# Conversation and Fun > Just Conversation >  Are you a true liberal?

## rbaker

1. You have to be against capital punishment, but support abortion on demand.

2. You have to believe that businesses create oppression and governments create prosperity.

3. You have to believe that guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens are more of a threat than U.S. nuclear weapons technology in the hands of Iran or Chinese and North Korean communists.

4. You have to believe that there was no art before federal funding.

5. You have to believe that global temperatures are less affected by cyclical changes in the earth's climate and more affected by soccer moms driving SUV's.

6. You have to believe that gender roles are artificial, but being homosexual is natural.

7. You have to believe that the AIDS virus is spread by a lack of federal funding.

8. You have to believe that the same teacher who can't teach fourth graders how to read is somehow qualified to teach those same kids about sex.

9. You have to believe that hunters don't care about nature, but PETA activists do.

10. You have to believe that self esteem is more important than actually doing something to earn it

11. You have to believe that Mel Gibson spent $25 million of his own money to make "The Passion of the Christ" for financial gain only.

12. You have to believe the NRA is bad, because it supports certain parts of the Constitution, while the ACLU is good, because it supports certain parts of the Constitution.

13. You have to believe that taxes are too low, but ATM fees are too high.

14. You have to believe that Margaret Sanger and Gloria Steinem are more important to American history than Thomas Jefferson, Gen. Robert E. Lee and Thomas Edison.

15. You have to believe that standardized tests are racist, but racial quotas and set-asides are not.

16. You have to believe that the only reason socialism hasn't worked anywhere it's been tried is because the right people haven't been in charge.

17. You have to believe that homosexual parades displaying drag queens and transvestites should be constitutionally protected, and manger scenes at Christmas should be illegal.

18. You have to believe that this message is a part of a vast, right-wing conspiracy.

19. You have to believe American soldiers, sailors, and Marines are uneducated poor psychopath killers and that insurgents and terrorists are freedom fighters.

----------


## rinselberg

> You have to believe that global temperatures are less affected by cyclical changes in the earth's climate and more affected by soccer moms driving SUVs.


Many good points, rbaker - and a humorous post as well.

But if I may take the opportunity to offer my two cents worth on the earth's climate:

The problem isn't "soccer moms driving SUVs". It's unprecedented levels of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. There's no question that given enough time, the earth's climate will change - even drastically - irrespective of atmospheric carbon-loading from human activities. The Ice Ages that have waxed and waned over the past few million years or so are a case in point. But reducing our climate-related issues to "soccer moms driving SUVs" is one short step away from suggesting that no one should be concerned about any of this - and that makes about as much sense as trying to put out a house fire by spraying gasoline on it.

If we could avoid killing ourselves off in just another century or so as a consequence of our own technologies, we _may_ find the time to avert or ameliorate whatever new challenges nature has in store for us.

Or - we could just keep driving those SUVs right off the edge of the environmental cliff.

As to what exactly should best be done about all this - _that_ is where there could be many legitimate differences between "liberal" and "conservative" ideas about bettering our chances.

That's how I see it.

I would be more than happy to post some online links to the scientific reports that I think are of the most service in clarifying these issues.


_"Inventor" probably isn't the first word that comes to mind in connection with the celebrated cognomen of "Ollie North"; nevertheless, a search of the Google Online Patents Database reveals that the very same Oliver L. North of Iran-Contra fame is credited as a "co-inventor" on three U.S. Patents related to the provision of bullet-resistant armor for military and police applications.

Theirs is a scandal that deserves to be told ..._

----------


## Grubendol

I'm sorry I'm a proud liberal and this is insulting and stupid in alot of ways....

oh, and as for:
11. You have to believe that Mel Gibson spent $25 million of his own money to make "The Passion of the Christ" for financial gain only.

Actually I don't think a single liberal thinks that he made it for financial gain...as for myself speaking as a true blue dyed in the wool San Francisco liberal, i think he did it because of a deep personal faith, and also to prosleytize.

