And it's possible that the Republican party could be taken over by someone who wants to throw every non-white, non-christian, non-straight person into a gas chamber. ------------------ www.swirve.com "Pre-born, you're fine, pre-school, you're f*****."-George Carlin
Okay, I'm with you now Rocketman95. Good point! ------------------ Time is a great teacher-- only problem is it kills all its pupils.
I hope you're not being sarcastic. I don't think that would ever happen and I know that 99.9% of conservatives aren't like that, just like I hope you know that 99.9% of liberals are like Larry Flynt. ------------------ www.swirve.com "Pre-born, you're fine, pre-school, you're f*****."-George Carlin
Wow! The above statement shows me that you did not even read about the case. Clinton was given a definition of "sexual relations" before he was asked any questions by the Grand Jury in his Civil Rights Sexual Harassment violations lawsuit (that he settled out of court for almost 1 million dollars). Included in that list of activity was oral sex. He lied to his fellow Arkansans, and your ignorance of the case does not change that fact. Wrong! When a person is accused of sexual harassment, the historical behaviour of the defendant is always admissible, as ruled by the judge, and an appeals court. The Supreme Court ruled 9 to 0 that Clinton had to stand trial. The question of perjury was not contingent on a political trial. He was asked a question deemed proper by the judge, and he lied. I wonder how you would feel if your wife, sister, or mother said to you that her powerful boss had police officers take her to his office, the boss exposed himself, and then he asked for oral sex. Would you call her "trailor trash" like Democratic operatives did after the Jones case? Are you anti-female? This Clinton v Jones case is about one simple question- Are we as Americans going to hold our leaders to the same legal standards as we hold the poorest among us? Does it matter that the Clinton Justice Department put a woman in jail for lying about an affair? Do you really feel that Clinton, the highest ranking law enforcement officer in the land should walk away for an offense that merits putting a woman in jail in another case? Are you ignorant of these facts or do you want to live in a Monarchy, where we can worship our leaders? What a perfect ending to your diatribe of ignorance! I think it is fitting that you align yourself with Flynt, who is accused by his own daughter of molesting her as a young girl. Amoral confederates in an amoral cause.... ------------------ I hate rice and beans!
My personal experience is different than this, of course. Every physician I know is more conservative than liberal and considers themselves Republican (and I know a lot of physicians. Not all physicians, of course). Most lawyers I know are also Republicans, but I do know a couple of lawyers who are Democrats (including one who is the epitome of a liberal). But I don't think we see too many radicals of any stripe in everyday life. People tend to be more middle of the road than we see in the leadership of the political parties. I think most of us tend to get more middle of the road as we get older, too (not always, of course. And I disagree with the assertion that people become more conservative as they age. It depends on where they're starting from. I was far more conservative as a 20 year-old than I am as a near-30 year-old). I consider myself a Republican, but there are many, many things that the Republican leadership espouses that I don't agree with. I'm pro-choice. I support the separation of church and state. I support welfare programs. I support more open immigration. I think there are things that the Government should do. The free market is not always the best way to accomplish things (though I support the free market approach more often than not). I support civil rights moreso than the Republican Party Leadership tends to. I'm not as big a fan of the death penalty as many of the Party's leaders are. And so on and so on. Truth be told, I'm probably more Libertarian than Republican, but I'm not 100% behind their stated philosophies, either. (And I've never voted for anyone who wasn't a Republican). Personally, I don't think that we can label a person and know his/her total world view based on that label. We only have a handful of choices among the political parties. The political parties cannot possibly speak for 100% of us 100% of the time. ------------------ Houston Sports Board Film Dallas.com AntiBud.com
mrpaige: Differen't experiences, I suppose... although I admittedly circulate in among liberals. Two of my uncles are doctors, and they're both Democrats. What sort of lawyers do you generally associate with? I'd say an easy majority of those I've met, not just in my acquaintance, have been liberal. The AMA and ABA endorsed Gore this time, though, didn't they? I completely agree that most people don't support one party 100%. It would seem like a case of brain-washing if they did . ------------------ A few years back on the Senate floor... Phil Gramm: "If Democrats could, they'd tax the air we breathe." Ted Kennedy (jumping up): "By God, why didn't I think of that sooner!" Boston College - NCAA Hockey National Champions 2001 [This message has been edited by haven (edited June 05, 2001).]
