Sen.Kerry? Liberal? No Way

Status
Not open for further replies.
quote:

Originally posted by Whimsey:

quote:

Originally posted by Jelly:

quote:

Originally posted by GROUCHO MARX:
Is being a liberal a bad thing?

In New York, no.

In rural Kentucky...


It's ok Jelly, your secret is safe with us
grin.gif
.

Whimsey


I'm actually a registered independent...sucks as I can't vote in the primary, but it's the best thing for me to do as I side with each on different issues...

A friend of mine once called me "an open-minded redneck"...
 
I think some people who like to consider themselves 'liberals' have gone so far in extreme positions that they really cannot be considered to be liberals at all. Much of the leadership of the current Democratic Party seems to me to be more Socialistic rather then liberal. To me a liberal is not a person who tries to force things on other people. To me, a liberal is a person who believes in personal freedom within reasonable limits.

A good example of all of this are the judges who no doubt consider themselves to be liberals and force court rulings down the throats of everybody else. A true liberal would want the people to decide themselves what they want.

We have to have laws and we have to have reasonable limits to personal freedom. But a true liberal believes that people should be as free as logically possible. When YOUR freedom starts to HARM some other person, then logically your freedom cannot extend that far (Golden Rule-treat others as you would want to be treated yourself).

I don't consider John Kerry to be a liberal. Not a true liberal.
 
quote:

Originally posted by labman:

quote:

Originally posted by Whimsey:
snip
I find it amusing that many "Liberals" resort to name calling instead of intelligent discourse.
snip...
Whimsey


What else are you going to do when you done have any real issues?


Ah! But labman you're wrong. Liberals do have real issues but let's just say they are not REALLY popular with us "common folk", who pay outrageous taxes on our wages and property. Where as the rich libs don't have taxable income or wages, just tax shelters, trust funds and capital gains. Otherwise Terreza Heinz Kerry would have to pay a LOT more in taxes than she appears to do. But then again she and John Kerry refuse to release their tax returns, because they are above us peons. So we are not really sure of their wealth and how it's "earned"
grin.gif
. Well actually we do now how Terreza earned her money, she married it and the poor bas*ard died. Ole John just marries money
wink.gif
.

Basically the Libs/Dems think you, the average wage earning American are too stupid to spend your hard earned money "properly" and they should tax the cr*p out of you in order to "give" it to "more worthy lazy sods" who will hopefully vote for them. I thing that sums it up. Oh, and strong national defense is not necessary. After all the conservatives just "lie" to start wars. Since the libs don't lie we don't need a strong defense. The world will love us and NO ONE would dare attack us. After all there were no attacks against the US or US interests during Clinton's reign
rolleyes.gif
.

Whimsey
 
quote:

Originally posted by Jelly:

quote:

Originally posted by Whimsey:

quote:

Originally posted by Jelly:

quote:

Originally posted by GROUCHO MARX:
Is being a liberal a bad thing?

In New York, no.

In rural Kentucky...


It's ok Jelly, your secret is safe with us
grin.gif
.

Whimsey


I'm actually a registered independent...sucks as I can't vote in the primary, but it's the best thing for me to do as I side with each on different issues...

A friend of mine once called me "an open-minded redneck"...


Just busting your chops guy. Us "Fascist" conservatives really do have a sense of humor
grin.gif
. As you get older and start see huge sums of taxes taken out of your paycheck and from everything you buy and the house you will eventually own you'll become more conservative. Especially when you see how your hard earned wages are being "redistributed" to lazy slackers in order to secure their vote for the Democrats.

Whimsey
 
quote:

Originally posted by GROUCHO MARX:
I guess what I was trying to say that there had been a time where liberal idealism was not a bad thing. There has been such a swing to appeasement and pandering that "liberal" has taken on a negative connotation. Let's consider that a vast majority of people who proclaim themselves "liberal" really would like what's best for everyone.

In doing this, let's remember that the vast majority of "conservatives" want this as well.


