With empirical evidence to back it up.

I'm more of a moderate on foreign policy, but I can't think of any progressive economic idea I don't support.

kind of single payer system. I support a bank of the united states to compete against the mega banks.

no problem supporting a Nader candidate which allows a bush to be elected...

that is the extreme left


btw...Richard Nixon is the one that supported clean water and clean air and gave us the EPA...study your history some

do not know my history bruh.

- Anti-gun owning/choice (ie, wants to stop all guns sales except to people who work for the government and want to remove all guns except by the wealthy/government)

- Wants to remove choice to allow people the choice to home school

- Anti-choice on what people can choose to eat/drink and the size of what they want to eat/drink

- Anti-choice on what adults ingest (plants such as tobacco, beef, eggs, etc)

The extreme left wants to control others and their choices like the extreme right does just on different items and for differing 'religious' reasons. Both want to save others from choices they themselves see as 'sinful'.

Srsly? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...<gasp> <wheeze> <gurgle>.....whew.

I am Extreme Left and I have never met or heard of ANYONE who advocates those positions.

But then, it seems a lot of DU'ers are just right-lighters who think taking a mild stance on foregone social issues is going to get them a free pass.

I think you guys are hilarious.

Your more "radical" than I am. Choice is important in all walks of life. Why would you want to take away the choice of people homeschooling? I thought we were more free than that. You may have a great reason.

That was the point

...way better than the wit who wrote the last list of bogus "leftist positions" that are passing from screen to screen these days. I say to you, please keep them coming. Nothing spices up a campaign like a few creative Bozo Eruptions. 8-)

I don't want to control anybody's choices on that list you just enumerated.

I just don't want your choices IMPOSED on me.

So there's that.

the right of Eisenhower too.

Literally. He was Nelson's brother, Winthrop Rockefeller. "WinRock" was a vast improvement over his predecessor, Orval Faubus of Little Rock Central High infamy. If he were alive today, WinRock would surely be to the left of most of today's Democrats.

Y'all aren't fooling anyone.

All calling anyone opposing spying on American citizens and invading countries at will "anarchists" does is display for everyone just how authoritarian some people are.

Especially if it means "Doesn't unquestioningly worship authority", which is what you seem to think it means.

Y'all may not like the term, but you self-identify as authoritarians every time you speak.

... anarchic.

Who are you to be throwing pejoratives about like this? Thanks, I will wait for your measured reply.

8-)

Do you not see the planned right wing takeover that put the money in the pockets of The Few and resulted in the poverty of The Many as extreme? This is not just in the US; this is world wide. What do you think it will take to overcome this? I'll tell you: Years of building unity, years of planning and education. It's not in Washington that the most important work will be done; it's in the states.

We must name names!

If you run H. Clinton-Sachs then dont blame the left if they wont support her. It's your responsibility if you choose to wallow in the status-quo comfort of Corporate-America's choice. If you are ok with the state of the nation then go ahead and vote corporate, but dont blame the left.

What issues do you think are extreme leftist?

Good luck with recruiting Kucinich! You all have a lot of complaints but not a lot of solutions!

Last edited Tue Feb 11, 2014, 08:37 PM - Edit history (1)

to marginalize and suppress traditional Democratic values in favor of corporate-friendly policies.

Anyone accusing someone here of being "extreme left" can be comfortably ignored.

They claimed superiority based on a simple formula: Dukakis lost / Clinton won = Liberals should STFU.

Then, as the Right bought up the media and played revisionist history to the Reagan Years the DLC's message to Republicans was "Promise you wont hurt me and I'll vote with you".

There appear to be many fine examples in this thread already.

One even seems proud to admits that the Democratic party is now to the right of Nixon. A fact that is obvious and true, but not one I would brag about.

low information voters until they vote the way you want? How do you win enough votes to HOLD the LINE on the progress we have made SO far? Good luck convincing Average Joe and Jane Six Pack......you HAVE to keep the Republicans from reaching them with their bullshite Ad Agency tactics to sell them on voting against their own best interests......they barely can handle Obamacares!

Never mind, seems you already have.

