Bush's Lunacy?

[Rat Faced]

Originally posted by j2k4@1 July 2004 - 20:34
perhaps after the U.S. Presidential election, we should have another more lengthy discussion defining the "world" political spectrum, as it is obvious our previous attempts have been a total waste of effort.

This is because its not a straightforward line, but more a Monster with tenticles stretching all over the place....

[j2k4]

Originally posted by Rat Faced+1 July 2004 - 15:54--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Rat Faced &#064; 1 July 2004 - 15:54)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-j2k4@1 July 2004 - 20:34
perhaps after the U.S. Presidential election, we should have another more lengthy discussion defining the "world" political spectrum, as it is obvious our previous attempts have been a total waste of effort.

This is because its not a straightforward line, but more a Monster with tenticles stretching all over the place....


[/b][/quote]
Just so-

Still, we ought to at least be able to address this annoying duplication of mis-applyed terms, yes?

For instance, as you&#39;ve agreed (I think), even that particular animal which is labelled here in the U.S. as a Democrat would be considered to fall to the right of your native conservative.

Here&#39;s an idea:

Perhaps it would be more useful (and easier to agree upon) if we bent to the task of plotting where, on a generic spectrum, our respectives countries fall, rather than any individual party or politician?

A good starting point, I think.

[Biggles]

Certainly would not be difficult to pin Scotland on such a spectrum.

[j2k4]

I claim the middle for the United States of America, by my cunning use of this flag.






Make believe I have a flag, ok?

[Alex H]

Originally posted by j2k4@1 July 2004 - 21:17
Perhaps it would be more useful (and easier to agree upon) if we bent to the task of plotting where, on a generic spectrum, our respectives countries fall, rather than any individual party or politician?

Can we have a graph?

[j2k4]

Originally posted by Alex H+4 July 2004 - 23:53--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Alex H @ 4 July 2004 - 23:53)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-j2k4@1 July 2004 - 21:17
Perhaps it would be more useful (and easier to agree upon) if we bent to the task of plotting where, on a generic spectrum, our respectives countries fall, rather than any individual party or politician?

Can we have a graph? [/b][/quote]
Give it a spin, Alex-

See what you come up with.

If it doesn&#39;t work, it will go on the scrap heap where it belongs.

[Biggles]

Originally posted by j2k4@1 July 2004 - 21:31
I claim the middle for the United States of America, by my cunning use of this flag.






Make believe I have a flag, ok?

This flag, the subject of my make belief, is it ok for me to place about here.... in the middle somewhere?


A graph is good

: :
....:....
.: :.
.: :.
.: :.
............: :...........

The bell jar (or was that Sylvia Plath?)



Edit - One for the scrap heap I fear - it looked so nice too - I see this is not wysiwyg.

[clocker]

I see this is not wysiwyg.

Ok, I&#39;ll bite.
What, praytell, is "wysiwyg"?

[Biggles]

What you see is what you get



A computing term I believe - although our IT people could have simply been messing with my head - they are a bit like that.

[Rat Faced]

wysiwyg = What You See Is What You Get


They werent having you on