I think for the majority of this post you can take liberal to mean "left, or extremely democratic views".

What's interesting is that according to the dictionary, conservative seems to have a more derogatory meaning.

liberal -- (having political or social views favoring reform and progress)

conservative -- (opposed to liberal reforms)

It places a true definition and meaning with liberal and defines conservative as just an opposition to that.


Here's a couple links to what I think are better definitions of liberal and conservative in a political context.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-wing_politics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing_politics

-T
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-wing_politics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing_politics

I find both of those definitions too negative, They bring out neither the true liberals' concern for the well being of all individuals, or the conservatives concern for individual freedom.

Actually I am not conservative. I certainly am not happy with the way things are, and do not want to keep them the same. The government intrudes in our personal life, stifles economic activity, and has created a huge class of non productive bureaucrats, lawyers, and accountants. I will be voting straight Republican, but only because I trust them more to keep what does work, and change what isn't. At least they shouldn't make things worse as fast as Kerry and the Democrats.
 
quote:

Kerry Anti-Terror Plan Removed From Campaign Web Site After Berger Revelation
By Jeff Gannon
Talon News
July 22, 2004

WASHINGTON (Talon News) -- Shortly after news broke that former Clinton administration National Security Advisor Samuel "Sandy" Berger was being investigated by the Justice Department for illegally removing highly classified documents from the National Archives, the presidential campaign of Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) removed its anti-terror plan from its web site.

Republicans have suggested that the information contained in the documents was used to formulate Kerry's policy, but are limited in proving those charges because the material is still classified. The sudden disappearance of the policy from the campaign web site that coincided with Berger's dismissal supports Republicans' contention that the purloined data formed the basis of at least part of the Democratic candidate's homeland security program.

The link to the policy is now defunct, but the original page was temporarily preserved in a Google cache. The Kerry release outlining the policy is also archived on the conservative discussion board FreeRepublic.com (web site).

Key portions of the policy removed from the web site included the following three passages:

-- Increase Port Security and Accelerate Border Security. Currently, 95% of all non-North American U.S. trade moves by sea, concentrated mostly in a handful of ports. John Kerry believes improvements in port security must be made, while recognizing that global prosperity and America's economic power depends on an efficient system. Kerry's plan would develop standards for security at ports and other loading facilities for containers and assure facilities can meet basic standards. To improve security in commerce, John Kerry believes we should accelerate the timetable for the action plans agreed to in the U.S.-Canada and U.S.-Mexico "smart border" accords as well as implement security measures for cross-border bridges. Finally John Kerry will pursue modest safety standards for privately held infrastructure and will help owners find economical ways to pay for increased security.

-- Secure Nuclear Power Plants, Nuclear Weapons Facilities and Chemical Facilities. John Kerry will appoint an Energy Secretary who takes nuclear plant security seriously and ensures meticulous follow-up to any security violations. He would also order an immediate review of engagement orders and weaponry for plant guards, and ensure attack simulation drills be as realistic as possible. A Kerry Administration would ensure that security of our nuclear weapons facilities is a U.S. government responsibility -- not cede it to private contractors as the Bush Administration considered doing. A Kerry Administration will tighten security at chemical facilities across the nation that produce or store chemicals, focusing first on facilities in major urban areas where millions of Americans live within the circle of vulnerability.

-- Tighten Aviation Security and Combat Threats to Civilian Aircraft. John Kerry will close loopholes in existing regulations on cargo carried by passenger flights and increase the reliability of new screening procedures. Kerry will increase perimeter inspections of U.S. airports and work with international aviation authorities to make sure the same standards are in place at all international airports. He will work with our allies to crackdown on the sale of shoulder-fired missiles that could be used in an attack on civilian aircraft, and are sold on the black market.

The Kerry campaign did not respond to a Talon News inquiry about the removal of the link from the web site.

Instead of reviewing documents for the 9/11 Commission investigation, Republicans suggested that Berger used the information from the National Archives to help the Kerry campaign.

Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) said, "Reportedly these documents related to homeland security and then suddenly we see that the Kerry campaign came forward with what may have been illegal documents. This is sensitive stuff and was a significant breach of security."

"Kerry knows better than to use these documents," Chambliss added.

Berger admitted to removing documents from the National Archives on five separate occasions, but maintains that it was "inadvertent."

Sen. Gordon Smith (R-OR) believes otherwise, saying, "There is a curious connection between the removal of these documents and the Kerry press conference on port security. It's disappointing what people might do as they try to take the president down."

Berger had been the dominant national security advisor to Sen. Kerry and was suggested by some as a potential Secretary of State in a Kerry administration, something that now appears unlikely no matter what the outcome of November's election.

When asked by NBC if he was aware of the investigation, Kerry said, "I didn't have a clue."

Democrats tried to deflect the damaging revelation by claiming its timing was politically motivated.

"Somebody leaked it obviously with an intent to do damage to Mr. Berger, and that's unfortunate," Sen. Tom Daschle (D-SD) said. "I think the timing of all this is curious. Berger deserves the benefit of the doubt until the investigation is complete."

Democratic National Committee Chairman Terry McAuliffe filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for the Justice Department to produce documents about any correspondence with the White House on the investigation. He is accusing Republicans of a "smear campaign" against Berger.

McAuliffe has great cause for concern since two important Kerry advisors have been damaged in the past two weeks.

Former Ambassador Joe Wilson was discredited by a Senate Intelligence Committee report that contradicted Wilson's public statements about how he was selected for a sensitive mission to Niger in 2002 and the results of his report about Saddam Hussein's attempt to purchase uranium in Africa. Wilson represented his investigation as proof that President Bush misled the United States in making the case for the invasion of Iraq. An investigation into British intelligence confirms that Bush's claim was "well founded."

While political reactions to the Berger affair are predictably mixed, there is no doubt that the former national security advisor broke the law. The documents he removed carry the highest classifications for secrecy: code word clearance.

Republican House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-TX) called Berger's actions "just a third-rate burglary."

But former FBI agent G. Gordon Liddy disagrees, calling it a grave transgression against national security. Liddy wonders why the Justice Department has not arrested Berger for having admitted to committing five felonies.

Liddy pointed out that Berger is the second Clinton official to face prosecution for withdrawing classified materials from secure premises. Former CIA director John Deutsch was pardoned by President Clinton in the final hours of his second term and spared from suffering any punishment for having taken laptops with classified materials to his home in 1996.

Rep. Mark Foley (R-FL) questioned Berger's motivation for the thefts.

He said, "What in heaven's name was he thinking? What is so important that he would risk both his reputation and prosecution to remove these documents? What's there to hide?"

He added, "There is no one with his experience who can claim that these are the actions of an absent-minded employee. Sandy Berger knows better."

Foley recalled the final days of the Clinton administration when he said, "And we thought it was bad when they were only stealing furniture."

Copyright © 2004 Talon News -- All rights reserved.


 
"With all of the flip-flopping charges, I would have expected his rating to be closer to the middle than the extreme. NOT saying he would be rated a moderate, just saying that with his reputation of being on both sides of issues, he shouldn't be at the extreme of any rating."

That’s a good point ... and I hadn't really thought of that before. Actually, the flip-flopping is more of the liar-politician in him coming out. He wants to have it both ways on every issue to pander to a (largely unthinking) populace. But when it comes to actually casting votes, this guy is liberal in the extreme ... and he's got the record to prove it. The flip-flopping double-talk is all a smoke screen to cover up what he's really about.

GROUCHO: "I guess what I was trying to say that there had been a time where liberal idealism was not a bad thing."

If you understand that in the current, truest political sense that a liberal is essentially a socialist then look at Cuba, Europe, etc ... where socialism hasn't completely doomed a country, it's given them a mountain of debt, low productivity and double-digit unemployment. Reforms in those countries have centered around reversing socialism (selling off state industries to private concerns).

