1
   

I am an extreme liberal

 
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Nov, 2006 04:59 pm
It would be nice to nail down some real differences.

I'd like to know how dys thinks the US should be governed on some specific issues.

Anything.

I would be a liberal--or would embrace liberal policies if I thought they could be sustained and they wouldn't damage our way of life in the long run. I really think a proliferation of liberal policies would eventually hurt a great many more people than would be helped in the short run.
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Nov, 2006 05:00 pm
you should have known me when I drove a Lotus.
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Nov, 2006 05:10 pm
Lash wrote:
It would be nice to nail down some real differences.

I'd like to know how dys thinks the US should be governed on some specific issues.

Anything.

I would be a liberal--or would embrace liberal policies if I thought they could be sustained and they wouldn't damage our way of life in the long run. I really think a proliferation of liberal policies would eventually hurt a great many more people than would be helped in the short run.

I offered a ride in my Porsche but Lash insisted on driving, typical repubican.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Nov, 2006 05:13 pm
Re: I am an extreme liberal
dyslexia wrote:
Liberalism is an ideology, philosophical view, and political tradition which holds that liberty is the primary political value.[1] Liberalism has its roots in the Western Age of Enlightenment, but the term now encompasses a diversity of political thought.

Broadly speaking, liberalism emphasizes individual rights.

Then why do "liberals" scream when someone exercises their rights?
Why do "liberals" complain when someone refuses to rent a house because they dont like the person trying to rent?
Why do "liberals" complain when I exercise my right to carry a concealed weapon,or to exercise my property rights?


It seeks a society characterized by freedom of thought for individuals,

Then why is there legislation on the books for "hate crimes" based on what they think someone else might be thinking?
Why do they get so hostile when someone uses language that isnt "PC"?

limitations on power, especially of government and religion,
Except for a national health care system run by the govt,and welfare run by the govt,and many other govt giveaway programs.
As for religion,I thought the "liberals" believed in individual rights?
Religion is an individual right and an individual choice.
Why do the liberals want to get involved in my or any one elses religious choices?


the rule of law,
You mean like when Clinton pardoned CONVICTED TERRORISTS,or people like William Jefferson,the dem that got caught with $90,000 in his freezer.
Or people like Ted Kennedy,who committed manslaughter and got away with it.
Or people like president Clinton,who committed perjury and was defended by the liberals?
BTW,perjury is a crime.


free public education,
If the taxpayers pay for it,it isnt free.
Taxpayers means govt.


the free exchange of ideas,
As long as the liberals agree with those ideas

a market economy that supports relatively free private enterprise,
and a transparent system of government in which the rights of all citizens are protected.
Notice even you said CITIZENS,yet you and other liberals are constantly demanding that people here illegally and not citizens get special treatment and the same rights as citizens.

[2] In modern society, liberals favor a liberal democracy with open and fair elections, where all citizens have equal rights by law and an equal opportunity to succeed.[3]

If you want everyone to have an equal opportunity to succeed,why do you support affirmative action and other quota plans used in the US?
Doesnt that take away some peoples opportunity to succeed based solely on their skin color?
Also,again you used the word CITIZENS,meaning that non citizens dont get the same rights and opportunities.
Those are your words,not mine.



Which is the extreme opposit of conservatism in american politics.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Nov, 2006 05:13 pm
Lash, Do you think Bush embraced conservative values? Please show us how and when?
0 Replies
 
Diane
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Nov, 2006 05:26 pm
LOL Thomas. When can we get you to come to New Mexico?
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Nov, 2006 06:09 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:
Lash, Do you think Bush embraced conservative values? Please show us how and when?

I'm not sure exactly why you asked this, ci. "Please show us how and when" seems like you have an agenda--which is OK, but I haven't made any claims.

I'm pretty sure for every conservative ideal adopted by Bush I could name, I could also think of a new spin he put on it. Most of them, I approve--like the immigrant issue--he improved it, imo. "Conservative" and "liberal" are such transitory terms.

I asked dys if he'd give me some ideas as to what he considers good liberal governance on a few issues so I could see the difference in my views and his.

I have had an offer to ride in his cars, but that's about it so far. (I did not drive!)
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Nov, 2006 07:11 pm
Lash, To be honest, I was only trying to say that trying to tie down what is liberal or conservative only creates more confusion. Bush's legacy has been 1) bigger government, 2) higher national debt, 3) don't negotiate with our allies, 4) don't negotiate with our enemies, and 5) keep everything secret. I don't find them to be conservative values.

On the same token, many of the dems voted with the republicans on non-liberal issues. They voted to approve torture of prisoners, Patriot II, and more funding for the Iraq war without oversight on how they spend it.

