but at least your reaction is constructive as opposed to treating me like an idiot, which is not appreciated. The first few pages that roared down the pike today really surprised me and was truly an education about some of the contributors here. And perhaps I handed back a little sarcasm as well, but I thought it was deserved.
First, "Clinton" has the energy to jog because it may well be a robotoid, and second thing, an assassination of a robotoid is not so serious. These robotoids have a biological computer-brain that is programmed. They can think in the sense a computer thinks, but secret advances in understanding the human brain, have allowed the makers of organic robotoids to have the memory of a person at a given point in time transferred to an organic robotoid. The key then for making what appears to be a clone--but they are not a real clone--is to capture the person to be copied and make a holographic copy of the brain memory and transfer that to the robotoid.
I was alive in 1970 okie and although not old enough to vote my grandfather was chairman of the county Democratic party and my father held a non-partisan elected office.
I can practically see the Hubert H Humphrey Metrodome from my office window.
The Hubert H Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs is about 15 blocks from here.
I grew up less than 50 miles from Wallace, SD, the birthplace of HHH. I have met and had conversations with Walter Mondale and Hubert "Skip" Humphrey III outside of political settings. I drive by the church where Muriel's funeral was held at least once a week.
Your condescending crap about how I might have common sense if I only knew what you do is, just that, CRAP. I have spent almost my entire life in the part of the country where HHH was a major force in politics and public opinion. I might not be as old as you okie but I am not senile enough to claim I can tell you about the Oklahoma mindset of 30 years ago without any evidence to back me up.
As Senate expert on disarmament, he advocates practical steps toward real disarmament.
Here's what we're going to do:
Stop the bombing of the North -- taking account of Hanoi's action, and assurances of prompt good faith negotiations. We'll only resume bombing if the Communists show bad faith.
We have friends and allies around the world. We will consult with them and ask them to accept a fair share of the burdens of peace and security." Trust Humphrey to keep America strong.
Created the Peace Corps and established the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency -- both Humphrey ideas.
Under Food for Peace -- Humphrey's idea -- distributed enough food around the world to feed 100 million people a year.
Here's what we're going to do:
Press forward with negotiations to achieve a de-escalation of the arms race, with proper safeguards. Support the strengthening of the United Nations capacity for peacekeeping. Hold annual summit meetings,
Make a determined effort to uproot the causes of crime, especially juvenile crime (which accounts for almost all of the increase in crime).
Here's what we're going to do:
Intensify the fight against air and water pollution, Intensify efforts in desalinization. Continue to expand the national park and seashore systems. Start a Heritage Riverways Program to save our rivers through the type of total attack strategy employed in the Model Cities Program. Use Federal surplus lands for recreation and conservation in the cities and in the countryside. Push forward with urban and highway beautification, Trust Humphrey to build an America where progress is not at war with beauty.
Instruct the Federal agencies to work to eliminate pollution and respect environmental values in all the activities they conduct, support, authorize or finance.Use Federal surplus lands for recreation and conservation in the cities and in the countryside.
The Wilderness Act of 1964 set aside 9 million acres of wilderness so, as Hubert Humphrey put it, future generations could see what their forefathers had to conquer.
I am having nothing to do with enforcing a law that will destroy the rights of private property.
, there is no left in politics.
Okay, I'll take the issues where I scored Humphrey less than liberal:
3. Defense / Terrorism - Humphrey was a full supporter of Johnson in the Vietnam war, until at the very last of the campaign he softened his stance to accomodate the peace activists in an effort to unify the party.
As Vice President, Humphrey was controversial for his complete and vocal loyalty to Johnson and the policies of the Johnson Administration, even as many of Humphrey's liberal admirers opposed Johnson with increasing fervor about the Vietnam War. Critics later learned that Johnson had informed Humphrey that he would oppose him for the presidential nomintion if Humphrey (whom Johnson knew increasingly opposed the war) broke with the Johnson administration's Vietnam policies. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubert_H._Humphrey
Let us face up to the realities of our present posture. Our urgent need is to end the war -- and to do it now. I served as the Vice President during the period of our heaviest involvement there. Yet when I spoke to the American people during my campaign for the presidency in 1968, I said that my experience had led me to the conviction that however noble the intent of three Presidents who felt that our Vietnam involvement was essential to our national security, that position was no longer valid. I pledged in 1968 to end the bombing, a cease-fire, and immediate troop withdrawal program. I would've carried out that pledge.
It is taking Mr. Nixon longer to withdraw our troops than it took us to defeat Hitler. Had I been elected, we would now be out of that war. I repeat that pledge.
http://www.4president.org/speeches/hhh1972announcement.htm
I think you could hardly classify him liberal all the way on that. Going into the 68 convention, antiwar delegates supported McCarthy and McGovern, but the opposing factions opposite of the antiwar factions won out and nominated Humphrey. As far as disarmamant and treaties, I think most presidents have pursued that where practical. Humphrey, especially early on, was very anti-communist, so I think his stance toward them would have been sort of like Reagan, "trust but verify."
http://www.chicagohs.org/history/politics/1968.html
4. Foreign Policy / Trade - I am unsure about this issue but felt it would likely track with his traditional defense policy.