I don't HAVE to keep the Republicans from reaching them. That sounds like voter suppression, liberals don't believe in voter suppression. Liberals believe in choice, I HAVE to try to encourage more and better liberals to run giving them a better alternative for their vote. And I don't want to HOLD the LINE, I want to move it back to the left where it used to be and where it would make for a better United States.

Many people would suggest using education to inform the voters instead of Punching. Punch all the Wishy Washy low information voters? Why do people on the right always use violent scenarios?

authoritarian they are, saying things like "keep the Republicans from reaching (voters)" and "wishy washy, low-information (ie, stupid) voters".

It betrays such a casual disdain for the general populace, and a 'we know best, so sit down, shut-up, and salute your betters' sort of attitude. And they don't even seem to realize it.

blame the left or unaffiliated voters when their candidate loses.

It's always someone else's fault. They still blame Nader even after all the evidence showing otherwise.

They also wonder why unaffiliated is the fastest growing segment of voters.

The lesser of two evils is still evil. A Republican car and a Democratic car are headed toward a cliff, the only difference is one is traveling at 100 mph and the other is traveling at 50 mph, some choice.

Causes some conservatives to at least think about it.

Guaranteed health care, housing, & food. Increase in public lands, strict timetable to drastically lessen emissions, massive infrastructure rebuild, strict banking regs, divorced from speculative scams, increase taxes on wealthy, balanced budgets, right to control your body; what you put in it, who you put it against, and use deadly force to defend it. Living wage for all workers. Structured fed income tax reduction for small, smart-up businesses.

I'll think of more Standard stuff later.

A competitive board game currently being played by billionaires, characterized by: unbridled capitalism, the best man wins, Makers and Takers (referring to the 1% at the top who are taking all the moolah), Hotels on Broadway and Park Place, Foreclosures, Bail, Foreclosures...

Game over. Who wins?

You sound just like a Republican. Our values are the real values. Except that you haven't convinced most people. The extreme left or right are minorities, but self righteous ones. Most of the people out there don't respond to that kind of thing.

IMO most liberals are for things they know aren't going to be obtainable right away, and sitting around criticizing and stamping feet and calling names does not work, so we deal with the current reality. We're being accused of being against things we are for, just that we accept the reality that the current voters aren't going to support it en masse. They may be convinced over time and things will progress, but crying and blaming right now doesn't cause a bit of progress and may help the other side.

Oh, for fuck's sake.

someone needs to be schooled on the actual meaning of political identification, separate from personal interpretation of what is generally regarded as ""political practicalities" and personal opinion of what is "reasonable".

completely different discussion, not even within the same universe as the OP.

Seriously.

only the ones you dislike use THOSE right?

I don't believe Right Wing Dems consider it an insult to be referred to as "Right Wing Dems".. so why should you?

In fact they consider it a badge of honor, even given themselves the title "Blue Dogs".

but I have NEVER seen them SELF IDENTIFY themselves with a "right wing" monilker...I have seen it THROWN perjoratively around here though...

I have not seen one person call themselves Blue Dog Democrat here either....

So I call bullshit on this...

bye..

don't blame me if you don't want to respond to my reply....

yeah right....

I hold all of those stances myself. What does make a person an extremist IMO is how they act. An extremist views everyone as the enemy who even disagrees with him or her once. They dislike moderates and may view them as weak/useless, they may refuse to work with the other party in order to get things accomplished, they may see both major parties as identical despite their numerous differences, and they may be incapable of recognizing agreements with various politicians and/or achievements for their own agenda unless it is 100% of what they want.
That is my definition of an extremist.

ending up with far right/corporatist policies that hurt regular people.

Trickle Down economics things are so far out of balance it will take a lot of extreme left policy to even get back to a point where we can compromise with the other side. No. I'm done with compromise. At least until we get things balanced out again.

use to it, yes.


There is nothing wrong with saying that things have to change.

that represents good for you?

with some bites of good, unfortunately some lumps of bad have been continued or started (TPP).

We always have to compromise. Unless I can be dictator, it won't turn out just as I want it. We'd have had single payer long ago. We can't just blame Clinton and Obama. We have to recognize that life with other people involves compromise. We can't go to war over every disagreement.

That's why there are so many DU posts whining about why there are no rioting in the streets. They want violence if it's not going to be their way by the Democratic processes of the Constitution.

Beat me to it. None of what the OP has identified makes him/her an extreme leftist.

nt

is not mutually exclusive.

