A Clear Choice in 2008
February 22nd, 2008 at 11:16am Mark Noonan
Yep:
I think what we are watching in the Democratic primary is historic. First, there has not been a candidate nominated for President more liberal than Barack Obama since George McGovern — not Carter, Mondale, Dukakis, Clinton, Gore, or Kerry. This is unapologetic liberalism in the classic European-socialist sense, and for the first time in many years we will see its envisioned agendas without Clintonian trimming or apologetics — the flip side of the purist Goldwater in 1964. Obama will put the best face on this ultra-liberalism and the voters can freely decide. A real cut-and-dry choice.
Second, I don’t think there has been this much acrimony for so long in a Democratic primary since the Humphrey campaign of 1968, much more venom than Kennedy-Carter in 1980 or Hart-Mondale in 1984. But more importantly, the fault-line this time is not ideological so much as personal, with ugly undertones that will be hard to heal, given there can’t be horse-trading over policies. In the end, the Clintons are livid that the upstart Obama cut in front of the line and destroyed what was otherwise a near-decade long carefully planned and scripted return to power until 2016.
Our liberal friends are already convinced that they’ve won in November by a massive landslide - this is because liberals live in a dream world entirely divorced from reality (and in a really ironic twist, they call themselves the “reality based community”); but be that as it may, in a McCain/Obama contest, the battle will be between liberalism and conservatism in very stark terms. Ever since Dukakis was creamed in 1988 mostly due to the fact of his liberalism, Democrats have shied away from that label, but Obama is embracing it (though not, of course, actually spelling out what his liberal policies will entail) - and liberals are convinced that America has turned left, and are ready for an unabashedly liberal President and government. We shall see - so far, when we battle between liberalism and conservatism, the record is Conservatism 6-1…will 2008 make it 6-2? So far, only Goldwater failed to convert the battle of conservatism vs liberalism into victory for conservatism…but that was back in 1964, before liberalism poisoned itself with “new left” ideology from 1968 forward.
Entry Filed under: Campaign 2008, Democrats, Republicans
111 Comments
1. Amanda | February 22nd, 2008 at 11:26 am
“…unapologetic liberalism…”
You’re right. I’m not sorry. “Liberal” isn’t a dirty word.
2. SEW | February 22nd, 2008 at 11:34 am
A significant number of Billary supporters will not vote for Hussein. But watch him start reaching out to them on March 5th.
Moderate Democrats and outraged Billary supporters will vote McCain, as will those that project the vision of Hussein as commander in Chief.
Another stolen election. What a group, Dukakis, Gore, Kerry and Obama.
3. Retired Spook | February 22nd, 2008 at 11:48 am
You’re right. I’m not sorry. “Liberal” isn’t a dirty word
I agree, Amanda, but it is a very descriptive word connected to an ideology that has become increasingly un-American, anti-capitalism, anti-free market and anti-personal responsibility.
4. Retired Spook | February 22nd, 2008 at 12:01 pm
Maybe it’s just the election season, and this is an election season unlike any other in a long time; but has anyone but me noticed that the Lefties who post here have just gotten kookier and kookier? They have an extraordinarily difficult time staying on topic and engage in almost no original thought. I suspect the majority of them are young (20’s and 30’s) which is a horrible reflection on the state of education in this country. The only positive thing that can be said is that most of them are civil.
5. sam | February 22nd, 2008 at 12:01 pm
Spook,
Who are you to say what is ant-american??
6. Joe | February 22nd, 2008 at 12:03 pm
A significant number of Billary supporters will not vote for Hussein.
That is where you are wrong. Everywhere you read or hear, Dems are happy with EITHER of their candidates. But hey… keep calling them names instead of their first or last names. It really shows your maturity level.
7. Sunny | February 22nd, 2008 at 12:11 pm
SEW | February 22nd, 2008 at 11:34 am
A significant number of Billary supporters will not vote for Hussein.
You never fail to deliver - you are an idiot1
8. SEW | February 22nd, 2008 at 12:14 pm
“keep calling them names”
I wouldn’t dare call him ‘chimp’ or ‘Hitler’. But why do you suggest using his given name of Hussein is “calling them names”?
9. Almiranta | February 22nd, 2008 at 12:19 pm
Sam, great post!! Too funny.
Joe, just going by what the most ardent supporters on each side say, there may very well be a backlash against whichever Dem candidate is nominated. You need to start getting out more. Daily Kos and Airhead America (are they still on, by the way, or has Soros pulled the plug?…) are not going to tell you anything but the simplistic party line you have just regurgitated.
Amanda, we merely wonder why liberals shy away from identifying themselves as such. We conservatives are proud of being conservative—as a matter of fact, most of us identify ourselves by our political philosophies first, and then by our political affiliations—if we even have any.
But when is the last time you heard any candidate stand up and say “As the most liberal of all the candidates running, I think I should be the party’s nominee”. Or anything even remotely similar.
Whether you are talking about small-L liberal, which is the majority of the Democrat Party, or capital-L Liberal, which is the more (and increasingly radical) far left movement trying to take over the party, the word itself is dodged, avoided, and shunned.
We just wonder why.
No, if you have to come up with an indentifier for your political positions, it is some inaccurate word like “Progressive”—which is a hoot, as for the last decade or so the so-called Progressives have been so totally REgressive it is a wonder they can utter the word with straight faces.
Unless the New Socialist Dictionary defines PROgressive as moving backward to failed economic policies, the disaster of punitive taxation, the debunked theory that forced confiscation of private property for redistribution by the State is a move forward, the choice of the collective over the individual, and the stifling of free speech and freedom of religion.
