Left to right

[Ed R]

Left:                                                                                                                       Right:

       Liberal - Libertarian - Independant - Moderate - Undecided - Conservative

 

I put Ron Paul in the Libertarian category

I put Huntsman in the Independant category

I put Mitt Romney in the Moderate category

I put Rick Santorum, Rick Perry, and Newt Gingrich in the Conservative category

 

 

[Brent Richman]

Ed you are bass ackwards and a microcosm of the problems that face the Republic today. Rick Perry a "conservative"? The guy handed toll roads over to the King of Spain, claimed that it was the law that you had to inject your daughter with Gardasil (Merck Pharmaceuticals that he used to work for). Whatever Ed, you are a lost cause brainwashed bootlicking scumbag as far as I'm concerned.

I hope you enjoy watching your kids and grandkids lick the boots of their captors.

[Scott Arnett]

Brent, this is not the way to win an argument or discussion. Bring the facts with legitimate resources to research.

[Gary Lewis]

Ed, your post made me realize I had forgotten what left and right meant so I went on the internet and offer this link below which I found made more sense than the left to right spectrum you show.  What are your thoughts? Brent I understand your frustration, but it is better to enlighten than to just scold.

http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message1546492/pg1

[Janet Blazen]

Gary, Good video............I"seen it before and am glad you posted it............kinda explains things.

[Scott McPhail]

Gary this video was fantastic! I have never understood the claim that fascism is far right. It's funny because when people say "we are a democracy" I have to politely remind them that no, we are a republic and a constitutional republic at that! Well...we were at one time.

Oh and Ed, even accepting your definition of left to right I would strongly disagree that Libertarians are left. At one time Liberal was a good word. In fact many ways I would consider my philosophy classical liberalism. 

[Ed R]

After watching many debates and analyzing the ideas of the four remaining candidates I now put Romney in the Liberal category.

[Ed R]

The technology of today requires our National defence to be different than it was in 1776.  No one in 1776 was able to communicate around the world with a simple device, because that device had not not yet been created.  How would have the battles in the revolutionary war turned out if that type of communication existed.  The SR-71 is now in a museum and it traveld over 4,000 MPH in the atmosphere.  The Earth is about 25,000 miles around, so it would take a little over 6 hours to go around the entire planet in an SR-71.  The technology of today changes the way we defend ourselves from foriegn threats.  If you believe there are no people on this planet that are willing and capable of killings us, then you are living on a different planet than I am (you can take that last phrase either way you wish).

[Gary Lewis]

Ed, tell me please what your definition is for Liberal?
 
Ed R said:

After watching many debates and analyzing the ideas of the four remaining candidates I now put Romney in the Liberal category.

[Ray Kirkus]

Please define you concept of what a conservative is .. I would really like to know  For the sake of dialogue, this is how I see it , just for starters:

 Conservatives are for small government, None of the 3 have any plan to reduce the size and scope of government. Yet neo conservatives  pushed the Patriot Act, Military Commissions Act, the NDAA, and continue eroding our freedoms via more draconian legislation and creating monster bureaucracies like the TSA.  The three candidates support all this to be left in place.

Ron Paul has a plan to eliminate Five Federal bureaucracies. and eradicate the TSA.

Conservatives talked about being fiscally responsible. None of the 3 cut any money from the baseline budget at all and increase spending into the future.

Ron Paul cuts the budget by 1 trillion dollars the first year and says exactly how he will do it. Bring spending back to 2006 levels.

Libertarians are generally not pro-life. and do not believe in borders.

Ron Paul believes in closing the borders and getting rid of the magnets of entitlements that attract illegals. He also believes in getting the government out of the way of individual liberties here at home. Ron Paul is pro life in all cases and is the only one committed to truly protecting the lives of our troops, by bringing them home.

Republicans used to agree with libertarians on civil liberties and small government ..

Reagan said , Libertarianism is the heart and soul of conservatism..

[Janet Blazen]

There appears to be so many definitions of :

Libertarianism

&

Conservatism

How can this be ?    Could someone please explain ?

