10
   

Left-wing America now stands alone

 
 
Reply Mon 30 Dec, 2013 07:10 am
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3106467/posts


Quote:
American progressives like to think of their country as backward and reactionary compared to Europe. And they have never been more right than now when Europe and the rest of the First World have gone right while America under Obama has been left back.

In America Alone, Mark Steyn envisioned the United States as a beleaguered hope in a dying West. Seven years later, American politics are much less healthier than those of the rest of the free world.

America does stand alone. It stands alone in embracing the rule of the left.

Recently Australia, Japan and Norway welcomed in conservative governments. Tony Abbott, Australia’s new prime minister, is a former heavyweight boxer who attended Oxford and is putting a spoke in the wheel of the Global Warming ecohoax. Japan is casting off its pacifism and standing up to the People’s Republic of China and Norway gave its left-wing government the boot and moved in “Iron Erma” in a coalition with the libertarian Progress Party which opposes taxes and immigration and supports free enterprise.

Australia, Japan and Norway are not outliers. The majority of First World countries now have conservative governments.

Canada has embraced a patriotic foreign policy and energy exploration under Prime Minister Stephen Harper. In Israel, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his conservative Likud party have continued to move Israel’s economy toward free enterprise. And even in the UK, Prime Minister David Cameron, for all his follies, is a conservative, even if he is more McCain than DeMint, and has pushed for deregulation and welfare reform.

Sweden’s center-right coalition government has won re-election for the first time in a century. Norway and Sweden, countries that Americans used to consider the very embodiments of Socialism, now both have conservative governments......
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 10 • Views: 8,067 • Replies: 190

 
izzythepush
 
  3  
Reply Mon 30 Dec, 2013 07:23 am
@gungasnake,
The right wing parties over here are politically about the same as your Democrats. America is still far to the right of Europe. If anyone tried to abolish the NHS they'd face electoral meltdown.
Frank Apisa
 
  3  
Reply Mon 30 Dec, 2013 07:35 am
@izzythepush,
izzythepush wrote:

The right wing parties over here are politically about the same as your Democrats. America is still far to the right of Europe. If anyone tried to abolish the NHS they'd face electoral meltdown.


Thank you, Izzy.

Gunga likes to dream...and "the sky is falling" is one of his mainstays.

Our nut-case right...particularly the grass-roots...actually thinks we are too far to the left. They cannot even recognize they are being used.

Anyway...there have always been the down-trodden who will fight for the right of the barons to walk on them.

gungasnake
 
  -3  
Reply Mon 30 Dec, 2013 07:36 am
@izzythepush,
I can't believe the situation in England is that much different from what we have here.

The main problem with obungacare is that it doesn't fix anything, it's basically just another redistribution program. You'd only need to fix four or five serious abuses, and the only health insurance anybody would need would be catastrophic cost coverage. Nobody should want to be buying bandaids, iodine, or birth control pills from an insurance company any more than you'd want to buy a hammer or a lawnmower from an insurance company.
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Dec, 2013 02:24 pm
@gungasnake,
I don't care what you believe, your system doesn't go far enough. Nobody should be paying health insurance. I don't. My son went to see the doctor on Friday with tonsillitis. We were seen straight away blood tests were taken for possible glandular fever and he was prescribed a double dose of antibiotics.

Didn't cost me a penny.
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Dec, 2013 02:26 pm
@Frank Apisa,
David Cameron and Barak Obama are so close politically there's nothing much to choose between them. If anything I'd say Obama was slightly more right wing.

And Cameron is head of a coalition government with the Liberals, after ten years of Labour, and the global financial meltdown he still couldn't achieve an overall majority.
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Dec, 2013 02:27 pm
Only Gunga Dim would cite a Freeper post as though it were an authority. He cracks me up!
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Dec, 2013 02:29 pm
@izzythepush,
izzythepush wrote:

David Cameron and Barak Obama are so close politically there's nothing much to choose between them. If anything I'd say Obama was slightly more right wing.


If anything, Izzy...damn near EVERY politician who intends to get elected in America...probably should be to the right of people like Cameron. Hell, most probably have to be to the right of where Margaret Thatcher was in order to get elected.