And it very well may. It would not be its first foray into Orwell Country.
10. Joe | February 22nd, 2008 at 12:21 pm
Calling him Hussein is not calling him names. It just shows that you have a very weird fear of anything (including names) that appear to be from the Middle East. In that fact… you are a dope.
But anyway, the choice is absolutely clear on who we should vote for! I say we all vote for that guy who has a co-chair of his Presidential campaign INDICTED (aka Rick Renzi).
If Obama is a Communist because he once knew a Communist, then I guess that means McCain is corrupt because he KNOWS someone that is corrupt. Right?
11. Joe | February 22nd, 2008 at 12:23 pm
Almiranta,
You have your info wrong. If Obama wins, Hillary supporters will be disappointed, but will still be happy with Obama and vice versa. That is much different than having a backlash against the other.
You need to get your story straight and not just make crap up.
12. Some Assembly Required | February 22nd, 2008 at 12:30 pm
Spook,
That post can apply to both sides on this website, not just the ‘kooky’ left.
I am one of these young (20’s - 30’s) you speak of. I spent my last years in high school and graduated from college while Bush was enacting policies. Needless to say I’m fairly well educated, or at least my employer thinks so. From what I gather people like me are fed up with where the country is. We can’t trust the news, can’t trust any government officials, seems like every week theres some other scandal with the bush government. I fail to see how Questioning policies and decisions are a sign of stupidity? Or coinciding a point instead of blaming the previous president.
SEW,
Obama and Hillary are running on basicly the same platforms. Their policies are almost identical, to the point where the voters are having a tough time distinguishing between the two. So to say anyone who supports Hillary will not support Obama is simply naive.
13. SEW | February 22nd, 2008 at 12:31 pm
Joe, I don’t have a weird fear. I find pleasure. It is you liberals that have the fear, not of AQ, but the association of Obama and his given middle name. And your fear will be realized in November. That is obvious from your objections about using his legally given name.
In the meantime, I will cast my vote for Hillary on March 4 only. Good luck in Denver!
14. Joe | February 22nd, 2008 at 12:42 pm
See SEW, that is where you are wrong. Dems are not afraid of his middle name. We don’t care what his middle name is.
What is aggravating is people like you that will bring up the name over and over and over again. There appears to only be one reason to and that is to make sure the uneducated among the wavering Republicans, as well as the gung-ho Iraq crowd that still believes that Iraq had something to due with 9/11, know what his middle name is in hopes that they make a connection that he is or at least is similar to Sadaam Hussein.
But hey… keep bringing it up. People will just continue laughing at you.
15. SEW | February 22nd, 2008 at 12:44 pm
So Hillary, Barack and the MSM will be able to kiss and makeup? Barack and the MSM will certainly try, Hillary will NOT buy. Nor will her supporters.
16. SEW | February 22nd, 2008 at 12:49 pm
“There appears to only be one reason to and that is to make sure the uneducated among the wavering Republicans, as well as the gung-ho Iraq crowd that still believes that Iraq had something to due with 9/11, know what his middle name is in hopes that they make a connection that he is or at least is similar to Sadaam Hussein.”
All of that into using a legally given name? Diagnostic for the liberal delusional mind. No one is laughing at you, it is the associated paranoia.
17. Joe | February 22nd, 2008 at 12:53 pm
SEW,
Again, your opinion. Just because you believe Hillary is the anti-Christ, you think she and her supporters will not “kiss and makeup”?
All you do is toss crap against the wall and hope it sticks. Good Luck to you with that.
18. Some Assembly Required | February 22nd, 2008 at 12:54 pm
Like I said, Naive.
19. Retired Spook | February 22nd, 2008 at 12:56 pm
Unless the New Socialist Dictionary defines PROgressive as moving backward to failed economic policies, the disaster of punitive taxation, the debunked theory that forced confiscation of private property for redistribution by the State is a move forward, the choice of the collective over the individual, and the stifling of free speech and freedom of religion.
Almiranta, that is just so right on the money. The problem I see here is that Lefties like SAR (see his 12:30 post) are young enough that they don’t remember how the policies that they and the candidates they support espouse failed in the past, because accurate accounts of such failed policies have been edited and outright deleted from elementary, high school and college history textbooks. Anyone who doubts that, I challenge you to go to your nearest public school and ask to look at a history book. Pretty tough not to repeat history when you’re prevented from learning it in the first place.
20. Jay Gaultieri | February 22nd, 2008 at 1:07 pm
Back in 2004 when this blog was Blogs4Bush it was one of the more popular political blogs on the Internet. These days it’s the refuge for a dozen or less grumpy old men to post at. To understand the power of this demographic look at the influence talk radio had on the selection of the GOP nominee: They all hate John McCain with a passion and he got the nomination anyway.
The Obama phenomenon is a direct repudiation of the hatred, fear, and ignorance President Bush championed for eight years. Obama is doing something Reagan did 28 years ago. He’s making people feel good about being Americans again. And lies about his religious faith and gay-bashing won’t change that.
21. Tractatus | February 22nd, 2008 at 1:10 pm
this is because liberals live in a dream world entirely divorced from reality (and in a really ironic twist, they call themselves the “reality based community”)
I’ll grant you this, Noonan: You seem to have figured out that when you say the above, it’s a punchline. Now you just have to figure out that the target of the punchline isn’t who you think it is.
PS: Have you looked up the word “fact” yet? Learning it might also help you with learning what the word “reality” means (Hint: “Reality” is not the world inside your head).
