I'm constatly amused by how easily people are convinced by any argument that backs up their own prejudices.

I'm also constantly amused by how easily people can see this behaviour when it's displayed by others, when they are unable to see it in themselves.

How is that not a thorough rebuttal of the video? It's not bias, that video is just crap, empiracally and verifiably

How about I respond by pointing out that there's a big difference between "The Republican Party in the United States in 2011" and "right-wing politics"?

You don't seem to know anything about politics outside of your own country and this current time period. Based on my experience, I could well say that left-wing governments are all about supporting their friends in big business at the expense of everyone else. That's what they've been doing all over Europe for the past few decades. Except Iceland, where there isn't enough money for the taxpayer to bail out the banks, and where the government would, no doubt, face a violent revolution if they even tried.

Out of curiousity, where do you think my country is? 

Oh, you're not American?

Then it's strange that you should focus so heavily on American politics. Maybe because that makes things much easier; the US has the worst conservative party in the Western world, after all...

Scott Walker (and there are plenty of other examples, such as Thatcher, to use an example that is neither from my country nor the present day, or John Howard, who is from my country and approximately the present day) and their union busting activities. All Right wing without a shadow of a doubt, all acting in defiance of the 'small government' concept in order to concentrate wealth in the hands of the already wealthy. I would also like to point out that after Howard was voted out of office, the Labor party (left wing) overturned John Howards ban on collective bargaining.

Trade unions aren't inherently bad, but they've very often been used to hold both employers and governments to ransom, and their political goals tend to be "big government" goals.

They also have a habit of bullying their members into supporting actions they don't agree with, and they often refuse to allow people to work for whoever they're striking against. This goes dead againt concepts of individual liberty and the free market.

It's interesting that you should bring up Thatcher. At the time she took power, union leaders in Britain were almost tyrants; they were close to ruling the country as an oligrachy. The people were damned sick of them, and they showed their support for Thatcher in the ballot box.

Of course, no left-wing government would oppose such activity; they need the union votes.

You can also look at the tax cuts that Bush brought in, or the GST that Howard brought in as examples of ways the right wing shift the tax burden to the poor.

Are you talking abot making tax more equal and refusing to punish the wealthy for their success?

Some of us think it's quite unfair that some pay so much more tax than other, so we support relatively flat rates.

Of course, Bush took things too far, but if you're going to take his as the archetypal right-wing politician, I'm going to take Stalin and Mao to be the archetypal left-wing politicians. It's only fair.

Now, if you left-wingers love the poor so much, why do you always starve them to death?

I also used the example of Iceland (left wing) not giving bailouts, and the Democrats (and eventually Republicans) (both right wing, to varying degrees) giving bailouts.

Now the Democrats are right-wing? This is where I stop taking you seriously.

You claim that there are left wing governments that are "all about" supporting their friends in big business. name some, as many as you can. I can't respond to your experience, if I don't even know what countries you are refering to.

Look all over Europe. Our continent has been almost universally left-wing for decades, and things seem to be much more skewed in favour of the big business status quo here than they are in the US.

If you want a classic example of a corrupt left-wing government looking after its friends, look at the British Labour party. I could go on for days about the horrible things they've done...

It is.

And therefore, a rebuttal of the video isn't really an argument for anything. The blogger clarly seems to be picking on one video in order to make a broad political point, which is quite intellectually dishonest.

And even so, the blogger twists and cherry picks. Assuming that birth rates amongst immigrants will be the same as birth rates in their country of origin? That's a big assumption to make, espeically when immigrants tend to be younger than average and to come from (and join) lower socio-economic classes, whose birth rates tend to be higher.

And it's pretty dishonest to only look at birth rates for countries like Tunesia and Turkey (i.e. the ones with the lowest birth rates in the Islamic world) and ignore Islamic immigration to Europe from countries like Afghanistan and Somalia, which have much higher birthrates. Classic cherry picking.

And finally, he ignores the question of how many of the births in the European countries he compares are to Muslim families.

Europe isn't going to be Muslim-majority by 20-whatever the video says. But nor will the Muslim poulation remain low, which is what the blogger implies.

Data was provided that showed they were basing it on the countries that most of the immgirants were coming from, which tended to be Tunisia, Turkey, and Algeria, at least as far as France went

Yes, as far as France went.

1) The tea Party is one of the few right wing parties that bucks some of the usual trends of right wing politics. In some ways, the Tea Party is less right wing than the democrats.

2) Right wing governments are not about free market capitalism, nor are they about small government. They are about limited government control over big business, and the maximum amount of government control over everything else, including economic rights of the 99%. Would you claim that Scott Walker, because he was intervening by banning trade unions, was a left winger? (This isn't a rhetorical question, please answer it, I honestly can't understand you and I think answering this question will help me to learn what you think right and left wing mean)

3) It is completely irrelevant to my point that the republicans voted against the bailouts. The Icelandic parliament is controlled by the left wing, and they did not bail out the banks. The Democrats are a moderate right wing party, and they voted for it. The Republicans, from what I can gather, voted against it simply because they knew it would win them votes to do so.

@ Kudistos megistos - How about you respond to my points instead of resorting to petty insults.