----------


## Pete Hanlin

As a conservative, I can empathise with Grubendol's comments about this thread- there are many times I feel insulted by stupid assertations and over-simplifications portraying conservativism as either evil or insipid (unfortunately, a lot of airport lounges carry CNN, so I have to listen to such assertations on a more-or-less constant basis).

Seriously (well, I was kinda serious in the above), while I do tend towards the conservative side on most issues, liberals and conservatives both have valid reasons for their opinions and goals for our society, economy, and ecology.

For example, while I still personally feel that our current campaign in Iraq was well-undertaken (given what we thought we would find), and is still being run as well as it can be (without argument that it has turned into a quagmire), assertions by liberals that the war was an ill-conceived idea that is wasting a lot of money certainly seem to be based on solid ground as well (your opinion on the matter certainly depends alot upon one's vantage point).

Likewise, while I firmly believe in as little taxation as possible, I can understand the logic of raising taxes as well (I simply vehemently disagree with that logic).

Point being, I think we all need to ease up a bit.  The only "stupid" liberals or conservatives are the ones who fail to remain informed on the issues (unfortunately, the less informed an individual is, the more likely s/he is to be adamant in their opinion- since information usually shows one that the issue is not quite as black and white as one originally thought).

All that said, I thought #18 was funny (everyone knows the right-wing is too fractured and disorganized to engage in any kind of conspiracy... heck, we couldn't even fix Social Security with the Presidency and majorities in both sides of Congress)!

----------


## DragonLensmanWV

As one that would be classed as a Liberal, though I think you might be surprised at how many things I might agree with you, I find this post to be of the "Please forward this to everyone you know!" type of spam.

I want to know - have you stopped beating your wife?

There are many instances of no-win phrasing, and that's how a lot of conservatives overheat the environment with their hot air. And then they deny there's any sign that the Earth might be warming. Sure there have been cycles before, both hot and cold, and look what happened to life during those times.Mostly people think that it's a fabrication because they don't agree on the politics of those who warn, not because there's any evidence to the contrary.I think most people are in denial of global warming because it would require them to change their views of the world, and actually embrace science. They don't want to worry about it, so they say it will take too long to notice, so what the hell, it'll happen after I die- who cares?
I'm surprised global warming is even mentioned by the biased, extreme-right conservative media.

Or you could turn a lot of those phrases around, taking the last part of the sentence and switching it with the first part.
Like
You have to believe that because homosexuality is natural, gender roles are artificial.

----------


## Grubendol

> As a conservative, I can empathise with Grubendol's comments about this thread- there are many times I feel insulted by stupid assertations and over-simplifications portraying conservativism as either evil or insipid (unfortunately, a lot of airport lounges carry CNN, so I have to listen to such assertations on a more-or-less constant basis).
> 
> Seriously (well, I was kinda serious in the above), while I do tend towards the conservative side on most issues, liberals and conservatives both have valid reasons for their opinions and goals for our society, economy, and ecology.
> 
> For example, while I still personally feel that our current campaign in Iraq was well-undertaken (given what we thought we would find), and is still being run as well as it can be (without argument that it has turned into a quagmire), assertions by liberals that the war was an ill-conceived idea that is wasting a lot of money certainly seem to be based on solid ground as well (your opinion on the matter certainly depends alot upon one's vantage point).
> 
> Likewise, while I firmly believe in as little taxation as possible, I can understand the logic of raising taxes as well (I simply vehemently disagree with that logic).
> 
> Point being, I think we all need to ease up a bit.  The only "stupid" liberals or conservatives are the ones who fail to remain informed on the issues (unfortunately, the less informed an individual is, the more likely s/he is to be adamant in their opinion- since information usually shows one that the issue is not quite as black and white as one originally thought).
> ...


Pete, you are the imbodiment of what conservatism used to be (and should be IMHO)...we, as a country, have to realize that whether conservative or liberal, we all want essentially the same things for our community....a happy and healthy family, security for our nation, etc.  Where we differ is how we get there, that's all.....which makes it easier to find compromise.