Much as it pains me to say this...our country has made a move in a decidedly wrong direction.
0 Replies
 
Romeo Fabulini
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 30 Dec, 2013 02:49 pm
America is basically a two-horse country (Republicans and Democrats), therefore American politics (and politicians) are largely stagnant and the voters haven't got much of a choice.
By contrast, Britain has 3 main parties plus several smaller far-right "firebrand parties" that keep the big 3 on their toes and keep stirring the pot..Smile
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Dec, 2013 03:02 pm
@Romeo Fabulini,
Romeo Fabulini wrote:

America is basically a two-horse country (Republicans and Democrats), therefore American politics (and politicians) are largely stagnant and the voters haven't got much of a choice.
By contrast, Britain has 3 main parties plus several smaller far-right "firebrand parties" that keep the big 3 on their toes and keep stirring the pot..Smile


Actually, I think the move to a parliamentary system might help us with the major problems we have right now...but I think there will be a trade-off with other problems taking hold.

Parliamentary systems seem less stable than our two-major-parties system...but there is more choice...and a better chance of getting compromise government.

But Parliamentary systems have the problem of instability.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  0  
Reply Mon 30 Dec, 2013 03:14 pm
@gungasnake,
gungasnake wrote:

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3106467/posts


Quote:
American progressives
like to think of their country as backward and reactionary compared to Europe.
I take exception to the nomenclature,
unless we get a definition of TOWARD WHAT
the putative progress is being made.

Is it toward despotism, as it was in the Weimar Republic in the 1920s??
When it was progressing in the direction of the 3rd Reich?

Progress can be in ANY direction, some of which are bad.
0 Replies
 
NSFW (view)
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Dec, 2013 04:31 pm
Actually, all the three parties which form the Swedish government,are liberal parties - two (Center Party and Liberal People's Party) are member of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe and the Liberal International, while the Moderate Party is a member of the European People's Party and International Democrat Union.

Within the European political parameter that certainly is centre-rightish. (The Swedish Liberals have a strong Green tendency, though.)

Similar to what izzy said: the actual US-government would be a conservative government in Europe, really very similar in politics to that in Sweden.
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  2  
Reply Mon 30 Dec, 2013 04:36 pm
@gungasnake,
The freepers haven't got much of a sense of what's going on in Canada.

Our conservative prime minister is to the left of pretty much everything I see in the U.S.
OmSigDAVID
 
  0  
Reply Mon 30 Dec, 2013 09:03 pm
@ehBeth,
ehBeth wrote:
The freepers haven't got much of a sense of what's going on in Canada.

Our conservative prime minister is to the left of pretty much everything I see in the U.S.
What does he conserve ?
ehBeth
 
  4  
Reply Mon 30 Dec, 2013 09:10 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
His job.
0 Replies
 
Butrflynet
 
  2  
Reply Mon 30 Dec, 2013 09:41 pm
@gungasnake,
Quote:
the only health insurance anybody would need would be catastrophic cost coverage. Nobody should want to be buying bandaids, iodine, or birth control pills from an insurance company


Are you actually implying there is no need for access to medical services that are covered by insurance in that grand canyon sized gap between band aids and catastrophic costs?

Hello?
0 Replies
 
NSFW (view)
parados
 
  2  
Reply Mon 30 Dec, 2013 09:56 pm
@gungasnake,
If only the conservatives in the US could embrace the medical system that conservatives in Sweden and Norway are fine with.

http://www.nhh.no/en/about-nhh/living-in-norway/health-care.aspx
http://sweden.se/society/healthcare-in-sweden/
Romeo Fabulini
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Dec, 2013 10:26 pm
The Republicans must have been bananas to field Johnny McCain against Obama, he's a nice guy but 10 years too old to stand the rigours of being President. I honestly thought he might keel over during the live debates.
Most of the US voters must have thought so too, so they had no real choice but to put Obama in the White House.
Next time around the Reps fouled up again by putting up another bland candidate in Mitt Romney, he was too squeaky-clean to be real and came across as a highly-manicured shopwindow dummy, heck his teeth were whiter than the White House, so Obama had victory handed to him yet again.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Left-wing America now stands alone
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/18/2021 at 12:33:38