[Ray Kirkus]

Ed R I posted a Christian perspective on Newt and would love to have you convince me that Gingrich is a conservative.. Please.  I am Tea party and am trying to understand. I'd love to explain to you how conservative  Ron Paul actually is.

[Ed R]

I know that I started this post by laying out where I stood, at the time, of my interpretations of my positions as to where the candidates fit into my definitions of the afformantioned categories.  I don't get my talking points by pointing to what others have said i.e. links to whatever; the words I write come strait from my observations and ideas. 

There are issues in this election cycle that are important to the survival and progress of this country.  Number one on the list is whether we can keep our country safe from being dominated from foreign or domestic invasion.  Ron Paul and Mitt Romney, as of yet, have not convinced me they are willing to be an effective commandor and Chief of our military given the current threats that face our nation.  In the case of Romney he appears to me as a man that has no interest in being forceful in changing our current trajectory toward where we are currently heading at this time and that concernes me a lot.  Most of the power of the Presidency is with foreign policy.  I am somewhat convinced that given the opportunity Ron Paul would nominate a very conservative constitutionalist to the Supreme court; Romney has not convinced me of that.  We needed a national military to defend us from invasion at the time of our creation as an independant nation.  We still need a military, that is more than able, to carry out the mission of defending us from invasion from outside our bourders.  Even in 1776 we needed to be aware of what was going on outside our boarders to be prepared militarily to defend this country.  It is the responsability of the President of the United Satates to handle foreign affairs.  We have had threats to our nation since it began from forien hot forces and the way our military handled those threats in the past is not the same as they need to be today.  I am not in favor of changing our Constitution.  As in 1776 we need a military that is capable of defending us against foriegn invasion.  The tactical as well as stategic plans and capabilities of our enemies are vastly different than they were when our nation began.  We cannot deffend our country from invasion from outside forces with a 1776 vision of military strategies.  Many Ron Paul supporters have repeatedly condemmed the military industrial complex.  The industrial military complex is mostly private sector.  Yes; there are those that loby the powers in DC to award contracts to private sector companies, but that does not take away the need for a modern approach to national defence.  It is our private sector that creates the equipment that our military uses for our national defence.  In the modern world the threats to our nations security are more destructive, intense, and immediate than at the beginning of our creation as a nation.  Our military mission needs to be different than it was in 1776 and Ron Paul has stated time and time again that he will adopt the 1776 version of foreign policy, which is dangerous.  If we as a nation do not handle foriegn policy poperly in this modern age of almost instant everything, then we will pay the price losing everything in a matter of a very short time period.  While serving in the Strategic Air Command in the United State Air Force back in the 1970's it was clear to me the dangers of letting our guard down.  Becoming an isolationist nation ignoring other nations and allowing them to create weapons that will allow them to attack our nation effectively is beyond dangerous; it's irresponsible.  Like it or not we are a global world now.  We have the ability to stay in our homes and communicate and transact with anyone on the planet twenty four seven.  People all over the world have the ability to create things with technology that do great good and also great harm.  If we ignore those around the world we will find out when it is too late that some of them wish to do great harm and that harm may be at our expense.  So; first of all; and most important; we must create the ability to defend ourselves, at all costs, or nothing else will matter.

Our vision today as individuals is mostly trying to get from one paycheck to the next and that is only for those that are getting a paycheck.  I worry everyday if I will have a job tomorrow; I don't wish to live like that.  This myth that we as a nation cannot do great things because the government is not taking in enough money is missing the whole point.  A reasonable tax system that allows the economy to grow will in fact create more jobs, that in turn will increase government revenue.  This works everytime it is implemented.  More to the point; Money is not the problem.  Money is nothing more than a note that represents an individuals efforts building something that someone else wishes to trade some of their earnings.  As long as people are creating something that someone else wants there will be a steady growth in the economy.  It is this creation of products and services that supplies our nation with more.  Our Nation can afford to think big dreams; in fact; we will wither away without big dreams.

This is not rocket science; I know; I know a lot about rocket science; this is not rocket science; it is common sense.