Most of the lawyers I have met are corporate lawyers, though I also know some family lawyers and a couple of criminal lawyers. One thing to keep in mind is that the majority of physicians and lawyers I know are from the Panhandle, where people tend to be more conservative than other places (though my personal experience has held so far in D/FW, as well. I just don't know as many physicians and lawyers in D/FW). I'm quite certain that the ABA endorsed Gore in 2000, and I'm pretty darn sure that the ABA endorsed Clinton in 1992 and 1996. But the ABA doesn't take a poll of its membership to determine who they will support. The leadership decides that, and the leadership of a group or organization is not always indicitive of the membership as a whole. Here's the question, too. Was the ABA's support of Gore or Clinton based on an overall agreement with his policies, or was their support based on Clinton/Gore's opposition to things like Tort Reform? Is the endorsement a matter of principle or of pragmatism? Again, though, I am going to venture to guess that the majority of lawyers, doctors and the rest of us fall closer to the middle of the road on the vast majority of issues. Personally, I would hesitate to call anyone I know a liberal. They may vote Democratic, but they aren't far enough to the left for me to think of them as true liberals in the common sense of the word today. ------------------ Houston Sports Board Film Dallas.com AntiBud.com
"people become more conservative as they age" I certainly hope this does not happen to me. Conservative economic policies always seem to favor those who have attained wealth whereas the liberals try to help the poor. This is the main reason I support Democrats. ------------------
WM02: I guess you also hope NOT to age. What exactly is wrong with growing conservative with age? Isn't change good? Shouldn't an evolving life experience reflect and rely upon a freshened outlook? That may mean growing conservative. I believe it was Winston Churchill who said something like this: If you're not liberal while young, you don't have a heart. If you're not conservative with age, you don't have a brain. I was ridiculed here for admitting this evolution in my own life and observing the pattern in general. Is remaining liberal a gallant kind of refusal to grow up?! Who knows? Is it just clinging to a set of youthful ideals? Maybe. Try this one on: Conservatives are more willing to make tough, realistic choices. Liberals seem to be wanting to forestall that necessity: 1. Approve of almost anything and everything, and 2. MAKE the haves provide for the have-nots (it's easy to spend others' money). I know it's a complicated matter and EVERYTHING written here is overly simplistic. I'm a hard-assed Republican who likes chick-flicks, cries when children get rescued, and doesn't flinch when the death penalty is carried out. I don't own a gun. I give to charity. I don't mind paying some taxes; I just hate to see so much of our tax-dollar wasted unnecessarily. Those who lean left have good hearts-- but not better than mine. Ann Landers once advised NOT to be so open-minded that your brain falls out. But then there's this: a mind is like a parachute-- only good when open. ------------------ Time is a great teacher-- only problem is it kills all its pupils.
Yeah, and isn't he the guy whose ass we had to save in WWII? ------------------ www.swirve.com "Pre-born, you're fine, pre-school, you're f*****."-George Carlin
Actually, the most important thing to note about Churchill is that he was talking about a different kind of conservative, politically. Europe is different, remember, especially when talking about 50 years ago... In contemporary French politics, for example, the Fascist party has seen a minor rise in popularity/strength. Here in the US, these politicians would be called conservative Republicans (meaning the farthest right, not all). Rich, You were "ridiculed" because your simplistic generalization used to categorize on political view as "youth" (meaning naive, uninformed, etc...) deserved it. I would have had the same reaction if you had said there were no young conservatives. What is the point? Under your standard, people such as: J.S. Mill, Bertrand Russel, Isaiah Berlin, Gustavo Gutierrez, Noam Chomsky, Michel Foucault, Guy Debord, Michael Harrington, Marx, Howard Zinn, etc... all should be dismissed because they are "trying to hold onto their youth" because they represent non-conservative viewpoints (most into very old age -- some just have not gotten there yet). That, my friend, is the real naive view. That is the real view worth dismissing, suggesting a lack experience, maturity, intelligence -- whatever word you deem fit. Why not just allow, *generally*, for a difference of opinion? Are you so insecure that you must attempt to raise yourself above those whose opinions differ by such tactics? ------------------ "You sanctimonious philistines, who scoff at me!" [This message has been edited by rimbaud (edited June 06, 2001).]
