Republicans & Conservatives: Archives

Kerry a liberal? What ever are we going to do now?

How predictable. To try to use liberal as curse word. Liberal anything is going to be better and more predictable than this wild card in the Whitehouse who has one hand on the “button” and the other on the “heart of god”. This madness must end. Either go all the way and put Pat Robertson in the whitehouse, or good old fashioned Liberal who will at least pay for the programs he proposes with tax cut roll backs instead of Bush’s favorite technique, “Charge it to the next generation”.

Liberal, Moderate, Martian, who cares, as long as they will bring sanity back to the world and this nation. Having a President who can and does justify everything he does as good, righteous, and just for he has God as his guide is the most dangerous situation this nation has been in since the Cuban missile crisis.

Oh, God no! Not a liberal!

Heaven forbid the next President of the United States be:

• Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry.
• Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded.
• Tending to give freely; generous

the point is that Kerry is going to try to sell himself as a moderate, and its important that people know how far left of them he is on issues they care about (I am from the people’s republic of massachusetts, so I have an idea of how leftwing this guy is- he is even left wing in our state!). the label “liberal” is not important, what is important is that the people should elect a president knowing what he really stands for- and as this campaign will show, Kerry stands for a set of ideals that most Americans do not share. The question, of course, will be if Bush’s rather mediocre performance- at least on domestic issues- will override the people’s dislike of Kerry’s leftist record. I think it will be a close call.

i’ve always viewed the word “liberal” to mean “more open to new ideas”

instead it apparently means “evil anti-christ commie who will eat your children after selling them into the sex trade for a few years”

stop it…..it’s block classification and its stupid.

conservative does not mean good
liberal does not mean bad

there are plenty of evil people in the world…on both sides of the fence.

but to sit there and paint a person as a “liberal”, hoping to have it mean something negative, is a sad state of affairs.

“be careful dear, don’t you know liberals cause cancer if you get too close?”

downright stupid.

If I remember correctly Bush campaigned under a “Compassionate Conservatism” platform, promising a new era of bipartisanship and bringing back “decency” to the White House!! As he has obviously shown us he proved extreme Right! Besides, given the Republican dominated Senate and House, even if Kerry wins he will surely be at constant odds contending with that!! Right now Bush has it EASY!! He doesn’t have a strong opposition party to contend with! He gets custom made investigations per his demands! One hour of off the record testimony compared to the six hours required of Clinton!! Which matter deserves more attention: A mans personal affair or nation security? Obviously we see the priorities of the GOP!!

And all that ontop of the fact that Bush is a fiscal liberal..see here: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/index.html

Society is not deteriorating, as conservatives would have you believe. In the last 400 years, Western society has seen continual progress under the Scientific Revolution. This has resulted in social, scientific and economic miracles too numerous to mention. Just a few examples include doubled lifespans, mass education, rising standards of living, not to mention the abolition of slavery, the Inquisition, the witch hunts, dueling, pogroms, serfdom, feudalism, etc.

The traditional meaning of “conservativism” is the attempt to conserve the various aspects of society, but why anyone would wish to preserve such a sick society is a mystery. The traditional meaning of “liberalism,” on the other hand, is openness to progress and change, and the last four centuries bear testimony to its success.

Liberals be proud! Its damn near a badge of honor now!!

Bush is extreme right! yeah. sure thing. I guess his huge medicare increases (biggest ever), amazing budget deficiets, complete silence on abortion, increases in funding for the NEA (biggest in 20 years), amnesty for elligal immigrants are all extreme-right positions now. Bush has governed as a moderate on domestic policy (much to my shagrin- i hoped he would support smaller government), and i find it laughable that democrats continue to say he is far right.

I agree that Bush is something other than a traditional conservative…a big spender , sweeping federal government….not very Republican of him.

However, my point here was….when Conservatives speak about themselves, it’s about compassion, values, etc….

and then they mention the word liberal..and they all scream and point like some wierd body-snatchers movie….

yes they have differing priorities…however, neither side is trying to destroy america. yet that’s what we keep hearing….

i’m tired of this liberal/conservative labeling.

Review the policies of the politicians at hand…namely Bush and Kerry. It’s how they vote, who they get their money from, policies they have put into place, and so forth that make the man.

Misha said, “…should elect a president knowing what he really stands for- and as this campaign will show, Kerry stands for a set of ideals that most Americans do not share.”

I don’t understand why we waste so much money and time on elections when all we have to do is ask Misha what the people want and don’t want, and just go with what she says, since she says above she knows most Americans don’t share ideals with Kerry.

Really, let us save time and money and let Misha be appointed Queen. She knows what the majority of Americans want, don’t want, like, don’t like, need, don’t need.

Beware of the traps one lays for oneself :-)

Neil Peart once said “Those who know whats best for us must rise and save us from ourselves.” I tend to agree!

who was it that said “stay outa my house and mind your own damn business!”

