Kingdom on Earth (Re: Barack Obama comments)

Obviously, anyone to the left of the individual is a liberal and anyone to the right is a conservative, totally subjective.

---

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other

Actually, both conservatives and liberals are to the right of me.

---

Progress in human affairs has come mainly through the bold readiness of human beings not to confine themselves to seeking piecemeal improvements in the way things are done, but to present fundamental challenges in the name of reason to the current way of doing things and to the avowed or hidden assumptions on which it rests. -- E. H. Carr

quote:

---

Then again, I suppose the term "liberal" is subjective to the eye of the beholder.

---

Right, except that it really isn't.There really are traditional, long-standing, fairly constant characteristics of such groups that political scientists and sociologists have used for a long time to measure the shifting sensibilities of populations and cultures.Remember what I said about how Goldwater and Nixon would be unwelcome in today's Republican party because they were far too liberal? What was a right-leaning Republican only a few decades ago is a moderate Democrat today.The reason I contantly bring this kind of thing up is because I really don't think that most conservatives these days realize how incredibly far-right wing they really are compared to the rest of the world, and also to the history of American politics.People like you seem to complain about "the liberals" and "the far left" as if they actually exist in any appreciable numbers or have any real power in America.They don't and don't.The entire country has swung waaaaaaay right. So far right that anyone who has any sort of Libertarian ideas, once the common mainstream Republican atttiude on most social issues, is accused of being "too liberal"."Government Out Of Our Lives!" Remember that? It was Newt Gingerich's rallying cry.My how things change, eh?

quote:

---

He reduced the size of the military which Reagan spent building it up. The Navy downsized considerably, going down to something like 300 ships.

---

Clinton's military invaded Afghanistan. I think they did just fine, don't you?Better than fine, in fact.That is, until they were divided to go to Iraq...

quote:

---

Did he? How did he do that if the death penalty is a states prerogative?

---

He expanded the number of federal offenses that are eligible for the death penalty.

quote:

---

Do you think that was a bad move?

---

The point is, it was a typical modern Republican move.

quote:

---

Well, the welfare system needed some improvements since indiscriminate giving doesn't help anyone in the long term.

---

But the Welfare State is a traditional Democratic institution, right?Clinton didn't make it any bigger, did he?And I assume you agree that deregulating TV and radio broadcasting companies is a rather Republican move, yes?

quote:

---

He also instituted the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy for the military.

---

Yes. Just like Barry Goldwater supported.

quote:

---

Maybe on certain issues.

---

On almost all issues, actually. Foreign policy, too.

quote:

---

But he seemed pretty consistently Democrat during the bulk of his tenure.

---

That's just crap! The list I provided WAS the bulk of his tenure.Edited by nator, : No reason given.

Actually I don't think NJ's question is beside the point. Do you believe the Communication Decency Act was a bad move? As far as I can tell it is just as liberal a policy as it would be a Republican one.Having tried to fit into the "progressive" "liberal" democrats, I can tell you that I have seen just as much, if not more, demands for censorship, than from the Republicans.One fantastic example is Gore. He and wifey drove censorship during the 80s and 90s. He even proclaimed that proudly in his run for the presidency in 2000. There was a very small backlash, from people like me who don't like censorship.You'll find more acceptance for free speech among the libertarian wing of the Republicans.

---

h
"Civilized men are more discourteous than savages because they know they can be impolite without having their skulls split, as a general thing." - Robert E. Howard

Obviously there is some justification, otherwise our usage of the words would be meaningless. However, there is some subjectivity to it. Ron Paul is a conservative. So is Rush Limbaugh. Do you see many similarities? I see virtually none. Therefore, the term is somewhat confined to private interpretation.And then you go on to give a Goldwater/Nixon analogy that further supports how labels can be subjective. All I am saying is that these labels are not entirely clear, even if there is a legitimate basis for them. What are you basing that off of? They do, and do. On the college campuses of America, liberal identities are the primary faces you will find. You can't turn on your television without seeing liberal-friendly, political correctness. Its everywhere. Liberal ideology is deeply ingrained in this country now or days. And this explains why Bush's ratings are at something ridiculously low, like less than 20%? The country still has elements of the Right. They own the radiowaves, no doubt. But the Left has television. The Left is out-competing the Right. You couldn't possibly be serious that this country is spiraling to the Right, when its clearly going Left. The funny thing about Libertarians is that the Rightwing calls them liberals, and the Leftwing calls them conservative. They seem to be in a niche'. Not really. But dare I say if this continues, we will be OT talking about the Patriot Act?

---

“This life’s dim windows of the soul, distorts the heavens from pole to pole, and goads you to believe a lie, when you see with and not through the eye.” -William Blake

I also was disappointed with that comment, as it left you wondering, just wtf he meant by it.All I could figure was he wants people to know he is religious, but is also a realist? I don't know.But the flip side is, thats about the only thing that he's said that made no sense. He is pretty well spoken.

quote:

---

And this explains why Bush's ratings are at something ridiculously low, like less than 20%?