22. Some Assembly Required | February 22nd, 2008 at 1:15 pm
Spook,
Just because a policy failed in the past does not mean it will in the future. What you fail to understand in your old age (Since you call me young) is that times change. What once may not have been possible can be because things change. That is the fundamental problem once you pass a certain point in your lives. Change goes out the window for tradition because it is familiar and easier. This happens to everyone, it’s only a matter of time. Also, more information is available to people like me now. We not only can learn about failed american policies but how similar policies are working for other governments in the world. The world is becoming smaller and smaller by the day. For instance, being able to speak two languages in Europe is almost a requirement now a days.
23. eric | February 22nd, 2008 at 1:15 pm
Also, Spook, let’s see if any of our resident lefties can provide examples of where socialism has worked and flourished.
24. rockville | February 22nd, 2008 at 1:19 pm
Retired,
I am younger than you, but have lived as an adult with Regan, Bush, Clinton and BUSH.
Repeating history is all that history is about, but my question is…”Should SAR not vote because he is not conservative and wants to see a more understanding and balanced gov’t?”
It is crazy that everyone is talking about Obama middle name and the blog skipped McCain’s news. I don’t find it relevent, but conservatives seemed to be scrapping barrels to find dirty.
If Cindy can live with issues, so can I.
25. Some Assembly Required | February 22nd, 2008 at 1:23 pm
Are we really going to go through this again? I’ll say Canada and Europe, you’ll say their stagnant economies and too much government control. I’ll say people are not losing their houses, you’ll bring China and Cuba into this. To which I’ll say there communist. Then there will be some name calling, Mark or Matt will post another article to which will start another debate but wind us right back to where we are now.
26. TiredofLibBullShit | February 22nd, 2008 at 1:23 pm
If “liberalism” wasn’t a dirty word, then why don’t liberals call themselves “liberals”?
Why do they insist on calling themselves “progressive” when their agenda is devoid of progress?
Stagnant is more like it.
27. Herkimer X. Arbuthnot | February 22nd, 2008 at 1:27 pm
I don’t believe that everyone shares your enthusiasm, many - many Hillary supporters will not vote for Obama; that’s simply a fact.
Retired Spook,
How many times have we heard that argument, it didn’t work before because the right people didn’t do it. Reminds me of Bullwinkle pulling a rabbit out of his hat, “This time for sure!”
Doing the same thing again and again expecting different results … hmmmm …
28. FoolYouTwice | February 22nd, 2008 at 1:31 pm
Spook,
Do you honestly believe there is a vast leftwing conspiracy to remove failed liberal policies from history books?
Your hatred of liberals is allowing you to believe completely made up things.
How many history books have you actually looked at to draw this conclusion? How many history books are out there for schools to use? Who exactly would be deleting this material?
Finally, please tell me what specific incidents/policies are not in a specific history book that should be. Then, after showing why that is an obviously relevant piece of information that has been excluded, please show how many history books exclude this piece of information. This would be a small start to actually proving your point. I doubt you can handle even this, but we shall see.
Have you really thought about any of this in a realistic way or are you just going to believe that it must be true because you hate liberals?
Some actual evidence from you for once would be nice.
29. Brian (Boston) | February 22nd, 2008 at 1:33 pm
The problem is that the conservatives have been anything but conservatives. I wouldn’t mind a bit of conservatism, but I have not seen it in years.
30. Joe | February 22nd, 2008 at 1:36 pm
Herk,
To prove the point, you point to an Oprah blog? Anyway…. read thru the comments. There are a number of people saying they WOULD vote for him. There are a number saying they wouldn’t. If I were a betting man, when it comes down to it, anyone calling themselves a Democrat would NOT vote for someone that says he is ok with an endless war and would vote against him.
Lib, call people liberal all you want. It is the same as calling Obama “Hussein”. Just because you think it may scare people. Well… people are wise to that. So you and SEW can continue with your foolishness.
Oh wait… I guess you are, in fact, a USEFUL IDIOT.
31. Uncommon | February 22nd, 2008 at 1:37 pm
As far as the original post is concerend - if you look at any of the Primary and Caucus results the first thing you will realize is that more often than not, more people voted for Obama and Hillary than all of the other Republican candidates combined. In many cases (such as California and New York) more people voted for just Hilary or Obama than all the other Republican candidates combined. So unless conservatives are being dishonest by by artifically raising the liberal vote count and are planning to switch in November or are laying in waiting until then, it doesn’t look promising. Even if you guys are right and some Hilary/Obama supporters are not happy with the Democratic nominee and defect from the party, their numbers will not be enough to tip the scales in favor of the GOP. In the face of these facts it is very naieve and cowardly for Mark to sit here and say that liberals are living in a dream world, when it is he that is delusional.
Now this idea that somehow liberals are ashamed of their political beliefs and shy away from said label I have this to say. When people like Mark, Spook and Alma, say they stand up and proudly espouse their conservative dogma and political affiliation they are simply saying “I have tunnel vision”. When you allow yourself to be stuck in any type of label you are forced to believe in a certain set of principles and beliefs and cannot allow yourself to think outside the box you have put yourself. Labels lack critical thinking, individual creative thought process, and limit your ability to experience other view points that contrast your own. Basically labels create robots, people who are unwilling to compromise, unable to understand differences, and inable to work with others they disagree with. Ignorance breeds intollerance and there is no act more ignorant that boxing yourself into a label. And the correct term for those that don’t want to espouse this ignorance are called Independents not Progressives.
32. Some Assembly Required | February 22nd, 2008 at 1:39 pm
You can use all the analogy’s you want but the simple fact is the system is not working. We can keep going and run it right into the ground or we can try to turn this mess around. Regardless infighting has got to stop. You say it yourself education is failing, so is healthcare, the economy isn’t in much better shape either. I’m just wondering what it will take for you to recognize that this is not working and something must be done other than a tax cut.
