mudcat.org: BS: reasons Liberals fail
Lyrics & Knowledge Personal Pages Record Shop Auction Links Radio & Media Kids Membership Help
The Mudcat Cafeawe

Post to this Thread - Printer Friendly - Home
Page: [1] [2] [3] [4]


BS: reasons Liberals fail

beardedbruce 04 Oct 05 - 01:56 PM
Peace 04 Oct 05 - 01:58 PM
beardedbruce 04 Oct 05 - 02:05 PM
Peace 04 Oct 05 - 02:06 PM
Clinton Hammond 04 Oct 05 - 02:07 PM
CarolC 04 Oct 05 - 02:07 PM
beardedbruce 04 Oct 05 - 02:11 PM
Peace 04 Oct 05 - 02:12 PM
Bill D 04 Oct 05 - 02:13 PM
Peace 04 Oct 05 - 02:13 PM
CarolC 04 Oct 05 - 02:20 PM
Jack the Sailor 04 Oct 05 - 02:21 PM
beardedbruce 04 Oct 05 - 02:23 PM
Don Firth 04 Oct 05 - 02:28 PM
Peace 04 Oct 05 - 02:28 PM
GUEST,Chief Chaos 04 Oct 05 - 02:31 PM
Ebbie 04 Oct 05 - 02:32 PM
Les in Chorlton 04 Oct 05 - 02:35 PM
WFDU - Ron Olesko 04 Oct 05 - 02:41 PM
beardedbruce 04 Oct 05 - 02:45 PM
Ebbie 04 Oct 05 - 04:06 PM
Susu's Hubby 04 Oct 05 - 04:07 PM
John Hardly 04 Oct 05 - 04:13 PM
Little Hawk 04 Oct 05 - 04:17 PM
Ebbie 04 Oct 05 - 04:22 PM
Little Hawk 04 Oct 05 - 04:34 PM
John Hardly 04 Oct 05 - 04:38 PM
Don Firth 04 Oct 05 - 04:41 PM
GUEST 04 Oct 05 - 04:56 PM
McGrath of Harlow 04 Oct 05 - 05:29 PM
GUEST 04 Oct 05 - 05:40 PM
artbrooks 04 Oct 05 - 05:52 PM
Little Hawk 04 Oct 05 - 05:57 PM
Bill D 04 Oct 05 - 06:12 PM
GUEST 04 Oct 05 - 07:20 PM
Peace 04 Oct 05 - 07:35 PM
McGrath of Harlow 04 Oct 05 - 07:43 PM
Amos 04 Oct 05 - 07:54 PM
M.Ted 04 Oct 05 - 10:19 PM
Little Hawk 05 Oct 05 - 12:41 AM
GUEST,TIA 05 Oct 05 - 08:17 AM
Amos 05 Oct 05 - 09:08 AM
John Hardly 05 Oct 05 - 10:29 AM
GUEST,Chief Chaos 05 Oct 05 - 12:17 PM
GUEST,rarelamb 05 Oct 05 - 12:24 PM
Bill D 05 Oct 05 - 12:52 PM
John Hardly 05 Oct 05 - 12:59 PM
Don Firth 05 Oct 05 - 01:01 PM
GUEST,Chief Chaos 05 Oct 05 - 01:15 PM
John Hardly 05 Oct 05 - 01:31 PM
Lyrics & Knowledge Search [Advanced]
DT  Forum
Sort (Forum) by:relevance date
DT Lyrics:






Subject: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: beardedbruce
Date: 04 Oct 05 - 01:56 PM

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/03/AR2005100301492.html

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/05/22/INGUNCQHKJ1.DTL

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/jamieson/198304_robert05.html



OK, now I will sit back and wait for all the personnal attacks from those who can't bother to argue facts.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: Peace
Date: 04 Oct 05 - 01:58 PM

Liberals fail for the same reason conservatives fail: they don't study for the exam.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: beardedbruce
Date: 04 Oct 05 - 02:05 PM

true.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: Peace
Date: 04 Oct 05 - 02:06 PM

I agree with the first article; Thompson's is a personal statement and he's welcome to it; Jamieson's statement is a good one. I see little here to argue with let alone attack anyone over. Facts is facts. And opinions is opinions.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 04 Oct 05 - 02:07 PM

I think the reason anyone or anything fails is the mistaken belief that any ONE 'ism' or 'ology' has all the answers....