----------


## Johns

> I want to know - have you stopped beating your wife?


 
Here we go!!!:drop: :cheers:

----------


## DragonLensmanWV

I agree with Grubendol about Pete's post. It is no shame to be a conservative that actually uses logic in a discussion, and if everyone of all political persuasions were to actually respect the opinions of someone else and not use logic bombs, then I think the country would be seen as less of an Evil Empire Building country and more of the humanitarian country we used to be before Shrub got elected.
Now, do you think we'll be in Iran next? North Korea? Our "War President" sure seems like that's all he knows how to do - invade sovreign countries.
I, along with the rest of the country was all for the action in Afghanistan, but it's clear we got railroaded in to Iraq by Shrub's desire for revenge to please his daddy. Otherwise, why would the Sr. Bush be awarded Saddam's sidearm for a war prize. I knew we were in trouble the minute Shrub said" You've given me political capital - and I intend to spend it!"

----------


## Grubendol

Actually, you do realize that back in 99, before he even announced he was gonna run for Prez, Bush Jr. said that if he had the political capital he would invade iraq....it's a quote from the ghost writer of his autobiography.

i guess the point I'm trying to make is that things have definitely become more polarized under Bush than under any other president in the history of our nation....but i think the problem really began with Reagan and his "voodoo economics".  conservatism is not a problem, but these made up economics of borrowing from children to pay for the now is the worst kind of fiscal irresponsibility that has been done deceitfully to make it appear as though this economic policy works.  Our economy is now entirely dependent on the health of the Chinese economy thanks to this policy....and it's been the fault of both republicians and democrats who have continued to support and act on this failed economic model.

----------


## k12311997

> I agree with Grubendol about Pete's post. It is no shame to be a conservative that actually uses logic in a discussion, and if everyone of all political persuasions were to actually respect the opinions of someone else and not use logic bombs, then I think the country would be seen as less of an Evil Empire Building country and more of the humanitarian country we used to be before Shrub got elected.
> Now, do you think we'll be in Iran next? North Korea? Our "War President" sure seems like that's all he knows how to do - invade sovreign countries.
> I, along with the rest of the country was all for the action in Afghanistan, but it's clear we got railroaded in to Iraq by Shrub's desire for revenge to please his daddy. Otherwise, why would the Sr. Bush be awarded Saddam's sidearm for a war prize. I knew we were in trouble the minute Shrub said" You've given me political capital - and I intend to spend it!"


 
just dripping with respect aren't ya

----------


## Grubendol

it's the bane of a liberal's existence to be dripping with respect.

----------


## Spexvet

> just dripping with respect aren't ya


As dripping as Hannity, Coulter, Limbaugh, etc are of Liberals, and Democrats. What was it that they called Clinton?

----------


## k12311997

> As dripping as Hannity, Coulter, Limbaugh, etc are of Liberals, and Democrats. What was it that they called Clinton?


What are their screen names?  They are media entertainers that play to the extremes.  They aren't on here using the word respect in one sentence and a derogatory nick name in the next.

I've seen lists similar to the one above about conservatives and laugh at them, and see the grains of truth that they are based on.  If you're in the "middle" which is where most of real America is that list is nothing more than a joke if you are so far left you can't see the middle that joke is accurate and that is why it bothers you Spex.

the hottest new bumper sticker is non partisan it says - Run Hillary Run -
liberals place it on the rear bumper, conservatives place it on the front bumper.

----------


## Spexvet

So many of these can be flipped around for conservatives

Are you a true conservative?




> 1. You have to be against capital punishment, but support abortion on demand.




You have to be for capital punishment and military slaughter, but against treating a cluster of cells as a cluster of cells.




> 2.





> You have to believe that businesses create oppression and governments create prosperity.




You have to believe that big business can be trusted and industrial waste is healthy to drink.




> 3.





> You have to believe that guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens are more of a threat than U.S. nuclear weapons technology in the hands of Iran or Chinese and North Korean communists.




You have to believe that guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens are NEVER used illegally or irresponsibly.