But that said ... the things that he/she cited don't make him/her particularly progressive, either. I would say those thing put him/her in the mainstream of the Democratic Party.

But know ... if I post He/She again, it's because there is only so much space in this old head's head.

nt

But there are extremes to being progressive.

When we/folks prefer moral victories to moving the ball, however slightly, that is extremist thought. When we/folks argue to "go over the fiscal cliff" without regard to those that will suffer ... that is extremist. When folks create a fantasy world where "if only we hit back" serves as actual a political strategy, that is extremist.

...who must surrender their values to "compromise" with the Centrist Democrats...ALWAYS.

Can you show us a specific incident where the "centrists" have Stepped to the Left in unity
to accommodate those of us in the Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party?
Why must we always move toward the Republican RIGHT to keep YOU happy?
THIS has been the Party Blue Print for the last 25 years,
and LOOK where it has gotten us.


[font size=3]CENTRISM!!!...because it is so damned EASY!
You don't have to STAND for ANYTHING,
and get to insult those who DO![/font]

It is only compromise when it goes both ways. There is no compromise when one side never gets less than 90% of what it wants while the other side pays for it with their blood sweat and a whole lot of tears.

-- until an election goes south and then it's all the liberals' fault because we didn't show up (untrue). Then all of a sudden we're just so needed.

BTW - 2010 it was the young Obamacrats who didn't show up because he wasn't on the ballot.

as much as we don't want to acknowledge it, legislation/governance comes down to where the votes are. Period. The rest is just fantasy stuff.

The system is rigged, has always been rigged and is likely to continue to be rigged until long after my life here is done. it's one giant fucking Tammany Hall Revisited over and over and over and over again.

I just love how so called "reasonable moderates" who continue to insist "things" are otherwise. But when "things" move farther and father to the Corporate-Authoritarian Right, well, it's the fault of the Progressive Leftists fighting for socio-economic justice and serious reforms.

We're "whining and complaining" because the party that supposedly "shares" these same said goals in speeches, wind up doing exactly the opposite in legislation, administrative and judicial appointments.

The message to us leftist is: stop whining and complaining, accept Tammany Hall's best and finest of the most corrupted and get the fuck over it.

got it.

your vote counts ... depending how one uses it.

Fact is ... We are no further to the "corporate-authoritarian right" than we were 10 years ago ... it's just the libertarians are just finding their voice, in the guise of the "progressive left."

No ... the message from "Tammany Hall" to you "leftists" is stop calling yourselves "the progressive left" (a group that the spectrum of Democrats have always been able to work with) and call yourselves what you are, libertarians.

Is Noam Chomsky someone you'd consider an 'extremist'?

its bullshit. Complete and utter propaganda. When is the last time anyone can point out any instance whatsoever that the left ever gained an inch by compromising? Its always us giving into terrorist tactics and then saying well only a few people got shit on instead of all of us at once.

makes me want to puke

Please look at this chart. It's the number of Americans who think "Big Government" is the greatest threat to the U.S. vs "Big Business".

Look especially on the Democratic line. Now compare it to what you yourself would answer to that question:


An amazing 56% of Democrats think that "Big Government" is the biggest threat to the Future of the Country, as opposed to a mere 36% thinking that "Big Business" is.

Of course "Big Government" is what you advocate for to solve all those social ills. Not to mention that you ascribe Conspiracy level theorizing to Big Business.

Hillary and Obama are solid liberals compared to American attitudes. Only the people out on the left wing fringe consider them conservative - exactly in the same way that only Tea Partiers think Boener is a RINO who should lose his speakership for compromising with Obama too much.

Furthermore, rather than going out to try to change the public's mind as the liberals I respect do, you're bound and determined to post ineffectual screed after ineffectual screed on the D.U. This isn't mild disagreement with the President, it's more flinging verbal dung at Democrats like a pack of crazed monkeys because they won't take positions the public won't stand for.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

government. I bet you are a huge fan of corporatists like Reagan, Bush I & II, Clinton, and Obama.

The very fact that you are putting Clinton and Obama in the same box as Reagan shows everyone who extremist you are.

The only surprise is that you don't consider FDR, Eisenhower, and Truman evil-capitalists.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community