Liberals vs Conservatives

Status
Not open for further replies.
Wasn't it Clinton that signed NAFTA and gave favored nation trading status to the Chinese? 427Z06

Slick Willy is a conservative in liberal clothing. Jobs going overseas has been going on long before the current group took power. bob woods
 
quote:

Originally posted by Bob Woods:
Wasn't it Clinton that signed NAFTA and gave favored nation trading status to the Chinese? 427Z06

Slick Willy is a conservative in liberal clothing. Jobs going overseas has been going on long before the current group took power. bob woods


Whatever you guys are drinkin', I want some.
lol.gif
 
quote:

Originally posted by XS650:
You are right on the many countries part, but if you go to Northern California there is no problem finding good beer well inland. A lot of it brewed locally. Same with the food.

Please don't remind me. I've been to Monterey/Carmel, SF, Mendocino. Napa/Sonoma kicks A$$! Can't still forget that meal I had at the CIA 3 years ago.

Inland from Orange County isn't quite the same. But the beaches make up for some.
wink.gif
 
I like imported beer, sushi, hunting, fishing, my gas guzzling SUV, hiking, canoeing, camping, I donate to several charities, and I eat my steak medium-rare. I must be a conserveral.
 
Liberal: Will believe anything a guy with a "D" behind his name says, no matter what.

Conservative: Will believe anything a guy with a "R" behind his name says, no matter what.

Both are dopes.
 
quote:

Originally posted by mormit:
Liberal: Will believe anything a guy with a "D" behind his name says, no matter what.

Conservative: Will believe anything a guy with a "R" behind his name says, no matter what.

Both are dopes.


i consider myself quite liberal, but i've disagreed with my representation on several issues and will not vote for them again, regardless of the fact that they are democrats.

when i lived in indiana i voted for richard lugar (r), and would do so again. i crossed party lines in the 2000 presidential primary.

it's too convenient to pigeonhole someone based on party affiliation. i will vote for who i believe is the best person at the time. my ticket gets split quite often. if i don't like the major party candidates i either skip that position or cast a protest vote.

cheers.gif
 
quote:

Wasn't it Clinton that signed NAFTA and gave favored nation trading status to the Chinese? 427Z06

Slick Willy is a conservative in liberal clothing. Jobs going overseas has been going on long before the current group took power.

I think Bush Sr. started the free trade ball rolling and Clinton continued it. I support it myself. Free Trade is the right idea, in the long run it makes everyone better off. The transitional periods (such as now), as economies realign themselves to the new reality, are difficult to manage and companies and governments need to do more to redeploy the workforce effectively. Companies need to bear the full cost of off-shoring in terms of retirement packages for older workers, and training packages for those who still want to work.
 
quote:

Liberal: Will believe anything a guy with a "D" behind his name says, no matter what.

Conservative: Will believe anything a guy with a "R" behind his name says, no matter what.

Both are dopes.

You couldn't be more right!


quote:

Free Trade is the right idea, in the long run it makes everyone better off. The transitional periods (such as now), as economies realign themselves to the new reality, are difficult to manage and companies and governments need to do more to redeploy the workforce effectively. Companies need to bear the full cost of off-shoring in terms of retirement packages for older workers, and training packages for those who still want to work.

Great point, completely agree.
cheers.gif
 
quote:

Liberal: Will believe anything a guy with a "D" behind his name says, no matter what.

Conservative: Will believe anything a guy with a "R" behind his name says, no matter what.

Both are dopes.

That's not true, I think most Libs accept that politicians lie. No one can get elected being 100% honest, sadly, the electorate not sophisticated enough to deal with complete honesty. (Kinda like Jack Nicholson...."you want the truth? YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH"!!!!)
grin.gif


I view all politicians as being too close to business and the entire political system (both in the US and to a slightly lesser extent Canada) as being hijacked by special interests. I do find that the Dems are more equitable though.
 
Sparkman said "I like imported beer, sushi, hunting, fishing, my gas guzzling SUV, hiking, canoeing, camping, I donate to several charities, and I eat my steak medium-rare. I must be a conserveral."

