“Gay Agenda” is bullshit, paranoid, meaningless crap. So is “secularism.”
'Death Tax" is simply inaccurate and the estate tax is typically misrepresented by right-wing idealogues.
[singing=off key]
You may say I’m a dreamer but I’m not the only one.
I hope some day you’ll join us and the world will be as one. [/singing]
Dio, how about “secular agenda”? 
I am a little miffed at how the Republican party/rightist ideologues have promulgated this notion that liberals have heart but lack the brains. By constantly portraying and describing liberals as whiny, emotional, easily offended and dreamy-eyed idealists, they have succeeded in propagating this myth that conservative ideas are the only ones with intellectual rigor and merit. Some of the mud has indeed stuck and in fact seeped into mainstream consciousness.
(Gotta admit that “Hippie tree-huggers” has a devastating ring to it)
[OFF TOPIC]
Quick story. I was in fifth grade. We were doing a class play and our teacher (for the purposes of this play) was the mother of a fellow student, donating her time. She was a theater-type who was the epitomy of New-Age-Bleeding-Heart. Her idea was to avoid “constraining” us with a script, so she had us pick our own groups, then create our own scripts. In fifth grade. To picture what happened, just imagine thirty kids doing performance art, without having a clue what performance art is. Yeah, that bad. And my father (elucidator, for those not yet privvy), dutiful parent that he, was came to watch it.
Anyway, she did script two things. At the beginning, all the children got together to do some sort of weird dance, though I can’t quite remember what it was. At the end of the performance, we all dressed in white robes and lit a candle from a central flame. Then, we stood in a semi-circle facing the audience. One by one, we named a worldwide change we’d like to imagine, and blew out our candle.
And all of this was done to the tune of “Imagine”.
My dad, brave trooper that he is, did not laugh even once. Until we left the building.
[/OFF TOPIC]
Weird! Darling boy! Let me gather you in my embrace, crush you to my ample bosom, and give you big sloppy kisses! I don’t know if your father has mentioned me, but no matter…my warmest welcome!
Natasha
Of course I’ve heard of you my dear, dear woman! I’ve watched my father’s debates with nigh religious fervor, how could I miss you?
Thank you for the warm and <ahem> ample welcome. Consider this, my 100th post, to be my gift to you.
Oh yeah, and this. Keep it low. If it beeps, don’t worry.
It is the Democratic Party not the Democrat party. I’m a Green, but this just grates on my ears.
Republicans claim they are in favor of small government, while running the largest federal budget and largest deficit in history. It seems “small” is a very nuanced term.
Support the troops rallies get under my skin. The anti-war left does support the troops. We don’t want to see them killed. We are the ones raising hell about our troops being underequipped and underpaid*.
*See Christian Parenti’s article “Stretched Thin, Lied to & Mistreated” in The Nation, Oct. 6, 2003.
The use of the term “free trade” bothers me too. If you don’t support the WTO/FTAA/NAFTA model of free trade, FDI, Strong Intellectual Property Monopolies, and a lowering of standards, you’re against “free trade.” Never mind that you support the trade of most goods and services across borders…
Weird
If you have kept a significant cut for yourself, as government does, then yes, you have become richer. Did you think those politicians work for free?
The hamsters have finally decided to allow me back, so I offer this belated response to Stoid’s first post :
I find it vaguely diminutive, but it’s not so much the meaning of the term itself that I find significant. It’s just that I don’t think I’ve ever seen the term used by a conservative or moderate poster or in a post that spoke positively about Republicans. It’s not that I find the term to be offensive in and of itself, it’s more that I associate the term with very partisan posters.
Besides, GOP is even shorter 
I’m still clueless as to why Shrub is so offensive. It’s playing on his name. It’s not particularly clever, but I fail to see what so awful about it. I’m willing to be enlightened.
I glanced at the thread. I see ideas on what conservatism is. Some of them conflict with my ideas on conservatism. I don’t need to brush up on what conservatism is about just because my view of it does not coincide with yours.
You’re asking to be slotted into the ‘moron’ file, aren’t you?
So ethanol subsidies are tax breaks?
No. One subsidises life, the other subsidises a lifestyle.
Not at all. With farm subsidies, Governments give money to farmers and the farmers keep the proceeds. With your socialise-the-supermarkets scheme, at least the government would get the proceeds.