---

No, it explains how he won the Republican nomination and almost won two presidential elections.Just because he is a bumbling idiot who has made a shambles of everything he touches doesn't mean the country hasn't marched to the right.I mean, come on, Juggs. Can you see a Republican politician holding the positions that Barry Goldwater did a few decades ago? He was known as "Mr. Conservative", for heaven's sake. He was the "radical" republican, the "right-winger" just a few decades ago. Now, he's be considered a liberal.Nixon founded the EPA, OSHA, and the Endangered Species Act. Nixon is considered a pretty conservative Republican, yet he did all those things. Can you imagine the uproar in the Republican party if anything like this was proposed by any of them today? Heck, I don't think it would be particularly welcome within the Democratic party, either, becasue I think they would be worried about appearing too "liberal".

quote:

---

They do, and do. On the college campuses of America, liberal identities are the primary faces you will find. You can't turn on your television without seeing liberal-friendly, political correctness. Its everywhere. Liberal ideology is deeply ingrained in this country now or days.

---

Name their leaders. Demonstrate their influence and power. Report the numbers of members in their organizations. List the liberal pundits on TV and demonstrate how there are so many more of them than the conservatives. Demonstrate that FOX news is not popular at all with the American people and will be shutting down operations soon and NPR has more money than it knows what to do with. Edited by nator, : No reason given.Edited by nator, : No reason given.Edited by nator, : No reason given.

Don't confuse Goldwater's libertarian stance with Reagan's conservatism. I think that in many ways, the Republican party has gone through a metamorphosis. But so has the Democrat party. And for someone who called Kennedy a true liberal, you forget the fact that it was he that drug the country in to one the most unpopular wars in the history of the world. And then to top it off, it was Johnson that kept it in Southeast Asia.Those are very uncharacteristic of Democrats now or days. They either wouldn't even engage, or they would tuck tail and run at the first sign of trouble, such as what happened in Somalia, under Clinton, I might add. I think that's fantastic! And its only a misnomer that conservative doesn't mean conservationist. Its been a benchmark of Republicans, starting with Teddy Roosevelt, to concern itself with the environment. But for as every bit as one could say the Republican party has been hijacked by environmentally unfriendly crusaders, its just as easy to say that the Democrat party has been hijacked by the Green party, with its extreme stance on environmental issues. I think they'd all applaud. Who can find fault with a single one of those acts? Noam Chomsky, Ward Churchill, Ellen Degeneres, Martin Sheen, Al Gore, Al Franken, Al Sharpton, Susan Sarandon, "Hanoi" Jane Fonda, Norman Lear, Ted Turner, Leonardo DiCaprio, George Stephanopolous, Bill Maher, Rob Reiner, Robert Redford, Sean Penn, Michael Moore, Oprah Winfrey, George Soros, Maureen Dowd, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc.Do you really need to demonstrate their influence or their power? It should be more than evident. FOX news is quite popular, but then, so is ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC, etc, etc, which boasts all the other liberal identities. Particularly that extremely conservative show, The Family Guy. I guess you are going to tell me next that conservatives run Comedy Central too.What else is transparently conservative? CBN? Pfftttt. You can have it. They are of no help to any one, most of all, God.

---

“This life’s dim windows of the soul, distorts the heavens from pole to pole, and goads you to believe a lie, when you see with and not through the eye.” -William Blake

considering our current president, that's quite a compliment.

Well, actually, the creators of South Park are ocnservative.You know what's funny about Ward Churchill? That you listed him as a leader in the liberal movement, or something to that effect. He was recently (As in, several months back) kicked out of CU-Boulder.Wait, a liberal being kicked out of an institution you would consider liberal?I know of only 11 of the people you listed. Only 3-4 by what they've actually said or written. They are, to me, merely names. I'd hardly call any of them my leader(s). Check your facts. It was the Eisenhower adminstration that got us into that mess known as Vietnam, officially. That would be in 1955. He sent the MAAG to train the South Vietnamese Army. Previously, they had been in Vietnam to supervise the spending of the millions of dollars the Truman and Eisenhower administrations sent to support the French effort. brackets mine.Of course, if one doesn't really look at the situation, you can get away with making such asinine comments. It appears that part of the reason the marines were pulled out of Lebanon was for US-Arab relations.In the case of Somalia, the US forces were part of a larger UN peacekeeping force--UNOSOM I, followed by UNITAF, followed by UNOSOM II. In the case of UNOSOM I, it was ineffective, so the peacekeeping mission was expanded, leading to Operation Restore Hope, which was more succesful. The US forces associated with it withdrew, because the mission was succesful. UNITAF was then replaced by UNOSOM II, during which the infamous "Black Hawk Down" incident occurred. UNUSOM II was pulled out because it was unsuccesful at restoring government order. Now please keep in mind that in all three cases the US forces were part of the UN peacekeeping mission, and as such, would have had to be withdrawn regardless of who was in the administration.

None of those networks are liberal, NJ. We've been over this. They're stenographers for the GOP, and they have been since the Clinton days. If anything they act more like stenographers now because of their self-perception of being "liberal".Anybody who's been following the Joe Klein/Time Magazine controversy knows that the mainstream media doesn't do anything these days except reprint GOP statements verbatim.

Being a philosopher, you of all people should know that what you just said was a logical fallacy. Personally, I'm not a racist, but even if I am a racist it has nothing to do with what I think about the existing sexism in this country. I have a problem with everyone that couldn't vote for someone simply because of that person's sex or race or sexual orientation or religious background. Well, me too actually.

---

Owing to the deficiency of the English language, I have occasionally used the academic jargon generator to produce phrases that even I don't fully understand. The jargons are not meant to offend anyone or to insult anyone's intelligence!

Okay... I stand confused.But you are right that someone not liking X, gives no reason why they should accept someone not liking Y. Snif.

---

h
"Civilized men are more discourteous than savages because they know they can be impolite without having their skulls split, as a general thing." - Robert E. Howard