On 02-Nov-08 20:35, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Sun, 02 Nov 2008 12:27:33 +0100, andrel wrote:
> 
>> That may or may not be more true than my rule of thumb, but it almost
>> destroys
>> democrat <-> people/voters
>> republican <-> nation
>> For me the main value is that I do not live in the US, so the party
>> lines have not been part of my upbringing. The problem for me (and
>> possibly Andy, although it could also be his habit of living under
>> stones) is that in my country the two concepts are not mutual exclusive.
>> Indeed our republicans are republicans *because* they are fundamentalist
>> democrats. Still, when I want to guess which party in the US wants to
>> reform the medical system and which one is most likely to start a war,
>> it helps a lot.
> 
> An outside view does always bring a different perspective - and that's 
> the thing I find interesting.  I'd never thought about it that way myself.

> I think most people are more complex than either ideology lays out - for 
> example, I consider myself a fiscal conservative 

I don't know what that means (i.e. not a term used here.) Does that mean 
that you are against raising taxes? In favor of decreasing taxes for the 
rich? Or simply keeping the system as it is?

Anyway, this outsider (yes I am, to the point that I do think the US is 
international, a point unfortunately missed by Stephen :( ;) ) thinks 
that the current US government has directly and indirectly borrowed so 
much money from other countries that one day they'll have to pay back 
one way or another. Even McCain will have to raise taxes if he doesn't 
want to continue Bush's irresponsible politics. He knows that, and I am 
frankly amazed that large parts of the US electorate let him get away 
with attacking Obama because he is a 'socialist' and will therefor 
surely increase taxes. But I am just an outsider.

> but not a social conservative.

Which means you wouldn't mind if neighbours moved? ;)

Post a reply to this message