Clinton was a centrist; Bush a king, and the American public a conglamoration of everything in between. There are still 31 percent of Americans that supports Bush. I'm not sure if they are "true" republicans/conservatives, or just power-hungry idiots that doesn't understand the damage done by this administration.

Bush said "I'm a uniter, not a divider." That was the beginning of the end.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Nov, 2006 07:42 pm
I should have gotten that, CI--because it's what I was saying with my response.

It's sort of confusing.

dys started the thread saying he's an extreme liberal. I'd always thought so--I love dys--no surprises so far--but then I was thinking...

What would a dys approved US look like? What would the changes be? Would I approve of some of them as well? I wasn't being tricky. I am sincerely curious.

<shows up my sleeves>

But, you are correct on at least one point. The lines are getting so muddy between conserv and lib.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Nov, 2006 07:56 pm
If you know the politics of Kucinich, that's about as close to dys' politics you'll ever get. According to a test I took a couple of years ago, I learned I was a Kucinich supporter too!
0 Replies
 
JLNobody
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Nov, 2006 08:00 pm
I agree that liberals are far more generous in their social values; conservatives are clearly more selfish. Conservatives generally prefer others to defend the country for them. Liberals are dumb enough to go along with that preference, mainly because they, or their children, are poorer and therefore less able to afford the civilian life.
C.I.'s right: Bush's economic politics (spending) are not conservative, but his taxation policies are. He taxes the middle class who does not have the ability or resources to exploit loopholels and acquire tax breaks reserved for the rich.
Wealthy conservatives are, in the narrow sense, rational in their political values. They act to promote their economic interests. They are, however, decidedly irrational and spiritually short-sided in their anti-social/selfish values. Middle class and poor ideological conservatives are just plain dumb, acting irrationally against their own interests.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Nov, 2006 08:04 pm
That's too simplistic an analysis for you.

Have a beer and try again.

Wink
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Nov, 2006 08:09 pm
Bush's taxation policy that benefits the rich is not a conservative action especially in time of war when the national deficit and debt continues to escalate out of control. Some mention the capital gains tax that has been reduced to 15 percent, but I'm not so sure the middle class benefits when their wages have not kept up with inflation, and their savings rate has been dropping to new lows, and their debt higher.
0 Replies
 
gustavratzenhofer
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Nov, 2006 08:15 pm
Here's the thing that drives me absolutely up the friggin' wall. There are people, millions of them, who have no idea whatsoever what is going on in Washington. They don't read books, nor newspapers (with the exception of the sports pages) they stumble through life blissfully ignorant of what is going on around them because they have a job that pays enough money to keep them happy and that's all that counts.

But they vote, and the ones I am talking about, these working class people, vote Republican. And the number one reason they do so is because they have this deeply-imbedded fear, passed down from generation to generation, that somewhere someone is going to get something for nothing.

And that paralyzes them. It causes their blood to boil. "Ain't no goddamned welfare sucking bitch getting any of my hard earned money!", they scream.

Then they go vote Republican, they cheer for George Bush, and their money stays away from the downtrodden and lines the pockets of the rich.

And they are happy.

And another little child is born in the ghetto. (I had to put Elvis in at the end)
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Nov, 2006 08:28 pm
jl, gus, dys, the other liberal voices here, I salute you. It's been a long time since I have read a thread in which people unashamedly stand up for human rights over republican greed and willingness to share others' blood in their quest to become richer.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Nov, 2006 10:20 pm
I can't believe you are serious.
0 Replies
 
JLNobody
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Nov, 2006 11:01 pm
Very serious, Lash. And I find it difficult to understand how you and MGentix can seriously maintain your positions. Different worldviews (or "paradigms), I guess.
0 Replies
 
JLNobody
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Nov, 2006 11:01 pm
Very serious, Lash. And I find it difficult to understand how you and MGentix can seriously maintain your positions. Different worldviews (or "paradigms), I guess.
0 Replies
 
JLNobody
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Nov, 2006 11:09 pm
Great news for us old timers (Dys, Edgar, Gus and me):

NEW WINE FOR SENIORS


California vintners, in the Napa Valley area, which primarily produces
Pinot Blanc, Pinot Noir and Pinot Grigio wines, have developed a new hybrid
grape that acts as an anti-diuretic.

It is expected to reduce the number of trips older people have to make to
the bathroom
during the night.

The new wine will be marketed as...



PINO MORE.


HEARD IT THROUGH THE GRAPEVINE
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Nov, 2006 11:55 pm
JLN, When I go on the next wine cruise, I'll have to remember that one. LOL
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 12/29/2024 at 11:36:57