Mystic:"But a true liberal believes that people should be as free as logically possible. When YOUR freedom starts to HARM some other person, then logically your freedom cannot extend that far (Golden Rule-treat others as you would want to be treated yourself). I don't consider John Kerry to be a liberal. Not a true liberal."

The problem is definitional. What you are describing/defining is actually a ‘libertarian’ which is, in many ways, the exact opposite of a “liberal” which is (more or less) politically correct socialist. Liberals in the united states want to trade away our freedoms (personal and financial) for security.

And those dictionary definitions mentioned previously are at least decades out of date and exist in something of a vacuum so they really aren't applicable to the current US political scene. Reform? Reform of what? If you want to reform the tort system in this country, reform the tax code and reform the way government works ... you're more likely to be a Conservative Republican than a Liberal Democrat. The Liberals are more or less OK with things the way they are now ... just keep growing the Government with spending which is 2-3 times the rate of inflation and they are more or less happy (even if they don't act it).

Oh, and let me re-state for the record that there is no such things as a "Right-Wing Nazi." The Nazis were the "National Socialist Party" which favored a strong central government which controlled the economy from the top down. That's classic liberal/left and the opposite of a modern, American conservative.

--- Bror Jace
 
You are totally correct right there. The Nazis were SOCIALISTS. They were a different kind of Socialist as compared to international oriented Socialists, but they were Socialists. There are so few people today with any real knowledge of history that all of this is lost on people today. Socialistic is even in the name.

When some people in the Democratic Party try to link Conservative Republicans to Nazism it is really funny. Socialists rather then Capitalists are more closely linked to Nazism. Extreme left wing liberals in the Democratic Party are closer to Nazism then any capitalist.
 
What do you call it when the government is allowed to snoop into what books you buy or check out of the library, what websites you visit, and encourages you to tattle on 'suspicious' people?
 
At one time, libertarians, people who believe in small, non-intrusive government, individual rights, individual responsibility and the free market, were known as Classical Liberals.
As a libertarian, I will not vote for Kerry or Bush, but, will vote for Michael Badnarik, 2004 Libertarian Party Candidate.
The LP is the 3rd largest party, has been around for over 30 years and every one of it's members pay yearly dues. It does not just come out of the woodwork every 4 years like the Greens, Reform Party, Constitution Party and Ralph Nader.
I have voted Libertarian in every election since 1972.
Lloyd
 
We give something a name and then we seduce ourselves into thinking now we know it. Yet, humans were human long before we created language, so, what's in a name? What's "liberal", what's "conservative". Perhaps they can only be understood in the Hegelian sense of thesis and antithesis.

From a historical perspective, the opposition of liberal vs. conservative in our day and time denotes the final struggle for the soul of the State. The roots of liberalism lie in the "Enlightenment". Here, the old myths were held up to ridicule and truth now consisted of logic, cause and effect, in essence rational thought. "I think therefore I am", so did the rational mind boldly declare its supremacy. Intelligence counted for all, worldly wisdom nothing. A fervent belief in a better world to be, a hand me down of "God's kingdom come" rather than a proud skepticism. A deep belief in the perfectibility of humans either through divine intervention or the gradual evolution of the perfect socialist man rather than a worldly understanding that the first humans were solitary predators and human nature has not changed an iota since.

The liberals are the self-proclaimed do-gooders who seek to improve mankind. For this lofty goal they will stop at nothing. These illuminated ones first strode onto the world stage during the French Revolution when they brought us "The Terror". In reality, this has been their methodology ever since, human butchery. From the communes in Paris they moved to Russia and the Bolshevik slaughters. From there to China and the communist slaughters in Asia. For them, the stark reality is this, humans in their present form are "sub-humans", and can be imprisoned and butchered at will in the name of creating the "perfect human".