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: CarolC
Date: 04 Oct 05 - 02:07 PM

Ok, let's argue facts. What does "liberals fail" mean? Do you mean that "liberals" always fail? Conversely, are you suggesting that "liberals" never succeed? Or are you saying that "liberals" sometimes fail, and when they do, this is why? And if you are saying that "liberals" sometimes succeed, what are the reasons they succeed when they do? And if you are saying that "liberals" sometimes fail and sometimes succeed, do you also suggest that people who are not "liberals" also sometimes fail? And if they do, what are the reasons people who are not "liberals" sometimes fail?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: beardedbruce
Date: 04 Oct 05 - 02:11 PM

CarolC,

If I wanted to say "always", I would have done so. I found, in these articles from liberal sources (IMO) valid reasons (IMO) why liberals, on many occasions, have been less successful than they might wish (IMO). I make no comment on others failing- they do- but THESE articles discuss LIBERALS.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: Peace
Date: 04 Oct 05 - 02:12 PM

Beardedbruse: I can't see anyone getting too upset by the articles, tell ya the truth. I think the two-party system in the USA has allowed serious abuses of power--by Bush, by Clinton, by Reagan, et.al. The problem seems no longer to be WHO is in power; the problem seems to be distinguishing the parties from each other. It's like ya can't tell the difference without a script. I can't, anyway.

Please recall that while I really dislike Bush, I really disliked Clinton, too. So, the state of American politics now is bad. It's bad not due to the Bushes and Clintons, but due to the system that consistently forces folks to choose the lesser of evils. Democracy is in decline. The Caligula-state of Rome. Things jus' don't look so good right now.

I wish y'all luck getting trash OUT of Congress and OUT of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. The rest of the world has the same hope, IMO.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: Bill D
Date: 04 Oct 05 - 02:13 PM

oh bruce! If you could just have managed to restrain yourself and ask "why some liberals manage to shoot themselves in the foot when given a golden opportunity", you'd have a point....why they'd be acting like some conservatives then!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: Peace
Date: 04 Oct 05 - 02:13 PM

Sorry about misspelling your name, BeardedbruCe.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: CarolC
Date: 04 Oct 05 - 02:20 PM

Thanks for the clarification, beardedbruce.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 04 Oct 05 - 02:21 PM

I'll stick to facts.

Reasons Richard Cohen failed: Nancy Pelosi is not the judge or a juror in the DeLay trial. She is not subject to the innocent until proven guilty dictum, which only applies to trials. She is allowed to look at DeLay's prior bad acts, more censures than anyone in the history of Congress, and say that he is corrupt.

Reasons Tom Delay failed" Because he is so corrupt and arrogant that he had to get caught some time.

Reason Beardedbruce failed: His premise has been invalidated is at least three different ways on this thread without an attack on him. This because "reasons Liberals fail" is such a pathetically weak and flimisy start to a discussion that it damned near falls down on its own.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: beardedbruce
Date: 04 Oct 05 - 02:23 PM

SOME liberals deserve SOME conservatives.


I was not trying to upset people, just to point out that EVEN some liberals have noticed a less than angelic side to some liberals' actions.

So much for Bobert's Liberal Ubermensch....


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: Don Firth
Date: 04 Oct 05 - 02:28 PM

Beardedbruce, you seem to be making the mistake of assuming that the Democratic Party is representative of the liberal position.

Be of good cheer. You have a lot of company. Even members of the Democratic Party suffer from that misconception.

And along with that. most Americans assume that the United States is a democracy. It isn't. It's a plutocratic oligarcy.

Don Firth


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: Peace
Date: 04 Oct 05 - 02:28 PM

As it stands now, I have NO use for either of the major parties in the USA. One is dressed up as nice; the other is dressed equally nicely. Bottom line is that they both pimp for big business. That is all I have to say on this thread.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: GUEST,Chief Chaos
Date: 04 Oct 05 - 02:31 PM

Failure can be ascribed to both parties for many different reasons. Unfortunately in a political system which only gives two "real" choices, both of which are deep in the pockets of special interests, and both of which are ideologically at either end of the pendulum, we, the folks in the middle, find ourselves unrepresented by either party.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: Ebbie
Date: 04 Oct 05 - 02:32 PM

(The spineless White House also refused to defend Bennett.) Richard Cohen

1. What was their excuse? Should the thread title perhaps be: Reasons Conservatives Fail?

2. Keith Thompson does not impress me any better than he did the first time I read that screed. Obviously Spiro Agnew was his mentor.