Yeah, and isn't he the guy whose ass we had to save in WWII? Who taught you history, Jerry Bruckheimer?
Yeah, so? ------------------ www.swirve.com "Pre-born, you're fine, pre-school, you're f*****."-George Carlin [This message has been edited by Rocketman95 (edited June 06, 2001).]
rimbaud: when I made that remark, I was specifically referring to shanna and haven with whom I was "conversing" at the time. I believe that is when you first jumped all over my case, isn't it? Shanna's remarks struck me as "textbook" and, I think, haven works in a university library somewhere, so to me their take on these matters struck me as right out of a university classroom-- places which are not particularly known for their fair treatment of conservative positions. EVERYTHING said here in a few lines is generalized and simplified. Nothing else is feasible. I realize that and think you should too. I get your meaning and you get mine. Let's not hold each other accountable unto the end for these brief, inexact comments. But thanks for your mean-spirited remarks!!! Thanks for suggesting that I am immature, inexperienced, and unintelligent. By the way, I enjoyed your analogy of the European Fascists to Rightwing Conservatives. That is especially insightful! You are a helluva spokesman for your point of view... ------------------ Time is a great teacher-- only problem is it kills all its pupils.
RichRocket, Your "isolated" statement has been mirrored here in a different thread, that was the reasoning behind my response. From there, we may continue... I believe haven is a student, I do not know about the library part...regardless, why is that an issue? Shanna is not a student, so why are his remarcks "textbook?" During my undergraduate years, I had both conservative and liberal professors. I had two extreme ones: one left, one right. the left was a big comedian and enjoyed it when students made fun of his views, but still promoted them. The right would just make up things about leftist views and controlled the sylabus to reflect his views (this in a 20th Cent. Political Theory class). Point is, there are bad on both sides. Anyway... I never attacked you personally, I was saying that if you promote the view that all non-conservatives are either young or somehow flawed, then that was naive, ignorant, etc. View, not person. You say you know differently, but yet insist on bringin up the same generalization in different contexts -- that is my issue. As far as the fascist/far-left conservative thing...I was trying to illustrate the difference between European and American ideaology. What the French call the Fascist Party has a foundation of beliefs that are similar to the far-right conservatives of this country (Pat Robertson, Buchanan, etc.). That is a fact. When I lived in Paris I got a very cut-and-dry breakdown of all of their parties. It certainly was not meant as a slam against the Republican party, as you seemed to have taken it. Again, just pointing out differences in categorizing. This country is much more limited with its two party system. That, coupled with specific european evolution of political thought, leads to such differences. Thus, it is a little inappropriate to transplant Churchill's words to represent our Bush/Gore options. Seeing as you do not even know my political "pont of view" (I certainly have not brought it into these two threads) I do not see how you can make judgement upon my "spokesman" merit. ------------------ "You sanctimonious philistines, who scoff at me!"