> 4.





> You have to believe that there was no art before federal funding.




You have to believe that conservatives would actually support art or be able to tell the difference between art and NASCAR. 




> 5.





> You have to believe that global temperatures are less affected by cyclical changes in the earth's climate and more affected by soccer moms driving SUV's.




You have to believe that driving SUVs uses less gas and creates less damaging emissions than more efficient, smaller cars.




> 6.





> You have to believe that gender roles are artificial, but being homosexual is natural.




You have to believe that because you are heterosexual, EVERYBODY should be heterosexual, and make a law to ensure it will happen.




> 7.





> You have to believe that the AIDS virus is spread by a lack of federal funding.




You have to believe that federal funding won't help find a cure for AIDS, and that if your loved one had AIDS, you would still feel the same way.




> 8.





> You have to believe that the same teacher who can't teach fourth graders how to read is somehow qualified to teach those same kids about sex.


You have to believe that the same parent who teach their kids to be racist and who had illegitimate children when in high school can teach those same kids the truth about sex.




> 10.





> You have to believe that self esteem is more important than actually doing something to earn it




You have to believe that a child beaten down emotionally can function as well as a child with high self-esteem, and that winning is the *only* thing - even worth killing for. 




> 13.





> You have to believe that taxes are too low, but ATM fees are too high.




You have to believe that taxes are too high, then complain about the poor treatment of wounded soldiers at Walter Reed Hospital, and the pot holes in the roads, and the lack of police protection....




> 15.





> You have to believe that standardized tests are racist, but racial quotas and set-asides are not.




You have to believe that the old-boy network would actually hire a minority (as if that would ever happen).




> 16.





> You have to believe that the only reason socialism hasn't worked anywhere it's been tried is because the right people haven't been in charge.




You have to believe that the reason that capitalism has worked is not really because the successful capitalists pay the politicians to make sure it doesn't go away.




> 17.





> You have to believe that homosexual parades displaying drag queens and transvestites should be constitutionally protected, and manger scenes at Christmas should be illegal.




You have to believe that manger scenes at Christmas should be constitutionally protected, and homosexual parades displaying drag queens and transvestites should be illegal, along with manuras during Channuka.




> 18.





> You have to believe that this message is a part of a vast, right-wing conspiracy.




You have to believe that the media has a Liberal bias.

You have to believe that government should not interfere in your personal life, but should interfere in the lives of homosexuals, non-Christians, and women who want to control their own bodies.

You have to believe that welfare recipients are stealing from you, but Exxon/Mobile should make record profits every quarter.

Sorry, I just couldn't resist. :D

----------


## cocoisland58

You have to believe that welfare recipients are stealing from you, but Exxon/Mobile should make record profits every quarter.

Sorry, I just couldn't resist. :D[/quote]


Well yes actually.  I personally know more than one cheating welfare recipient who by feigning mental illness and /or disability is stealing from all of us.

I am not against Exxon Mobile making profits since I own EM stock and it has been a good investment long term.

----------


## DragonLensmanWV

> What are their screen names?  They are media entertainers that play to the extremes.  They aren't on here using the word respect in one sentence and a derogatory nick name in the next.
> 
>   So you really RESPECTED Clinton?
> Besides, it was about respecting OPINIONS,not OFFICES, and if you want respect for Bush, then you must also respect every President, even Clintons 1 & 2.
> 
> :bbg:
> 
> I've seen lists similar to the one above about conservatives and laugh at them, and see the grains of truth that they are based on.  If you're in the "middle" which is where most of real America is that list is nothing more than a joke if you are so far left you can't see the middle that joke is accurate and that is why it bothers you Spex.
> 
> ...


Hmmm, maybe I'll make a similar one for McCain.
No, I actually respect him.