The traditional meaning of “liberalism,” on the other hand, is openness to progress and change, and the last four centuries bear testimony to its success.

Actually the traditional meaning of liberalism is more akin to the conservative positions of Natural Rights and free markets etc.

The main economist of Classical Liberalism was the Scotsman Adam Smith (1723-1790), who broadly advocated the doctrine of “laissez-faire” or “let [it] act” — minimal government or command intervention in the function of the economy. Adam Smith developed a theory of motivation that tried to reconcile human self-interestedness with unregulated social order (mainly done in The Theory of Moral Sentiments (1759)). His most famous work, The Wealth of Nations (1776), tried to explain how an unregulated market would naturally regulate itself via the “invisible hand” of aggregated individual decisions. -Wikipedia

David, David, David- glad to see you back and posting :)

1. I am a guy (misha is russian for mike)

2. My point about John Kerry is a predictive one- just like the many predictive ones you guys make about Bush. Those in glass houses….

Misha, my apology, I was not aware.

You are right of course, turnabout is fair play.

More like moderate Liberal, or liberal Moderate - but then he did vote to let Bush invade Iraq and for NAFTA - so I guess that makes him a bit conservative too - dang labels just aren’t what they used to be!

But you know, it does not matter what or how you label him, because this election is not about labels. It is about sending Bush back to Crawford with his tail between his legs for having mislead us, abused our military, cheated our veterans, indebted us for at least a generation if not two or more, and finally for just plain not living up to his words when he campaigned in 2000. Remember that bit about Uniter not a Divider? NOPE, not about labels…. so call Kerry whatever, he is still going to be the candidate that calls Bush to task for his misdeeds before the American Public, and it ain’t gonna be pretty.

Nader should be lending a hand as well - bring the misdeeds to light, that is.

I don’t know Dustin. Maybe you’re not wanting to see the possibility that many Americans might have had their fill of Conservative leadership for this generation, and might be feeling the urge to get back in touch with the old fashion liberalism. I’m not going to say revolutions in the street, but I think Bush pushed certain things too far.

It’s true liberals have never been too fond of Dubya. But before 9/11 the discontent never had anything solid to crystallize on. Bush’s war in Iraq has changed that.

While the Have You Forgotten myth has been a comfort to those bewildered by the lack of liberal support for our brave Shrub, I highly doubt most Democrats have forgotten. I think it’s one of those indelible things you don’t forget.

I know where I was on 9/11, when I first found out. I know that I saw the plane go into the second tower, and that a few hours later, I saw the towers crash down.

Thing is, I can’t forget. My disagreements with Bush are not a break with the horror of that time, a moving on. They are a product of it. I don’t want some wasteful, misleading philosophy ruling the day on how we deal with the rest of the world, whether it’s neoliberal or neoconservative.

I want a practically effective foreign policy, not one that will destroy American lives trying to prove itself time and again. When we invade countries that aren’t real threats, we’ve wasted time, money and opportunities that could have made the difference between the next foiled plan, and the next attack.

What will Bush say if Al Quaeda strikes again, and the trail goes back to Afghanistan once more? That it was Clinton’s fault?

It is Bush’s incompetence that I detest more than his politics. It is his willingness to get into a fight that was barely relevant to fighting the terrorist threat, and doing so by neglecting a place we knew to be a terrorist haven, and that he knew was still infested with the scum. The man has a bad habit of declaring victories only to have events take a turn for the worse.

I really cannot stand another lecture from Bush officials explaining the murky world of intelligence, or just how clear cut an an obviously muddle issue is. I want somebody who’s willing to take the world as it goes, not try to conform it to some expectation, and it seems from the get-go that Bush’s people are willing to sacrifice objectivity and skepticism for the adherence of reports and strategies to their overall expectation of it.

The Republican rhetoric just gets boring after a while. The funny part is that the majority of the nation best identifies with liberal ideas, so being a liberal to any degree is a pro for Kerry.

I think the call of Republicans to push the notion that Kerry is the “most liberal ever” only appeals to fellow Republicans. So keep preaching to the choir.

Rats, I wish I’d seen this post earlier, after I read the article I was all set to rant and rave about the whole “a liberal! murder! sacrilege!” issue, unfortunately, everyone seems to have said whatever it was that I was planning to say.I feel robbed. :)
But you know it’s funny, I always thought liberal was good, and conservative was bad. I mean what are they trying to conserve anyway?
The environment?( hahahahahahaha)
The Health Of Their Citizens?(erm..no)
I’m glad Kerry is a liberal, but I tend to agree with Misha on the fact that not all Americans would be super glad were he to make ‘liberalism’ his rallying call. I think he’s doing a good job, playing center left,cause thats what will get him votes, and if he just happens to be more inclined to responsible foreign policy, then more power to him.