3. Jamieson, imo, misunderstood the reaction to his experiment. I think the people who heard him say that he was a member of "Blacks for Bush" and cut him off were honest.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 04 Oct 05 - 02:35 PM

We should all be concerned that most people don't want to or cannot join and work within political parties.

Simply voting for people (especially when most people don't) is not democracy. Opinion and policy have to come from the bottom up on some kind of rolling programme. (IMHO)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 04 Oct 05 - 02:41 PM

Why do you people fall for this stuff? Why is it so important what the other side thinks, and why is it so important to re-hash the same arguements? Do you honestly think you are going to convert someone to your way of thinking?   Find something useful instead of all this Mudcat whining!   Same cast of characters each time.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: beardedbruce
Date: 04 Oct 05 - 02:45 PM

Jack,

"Reason Beardedbruce failed: His premise has been invalidated is at least three different ways on this thread without an attack on him. This because "reasons Liberals fail" is such a pathetically weak and flimisy start to a discussion that it damned near falls down on its own. "

Your statement has not been substatiated, and is a poorly hidden attack. Would you care to state the three different way, or why the title, which was not the start of the discussion ( the articles were, if you bother to read them) is any weaker than the numerous anti-conservative "statements" I have seen here?


Don,

In this country, the Democratic party claims to represent liberals, as the Republican party claims to represent conservatives. I will agree that both claims may not be valid.


Ebbie,

"The spineless White House ..." Should I refuse to discuss something, just because it has negative comments about "my" ( NOTE QUOTES) side in it?

"I think the people who heard him say that he was a member of "Blacks for Bush" and cut him off were honest. " Honestly what? Bigoted against conservatives? Racial predjudiced in thinking that all blacks HAD to think the same? Please expand on this.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: Ebbie
Date: 04 Oct 05 - 04:06 PM

I'd love to, bb.

Honest- in the sense that they were surprised, shocked, that an obviously bright man had fallen into such an indefensible position. OK? *G*


BB: Should I refuse to discuss something, just because it has negative comments about "my" ( NOTE QUOTES) side in it?

No. You needn't refuse to discuss something. I just think it detracts seriously from your contention. Do you really mean to say: "The reason that Liberals and the White House fail"? If the Democrats/Liberals are out of line for a political position, why are the White House/Republicans not equally out of line?


Incidentally I am not a Democrat. I just mostly vote for their platform and the stances they take.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: Susu's Hubby
Date: 04 Oct 05 - 04:07 PM

I think that the articles are excellent even if they are opinion. But just because they are opinion does not take away from the truths that they are offering opinions on.

Good Post, beardedbruce.



Hubby


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: John Hardly
Date: 04 Oct 05 - 04:13 PM

Interesting links. Thanks for posting them.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: Little Hawk
Date: 04 Oct 05 - 04:17 PM

Neither the Democratic Party nor the Republican Party are liberal, in my opinion, nor are they traditionally conservative. I regard the gyrations of the Democrats in government as I would regard the squirming of a diseased slug. I regard the gyrations of the Republicans in government as I would regard the writhing of a rabid lamprey. Neither one of them is what they "claim" to be. Their claims are patently false propaganda, concocted merely to secure votes from naive people.

You want me to pick my favorite from those 2 parasitic beasts and defend it?

No thanks. The Redemocrapublicants are a single two-headed beast posing as separate parties, and they are defrauding and ruining American society while they serve megacorporations. You are wasting your time and energy trying to decide which one of them is the "good guy".


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: Ebbie
Date: 04 Oct 05 - 04:22 PM

Ah, but you are not 'Amurrican'.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: Little Hawk
Date: 04 Oct 05 - 04:34 PM

No, Ebbie. (grin) I will resist making any untoward remarks about that. I did live in New York State for 10 years (age 10-20), and I certainly learned a lot from that experience. The town I was in would have voted Republican if they ran Bonzo for President instead of Reagan. Hell, even if they ran Charles Manson for president...as long as he was Republican. What a travesty.

BB, the Iraqis are not defying fascism when they cast their votes...they are unintentionally deifying fascism and rubber-stamping World Corporate Empire. And World Corporate Empire IS fascism, on a bigger scale than was ever managed by Hitler or Mussolini or Joe Stalin (the killer who claimed to be an anti-fascist, but was in my opinion one of the great fascists of all time). Fascism is extreme control of society by the few, for the few, from the top, by propaganda, money, fraud, militarism, and deadly force. It can flourish equally well in the form of socialism or capitalism...or combinations of the two.

The Democratic and Republican parties are (in most individual cases, unwittingly) proponents of fascism...mostly in its capitalist mode. Stalin did it in a socialist mode.