----------


## Grubendol

> What are their screen names?  They are media entertainers that play to the extremes.  They aren't on here using the word respect in one sentence and a derogatory nick name in the next.
> 
> I've seen lists similar to the one above about conservatives and laugh at them, and see the grains of truth that they are based on.  If you're in the "middle" which is where most of real America is that list is nothing more than a joke if you are so far left you can't see the middle that joke is accurate and that is why it bothers you Spex.
> 
> the hottest new bumper sticker is non partisan it says - Run Hillary Run -
> liberals place it on the rear bumper, conservatives place it on the front bumper.


I have yet to meet a liberal who wants Hillary to run. it will be bad for the party and the nation, IMHO...spoken as a hardcore liberal.

EDIT:




> Originally Posted by *rbaker* 
> _You have to believe that global temperatures are less affected by cyclical changes in the earth's climate and more affected by soccer moms driving SUV's._
> 
> 
> You have to believe that driving SUVs uses less gas and creates less damaging emissions than more efficient, smaller cars.


i just have to add I actually know a conservative who believes this is true.

And, also adding i used to respect McCain but he's sold his political soul to try and get elected president.  he's stopped endorsing his essential core beliefs just to pander to the religious right and it sickens me.

as for the EM vs. welfare mother issue.....there are cheats on both sides and EM receives millions in corporate welfare in the form of shirking off their tax responsibility to us.  the average middle income family pays higher taxes because multinationals don't pay their fair share anymore (even though they use a much higher percentage of the commons than we do).

Taxes are the "dues" you pay to use the commons...the public infrastructure.  corporations use the court system more than we do, but pay less to operate it.  corporations use the roads and air traffic byways more than we do, but pay less to operate it.  corporations use the educational system (by hiring an educated workforce), but pay virtually nothing towards operating it.

Corporations can be good useful and important to the future of our nation, but if they do not pay their fair share, they are leeching us, pure and simple.
And as a hardcore liberal, i would argue with your points.  this nation is essentially middle, yes, but so are liberals.  Liberals are arguing for the tennants that the founding fathers argued for (at least most of them).  If you want to find a true left, you have to leave the U.S.  the true left is the Communist party and they virtually don't exist here....their membership is just a few people....the government owning the manufacturing, that is a left view.  health care for the populace, social security, minimum wage, these are all mainstream, moderate desires.

----------


## Spexvet

> ...
> Well yes actually. I personally know more than one cheating welfare recipient who by feigning mental illness and /or disability is stealing from all of us.


So you want to punish the truly needy because a few welfare recipients get $500 per month that you feel they don't deserve? That's not very charitable of you.




> I am not against Exxon Mobile making profits since I own EM stock and it has been a good investment long term.


Ok, how about Enron or Worldcom as an example. How did those investments pay off for ya?

----------


## OPTIDONN

I thought it was funny!:D

----------


## Pete Hanlin

Glad to see we've managed to keep things so even-keeled and high road on this thread (_that_ dripping sound is sarcasm).

Referencing back to the original post, I would suggest if you are a conservative, the core planks of your platform would be:
1.) limited federal government
2.) which leads to limited federal taxes (you should pay the bulk of your taxes to the state in which you live- which should be responsible for most of the programs and expenditures save national defense, interstate commerce, and the collection of tariffs)

That's about it...

Regarding the core beliefs of liberalism, I leave it to one of our liberal friends to identify what s/he believes is the core of the liberal platform.

----------


## Spexvet

> Glad to see we've managed to keep things so even-keeled and high road on this thread (_that_ dripping sound is sarcasm).
>  ...


I'm just curious, Pete - why wasn't this your initial response to the first post?

----------


## cocoisland58

> So you want to punish the truly needy because a few welfare recipients get $500 per month that you feel they don't deserve? That's not very charitable of you.
> 
> 
> Ok, how about Enron or Worldcom as an example. How did those investments pay off for ya?


The truly needy I would never punish. If not for the cheaters there could be even more programs in place for those that deserve help. 

I did not own stock in Enron or Worldcom.  Are you against making money on smart investments?

----------


## Grubendol

There are two ways to view smart investments.  ends vs. means.

that is the quintessential difference between the liberal and conservative views.  The liberal thinks not what is best for "just" himself, but also what is best for the community.  the conservative takes a more personal view on motivation first.

