[Rhodes22-list] Re spect
David Bradley
dwbrad at gmail.com
Fri Oct 24 19:38:39 EDT 2008
I agree that it's a crude test at best but a useful discussion point.
Also agree on polls - I was a quant major and started my career in
market research, so was able to interpret results with the best of
them but also know how to produce (or nowawdays buy) valid research.
Let me see if I can take a shot at a middle ground definition.
Believing in God is mainstream America. Asking for God's blessing in
sending troops to battle is very mainstream America. Saying it's
God's will that we win the war in Irag stretches it for some (I, for
one, find that offensive to my religous beliefs). Invoking God's will
in the name of some other state project (I can't remember what it was,
but let's just say for argument that it was the bridge) would make
many folks think that person was extreme in their religious beliefs
and it's wrong to mix politics and religion. Some might think that
person was a religious (fill in the blank - there are better words
than kook). Who's to say where is the "right" place to draw the line?
Dave
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 1:31 PM, Herb Parsons <hparsons at parsonsys.com> wrote:
> I suspect Brad was talking about Fiscal issues, and that put me pretty
> close in the middle. I suspect though, that the scoring is off. I don't
> think you'll see many "socially moderate conservatives" on the list, or
> anywhere else. I think THAT was the point.
>
> In addition, many of the socially questions didn't have answers that fit
> what I wanted. I tended to take more conservative answers than really
> fit my belief:
>
> For instance:
> Civil unions should be an option for the gay community, but the term
> marriage should be reserved for heterosexual couples.
> We need a Constitutional Amendment to protect the institution of
> marriage and define it as an act between a man and woman.
> Gay & lesbian couples deserve the right to marry and receive the same
> legal benefits as heterosexual couples.
> Individual States should have the choice of whether to recognize gay &
> lesbian couples.
> No Opinion
>
>
> The first option and the third are completely compatible:
> I believe MARRIAGE should be reserved for heterosexual, and CIVIL UNIONS
> should be allowed, if a state so desires. However, I couldn't choose
> both, so I went with the first. I wonder how many points the "other way"
> would have skewed it had I selected option 3.
>
> Government should be primarily focused on security and/or regulatory
> issues and should reduce its role in providing social services.
> Providing social services ranging from school lunches to Medicare is a
> primary function of government.
> The government should be actively involved in supporting social
> services, but should do so primarily through grants to and support of
> private organizations.
> Government-provided social services are important, but current levels
> are far too high.
> No Opinion
>
>
> This one is poorly structured:
> #1 is clearly the answer (for me), because it said "primarily". however,
> #4 also mirrors my view.
>
> The government should regulate the content of television and radio
> broadcast on public airwaves to reduce the violence and/or sex on
> broadcasts.
> The government should let television and radio determine their own
> content. Individuals can make their own viewing and listening choices.
> The government should provide economic incentives for corporations to
> focus on more family-friendly programming.
> Big media conglomerates have far too much control of the nation's
> airwaves and are too cozy with government.
> No Opinion
>
>
> #1 is out, because it said "reduce". I don't think we have a particular
> problem with TV right now that needs MORE government intervention. At
> the same time, I think regulation is necessary. I picked "no opinion"
> because none of these fi my view.
>
> A free market will naturally regulate the issues most important to
> Americans. Government should work to de-regulate industries as much as
> possible.
> The excessive environmental regulations placed on business are
> counterproductive and only hurt the economy.
> Regulation is necessary to protect both our safety and the environment
> from corporations only concerned with net profit.
> Regulations are a healthy strategy for long-term growth while
> protecting all members of society.
> No Opinion
>
>
> This is way too vague, and poorly worded, it doesn't define
> "regulation". The current anti-monopoly laws are a form of "regulation",
> I think we need them.
> #2 is self-affirming. By that, I mean they use the word "excessive". If
> it's excessive, by definition it is too much (that's what the word means)
> #3 assumes that coporations are only concerned with "net profit"
> #4 doesn't define "regulations" well enough. Obviously, the "excessive"
> stuff from #2 should be done away with, but the overall statement
> doesn't fit my view.
