: we are all liberals, we are all conservatives

[DanteGabriel]

I wasn't claiming that the parties hadn't changed. Only that Democrats had presided over invasions and occupations. Voting Democrat as some kind of peace vote is a losing proposition.

Bush isn't on the list because he isn't a Democrat.

Voting Democrat as a peace vote is a losing proposition, unless the only likely-to-be-elected alternative is a Republican.

I guess we had a misunderstanding about your "top five" list of warmongering invasions. You said the presidents who'd launched the most egregious invasions had been Democrats. I find it hard to believe Bush the Lesser doesn't make it into the top five of anyone who's not a Republican dead-ender. Seriously -- worse than FDR?

[sologdin]

clinton and carter were not peacemongers. they are different in degree, but not in kind from wilson through johnson, and the bell curves of bellicosity of the dems v. the GOP likely will have substantial overlap.

[OnionAhaiReborn]

The United States has been at war for most of its history. So most of our Presidents from whatever party, defunct or still existing, have engaged in war. If the question is which party, today, is less likely to engage in war, or to engage in war in lesser degree, the clear and obvious answer is the Democratic Party. The fact that Democratic Presidents (like all Presidents) have overseen wars notwithstanding, the Democratic Party today (and basically since Vietnam) clearly has a stronger anti-war wing than the Republican Party does. This wing doesn't exactly dominate Democratic Party policy or anything, but it's there in a way that it's not in the Republican Party.

[Larry of the Lawn]

Prohibition of narcotics and alcohol enacted by early 20th century progressives. MJ was banned by FDR.

Meh. That's like saying that progressives are all about appropriating land to build American controlled canals in foreign countries and keeping Europe out of Latin America.

[BloodRider]

Bizarre how? Importing tens of millions from third world nations to drive down the wage rates of the working class. It's the great progressive cause of the 21st century.

You know, just cause you "say it like you mean it" or you "sound just like ole Rushbo" in your head when you say it, it doesn't lend any weight to your claims. Freaking authoritarians!

[Tormund Ukrainesbane]

Bizarre how? Importing tens of millions from third world nations to drive down the wage rates of the working class. It's the great progressive cause of the 21st century.

LOL. "Importing" like they're hanging banners out or something.

Freedom of movement is a natural human right. Who are you to say who gets to live here or not?

[sologdin]

capital may have had the intent to push wages down, but the response to the practice of free movement of persons must be cosmopolitan--there must be no national working class to be protected from parasites abroad. the latter is the way of fascism.

[lokisnow]

As for the modern Dems, remind me who imported tens of millions to do the jobs Americans didn't want?

So democrats are responsible for high birth rates in latin america resulting in decades of illegal immigration? The drop in immigration that has paralleled the drop in latin american birth rates is caused by which american political party?

Bizarre how? Importing tens of millions from third world nations to drive down the wage rates of the working class. It's the great progressive cause of the 21st century.

ah, yes, the tech sector does want to import lots of foreigners in order to drive down american wages because they can't be bothered to invest in a week of training for an american born potential employee. but gridlock has so far prevented these mostly democrat blocs from ennacting their anti-wage policies. ;)

[1918me]

Oklahoma governor Mary Fallin, currently in the running to take the title of worst governor in the U.S., just signed into law a Texas-style abortion bill that imposes the admitting privilege requirement on abortion clinics in Oklahoma. Currently, Oklahoma has only 3 active abortion clinics...this bill will reduce that number to one.

But at the same time this admitting privileges craze has swept those states dominated by the Republican Party, all in the name of trying to protect the health of women (yeah fucking right), the curtain is finally being drawn back to reveal the true motives of the radical, far-right Christofacists who support and bankroll these initiatives:

So, as we knew all along, none of this was about women's health. It was all entirely about reducing the number of providers in order to make it easier to bring pressure to bear on the hospitals that allow admitting privileges in an effort to stamp out all access to abortion.

I wish I could say that this comes as a shock.

[Guerillacropolis]

How could Jimmy Carter not be considered a peacemonger? He's the only president in recent history to not have invaded or dropped bombs on another country. After he lost his re-election, he became one of the greatest humanitarians ever by beginning Habitat for Humanity.