As for socialism not working, I dare you to take a trip up to Alberta right now and not find a well paying job. Or go to France and talk to anyone about free healthcare vs taxes (with an open mind).
33. navydad | February 22nd, 2008 at 2:08 pm
So Joe, do you honestly believe there are no “racists” in the dem party?
If so, you may want to crawl out from under your rock and open your eyes. Even the DBM has indicated there are some that would never vote for a woman or an African-American, no matter what.
I live in a very rural part of NorCal, and have many older dem friends that have told me, in confidence, they would simply not vote if O’bigears won the nod.
34. Joe | February 22nd, 2008 at 2:15 pm
navydad, I never claimed there weren’t. There will always be in both parties. It is sad to say that there will always be that element in the U.S.
Maybe I’m too much of an optimist, but I really do believe that those are truly a minor part of the country and if those stay home or vote McCain, I honestly don’t think it is that huge of a difference in the vote.
Now… if I have under-estimated the number of people that feel that way and wouldn’t vote for an African-American or not vote for a woman, then that is truly sad. Then the people would get what they deserve and that is another dismal 4 years of a President that doesn’t fight for their interests (although at least McCain will fight more for their interests than the current resident of the WH).
I like to think more people are not that racist.
35. Retired Spook | February 22nd, 2008 at 2:17 pm
Do you honestly believe there is a vast leftwing conspiracy to remove failed liberal policies from history books?
FYT, I don’t believe that’s what I said, but I can certainly see how one might come to that conclusion. Have you looked at a primary or secondary education history text lately?
Your hatred of liberals is allowing you to believe completely made up things.
I’ve NEVER said that I hate Liberals. I think you have me confused with keefer, heh heh. Some of my best friends are Liberals. I just make the continued observation that liberal social, political and economic policies don’t work very well. It’s one of the reasons Liberals have such a poor history of being elected President.
How many history books have you actually looked at to draw this conclusion?
Apparently more than you have, the most recent one being my 13-year-old granddaughter’s 7th grade text. BTW, I minored in history in college back in the 60’s so I do have an historical perspective. This wasn’t just an idle comment. Here’s the perspective of an actual history teacher.
Finally, please tell me what specific incidents/policies are not in a specific history book that should be. Then, after showing why that is an obviously relevant piece of information that has been excluded, please show how many history books exclude this piece of information. This would be a small start to actually proving your point. I doubt you can handle even this, but we shall see.
“Handling it” wouldn’t be a problem. Acquiring a couple contemporary public school history books and responding to your question in the context of this thread might be a little tougher. That’s why I said, go to the nearest public school and ask to see a history text book. The real problem, as I think about it, is that you wouldn’t be able to recognize the revisionism if it jumped off the page and bit you in the nose.
36. Herkimer X. Arbuthnot | February 22nd, 2008 at 2:24 pm
Joe,
It’s called the Bradley Effect after democrat Tom Bradley; for whom thousands of liberal democrats swore they were sophisticated and enlightened and could vote for an African-American, but once in the voting booth voted for (middle-aged white) Deukmejian.
I voted for Bradley that year. The racist cowards on the left didn’t.
37. Joe | February 22nd, 2008 at 2:24 pm
Spook: Have you looked at a primary or secondary education history text lately?
I’m not defending one way or another, but in primary and secondary education, you are taught the high levels of history. Those grades don’t have the time to go thru each individual Presidential Administration and compare and contrast the economy, domestic and foreign policy, etc.
Sure… I’d love to see more domestic history of both good and bad Presidents and the results of their policies covered more thoroughly for my daughter. But that just isn’t going to happen. There isn’t enough time in the day or the year. So the highlights are covered. The revolutionary war, the civil war, WWI and WWII, Vietnam and now Iraq. The Depresion. Civil Rights movement, etc. There is no time for what you are proposing.
If you are to major in U.S. history in college, then great. You can cover it all. In a regular “History” class, how can they possibly cover it all?
Anyway….. back to the topic.
38. Joe | February 22nd, 2008 at 2:28 pm
Yes Herk. I understand what the Bradley Effect is. I also know that was 25 years ago. Again, maybe I’m too optimistic, but I like to think people have mostly gotten over that in those 25 years.
In those last 25 years, you have a whole generation of kids that have now grown up with other races in their schools and on sports teams. They now have friends of various races. Those are the kids that are now voting.
In 1982, those that were voting grew up in the 70’s when there were still a LOT of racial tension.
Geesh. You people are all so negative.
39. Some Assembly Required | February 22nd, 2008 at 2:30 pm
Spook,
School does continue after the 9th grade. As well, the internet offers more information to kids than any classroom could possibly do. Sadly I do not believe kids are taking advantage of it, personally I blame MTV and celebrity culture on this. Nobody really reads anymore. But to try and back your point by sighting a history book a 13 year old brings home makes me wonder about what kind of education you received in the 60’s?
The real shame is that once highschool students reach voting age, most of them really don’t care. It’s not ‘cool’ to care about politics so most refuse to take a deeper look into issues and policies. This is where Obama is truly changing everything for this generation.
40. SteaM | February 22nd, 2008 at 2:45 pm
I agree with this although I think it’s a little unfair for those who are of an more seasoned generation that still embraces progressive concepts and change as well. There are plenty of our elder American citizens who are open minded enough to not get stuck in their ways.
However, I do agree with what you say in that it can become an issue when there is a desperate need for some change and the only way it will happen is if the younger generation can work with the older to get something accomplished. Maybe even to the point of overriding them with sheer numbers at the polls on election day.