>
> So, I decided to stop "debating and thinking" on this one, and "Just
> believe" that "no opinion" is going to have to do.
>
> =====
> Overall, I don't think the poll is worded in a way that really reflects
> the type of "middle of the road" attitudes that Brad was talking about.
>
> Nothing about whether or not believing in God made you a "religious
> kook". Nothing about whether is was a good thing that 20% of taxpayers
> pay 68% of the total taxes.
>
> I could go on, but I think you see my point.
>
> I'm really not a big believer in polls. My statistical analysis class in
> college made it pretty clear that you can get you want - Tell me the
> numbers, and I'll from the questions to get 'em.
>
>
>
>
> David Bradley wrote:
>> Along this thread, I was a registered Republican for over 20 years
>> until I felt the GOP stopped majoring on economics and started telling
>> me how to live. Moving to NC when Jesse Helms was still running
>> things was a tipping point for me, and I haven't seen a reason to come
>> back since.
>>
>> Herb, it looks like I over-stated your relative position but not by a
>> whole lot. Did your scores surprise you? Do you feel you represent
>> the middle of America, as asserted by Brad? I truly have no issues
>> with the diversity on this list - it's what makes it interesting and
>> fun. But I try to go into the discussions with a desire to understand
>> others' views as much as assert my own. Just wanted to close the loop
>> on this.
>>
>> Dave
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 10:34 AM, Herb Parsons <hparsons at parsonsys.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Paul,
>>>
>>> It's a very "special" kind of Republican.
>>>
>>> Good memory though, I had forgotten about that.
>>>
>>>
>>> pdgrand at nospam.wmis.net wrote:
>>>
>>>> Ben,
>>>>
>>>> I thought you stated somewhere earlier that you were a Republican except
>>>> for this election.
>>>>
>>>> Paul
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Took the test
>>>>>
>>>>> Non-fiscal issues- moderate liberal 34; fiscal issues-moderate liberal 33
>>>>>
>>>>> Ben C.
>>>>>
>>>>> hparsons wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Non-Fiscal Issues, you rank as a *Strong Conservative (94)*.
>>>>>> On Fiscal Issues, you rank as a *Moderate Conservative (72)*.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Robert Skinner wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No surprises here.
>>>>>>> On Non-Fiscal Issues, you rank as a Moderate Liberal (32).
>>>>>>> On Fiscal Issues, you rank as a Moderate Liberal (27).
>>>>>>> /Robert
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> David Bradley wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The past day's exchange got me thinking about what does it mean to be
>>>>>>>> moderate and what does it mean to be extreme and who among us really
>>>>>>>> represents the "middle" of America (per your comment, Brad).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think the stats would say the middle of America in political
>>>>>>>> spectrum terms is undecided at the moment on who to vote for.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So I did a quick search on "politcal spectrum test" and tried one of
>>>>>>>> the self-tests (not to be confused with the Asshole self-test). I
>>>>>>>> have no idea how valid or invalid the methodology might be but I
>>>>>>>> thought it was interesting and it pegged me right where I see myself
>>>>>>>> (see the test output here):
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Non-Fiscal Issues, you rank as a Moderate Liberal (26).
>>>>>>>> On Fiscal Issues, you rank as a Centrist (49).
>>>>>>>> Your score is on a scale of 0 to 100, with 0 being fully liberal and
>>>>>>>> 100 being fully conservative.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Here is the link: http://www.politicalbrew.com/politest.cgi
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Give it a try.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Dave
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
>>>>>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
>>>>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> View this message in context:
>>>>> http://www.nabble.com/...-failure-of-leadership-or-leading-...-tp20084939p20143646.html
>>>>> Sent from the Rhodes 22 mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>>>
>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
>>>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> __________________________________________________
>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>> __________________________________________________
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> __________________________________________________
> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to http://www.rhodes22.org/list
> __________________________________________________
>
--
David Bradley
+1.206.234.3977
dwbrad at gmail.com
More information about the Rhodes22-list
mailing list