137
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 407:
Line 407: + +
→Not liberal
:::He may be a liberal, an insane one who carves his own niche in the political spectrum but a liberal all the same, but I dont think he's a Gore supporter any more. He was back when he believed Gore had a more anti-homosexual agenda, but now he strongly opposes Gore, and other Democratic figureheads like the Clintons. Any chance he'd be considered a populist or totalitarian? [[User:TPerry|TPerry]] 19:42, 26 February 2009 (EST)
:::He may be a liberal, an insane one who carves his own niche in the political spectrum but a liberal all the same, but I dont think he's a Gore supporter any more. He was back when he believed Gore had a more anti-homosexual agenda, but now he strongly opposes Gore, and other Democratic figureheads like the Clintons. Any chance he'd be considered a populist or totalitarian? [[User:TPerry|TPerry]] 19:42, 26 February 2009 (EST)
:::: Populist? Not at all. He argues that only members of his church are saved, and every other human being is going to Hell. That's not populist in any way; its about as elitist as could be imagined. Totalitarian? Hard to say, considering outside of his obsessions with homosexuals and how the government should treat them, I don't think he comments much on how a government should be structured. I wouldn't be surprised to learn he'd support a form of totalitarian theocracy, though, with himself as a priest-king. [[User:ArthurA|ArthurA]] 11:09, 27 February 2009 (EST)