Its why I think the voting age should never be higher than 18. We need young voices with new ideas and fresh perspectives to add to the public forum in a government that is by the people like ours is supposed to be.
41. Some Assembly Required | February 22nd, 2008 at 2:55 pm
SteaM,
What I said was more of a generalization, a stereotype if you will. I apologize if it offended you or anyone but it was not my intention.
Yes, a fresh perspective on things is needed at times and I don’t know about you, but people older than me often say it’s refreshing and inspiring to see so many young people getting involved in the process and becoming aware of the issues which will impact them in the future.
Obama will certainly be a force to be recked with if he wins March 4th. I think this is all but to apparent by the desperation shown on this blog alone in the past couple of days.
42. SEW | February 22nd, 2008 at 2:58 pm
steaM, The way is change. Hope. Maybe elect the most liberal senator of our time to unite both sides of the aisle? Awesome idea.
Maybe George McGovern for VP to solidify that approach, Jimmy Carter for Fed Reserve Chairman?
43. FoolYouTwice | February 22nd, 2008 at 3:11 pm
Spook,
Here is your original quote:
You claim that accounts of failed liberal policies are being outright deleted or edited in history books at all levels of education in this country. You use this as your basis for why young people would support policies which you believe have failed in the past. These are very wide encompassing statements that in order to be true would require a consiparcy at an amazing level.
An extraordinary claim such as this does require an amazing amount of proof. You have only claimed to have seen one current history book used in the tens of thousands of schools across this country. From that book, you have provided no examples of failed liberal policies that have been deleted from it. You did provide a link to a blog, which shows one paragraph from one book which I imagine is many hundreds of pages long. Even if this blog post demonstrates your point (which I wouldn’t say it does - it is a pretty weak example of what you claim to be happening), it would barely begin to rise to the level you made in your original post.
If this is happening at every level of education across this country, and at a high enough rate that young people are completely uninformed; it should be easy enough for you to provide many examples of this.
Or, you can admit that you really don’t know how much this is or isn’t happening. You can admit that you really haven’t looked into this in any meaningful way.
Apparently you can’t recognize it either as you have failed to point out any of this revisionism you have seen.
44. Joe | February 22nd, 2008 at 3:11 pm
SEW, how about someone who is willing to compromise and work accross the isle REGARDLESS of party affiliation?
You know… just like this President does:
45. BARRASSO | February 22nd, 2008 at 3:18 pm
Ah wingnuts, the majority of the country disagrees with you therefore they must be brainwashed by liberal education, liberal media, liberal talk radio, liberal internet, liberal telegraph, liberal cave painting, etc…
It can’t be that people have thought for themselves and made a choice that would benefit them the most personally.
It must be a conspiracy that is the only option!!!!
Keep up the logic and thought like this I will enjoy the dems controlling all branches of government next year.
46. Joe | February 22nd, 2008 at 3:19 pm
Deleted - off topic.
47. SteaM | February 22nd, 2008 at 3:20 pm
SAR,
I wasn’t offended at all so no worries there. I just wanted to add that one thing. My grandparents on both sides represent this well for me.
They are all in their late-80’s. Both men served in the military. All of them being religious. One side is southern baptist and very Bush-republican. Good people who like to live quiet simple lives, go to church every week, and strict southern baptist values are very important to them. The other side is pretty much the same except they are hardcore liberal democrats who, if they had the internet, would probably join right with you and me as progressive democrats .
The republican side, we do not talk politics but they are good hard-working people. However, they are very uninformed or their realities are bit blurred because they don’t seem to get the picture of what is going on outside their small towns and their circle of family and friends who also think and perceive things in a similar way. Many are friends they have at their church were the preacher guides them along subtly giving them direction regarding who to vote for using issues like gay marriage and abortion. Conservative radio or television, if they can get it or even watch it, reinforces this and strengthens it.
The democrat side is very cynical but have their values and have worked hard their whole lives. But in conversations speaking quietly at the side of the room at family gatherings so my republican family members can’t hear us I’ve talked to both of them about many current issues. My grandfather just looked at me once rubbing his chin and said, looking around the room to make sure it was just he and I in this conversation, “boy, that Iraq war looks like a mess”. And all I could say was: “yes, sir, it does”. My grandmother and I talked about the small possibility of the towers coming down having been an inside job or once we were talking about Cheney shooting the guy in the face and said, “I don’t think it was an accident. He knew something, I bet!”.
But I am only 30 so you cannot offend me in what you were saying. I knew what you meant, I agree with you and I think it’s important for the younger generations to have a spot at the table, and maybe a majority if they are willing to commit to it. The progressive open-to-change members of the older generations will join in and try to help out as well but will need our help.
48. SEW | February 22nd, 2008 at 3:26 pm
George always gets his way. He is a uniter. I wonder why the “unbiased” story you present has “war on terror” in quotation marks?
49. Joe | February 22nd, 2008 at 3:31 pm
Deleted - off topic…and really rather strange, as its such a wide-ranging topic, you really had to work at it to get off topic…naturally, your choice of off-topic stuff was more mindless Bush-hatred…
50. Some Assembly Required | February 22nd, 2008 at 3:35 pm
SteaM,
Sounds to me like it’d make for an interesting thanksgiving dinner at your place.
I am 25 myself though I must admit two or three years ago if you told me I’d be supporting any candidate for president or paying attention to the issues I would have laughed at you. It’s not that I didn’t really care, just that the politics in campaigning was simply ridiculous. I mean, really does it matter if you have an affair or sleep with a woman whose younger than you, etc.