I love potatos!!! they are so yummy. they make frenchfries they make potato chips(but of cource they do, what else would possible make potato chips) could you immagine hop potatos would feel if potato chips were made from brussel sprouts?? what a travesty this would be for spuds world wide. but i digress they make potato pancakes. they are often the most yumy part of stews they are just as yummy in soups baked potatos are yummy. so are potato skins, especially with bacon and saur cream, ahh I feel like Homer "dognuts(potatos), is there nothing they cant do??" if spelled PotatoEs they can humiliate imbicile vice presidents and thus the relevance to this thread. they can be used to power those potato clocks i used to have one of them, anyone else?? they are the foundation which hash browns were built upon. they only need to be cun in half and burried to drow MORE potatos they quite succesfully help feed the world. hurt when thrown hard you can make a potato gun with some PVC piping and some starter fluid, or other highly volitile material. in this incidents potatos are both good and bad. if one hits you you will lkely not be the same person afterwards, and you will hate potatos. but you will still eat them ahh and lets not forhet mashed potatos. both a food, and a way for aliens to communicate with humans(close encounters of the 3rd kind) they are a find sculpting material. potatos have even found their way into a BBS poster signature. I love Potatos. almost as much as I love cheese. potatos are cheaper however, and did you notice that you usually sayumm those potatos would be yummy if we added some______ to them, and not Boy thoser bacon bith would be yumy if we added some potato?? potato is the foundation of food. love the potato!!!! god bless America!! but not in school, lets keep god out of the schools ok people. hell keep got out of my potatos too. PEACE ------------------ Hanta-Force Paintball www.hanta-force.com
I must first preface the meat of this post with me reiterating that I, in no way, meant anything I posted in either this or the other thread to be personal. The only reason I responded was due to the continued generalization that I felt was intellectually irresponsible. Again, I would have reacted the same had someone said that only the elderly are conservative. I feel that it is a fallacy to hold such a generalizations as a "truism." If any of my words seemed too acerbic or personal, I apologize, as that was not my intent. The person of "you" never existed, as you are not real anyway (at least in this context). I do not know you, I do not know your intelligence, nor do I particularly care. I, therefore, would never attack you or suggest that you were in some way un-intelligent. It also follows that I was not trying to persuade you to my argument. There is not point to that. I do not get into discussions to change people's minds. That would be futile. I still feel that you were "slighting" both Shanna and Haven, but that is irrelevant at this point. You brought their "persons" into a political ideaology discussion in order to better promote your side. So be it. Haven, I have not read Arthur Miller's political commentaries, and I certainly would not have seen his piece on Clinton. I intentionally steered clear of anything dealing with that (except for one op-ed that was forced upon me and it read like a trashy romance novel, trying to make the (Democratic) players appear as if they belonged in a romantic tragedy). As far as your bit about people accruing and altering their eliefs to fit their new lifestyles...well, that is possible, but that just makes them ideological whores, right? I have seen my wealth and "estate" grow rapidly over the last few years and my views have stayed pretty much the same (although I do listen to jazz more now). ------------------ "You sanctimonious philistines, who scoff at me!"
VOR, I feel that anything I could post from now on in this thread would be inadequate when compared to your patriotic potato polemic. I must, therefore, bow out! ------------------ "You sanctimonious philistines, who scoff at me!"
Rimbaud: Not saying it's universal; just accounting for a general trend that probably does exist. About Miller: his op-ed piece simply likened the current sex-hunt to his play "The Crucible." RichRocket: My writing style is, in general, relatively acerbic and arrogant. Sorry about that, but it's nothing personal. I write that way in all but my fiction. I think it's the result of too much CX debate . There really is a culture of arrogance there... and it always "looks" better if you act like you're annihilating. I've only been intentionally insulting in tihs thread with "Bela," and that's because I think he's a troll. ------------------ A few years back on the Senate floor... Phil Gramm: "If Democrats could, they'd tax the air we breathe." Ted Kennedy (jumping up): "By God, why didn't I think of that sooner!" Boston College - NCAA Hockey National Champions 2001 [This message has been edited by haven (edited June 06, 2001).]
What a joke! The minute I showed how ignorant you are about the facts surrounding the Clinton Perjury Trial, you shut up and declared me a troll. Go back to school little boy, and mind your lessons before you make yourself look any sillier. BTW, it is very easy to declare oneself a socialist when you a. don't have any employees b. don't produce anything tangible c. don't have a stake in our current system. It is sooooo easy to tear down our great system when they did not sweat to maintain it! Off to Sweden with you please, and take your red beret with you! ------------------ I hate rice and beans!