You would ask me to choose between 2 insane monsters? No thanks.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: John Hardly
Date: 04 Oct 05 - 04:38 PM

Whether you are liberal or conservative, you usually only have either of two options to express your political wishes. It's not outlandish to suggest that for the past thirty years in America, conservatives have decided that the Republican party offers to represent more of their wishes, while the liberals have found what they believe to be better representation in the Democratic party.

What is interesting about the first two links is that the writer is making the case that, Democratic party aside, the liberal philosophy itself has drifted.

I read some interesting commentary a few weeks ago that was saying the same sort of thing, but was focusing on the detrimental effect the newly powerful liberal voice was having on the Democratic party.

Essentially, it pointed out that the finacial support for the Democratic party is now in the hands of groups too liberal for mainstream appeal -- and that finacial support forces the Democratic politian into a corner -- he must verbally acknowledge his liberal philosophical underpinnings, or risk the loss of his finacial support -- though in his gut he knows that mainstream America is not in agreement with the extremes from the left.

Interesting preference of term -- "progressive". Progressive seems to be the nomenclature of choice among those who were once "liberal" -- somehow many felt as though it became politically disadvantageous to call oneself "liberal" and so "progressive" served euphamistically.

But "progressive" implies (and it seems to have worked out this way) no actual philosophy other than change - progress - for its own sake.

Conversely, "liberal" is a VERY honorable word. As the one writer tried to point out -- liberals were for freedom -- liberty -- for all -- not the "libertine" it has come to mean to so many.

Not to worry too much though....

....if President Bush can be referred to as a "conservative", the same thing has happened to both sides.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: Don Firth
Date: 04 Oct 05 - 04:41 PM

Decades ago, Harry S. Truman (you may not have liked him or agreed with him, but you were never in doubt as to where he stood) said, "Betweeen a Republican and a Democrat who acts like a Republican, the Republican will win every time." The Dems seem to have forgotten this within recent times and that is the crux of their problem. If they offered a truly liberal alternative, it would be a whole different story.

Don Firth


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Oct 05 - 04:56 PM

What the fuck has this thread got to do with any of the political parties around the world that use the name "Liberal". Lower case PLEASE.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 04 Oct 05 - 05:29 PM

Thanks bruce for giving those links, rather than posting the articles here - much easier to read like thta.

Americans have lost the ability to disagree civilly - from that third link bruce gave. Some of the posts here would seem to inducate that that is true. But there are enough that aren't like that to suggest that it's a little too all embracing as a generalisation. (Well, at least some of these appear to be from Americans.)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Oct 05 - 05:40 PM

open with: "OK, now I will sit back and wait for all the personnal attacks from those who can't bother to argue facts."

follow closely with: "I was not trying to upset people..."

Oh bullshit. I stopped reading the thread right there.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: artbrooks
Date: 04 Oct 05 - 05:52 PM

Well, I read all three articles. None of them really discussed "liberals" as such, or why they fail. They did discuss the failure of "the left" or of the "progressives" which, as we should all know (ask any "progressive") are very different from liberals. In fact, liberals, by definition (Webster's) are really firmly in the center, since they believe in giving everyone an opportunity to express an opinion and in trying all possible options.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: Little Hawk
Date: 04 Oct 05 - 05:57 PM

This thread has nothing to do with all the parties in the World that are named "the Liberal Party". The Liberal Party in Canada, for example, a party that basically serves its rich friends, is the party that knows SUCCESS, not failure, politically speaking. Though they are rightly detested even by many who grit their teeth and vote for them....they have formed the vast majority of Canada's ruling national governments up to this time. That's because their opponents are at least as bad as they are, most of the time, but haven't got nearly as solid a power base to work from. The Liberal Party in Canada is duplicitous, clever...and only pretends to be liberal...kind of like the Democrats, except you can leave "clever" out of the equation. The Conservative Party in Canada is duplicitous, inflexible, money-driven, and pretends to be conservative, while serving its rich friends.

Ho hum.

If I may quote Dylan: "don't follow leaders"

Got that right.

There is no political party of any size out there right now that is worth casting a vote for. At least, none that I know of. Why? They've all been bought. (and by the same people too...in a general sense...I'm sure there are individual exceptions)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: Bill D
Date: 04 Oct 05 - 06:12 PM

I've said for years that we in the US need a multiplicity of parties as in other countries...such as Israel. Then we could join one that more closely reflects our views and have a rollicking good time making alliances at voting time. It is weird having Tom DeLay and John McCain and Arlen Spector in the same party...just as it is weird having Ted Kennedy and Bill Clinton in the same party. It makes people use the terms 'liberal' and 'conservative' in stupid, awkward ways!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Oct 05 - 07:20 PM

1:56 PM
"OK, now I will sit back and wait for all the personnal attacks from those who can't bother to argue facts."