To be perfectly honest I wasn’t for Clinton either until the debate last night. I’d take either candidate over McCain for the class which the exhibited alone. They debated the issues for the most part, instead of each others sex lives or calling each other ‘flip-flops’.
51. Obama? Clinton? The LEFT &hellip | February 22nd, 2008 at 3:38 pm
[…] A Clear Choice in 2008 […]
52. Joe | February 22nd, 2008 at 3:40 pm
LOL… off topic. I’ll give you that one Mark. It was going a bit off mark, but I was simply responding to SEW’s comment #42 and #48. Proving what kind of President we DON’T need.
Anyway… back to the topic at hand.
53. Mark Noonan | February 22nd, 2008 at 4:03 pm
SAR,
You’d probably be astounded by what you don’t know, if you would bother to listen for a while to Spook - or me. Its is a fallacy to say that older people are naturally resistent to change - what we’re resistent to is young people who want to make the same boneheaded mistakes as were made in the past.
You’re working from the presumption that President Bush and the conservative movement represents the status quo - the reality of it is that it was 50 years ago when liberals were observing that there was not, in the United States, any significant movement which could be classed as conservative…of course, it was right around that time that Buckley founded National Review for the express purpose of standing athwart history, shouting “stop” (this wasn’t a demand for ossification by the way - it was a play upon the leftwing concept that “history” was already determined and socialism was the ultimate state of mankind). It is we, on the right, who are the insurgent thinkers with the new ideas trying to shake up the status-quo.
You should realise a few things:
Social security? First thought up in the 1870’s.
Socialised medicine? Ditto.
Progressive income tax? 1890’s.
Feminism? First decade of the 20th century.
Birth control/abortion? Same time.
Your “change” is stuff that is more than a century old - you’re not moving forward, you’re actually working to re-establish the liberal status quo which became the national paradigm in the 1930’s.
So what, then, are we conservatives up to? What we’re supposed to be up to - conserving what was best out of the past is one way to put it, but the most accurate description of what conservatism tries to do is to continually re-attach society to truth. Not only are we not opposed to change, we sometimes are in the vanguard of it - but we must adhere to truth; truth doesn’t change, and it isn’t something which people decide on their own…it is outside of our control, decreed by God, and we must adhere to it. Failure to do this leads to madness - such as find all too often in our society today.
As it relates to the current political debates in our society:
The truth we are insisting upon is that in war, victory must be achieved. To say that a war can be “ended”. no harm, no foul is a lie - a war is won, or a war is lost - and a lost war is always a bad thing for the loser. Dress it up any way you want, but both Obama and Hillary are pledged to lose the war (though there is a strong chance that Hillary is just lying to you on the left and will actually go on and finish winning the war nearly completely won by President Bush, so she can take credit for it).
The truth we are insisting upon is that no large, centralised bureaucracy can deliver the proper services to people in a nation as large and diverse as the United States - it is impossible to figure out, for instance, what is “affordable” in Arkon, OH as opposed to what is “affordable” in San Diego, CA; and to say that we can figure this out is a lie; humanity isn’t built like that - only people down on their local level working with friends, family and community can make a proper assessment of what is best for themselves.
The truth we are insisting upon is that charity is something a person does for others, not something a government does for people. In fact, “government charity” is a contradiction in terms, as the government coerced the money for the charity out of the citizenry, and charity is inherently voluntary. We don’t dispute that government can play a large role in assisting citizens to help their less fortunate fellows, but we do insist that the concept of the Department of Housing and Urban Development being something along the lines of the Sister’s of Charity is a lie.
The truth we are insisting upon vis a vis “gay marriage” is that homosexuality, whatever else one might wish to believe about it, isn’t the same as heterosexuality, and any attempt to dress up homosexuality as being the same as heterosexuality is a lie. There is the way things are supposed to be done, and there is the way that some people go ahead and do them - but the proper way is the proper way, even if no one does it. We’re not about to particpate in a massive, socially destructive lie just because some people are more comfortable with lies.
54. majoriot | February 22nd, 2008 at 4:17 pm
First off, no one has been more regressive than the recent conservative administration and it’s followers. Tactics concerning those opposed to the “War on Terror” similar to the Red Scare, might makes right military philosophy, pre Geneva Convention attitudes regarding Human Rights. The disregard for and pushing aside of our own civil liberties.
Tank huggers such as McCain will certainly draw in the shoot first crowd, even among Independents (but not this one),and I imagine the spectere of 9-11 arise several times come fall. There are those who believe that we should pull out of Iraq immediately, but I was never fooled by the Bush administration into believing the invasion and occupation of Iraq was momentary. The enduring occupation will be more akin to the Israeli-Palastinian conflict.
Obama is popular because of Bush. College age students and people into their 20’s have seen his administrations policy of ideology before humanity over the last 8 years, along with the lack of Congressional oversight regarding their policies. The Republicans have been too weak, morally, to do the right thing. The Dems too weak politically.
Bush’s legacy will be Barack Obama.
55. liberalT | February 22nd, 2008 at 4:33 pm
yeah - i suppose national security is a brand new idea as well. The idea is not to break from the past entirely - but rather to change from the past 8 years. Try again Marko Polo
56. majoriot | February 22nd, 2008 at 4:39 pm
Well, when hasn’t our nation been secure?
57. Mark Noonan | February 22nd, 2008 at 4:40 pm
liberalT,
Haven’t I told you that you’re just getting boring these days?