In America, the liberals are best personified by the FDR administration. In effect, a front for the human butcher Stalin. Just as Stalin and Hitler (a fellow Darwinist-Marxist), the goal of the liberals in America is to establish a police state ruled by an authoritarian bureaucracy.

As in the movie Terminator, the reality is this:

"Understand. That Terminator is out there. It can't be reasoned with, it can't be bargained with...it doesn't feel pity or remorse or fear... and it absolutely will not stop. Ever. Until you are dead."
 
quote:

Originally posted by ex_MGB:
the goal of the liberals in America is to establish a police state ruled by an authoritarian bureaucracy.


EX-MBG
The goal of the liberals is to have the freeloading masses live off the productive and everybody to march in their bootsteps, the result of which will be an authoritarian bureaucracy.
The goal of conservatives is to force everyone to live according to their values, the result of which will be an authoritarian bureaucracy.
They are two different wings on the same bird of prey.
The only people who consistantly believe in Freedom are libertarians who are the antithesis of the above.
A libertarian is one who understands that no individual or group of individuals has the right to initiate force, or the threat of force, on another individual.
 
Lloydbob: I agree with your assessment and consider myself conservative/libertarian. I don't believe that the religious right should impose their views on us anymore than the fanatical left. I do however see much more hypocrisy from the left than from the right. I remember being in Hyannisport, Mass. a few years back and viewing the Kennedy 'compound'. Not a minority living
anywhere close to the Kennedy's. The same goes for Chappequa NY where the Clinton's set up home in NY. I haven't been to Crawford Texas but I know that Jeb Bush is married to a Latina. Another example of liberal hypocrisy is the fact that women's groups like NOW never condemned Clinton for all his sexual misconducts. The liberal Democrats have a "Do as I say not as I do" philosophy. At a time when Terrorism is (or should be) our #1 concern I feel much safer with GWB in the White House than JFK.
 
There is a lot of truth in ex-MGB’s post, although I'd have stopped short of calling FDR a "front for Stalin." That man was an elitist with some significant faults ... but I don't believe being Stalin's puppet was one of them.

At their core, liberals are elitists who believe they are smarter than most and should be given much more power in their world so they can run things better than we can. Socialism is the most obvious vehicle for this. However, this is fundamentally un-democratic (
which brings me back to MarkC:

"What do you call it when the government is allowed to snoop into what books you buy or check out of the library, what websites you visit, and encourages you to tattle on 'suspicious' people?"

Security is a very difficult issue to deal with when you are the one(s) in charge. Do too little and you'll get blamed when something goes wrong. Do pretty much anything and people whine and cry that you are inconveniencing them and/or violating their privacy. It's a no win situation.

It's popular in certain circles to portray people like Ken Starr and John Ashcroft as repressive deviants who get some sort of sexual thrill over prying into other people's library and video rental records. This is just silly. How were/are they supposed to do their jobs?
confused.gif


I'll take the current administration investigating people (mostly middle-east foreigners) who are researching explosives and water treatment plants over the last eight years of the left (Clintons) being in charge which gave us Ruby Ridge, Waco and the Elian Gonzalez kidnapping/rescue. The Republicans shoot/kill/terrorize far fewer innocent Americans than Democrats.

Acually lloydbob1, the conservatives are split into libertarian-types and cultural conservatives. And the cultural conservatives are split into mostly secular people who believe in traditional American values and the religious right. And don't forget, there are more than enough secularists to keep the religious right's agenda well in check. When was the last time they had a significant political victory on an issue?
dunno.gif


Back to topic, watch for Senator Kerry et. al. to try and portray himself as something 100% from the truth this week: Pro-gun, pro-US Military, pro-family values, etc ... However, his 25+ year record in office is a much better indicator of how he'd govern: Far, far left and out of touch with most of the country.

--- Bror Jace
 
The biggest cover-up in 50 years?

Kerry's voting record.

The excuses start with:

"Labels are silly........"

Bottom line: Kerry's voting record (and the groups/people he associates with) stink up the joint!!!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top