Only in America or a repressive Islamic regimes could Liberal be construed as dirty word. And here’s me thining that the whole point of the war on terror was to protect the West’s liberal and pluralistic way of life.

I’d have guessed that being on the right side of the arguement with regard to universal sufferage, civil rights, gay marriage would have guaranteed a place in heaven for all liberal minded people …………

I re-read Dustin’s article again, and I can not find where he said being a liberal is evil. I think his point is that the Democrats typically “shift” or emphasize their more moderate views when time comes for a general election. The same can be said for the Republicans. Both parties have to do this in order to obtain the votes of the vast majority of people in this country who are moderate to conservative (don’t shoot me for the labels!) and not part of the respective bases.

I think the problem is that Kerry, based upon his actions of the past 30 years, has a lot further to go to get to the middle than GWB does. So, expect the GOP to paint him way left, just as Clinton painted the GOP nominee in ’96 (Newt Dole), and expect the Democrats to cry foul every time they try.

“The Republican rhetoric just gets boring after a while. The funny part is that the majority of the nation best identifies with liberal ideas, so being a liberal to any degree is a pro for Kerry.”

Actually, that isn’t true at all, according to Gallups polling, Americans identify with conservatives on issues like taxation, health care, education, the enviroment, etc. Look here.

Most Americans believe that being liberal is not what they want in a President. Therefore, President Bush’s remarks pointing out that Kerry is a liberal helps him win the center of the vote, which is what decides every election.

yes, thank you tom for directing us to a conservative site that tells us how great conservativism is….i’m sure their numbers are not adjusted at all…

you know the klan has a site too…saying most people agree that the blacks and jews are ruining the country….

guess they must be right…..i mean they printed on a website!

Agree whole heartedly with rob. Yay rob! :)

I think things are mostly split down the middle. Ironically enough, if you look at the whole Gay Marriage issue, it’s way down the list of priorities on every poll it shows up on.

Electoral Priorities

First of all, that poll was done by Gallup, not by the website, and was reported on CNN, Fox and MSNBC, so you can choose to believe it or not based on your own bias of what you want it to say.

Look at some polls Gallup.com, you’ll find that on issue polls conservatives do very well.

I chose to point that website out because all the information was in one easy place. The only argument you have against the FACT that more Americans are conservatives than liberals is what you want to believe.

Tom: Well, actually, there’s also these statistics from 2002 that support the idea that overall there are more registered democrats than registered republicans in the states that have such registration. 9,065,243 more registered democrats than republicans, to be precise.
http://www.ballot-access.org/reg-totals.html

It all depends on how you define liberal. There might be fewer card carrying liberals, but once you account for people who are simply calling themselves moderate on account of things like tax cuts and military issues, The number goes up.

As for bias, I think it’s an open secret that such claims are merely meant to scare image conscious news editors into giving your side more leeway than you really merit. It lets you more or less claim that anything short of a whitewash of your causes, policies and the effects of those is rooted in the media being against you. It’s an excuse for not doing things right, for foolish and ignorant policy decisions.

riddle me this- if the country is so liberal, why is our house of representatives (which is basically proportional to the people) heavily republican? The problem is the democrats can do alright until they move in the John Kerry direction. As soon as they start talking about measures like universal health care, the republicans sweep into office ala 1994.

well misha, it also comes down to the fact that republicans and christian conservatives are a hell of a lot more organized and rally together alot more than those pesky liberals….

however…just watch….this 1950’s morality trip the administration has us on will have a negative effect/

and the Dem’s are starting to realize that the other side is actually out to destroy them….and they are slowly beginning to grow some balls.

as for the arrogance of your statement….well that’s a very conservative thing too…you actually think you are right.

Q: If a stupid democrat like Howard Dean does nothing more than get a bunch of non-voting college kids to do his bidding, then pisses away millions of campaign dollars for nothing, did anything get accomplished? A: Only in a demacrats mind. :)

(Comment deleted by WatchBlog Manager)

an accomplished doctor, governor of a state, ran (if unsuccessfully) for president of our country….yeah he’s not bright…..

most of the folks in public office have multiple degree’s from good schools, and to call any of them stupid is insulting.

sure you may not agree with their politics, however name calling is base, and really reflects on your intellegence more than dean’s.

Misha, the Congress has 229 Republicans and 205 democrats. The Democrats hold about 47 percent of the seats That’s not heavily Republican. That’s barely Republican. The senate is 51 to 48. Also a bare majority.

It’s easy for anybody looking from out from a partisan perspective to assume substantial majorities where none truly exist. I’ve done it before. Fact is, though, this nation is pretty neatly divided.

Websters defines liberal as ; “someone who’s mind is so open…their brain fell out”
Kerry fits right in.

ha…my sides…stop it…please….

man you conservatives sure are funny.