I like 'real' beer, which is either imported or more often one of the many excellent Pacific NW brews, and single malt. I too like sushi, as do my kids, I'm more of a target shooter when I have the time, think that a Marine or highpower rifle range is a piece of heaven on earth, and that Hoppes is one of the best smelling odorizers around. I carry a copy of the 'Rifleman's creed' in my wallet. I like fishing, cutlery, my diesel guzzling truck, hiking, camping, wood fires, and think that a good vacation would consist of visiting hardware and sporting goods stores in small towns. I like Carolina style pulled pork (we also do pulled chicken), medium rare steak, beer butt chicken, and prefer giving stuff to charities instead of trying to sell it in garage sales. I have a hound, but he'd look out of place in an ad with a campfire as it's a Russian wolf hound. Liberal friends think that I'm too conservative and conservative friends think that I'm too liberal. I guess that makes me a conserveral too.

from another thread k1xv said "I believe in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, personal freedoms, states rights, fiscal responsibility in government, truthfulness and transparency in Government, and strong international relationships. I also think that a society is often judged by how it treats its weak and vulnerable. Moreover, I am a pragmatist, and recognize that if some public health care costs are not directly funded by the Government, it will be funded through higher hospital fees and charges on those who do pay, thereby driving up the cost of health insurance to employers and employees, adn helping to drive even more jobs overseas."

I strongly agree with everything that k1xv said. I also believe that our quality of life, standard of living, and understanding of the world that we live in has progressed due to shared values and advances in science, and has regressed when replaced with dogma.
 
quote:

Let these sorry things work.I see help- wanted in the news paper every time I see one.
They cant say that they cant find a job.

Sure there are people that are lazy or pathetic that do not deserve help and abuse the system. But let me ask you this - you take a mimimum wage job (lets face it most of those people are gonna get min wage jobs) so who is gonna look after the kids? Oh!! now you lose your medicaid and subsidized housing and your teenager takes off an you get busted for child abandonment. The reality is, you have NO IDEA what challanges those people face. Sure some of them made bad choices, but everyone deserves another chance and the help to put their life right, if we don't do it, then their kids end up in jail at $95/day, now what kind of solution is that??
rolleyes.gif
 
quote:

Originally posted by mnztr:

quote:

Let these sorry things work.I see help- wanted in the news paper every time I see one.
They cant say that they cant find a job.

Sure there are people that are lazy or pathetic that do not deserve help and abuse the system. But let me ask you this - you take a mimimum wage job (lets face it most of those people are gonna get min wage jobs) so who is gonna look after the kids? Oh!! now you lose your medicaid and subsidized housing and your teenager takes off an you get busted for child abandonment. The reality is, you have NO IDEA what challanges those people face. Sure some of them made bad choices, but everyone deserves another chance and the help to put their life right, if we don't do it, then their kids end up in jail at $95/day, now what kind of solution is that??
rolleyes.gif


You should have to pass a test before you are allowed to have a kid. If you have one and can't take care of it then you should be spayed/neutered so you can't have anymore. There I fixed that problem. You got any other you want me to handle. Does this make me a liberal or a conservative? I get confused with all of the labeling
smile.gif
 
quote:

Sure there are people that are lazy or pathetic that do not deserve help and abuse the system. But let me ask you this - you take a mimimum wage job (lets face it most of those people are gonna get min wage jobs) so who is gonna look after the kids? Oh!! now you lose your medicaid and subsidized housing and your teenager takes off an you get busted for child abandonment. [/QB]

Sounds to me like people aren't abusing the system at all; they are responding predictably to the incentives created by the system. The real question is, who created this system and how do we change it?
 
quote:

Originally posted by mnztr:
I do find that the Dems are more equitable though.
How in the world can you say that Democrats are more fair? That is the definition of equitable,being fair.
They take from one group and give it to those that are in many instances,to sorry and or lazy to work.Dont get me wrong,I understand that there are some people that really need help,I am all for that.If a person needs help,I have no qualms with them getting help.
It is those that are to sorry and or lazy to knock a fly off of them and are setting at home getting government checks and food stamps that bother me.If the truth was known,I would say that a very large majority of those on public assistance are as I said,to lazy to work.
Let these sorry things work.I see help- wanted in the news paper every time I see one.
They cant say that they cant find a job.
Before the Liberal bleeding hearts bunch chimes in here.I started out in a low paying job like most any other person did.That is how it usually works.I worked my way up and in doing so,I received a pretty good salary.
The majority,my guess,99% that say they 'cant' find a job are doing so because they just dont want to work or because they think they should start at the top.It just doesn't work this way.
The thing is,why should they work? They have it made on the government system.
The get a check every month for setting at home.They more than likely get food stamps,there is a good chance that they are in some type of subsidized housing and more than likely they are getting 'free' healthcare.
How is this fair to the rest of us?
Many of these programs are touted to these people by the Democrats.

Yep,that sounds fair to me.
rolleyes.gif
 
quote:

Originally posted by mnztr:
you have NO IDEA what challanges those people face. Sure some of them made bad choices, but everyone deserves another chance and the help to put their life right,
mntzr,YOU ARE WRONG.I do KNOW what these people face.I grew up very poor without a dad,he was to busy drinking and cheating to be such.
He left before I was born.He gave NO help financially or otherwise.I KNOW EXACTLY what these people face.
I WORKED,unlike many that you are upholding.I worked at a minimum wage job starting out.I went from that job to a better one and on to a better one.This is what people usually do.Are those that are to SORRY to work any better? Are these people better than I am? No.
Sure,everyone makes mistakes and may need help,that is fine.
What is not fine is to LIVE a lifetime off of public assistance because a person is to SORRY to work.
What is not fine is for generation after generation to live off of public assistance just because they can.Its not fine when a person is just to sorry to work.
What is not fine is those that are getting SSI and assistance when they are healthier than I am.
You stated that some made a bad choice.Maybe so,however,that doesn't mean that they should live the rest of their life getting assistance when they are able to work.
If they DO work and need help with daycare,that is available.If they DO work and need a small amount of assistance,then if it IS needed,fine.These people are at LEAST contributing to their well being.
Those that are as able bodied as anyone else should WORK.They should NOT be getting assistance.
If a person is able to work and wont,dont give them a hand out and tell them it is OK.Its NOT.
SO,DONT tell ME that I dont KNOW what these people face,I DO.
It is an individuals responsibility to take care of themselves when they are able to do so.It IS NOT the governments job to keep up those that are to sorry to work.
 
Just because you faced some challanges and weren't born with a silver spoon does not mean you can claim to understand all their hardships. Obviously you have been brought up with a set of values that have served you well, and you probably had at least one parent that provided guidance. I agree that a lifetime of dependancy should not be allowed (unless there is some disability involved), but if you just cut of social assistance, guess what? You get a spike in crime rates. Jail, at $95/day per person, is MUCH more expensive then social assistance.
 
quote:

Sounds to me like people aren't abusing the system at all; they are responding predictably to the incentives created by the system. The real question is, who created this system and how do we change it?

I think if you looked at social assistance payments you'd conclude pretty quickly that life on that level of income is no bowl of cherries. That said, there are some "working poor" scenarios that are even worse, so yes some reform my be put in place to ensure that people are better of if they work, no matter how menial a job it is.
 
In the above sceneros, both are assuming a couple of things. One those of conservative values tend to template those values upon ohters that don't have them. Fair enough. Same for the more liberal minded. They too look at the "culture" as though it had a decent set of values ..albeit a more benevolent and needy set.

Either way you're stuck with them ..you can either train them (more programs and $$$) and displace others that don't get the training (more on the unemployment take) ..or jail them when they can't make a living (more $$$$ and more programs) ..or you can just let them be.

Some things have no favorable solution for all concerned.

Now I would be in favor of a required implantation of the Norplant or temporary tubal ligation of any woman on public assistance. Keep in mind that they used to routinely sterilize many in Appalacia during the 50's to stop the "self feeding" nature of poverty.

This goes against both value sets. The Right looks at it as state allow fornication without consequences (as though they don't have conesquences that 'others" pay for anyway) ..and the left will look at it as some assault on civil liberties.
rolleyes.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top