Thus, coming back to the smart investment question, is an investment smart when it makes you money at the expense of others, or is it smart when it makes you money while benefiting others?

----------


## Pete Hanlin

I'm just curious, Pete - why wasn't this your initial response to the first post?
Gee, Spexvet- I thought that's how I _did_ respond to the first post (notice my quote below in response to the first post)?  



> Point being, I think we all need to ease up a bit. The only "stupid" liberals or conservatives are the ones who fail to remain informed on the issues (unfortunately, the less informed an individual is, the more likely s/he is to be adamant in their opinion- since information usually shows one that the issue is not quite as black and white as one originally thought).


If you insist on taking issue for the sake of taking issue (a trait found in both liberals and conservatives), please accept my apology for not stating strongly enough that the kind/tone of rhetoric that began this thread doesn't generally foster intelligent or productive discussions (case in point, this thread).

----------


## Grubendol

Pete, you rock.....for a conservative :p

----------


## k12311997

grubie, 

I believe you are correct the biggest difference is the means to the ends and that what we all want is a stronger America.  The problem I have with Spex is I don't believe that is his goal.  all of his posts are filled with hatred and vitrol not thought or evidence.  

I found the list from the original post and my bumper sticker joke on a web site that has catgorized jokes.   They are jokes.  great they can start a political discourse, but every time Spex gets involved the mud comes out.  


Spex, 

I can respect your views.  I just can't take you seriously when you can't maintain a civil tone.  Why can't you respect others views and debate with logic instead of hatred.

Pete,

Thank you.  a truly thoughtful prospective.

----------


## Spexvet

> ...
> I found the list from the original post and my bumper sticker joke on a web site that has catgorized jokes. They are jokes. great they can start a political discourse, but every time Spex gets involved the mud comes out. 
> 
> 
> Spex, 
> 
> I can respect your views. I just can't take you seriously when you can't maintain a civil tone. Why can't you respect others views and debate with logic instead of hatred.
> 
> ...


I'm sure you thought they were funny - you're a conservative. And of course you [think] I bring out the mud, can't maintain a civil tone, debate with hatred, because I don't agree with you. The original post is offensive and insulting. I read it, and didn't respond, but when someone defended Liberals, and demeaned Bush the way Liberals were demeaned, it was *you* who posted




> just dripping with respect aren't ya


Now, was that respectful? Logical? Civil? No, it was sarcastic, verging on snide. How was my post any different, in tone and inference, than your post or the original post?

When have I not debated with logic, when not replying in kind? It's easy to attack the speaker when you don't like what is being said. I hope this post is not too muddy.

----------


## Spexvet

> ...please accept my apology for not stating strongly enough that the kind/tone of rhetoric that began this thread doesn't generally foster intelligent or productive discussions (case in point, this thread).


Thank you. I accept your gracious apology. :cheers:

----------


## cocoisland58

> There are two ways to view smart investments. ends vs. means.
> 
> that is the quintessential difference between the liberal and conservative views. The liberal thinks not what is best for "just" himself, but also what is best for the community. the conservative takes a more personal view on motivation first.
> 
> Thus, coming back to the smart investment question, is an investment smart when it makes you money at the expense of others, or is it smart when it makes you money while benefiting others?


 
We don't just invest in Exxon Mobil but it has been a good one.  The other good one is the trans-fat replacement ingredient.  It's taken off nicely and it is of course a friendlier stock.  I make no excuse for investing in oil.  We would like to retire in ten years.  We also give quite a bit to charity each year and not just for tax purposes.  Have you ever heard of Heifer International?  A wonderful charity.  But you have to make money to give money.

