Who is the most neutral person in or connected to politics that you can think of?

[AreaCode707]

No substantive content in my OP because, to my regret, I have no names to contribute.

 

[Craig234]

I'm neutral. Which leads me to 'liberal', just as neutral leads to siding with 'earth is round'.

You have to realize when asking this though that there are differences of opinion. Neutral for someone who is anti-corporatism is not neutral for a corporatist.

You might also define 'neutral' - do you mean 'doesn't care about issues' or 'in the middle'?

For a politician, any of them will be controversial as 'neutral', but I think Rep. Henry Waxman tends to be a pretty fact-driven person.

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: Craig234
I'm neutral. Which leads me to 'liberal', just as neutral leads to siding with 'earth is round'.

Wow, again, be glad my sig is full.

 

[Medellon]

Originally posted by: Craig234
I'm neutral. Which leads me to 'liberal', just as neutral leads to siding with 'earth is round'.

You have to realize when asking this though that there are differences of opinion. Neutral for someone who is anti-corporatism is not neutral for a corporatist.

You might also define 'neutral' - do you mean 'doesn't care about issues' or 'in the middle'?

For a politician, any of them will be controversial as 'neutral', but I think Rep. Henry Waxman tends to be a pretty fact-driven person.

You're neutral? Search for this guy's posts to easily prove him wrong.

 

[ProfJohn]

Brit Hume perhaps??

Not sure he fits the 'connected to politics' angle, but he always seems to take a middle of the road approach and lets the left and right wing people on his panels present the biased views.

 

[NoStateofMind]

Ron Paul.

Yeah I said it!

 

[Harvey]

Neutral has nothing to do with left vs. right. It's an empircal value that has everything to do with right vs. wrong.

For eight years we had to put up with the right who were so dead ass wrong about everything that their thankfully EX-execuitives should spend the rest of their lives in prison for the crimes they committed under their abuse of power.

No amount of neutrality mandates supporting what they did. :|

 

[BoberFett]

When Republicans do wrong, it's because everyone Republican is evil. When Democrats do wrong it's because they had a good reason. Right Craig? Neutral, LMAO.

 

[Tom]

Jim Lehrer

 

[soccerballtux]

Libertarians are pretty neutral. Personal responsibility, limited government, what more could you want?

 

[Hacp]

John McCain. He's a true national hero.

 

[Brainonska511]

Originally posted by: soccerballtux
Libertarians are pretty neutral. Personal responsibility, limited government, what more could you want?

Reality.

 

[Fear No Evil]

Originally posted by: Harvey
Neutral has nothing to do with left vs. right. It's an empircal value that has everything to do with right vs. wrong.

For eight years we had to put up with the right who were so dead ass wrong about everything that their thankfully EX-execuitives should spend the rest of their lives in prison for the crimes they committed under their abuse of power.

No amount of neutrality mandates supporting what they did. :|

Can you stop spamming every thread with your bullshit? But who gives a crap what you believe since you clearly don't believe the Constitution protects us from being ruled by a foreign court you are just as bad a you claim Bush and Cheney are.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: Hacp
John McCain. He's a true national hero.

When he is in maverick mode.

 

[LumbergTech]

Originally posted by: Medellon

Originally posted by: Craig234
I'm neutral. Which leads me to 'liberal', just as neutral leads to siding with 'earth is round'.

You have to realize when asking this though that there are differences of opinion. Neutral for someone who is anti-corporatism is not neutral for a corporatist.

You might also define 'neutral' - do you mean 'doesn't care about issues' or 'in the middle'?

For a politician, any of them will be controversial as 'neutral', but I think Rep. Henry Waxman tends to be a pretty fact-driven person.

You're neutral? Search for this guy's posts to easily prove him wrong.

hes a lot closer to neutral than most of the people i see posting...

i've seen him supporting both sides on certain issues..he does lean democratic but hes not an idiot who goes with a side just to go with that side

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: LumbergTech

Originally posted by: Medellon

Originally posted by: Craig234
I'm neutral. Which leads me to 'liberal', just as neutral leads to siding with 'earth is round'.

You have to realize when asking this though that there are differences of opinion. Neutral for someone who is anti-corporatism is not neutral for a corporatist.

You might also define 'neutral' - do you mean 'doesn't care about issues' or 'in the middle'?

For a politician, any of them will be controversial as 'neutral', but I think Rep. Henry Waxman tends to be a pretty fact-driven person.

You're neutral? Search for this guy's posts to easily prove him wrong.

hes a lot closer to neutral than most of the people i see posting...

i've seen him supporting both sides on certain issues..he does lean democratic but hes not an idiot who goes with a side just to go with that side

What are you smoking dude??

Please find me one topic where he did not take the far left liberal side of the argument.

Or find me a topic where he took a neutral view on a subject.

Hell, his example of a 'neutral' politician happens to be one of the most liberal politicians in congress.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: soccerballtux
Libertarians are pretty neutral. Personal responsibility, limited government, what more could you want?

Sanity.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: soccerballtux
Libertarians are pretty neutral. Personal responsibility, limited government, what more could you want?

Sanity.

So you want less personal responsibility and more government??

 

[IronWing]

Moonbeam is pretty well balanced.

 

[DaveSimmons]

Originally posted by: Hacp
John McCain. He's a true national hero.

Back in 2001 I'd agree. After he became an apologist for Bush's un-Amercian policies like torture, not so much. Once he started pandering to extremist Christians and chose a semi-literate beauty queen for a running mate, not at all.

I don't support or endorse either party but what I see as the lesser evil seems to be the Democrats more often than not so I guess not me either.

I'd never be accepted by "real" Dems though since I'm not against gun ownership, self-reliance, merit pay or personal responsibility.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: soccerballtux
Libertarians are pretty neutral. Personal responsibility, limited government, what more could you want?

Sanity.

So you want less personal responsibility and more government??

No, that's you framing the discussion in your straw man terms, like (edit: nearly) always.

 

[Thump553]

Tim Russert was. NBC's Chuck Todd is almost always pretty objective, which I think is a more realistic goal than "neutral." Neutral too often implies giving equal time and consideration to both sides. Does the world benefit with a Hitler gets a "fair and balanced" treatment of his policies and views?

 

[seemingly random]

Originally posted by: ironwing
Moonbeam is pretty well balanced.

All right, admit it. You're just trying to get into somebody's sig.

 

[seemingly random]

Originally posted by: Tom
Jim Lehrer

Almost boringly so. But, yes, he is and I can't think of anyone else who comes close.

 

[da loser]

Originally posted by: seemingly random

Originally posted by: Tom
Jim Lehrer

Almost boringly so. But, yes, he is and I can't think of anyone else who comes close.

:thumbsup:

tim russert was not a neutral person.