58. Some Assembly Required | February 22nd, 2008 at 4:43 pm
Mark,
If I wanted to hear from a preacher I’d go to church on sundays. I’m sorry man but thats all that long winded rant was. You are trying to tell me to believe something. This, this I say again, this… is exactly what college students like me see right through. People resent you when you try to force YOUR beliefs on them. Also, socialism helped England and most of Europe re-build itself after the second world war. Your so quick to turn on socialism as the devils work and defend liberties and such but then condone gay marriage. It’s absurdly hypocritical.
“Bush’s legacy will be Barack Obama.”
Couldn’t agree more… whats that equation go like again…. “for every action, there is an equal a opposite reaction”
59. Amanda | February 22nd, 2008 at 4:54 pm
“Birth control/abortion? Same time.”
Really? You think women weren’t having abortions before the 20th century? I suggest you do some research on that. A quick Google search of “abortion +history” should point you in the right direction.
And as early as 3000 B.C., men were wearing condoms in Egypt. In 1850, pessary was developed as the earliest female contraceptive. And oral contraceptives came on the scene in 600 B.C. in North Africa.
Damn, man. A little research. Seriously.
60. David.B.Schmidt | February 22nd, 2008 at 4:57 pm
First on topic. Senator Obama will hand the republicans a solid win in the next election based on his associations (Ayers and Dohrn), his “plans” that are currently estimated at $980 million in additional spending (and has anyone seen any government program come in under cost?) and his wanting to basically rewrite the 2nd amendment by outlawing all semi-automatic weapons.
Now, kinda off topic.
Two points here. The Democrats (and Independents where allowed to vote) always turn out in larger numbers than Republicans. This is a common trend and nothing “new & improved” – just like the mid-term in 2006. Standard. The trend reverses for the GE. Good choice of the two most liberal bastions in the United States for an example however.
Education is failing because of the progressives (Liberals) and their administration thereof. The Dept. of Education needs to be shut down, schools (personnel) need to be gutted to retain the best and lose the flotsam and possibly privatized. We need the basics – not why does Johnny feel this way?
Health care is burdened by those that don’t pay, lawyers (I would get Senator Edwards opinion but I can’t get into his 28,000 SqFt house—I must live in the other America) and a really crappy method of record keeping; however, as data and computers are stolen & lost daily with personnel information on them – not sure if I trust the government in this respect either.
What is it with the economy you disapprove of? I believe it is 52 straight quarters of growth (no recession) and what has been considered “full employment” for several years now. The deficit is being reduced on target for 2010 and the tax revenues into government coffers are holding around the average of 18% (see response to SAR ) as it is. This doesn’t change much no matter how high or low the tax rates go (approximation)
BTW, this was done via a tax cut by Pres. Regan and Pres. Kennedy– with similar results. People want to retry failed policies but don’t want to retry working ones??? Was the left’s hero Pres. Kennedy wrong to cut taxes also? Or just Pres. Bush? Sen. Obama is heading straight for the failed policies of Pres. Carter and I lived through that once—hopefully, never again.
40% income tax rate in Europe (England & Germany at least) plus everyone I talk with over there (several couples) always say the same thing “You don’t want our health care system” because they are forced to buy private insurance on top of the 40% (income only) tax and additional VAT and users taxes in order to get reasonable health care.
Personally, I want to spend what I earn where I want to.
61. liberalT | February 22nd, 2008 at 4:59 pm
Mark - thats because you realize you have no answer only insults you scared little boy
62. Mark Noonan | February 22nd, 2008 at 5:10 pm
SAR,
One mention of God makes it a sermon?
How am I forcing my views on you? I’m merely stating what I believe, and why I believe it - is the mere fact of my asserting that something is true a means of “forcing” a view on you? Do you reject the very concept of truth and find the advocacy of such a thing to be oppressive? Or, in the end, have you just not thought about the matter at all, but just accepted what your professors told you without question?
Also, as a college educated person, you should know what a rant is - or did they fail to teach you English in school? A rant is something like this:
With, of course, the dictionary definition being, “to speak or declaim extravagantly or violently; talk in a wild or vehement way; rave: The demagogue ranted for hours.” I don’t think my comment was even remotely like that - but, then again, I should be kind to you on this, as you merely have a college education, and that normally misses a lot these days.
Anyways…
What rebuilt Europe after WWII was a massive influx of US dollars - plus a few other things normally missed in discussions of the era (such as the fact that German industrialists kept on making machine tools all through World War Two, and these emerged unscathed from all the bombings…so, German production was really all set to go as soon as someone provided the funds to install the tools in new factories - with the influx of US dollars, the German economy fired up quickly, and that swiftly pulled the rest of Europe’s economy up). Socialism can’t ever build anything up because of its top-down mentality and reliance upon taxation for funding.
63. David.B.Schmidt | February 22nd, 2008 at 5:16 pm
Interesting because you a spewing exactly what your liberal teachers have led you to believe. And as a matter of fact – Germany, as well as the rest of Europe, was rebuilt with the help of America and capitalism. Took us eight~ten years after the war was over to rout out the Nazis still holed up. Same with Japan and the Shinto. Still in Korea since 1953, etc.
But 5 years is too long for the instant gratification crowd these days.
BTW, you should look at the difference between N. & S. Korea at night. I have the photograph from NASA on my wall to remind me – but on short notice I found this one (similar) on the web.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/dprk/dprk-dark.htm
Maybe it will help you understand the difference between capitalism & the path you are heading down.
64. Some Assembly Required | February 22nd, 2008 at 5:18 pm
David,
Yes, it is close to full employment, not disputing that. But this statistic does not give the hourly rate of the bulk of these jobs. Working 2 and 3 jobs to just get by seems like a failing system to me. Also, having a job is excellent, great for the economy yes, but really, when your employed but still foreclose on your house? Theres nothing wrong with the economy there. The 3 trillion dollar deficit for the war, a non-issue too.