Let’s look at a few other things conservatives like to spend money on. Like, well, there’s the military (very expensive, that one), and there’s that trillion dollar mess called Iraq. That’s a good one - it’s nicely rolled up with some juicy contracts for U.S. companies like Halliburton. Who said corporate welfare consisted only of tax breaks?
What’s another thing conservatives like to spend money on? Over here, they love giving it to private schools. Yes, I’m serious. They’re spending money on education, but giving it to private schools, not government schools. This is the small-government loving conservatism?
At times it seems like the only difference between spendthrift liberals and spendthrift conservatives is that the cons like to give tax cuts while they’re spending our money.
(Of course, I’ll emphasise that government spending isn’t automatically bad. But it’s a joke for conservatives to talk about ‘spendocrats’ and ‘fiscal responsibility’.)
Cite?
And, should you provide one (which I’d like, so I can get something a little bit more in depth than your one line summation), I don’t see what relevance this has anyway. You say yourself:
“The Democrats do have hold of our media and education systems much more so than Republicans. They also tend to live in cites (4/5 of NYC residents are democrats) while Republicans tend to control the rural areas. The spin on this is that the Democrats are Liberal Ivory Tower Cultural Elitists Types™”
Republicans have cleverly portrayed Dems as being too liberal ( :rolleyes: ) and elitist. Doesn’t make it true.
Though, while we’re looking at this quote:
You are looking to go in the ‘moron’ file, aren’t you? Let’s see a cite for the liberal media assertion. I’m fine with the education bit - it make sense that educators would support the side of politics that supports their interests. But you’ll need something good to back up the liberal media statement.
Look, folks. I am against corportate welfare. I think it’s shitty, and I won’t defend it.
But, saying that the conservative philosophy is for “big government” because it is pro business is just stupid. Corporate welfare isn’t giving our money to giant corporations. It’s giving tax breaks to corporations of all sizes. Tax breaks make the government smaller. Tax breaks to everyone like Bush’s tax cuts, tax breaks to businesses, any kind of tax break.
The other side of the coin, of course is cutting spending. This Bush hasn’t done. But, he certainly raised spending less than a liberal would have.
C’mon. Your post was very cynical. I didn’t accuse you of hating America.
If I did attack you it wasn’t the ole partisan “your beliefs differ from mine so I’m going to claim you hate USA” schtick. You were being an equal opportunity cynic and bashing both parties. Good for you.
I just think that all politicians are corrupt everywhere. This isn’t a US phenomenon. It isn’t a recent thing either. I wasn’t accusing you of America bashing, I was simply pointing out that if you compare our system to actual other working systems then it fares pretty good, IMHO.
I have an understanding about what the first ammendment means. I am curious as to how my responding unfavorably to BinaryDrone’s post on a message board constitutes “government retribution”. Let me assure you that I am not a government employee or agent.
It’s glad that you cleared up the fact that I didn’t accuse anyone of treason. I also have not accused BinaryDrone of cheating on his or her taxes, kicking puppies, or plotting to rule the world.
Oh, yes. I also didn’t make the leap that criticism = hatred. Or anything about us living in a system that allows free speech.
On a related note: MURDERING BABIES IS WRONG, DENIS!
not that I am accusing you of murdering babies, or anything like that
I myself am independant. I have conservative leanings on fiscal issues and liberal leanings on social issues.
It’s interesting how after reading a couple of my posts you not only make the leap that I am a Republican, but that I calim to have some copyright on morality.
Unfortunately after picking through the steaming pile of shite that you have left in this thread I have found nary a diamond. Some insults, some unfounded assumptions, some corn, but no diamonds.
When I hear it or read it I just see hatred.
Maybe it’s an association thing. Every time I see the word, it is followed up by a hatred fueled anti-Bush rant. Maybe it’s not the word itself.
Anyway, like I said earlier, “Dubya” was perfect. It mirrored “Slick Willy”. But, it wasn’t filled with enough venom for the rabidly anti-Bush left.
It is not only an element of conservatism, but a core component of it that the federal government should be kept as small and simple as possible. If you are still unclear on this then you are simply wrong. I have spelled it out for you and given you a very good resource for more information. Your continued and deliberate ignorance on this subject is not my concern.
We are in disagreement. If your mind only allows the possibility that I am a moron, than that’s your problem.
So ethanol subsidies are tax breaks?
WTF do ethanol subsidies in Australia have to do with anything?
It shows how little evidence there is backing your arguments that you need to come up with something so obscure just to provide an example of “big government” conservatism.