----------


## k12311997

> I agree with Grubendol about Pete's post. It is no shame to be a conservative that actually uses logic in a discussion, and if everyone of all political persuasions were to actually respect the opinions of someone else and not use logic bombs, then I think the country would be seen as less of an Evil Empire Building country and more of the humanitarian country we used to be before Shrub got elected.
> Now, do you think we'll be in Iran next? North Korea? Our "War President" sure seems like that's all he knows how to do - invade sovreign countries.
> I, along with the rest of the country was all for the action in Afghanistan, but it's clear we got railroaded in to Iraq by Shrub's desire for revenge to please his daddy. Otherwise, why would the Sr. Bush be awarded Saddam's sidearm for a war prize. I knew we were in trouble the minute Shrub said" You've given me political capital - and I intend to spend it!"


Spex,
Dragon's quote in full.   I do not attack his opinion  and yes my comment
was sarcastic, ( unfortunately more my natural state than an attack) how can you talk about respecting one anothers views and then use demeaning names.  

Dragon, Spex, and Grubie 

I don't disrespect you or your views.  If having a differing opinion is disrespectful than I am sorry.  I think I'll take up Harry's no longer playing in this sand box aproach when it comes to political discussion. 



> just dripping with respect aren't ya


spex said  And of course you I bring out the mud, can't maintain a civil tone, debate with hatred, because I don't agree with you

I'm not exactly suree what this says maybee typing to fast or lack of a comma some where but how i read it is.
 1. of course my responses are filled with hatred because I don't agree with you.
 2. of coures you believe my responses are filled with hatred because I don't agree with you.

I would lean more toward number 2 because that would be giving you the reasonable doubt.  But I would not find that to be accurate, the difference being I don't agree with Grubie either and yet I find his approach to an argument more thoughtful and less spiteful.

----------


## Spexvet

> ...
> spex said  And of course you


think



> I bring out the mud, can't maintain a civil tone, debate with hatred, because I don't agree with you
> 
> I'm not exactly suree what this says maybee typing to fast or lack of a comma some where but how i read it is.
>  1. of course my responses are filled with hatred because I don't agree with you.
>  2. of coures you believe my responses are filled with hatred because I don't agree with you.
>  ...


sorry, left out the word "think". #2 is what I was trying to say.

----------


## Grubendol

my usual response to when the political discussion breaks down....

Can't we all just get along?

----------


## DragonLensmanWV

> my usual response to when the political discussion breaks down....
> 
> Can't we all just get along?



But if we all got along, what fun would that be?

I understand the way conservatives used to be. Heck when I was growing up, I liked Ike, I was for AuH2O because my dad was for them. Later, after Nixon, it became clear to me that they were not really representing my views anymore.Reagan's "trickle down" economics did nothing to further the interests of lower-to-mid salaried people. I guess the rich didn't trickle enough down to me.

But still, remember when people used to say, "I disagree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it." Now, if you disagree with the current administration, you are labeled a traitor or at least unpatriotic.So much for Freedom Of Speech.
And the Republicans used to be for smaller government, but they're creating new agencies and engorging the government lickety-split.

Now, some people cannot see how you can voice support for the troops in Iraq (one of our opticians' son is there right now in the Marines), but disagree with how the war got started and how it's being run.It's basically being run like VietNam. I applaud R. Baker for his Nam stint (assuming that's what your ribbon is for). I had lots of friends forced there, all but two that I know came back OK, or mostly so.One's name is on the Wall, the other's making do with 1 1/2 legs, not too bad for a tunnel rat. Anyway,now we're going somewhere. killing a few insurgents, then it's off back to camp without actually taking territory.Granted this is an unprecedented opportunity for outsiders to enter the country to kill US soldiers.

Also, I think it can be granted that both sides have their fair share of scuzzballs. For every Clinton, there's a Gingrich. At least Clinton and Gingrich didn't get 3K US citizens killed.


What offended me about the original post was the ludicrous statements that were put in the mouths of anyone who disagreed with the credo of the poster.It obviously came from a circulated e-mail. I have a conservative friend that always forwards stuff like that to me, so I fax all my Bush jokes to him. Use a bit of humor, and everyone can see it's more like a ribbing,use no humor and it comes off like a Hitler diatribe.

----------


## rinselberg

I would only fault the original poster for not remarking that post, at the very end, as a circulating email that was received.

----------