But we chose Reagan because we didn't want to listen when he told us to turn down the thermostat and put on a sweater. Much easier to entangle ourselves in middle-Eastern politis for three decades...

[Horza]

How could Jimmy Carter not be considered a peacemonger? He's the only president in recent history to not have invaded or dropped bombs on another country. After he lost his re-election, he became one of the greatest humanitarians ever by beginning Habitat for Humanity.

But we chose Reagan because we didn't want to listen when he told us to turn down the thermostat and put on a sweater. Much easier to entangle ourselves in middle-Eastern politis for three decades...

Still the guy who didn't let his human rights based foreign policy get in the way of continued support for Somoza or the Shah of Iran (by then it may have been too late for the US to position itself to accommodate the Iranian revolution but Carter passed up the last chance to try).

Also, by late '78 into '79 Carter's foreign policy program had largely unravelled, leading to him being convinced by Brzezinski that events from the Horn of Africa to Afghanistan are part of a concerted Soviet push to warm water ports in the Persian Gulf. Acting on this belief, Carter begins military assistance to the Afghan mujahedeen in February '79 (i.e. nine months before the Soviet invasion) and accelerates plans for a rapid-deployment force in the Persian Gulf - laying the diplomatic and logistical infrastructure for all subsequent US military actions in the region. His adoption of classic Cold War binary thinking at this stage is also tragic because it means the Administration turns a blind eye to Saudi funding of jihad in Afghanistan, because those guys are clearly anti-Soviet, right? Funny thing: Carter gets so confrontational with the Soviets in 1980 that Reagan actually starts looking like a moderate.

[sologdin]

yeah, '79 is the year that carter lost his mind: mecca uprising, afghanistan, south korean coup, iranian revolution, sandinistas.

his regime had its covert moments in other years, and fair to say that he did not preside over an overt invasion, sure.

[The onion wight]

LOL. "Importing" like they're hanging banners out or something.

Freedom of movement is a natural human right. Who are you to say who gets to live here or not?

You advocate the abolition of your borders? Or are you just throwing out a debating point?

[Shryke]

Bizarre how? Importing tens of millions from third world nations to drive down the wage rates of the working class. It's the great progressive cause of the 21st century.

Bizarre in that it's ridiculous made-up nonsense.

[The onion wight]

capital may have had the intent to push wages down, but the response to the practice of free movement of persons must be cosmopolitan--there must be no national working class to be protected from parasites abroad. the latter is the way of fascism.

The intent? The reality is real wage growth in the US has been stagnant for decades, and has actually fallen in recent years. Mass immigration benefits the wealthy capital owners end of story. For those obsessed with the three Gs, which seems to be the majority posting on here, demographic changes caused by mass immigration will, in theory, guarantee a permanent majority for progressives. We will see how that works out I guess, in Europe it really hasn't.

[sologdin]

yeah, that may have been the intent of capital, and thereafter real wages may have fallen. it's a logical fallacy, post hoc ergo propter hoc, though--and it's fascist bullshit to attribute the cause of failing wages or lost jrrrrrrbs or whatever to immigrants.

[Stannisaurus]

Mass immigration benefits the wealthy capital owners end of story. For those obsessed with the three Gs, which seems to be the majority posting on here, demographic changes caused by mass immigration will, in theory, guarantee a permanent majority for progressives. We will see how that works out I guess, in Europe it really hasn't.

A simple truth most people can't even bear to consider.

[1918me]

A simple truth most people can't even bear to consider.

It sounds like it's being considered, and then rejected, frankly.

[Stannisaurus]

It sounds like it's being considered, and then rejected, frankly.

rejected (or "sidestepped") without serious justification imo

[The onion wight]

yeah, that may have been the intent of capital, and thereafter real wages may have fallen. it's a logical fallacy, post hoc ergo propter hoc, though--and it's fascist bullshit to attribute the cause of failing wages or lost jrrrrrrbs or whatever to immigrants.

No it's basic common sense, but well done, first Godwin of the day :)

In the labor market the bigger the available pool of workers chasing working class jobs the less by way of compensation employers have to offer. Progressives don't like to talk about the obvious consequence of policies they advocate.