9. Energy - I used to work in the energy field, and multiple use was widely and commonly accepted as standard procedure by policy makers for the vast majority of public lands into the 70's. It became increasingly difficult in the 70's, and up until now, after the generation to which Humphrey belonged to continue the same policies as before. Talk to public lands managers that worked in that field and they can tell you the history. Humphrey advocating recreational use of federal lands doesn't tell me much. Conservatives are in favor of that as part of multiple use, and they are in favor of some protection of key park lands, etc. If you can find hard evidence that Humphrey systematically opposed oil leasing, logging, and grazing on federal lands, I'm willing to admit I'm wrong. I only rated him an M on this anyway, not Conservative.
What comes to my mind relative to energy is ANWR, and I would find it difficult to fathom anybody in their right mind opposing such a program in the days of Humphrey. But oh well, I could be wrong, give him a liberal rating if you must.
11. Abortion - I gave him another M here, not conservative. Not totally known but I doubt he would have supported partial birth abortion. That would have been considered reprehensible by virtually everybody at that point I think. If you can find evidence in his record wherein he pushed for the rights of abortion, and in addition, to have it with no parental notification, I am willing to change my mind.
12 & 13 - Illegal Immigration and Crime - contained in his convention speech: "I put it very bluntly. Rioting, sniping, mugging, traffic in narcotics and disregard for law are the advance guard of anarchy and they must and they will be stopped." Does this sound like a man with a passive, permissive, liberal attitude toward crime, drugs, and other illegal activities?
Bush a liberal on health care and education?!?!
They are the rebels. They rebelled against the standards of the previous generation and still are. Many of the causes coming out now are the fruits of that. Humphrey was not a part of this modern liberal movement. A good article, which is rare, is in the current Newsweek about the Boomer Liberals from Yale, etc.
The Last Hurrah
The baby boomers tacked left, then right. Where will their politics go in the golden years? The 'I want it all and I want it now' crowd confronts its hardest campaigns.
They liberal Left still thinks like the rebels they are. Many of them don't even like the country I don't think.
One of the frustrations on a forum like this is the difficulty of getting people to honestly say what they believe. I think this is another example of that. I tire of moving targets to be honest.
why jump on me for simply making the obvious observation between left and right for each issue?
Parados, you did a great job in my opinion of laying out your thoughts on it. I am willing to see your points of view, and yes I admit to likely some bias in my characterization of left and right on each issue, but at least your reaction is constructive as opposed to treating me like an idiot, which is not appreciated.
I think you will need to concede some likelihoods in the absence of clear data.
If you want evidence, its everywhere and obvious. I've given you lots of obvious evidence, which you refuse to acknowledge.
I am TIRED OF MOVING TARGETS okie. .Define left/right in a valid objective fashion that does NOT CHANGE or I am out of here.
Fiscal and Monetary Policy
Taxes were lowered in 1962, 1964, and 1965 to encourage more private spending and reach full employment; they were raised in 1966 and 1968 to help prevent inflation, but with a net reduction in the eight Democratic years. We will continue to use tax policy to maintain steady economic growth by helping through tax reduction to stimulate the economy when it is sluggish and through temporary tax increases to restrain inflation. To promote this objective, methods must be devised to permit prompt, temporary changes in tax rates within prescribed limits with full participation of the Congress in the decisions.
The goals of our national tax policy must be to distribute the burden of government equitably among our citizens and to promote economic efficiency and stability. We have placed major reliance on progressive taxes, which are based on the democratic principle of ability to pay. We pledge ourselves to continue to rely on such taxes, and to continue to improve the way they are levied and collected so that every American contributes to government in proportion to his ability to pay.
A thorough revamping of our federal taxes has been long overdue to make them more equitable as between rich and poor and as among people with the same income and family responsibilities. All corporation and individual preferences that do not serve the national interest should be removed. Tax preferences, like expenditures, must be rigorously evaluated to assure that the benefit to the nation is worth the cost.
We support a proposal for a minimum income tax for persons of high income based on an individual's total income regardless of source in order that wealthy persons will be required to make some kind of income tax contribution, no matter how many tax shelters they use to protect their incomes. We also support a reduction of the tax burden on the poor by lowering the income tax rates at the bottom of the tax scale and increasing the minimum standard deduction. No person or family below the poverty level should be required to pay federal income taxes.
Our goal is a balanced budget in a balanced economy. We favor distinguishing current operating expenditures from long term capital outlays and repayable loans, which should be amortized consistent with sound accounting principles. All government expenditures should be subject to firm tests of efficiency and essentiality.
An effective policy for growth and stability requires careful coordination of fiscal and monetary policies. Changes in taxes, budgets, interest rates, and money supply must be carefully blended and flexibly adjusted to assure:
Adaptation to changing economic conditions; Adequate supplies of money and credit for the expansion of industry, commerce, and housing; Maintenance of the lowest possible interest rates;
Avoidance of needless hardships on groups that depend heavily on credit.
Cooperation between fiscal and monetary authorities was greatly strengthened in the past eight years, and we pledge ourselves to continue to perfect this cooperation.
parados wrote:I am TIRED OF MOVING TARGETS okie. .Define left/right in a valid objective fashion that does NOT CHANGE or I am out of here.
I already did that in my 21 points. You define them if you don't like them.