Look, even if you come up with 10 good examples of Republicans in the US supporting big government programs, that doesn’t change the fact that a core element of conservatism is smaller government.
Republicans deviate from this all the time. I wish they were better about it. I talked about this back on page one.
So, you have decided that health care is more important than food. So what? A conservative would want both to be run by the private sector as efficiently as possible with minimal government interference. That’s what I want.
Do you want the government running the health care of this country? If so, why not the farming industry also? If they would do a better job of providing health care why not providing food on the table?
Big government indeed.
My analogy is perfectly valid. Liberals wanting the government to run all aspects of health care is comparable to conservatives wanting the government to run all aspects of farming. It just ain’t so.
Yes, the military. I was wondering when you would come up with this. Sure, conservatives are in favor of a strong military. I won’t dispute this. In the conservative mindset that is one of the limited functions that the federal government should have. The 17% or so of the federal budget that goes to the military is well spent IMO, and I would think most conservatives would agree.
I will assume that you are talking about Australia again?
I am not pretending that every American politician is a perfect conservative all the time. I certainly am not making any claims about Australian politics that I know nothing about.
Here in the US the liberal position on education is = spend more money. The conservative position is privatization, vouchers and choice.
Your right in the sense that Bush should be cutting spending. You must admit however, the liberals would be even more on his case if he were to do this.
Shodan has gone into this at length in many recent threads. I will try to find cites on this later, but I must wrap this reply session up soon. I am doing work in between each posting.
Some examples off the top of my head are the election in CA with Arny. The suburban, middle class, democrat registered voter was fed up with the democrat party in that election and pissed off enough that they voted for a Republican. This is widely known and accepted.
I have admitted there is spin here. Just like the Dems spin the opposite way. What I said was that these things are rooted in truth.
It’s good that you are admitting there is a liberal bias in education. This proves you are somwhat in touch with reality.
I’ll work on the media thing in a little bit.
I knew there was another Gallup poll on this recently.
Only 20% of the country self identifies as liberals. Even 1/3 of these fringe liberals admit there is a liberal leaning to the media.
The only term that bothers me is the 4 year term of the current President.
And Debaser, your last sentence is wrong. 18% of self-identified liberal claimed that the media is too liberal according to your own link.
Oh for god’s sake, get over your labeling issues. When it comes to POLICY, the majority of people in this country ARE liberal.
Ah, so the poor dumb peasants are too stoopid to even know that they actually agree with you. Even thought they claim not to in the polls and elections.
Stoid, scoring another point for the Democrats are Liberal Ivory Tower Cultural Elitists Types™ lablel.
Hehe. Now, I will admit it on this one. I do just like saying it. First of all because people keep walking right into it. Also because I have no idea how to make that trademark symbol on my own. I have to keep going back to copy it from the original post by Binarydrone to use it.
Witty!
Yep. I was off by 2%! I stand corrected. Here is the part of the cite I was looking at:
So, they said less than 20%, and I claimed 20%. Of course, the fact that the number is lower actually backs up my position even more.
**
If patisanship in and of itself is a problem for you, then i feel confident that you will not be voting for the current occupant of the White House next year? By any measure, he is by far the most partisan president we’ve had in many decades, possibly ever. (Which would be irritating and upsetting under any circumstance, but given the manner in which he took office, and his professed intentions, well, it’s just galling in the extreme.)
indeed… but unfortunately it refers to the party, not the members of it. GOPERS, perhaps? (I think Pubbies is nicer, but hey…) I consider Pubbies on a par with Dems, which I take no offense at, nor do I dismiss the ideas and posts of someone because of that word choice.
And Debaser, try digging up some policy polls, instead of labeling polls. “Liberal” has been turned into an epithet, so no, most people won’t call themselves that, in the same way most women reject the label “feminist” in the same breath they will agree with virtually all of the fundamentals of feminism.
Labels mean nothing.
When you tell liberals to continue their circle-jerk, you’re either joking or you’re pathologically insane, Shodan. Despite your denials, I’ll continue to extend the benefit of the doubt and assume you’re just a shitty comedian.
As for who’smore out of touch with the mainstream as of today? Why, honey, I’d say that’d be you.
That’s not quite as bad as getting beat by a dead man, like the Attorney General was, but getting beat by an anonymous Democrat is not encouraging for the prez.
But you and your rabid right-wing friends should continue fondling yourselves frenetically; I’m just happy you’re too busy congratulating yourself for being “mainstream” to realize how disgusted Americans are with your antics.
Daniel