2:23 PM
"I was not trying to upset people..."

7:14 PM
Baloney!!!!!!!!!!!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: Peace
Date: 04 Oct 05 - 07:35 PM

"even by many who grit their teeth"

Nice play on words there, LH.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 04 Oct 05 - 07:43 PM

It makes people use the terms 'liberal' and 'conservative' in stupid, awkward ways!

I can't see why. If anything the reverse - I'd have thought that that very factor would lead Americans to talk about "liberal Democrats" as against "conservative Democrats" and "liberal Republicans" as against "conservative Republicans". Didn't they used to do that a few years ago?

If people "use the terms 'liberal' and 'conservative' in stupid, awkward ways" it's surely either because they are being stupid and awkward, or because they are trying to manipulate language for political reasons.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: Amos
Date: 04 Oct 05 - 07:54 PM

Your observations have nothing to do with anyone who is actually liberal, in the genuine sense of the word. Instead, you, like many others, have stolen the word in order to fabricate a new cuss word from it, following the lead of Ann Coulter and her like. There is nothing liberal about some of the things you document, just as there is nothing genuinely conservative -- in the truer and better sense of the word -- about De Lay and his ubermesnch gang.

I would suggest if you want a discussion about facts that you stop trying to point at senseless generalizations negatively intended, and see if you can come up with some constructive suggestions for remedying our budget deficit and the fact that we are spending billions fielding a death machine that could be better spent on forwarding alternative energy research. Are do you belong to the "we will never run out of oil..." school of thought?


A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: M.Ted
Date: 04 Oct 05 - 10:19 PM

Both sides have long since stopped having serious discussions about issues, and simply use the public platforms as an opportunity to make points with their fringe supporters.

Criticizing liberals and lambasting conservatives means nothing. Everything has been reduced to a tug of war, and both sides have the the idea that mobilizing the fringes might be all that it takes to pull thing their way.

Does anyone even know what the important issues are? And, more to the point, does anyone care?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: Little Hawk
Date: 05 Oct 05 - 12:41 AM

Yeah. Oil, profits, the drug trade, more profits, stock market manipulation, more profits, military production, the dollar, fresh water, gold, market share, and more profits. And profits too.

That's if you're working for the Empire.

If you're a Muslim zealot, then religion is quite important too, and not just for propaganda purposes...though it definitely works great for that. Even the Empire uses religion for propaganda. Quite shamelessly, in fact. Some of its henchmen actually believe the religious stuff. Now THAT's scary! (Did you know that God favors the profit-seekers?) (Yeah..right...)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 05 Oct 05 - 08:17 AM

No no LH, it's "blessed are the cheesemakers..."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: Amos
Date: 05 Oct 05 - 09:08 AM

I submit there are really only a few major issues.

The largest of these is reconfiguring the energy system in use here. The second largest is a long-term assessment and resolution to water issues. The third largest is redesigning the machinery of our social systems to try and resurrect respect and reliance on individual ability while at the same time seeing that help is available to those whose burdens are too great. That means health, employment, tax and related issues.

It always strikes me as odd that the current administration believes in not putting Federal effort behind art, behind science, behind resolving environmental and water issues, and funds no major energy efforts (except with lip service) but somehow it seems perfectly natural to spend a billion a day or so to field the machinery of death. Odd business, not exactly logical, nor (to my mind) very sane.
\
A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: John Hardly
Date: 05 Oct 05 - 10:29 AM

There is no good reason for the federal government to put money behind art (other than as part of public education).

Just try to stop an artist from creating.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: GUEST,Chief Chaos
Date: 05 Oct 05 - 12:17 PM

I don't understand how liberal became a bad word.
It's what the U.S.A. is actually founded on:

1. We liberated ourselves from religeous persecution.
2. We liberated ourselves from a non-representative gov't.
3. We liberated a lot of land (rightly or wrongly from the peoples already there)
4. We finally got around to liberating the slaves.
5. We liberated Texas (might have been a mistake).
6. We liberated Spanish territories in the "new world".
7. We "helped" liberate Europe (WWI)
8. We helped re-liberate Europe (WWII)

I could go on,
In between we attempted to liberate our people from ignorance, fear, poverty, starvation, etc.

