I think the confusion here arises in part from the difference between “socio-political” liberals and “economic” liberals.

Economic liberals are usually socio-political conservatives, although there are always exceptions.

There are far more exceptions than you may imagine, the economic conservatives (by which I mean Thatcherites) have a very difficult relationship with the social conservatives.

Exactly the same thing is present in the Democrat party, the Social liberals there also tend to be economic conservatives (by principle in International trade) which puts them at odds with a major part of the party base who are economic liberals. This is why you see Democrat presidential candidates flirting with protectionism whilst George Bush pursues it as hard as he can. Yet the social-liberals (the part of that category that attended Live8) is very much pro free trade, Its all a bit of a mess, which is why the parties go through regular masochistic sessions. The key to success is to keep your partys mix better balanced than the other guys. George Bush failed this miserably (as well as overseeing the Iraq collapse) so he fell from grace. For me at least this is what makes McCain so interesting, the reason he is getting such a bashing from certain quarters in the Republican party is becouse they are so used to getting there way. In reality McCain is far more of the Reagen streak that bought so much success in the eighties.

bit of a contradiction in terms dont you think? Right wing & Liberal…enough to get you unelected in the States!

Completely incorrect. US politics is full of such contradictions. There are very few actual pure liberals or pure conservatives. Most people and politicians are a combination of the different positions based on their personal, social, economic and security beliefs. Your statement was absolutely wrong.

Stop insulting and patronising other members whose view of the world is not identical to your own, sealordlawrence.

Last warning, fella! 😡

GA

I was not even aware there was an insult in there? There was a highly detailed and informative post to correct an incorrect broadly sweeping statement but certainly no insult.

Tried and executed at Nuremberg along with the others. I doubt there is any evidence to suggest that his postwar story would have been any different from the other Nazi leaders.

Really old boy time to take some shore leave….the sea state must have knocked something out of kilter 😀 !!!

Yet again you decide to ignore the main points …not good enough old son not nearly good enough!

There is one hell of a difference between offending a religious belief that numbers around 1 in 4 of the worlds population and having a go at the the Nazis who are the result of extremist far right beliefs !!!

The only similarity is that only small numbers of people actually support these Neo con Nazis and again only a small number actually support the extremist Muslims in either their role as Terrorists or for that matter where they hold power as a Government you cant damn all the people for the actionsof a few.

Let me think where are there some extremist Muslims in power? Where is Sharia law implimented in ? Where is democracy non existant or farcical? Saudi Arabia springs to mind as does Iran…. and who supports Saudi and why isnt something done about its laws that oppress women and gays:rolleyes: ?

Why you have decided to raise US foreign policy here is beyond me, I can only assume that it is due to the weakness of the rest of your argument.:rolleyes:

There is nothing wrong with offending a major religion or any of the beliefs that spring from it. Exactly the same applies to all other ideologies.

Not quite yet…………. 😀

You’ve a perfect right to hold that view but I wouldn’t stand next to you during a thunderstorm.

Just in case, you understand. 😉

I dont know whether or not to be surprised that this has all become such a science!:eek: 😀

Godwin!!!

You lose at the internets, sealordlawrence…….. :p

Damn, thwarted by wikipedia……….when will the degradation end!:o 😀

How about if we replace Nazi with KKK? does that work or does wiki checkmate me?:D

For the record I think it is perfectly legitimate to compare Islam (and all other religions for that matter) with Nazism, after all they are both corrupt ideologies with violent and oppressive streaks.

So according to Hurrifan we should not be allowed to criticise ideologies in case we offend the people who believe in them? The Nazis would certainly be offended by most of what is said about them today, should we stop incasewe hurt their feelings? We have every right to criticise and mock Islam, just as we do all other ideologies and many individuals. If people get up set by that they have to live with it, it is one of the responsibilities of living in a free society.