Why would we wan't to go back?

And the term conservative only applies to so called "majority" values.
The conservatives don't believe in conservation. They believe in exploitation (should they be called the Exploitatives?)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: GUEST,rarelamb
Date: 05 Oct 05 - 12:24 PM

Liberal as in 18th century usage is not what liberals are today. We call them liberal but they are actually socialists.

Conservatives are 18th century liberals.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: Bill D
Date: 05 Oct 05 - 12:52 PM

"It makes people use the terms 'liberal' and 'conservative' in stupid, awkward ways!"

well...I guess I should have said clearly 'some' people...or 'many' people, and I should have used a different word than 'makes'....typing in a hurry 'makes' someone miss the main point of my post about how having only major two parties tends to identify each with one of only two major philosophies.

Of COURSE some Americans refer to 'liberal Rupublicans' at times...etc...but we have folks who don't like to have to insert the qualifying nomenclature themselves and just plaster simplistic labels on things.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: John Hardly
Date: 05 Oct 05 - 12:59 PM

"4. We finally got around to liberating the slaves."

This is a fairly good example of the kind of "liberal-speak" to which I believe the writers of one of the linked articles referred.

It has become such a mark of the American left to woller in self-loathing -- in America-loathing -- that cannot even acknowledge, without the qualifiers (like "finally"), A goodness about America.

That "finally" happened well within the first hundred years of our existance. And we now have more history after that "finally" then we do before that "finally" -- almost 3/4 of a century more. In fact, 2/3 of our existance as a nation has been slavery free.

That "finally" ended an institution that we did not, as a nation, begin. Furthermore, on the world scene, we were cutting edge in ridding ourselves of that awful pestilence.

I don't find any need, when proudly pointing out that the US liberated slaves, to qualify it with "finally".

The American left does -- and it is not a winsome need.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: Don Firth
Date: 05 Oct 05 - 01:01 PM

Conservatives are far from 18th century liberals, rarelamb. Today's conservatives are basically feudalists. Lord of the manor (read "The Corporation") and the serfs (read "employees"). Conservatives have made no secret that they want to go back to the days before labor unions and government regulation of business (such as anti-trust laws and regulatiory agencies such as the Securities and Exchange Commission--which has recently been asleep at the switch, otherwise Enron and other rip-offs could never have happened). You should have stayed awake in your high school history and civics classes.

It's not for nothing that heads of industry used to be called "Robber Barons," and the current batch of conservatives want to go back to that era. If you doubt this, read some of the writings of Grover Norquist and other conservatives. What their talking about is hardly 18th cenury liberalism. If they get their way, you'll be bowing and tugging your forelock before the office manager soon enough.

Don Firth


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: GUEST,Chief Chaos
Date: 05 Oct 05 - 01:15 PM

John - The first colonist came ashore in 1607. Considering that as the starting point it was more than 200 years. (I know we didn't have slaves at the time). I state "finally" because salvery was an issue prior to our separation from England.
(cut and paste warning)
-From the Library of Congress:

The American Anti-Slavery Society was established in 1833, but abolitionist sentiment antedated the republic. For example, the charter of Georgia prohibited slavery, and many of its settlers fought a losing battle against allowing it in the colony, Before independence, Quakers, most black Christians, and other religious groups argued that slavery was incompatible with Christ's teaching. Moreover, a number of revolutionaries saw the glaring contradiction between demanding freedom for themselves while holding slaves.

I understand your post in context. I don't bemoan our actions in history. I only accept that we were responsible for some heinous attrocities.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: reasons Liberals fail
From: John Hardly
Date: 05 Oct 05 - 01:31 PM

We were not the United States Of America until the late 1780's. Until that point, "We" didn't make national choices for ourselves.

When "we" did, we made the anti-slavery choice very early in our existance.

And the irony is that you desire to put an even finer point to the America loathing by defining us early enough to be more "guilty" of slavery, illustrates exactly what I'm talking about.

It has become the liberal habit to define everything in some way as to paint the very worst portrait of our country. That is not winsome -- nor is it accurate.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate
Next Page

 


You must be a member to post in non-music threads. Join here.


You must be a member to post in non-music threads. Join here.



Mudcat time: 25 February 8:47 PM EST

[ Home ]

All original material is copyright © 1998 by the Mudcat Café Music Foundation, Inc. All photos, music, images, etc. are copyright © by their rightful owners. Every effort is taken to attribute appropriate copyright to images, content, music, etc. We are not a copyright resource.