Like I said earlier the same back and forth. European governments also subsidize private insurance. Talk to anyone whose come from europe or Canada for that matter to the US. If they get sick, they fly home as fast as humanly possible because they simply can’t afford it. They do a lot of complaining about the healthcare system and taxes sure. When they truly need it but don’t have to come up with thousands of dollars to cover expenses. How many complaints do you think you’d hear then? Crickets I’m willing to bet. I’d put my kidney on it if the US had that kind of healthcare!
65. Some Assembly Required | February 22nd, 2008 at 5:26 pm
“You’re working from the presumption that President Bush and the conservative movement represents the status quo - the reality of it is that it was 50 years ago when liberals were observing that there was not, in the United States, any….”
Telling me I’m working from a presumption and then going into defining reality; Then defending what your saying as your opinion and what you believe… That would be preaching.
66. TiredofLibBullSh** | February 22nd, 2008 at 5:32 pm
Mark says:
“SAR,
One mention of God makes it a sermon?
How am I forcing my views on you? I’m merely stating what I believe, and why I believe it - is the mere fact of my asserting that something is true a means of “forcing” a view on you?”
Mark, how dare you make them question their faulty beliefs. This is what they are taught in government indoctrination centers errrrr schools. We have no right to use logic on them and make them question their mentors?
These are the people who fought the establishment….and became the establishment themselves but somehow believe that they should not be questioned! How dare they question their mentors stagnant policies! They only want to “help” people.
Keep it up Mark.
67. Some Assembly Required | February 22nd, 2008 at 5:33 pm
Capitalism helped Europe get to it’s feet, but they rejected that system for socialism… interesting.
68. felix the cat | February 22nd, 2008 at 5:35 pm
The war that Mark Noonan and people like him are engaged in is a war of political ideology, repressive social morality and most importantly to them, religious certainty. Repeatedly, Mark comes across as someone who has just returned from Mount Siani to deliever absolute truth from the lips of an imagined god to the fearful and superstitious masses who lap up his every sylable. Mark infers with grand broad strokes that any form of free thinking (which is liberal) is fundementally flawed because free thinking…and a recognition of the obvious…. challenges the mindless adherence to the bastardized, pornographic and aborational spectre that modern “conservativism” has become. The Rush Limbaughs, Laura Ingrahams and Sean Hannity’s are a sub-species of traditional Burkian conservativism. Earlier Barry Goldwater was mentioned. If he were alive today and active in public service, he would be villified 100 times more than McCain has been by (so called) conservatives. Mark is not conservative at all. He is an authoriatrian and as such needs followers to obey his every command without question because to question means to doubt and to doubt or to have some sense of skepticisim is “liberal” and liberalisim is the bucket of water to Mark’s witch of the west. Without getting into the symptoms of the psychological disease from which he suffers, let me add a few contemporary names of people who suffered from this malaise as well. Jim Jones. Charles Manson. Jim Baker. Tedd Haggard.
Let me elaborate further. Mark set up a score board earlier as well. Lets add up all the Republicans who have been indicted, are in jail or who have had to resign because of corruption and then compare that # to the William Jeffersons. I guess this fits well into his “fallen man” theory.
The facts are, Democrats have turned out almost 2 to 1 in the current primaries. Democrats have raised significantly more $ than their Republican counterparts and younger voters…in droves…are supporting “big ears” as some of you so affectionately refer to him.
I truly cannot wait to see the heads of the “conservative” Rumplestilskins explode when big ears is elected. Talk about refutiation…………
69. Some Assembly Required | February 22nd, 2008 at 5:39 pm
Felix,
If theres one thing bush has done for the young, it’s make them skeptical of what their being told. So for that, I will given home acknowledgment.
70. Retired Spook | February 22nd, 2008 at 5:50 pm
If this is happening at every level of education across this country, and at a high enough rate that young people are completely uninformed; it should be easy enough for you to provide many examples of this.
FYT, you have a legitimate point. I was giving my opinion based on observations made over a period of years as one who has always been interested in history and its accurate portrayal.
How about if I gather, say, a half dozen history books from around my area that represent how history is presented to 5th through 12 grades and then ask Matt and Mark to allow me to do a guest post on the subject of historical revisionism in primary and secondary education?
71. Tractatus | February 22nd, 2008 at 6:10 pm
as you merely have a college education
..which is more than what you have, Noonan. And it shows.
72. felix the cat | February 22nd, 2008 at 6:33 pm
Some Assembly:
You are not alone. GWB is the worst president our great nation has ever had. A man so disinterested, intellectually incourious and phonetically challenged as to make one wince. He is controlled by others and lashes out at any criticisim of his decider decisions. (Was there a word “decider” before he made it up?? Or did he breed a noun, verb and adjective on his brush farm in Crawford? Clearly a sign of ADHD.)
My suggestion to younger people is to be aware in the first part, involved in the second and most importantly VOTE. The abboration of what today calls itself “conservativisim” is nothing of the sort. There is nothing wrong with being conservative, for the word at it’s root means to save. To conserve. To be judicious. But these folks are like whisps in the wind. Phantasmagorical entities that use fear and oppression in a futile effort to gain power. But, alas, they will fail. Much like a vampire on a day pass…..
73. Some Assembly Required | February 22nd, 2008 at 6:51 pm
Felix,
The five stages of Former Bush Supporters are:
“1-Denial-”this can’t be happening to me”, looking for the former spouse in familiar places, or if it is death, setting the table for the person or acting as if they are still in living there. No crying. Not accepting or even acknowledging the loss.
2-Anger-”why me?”, feelings of wanting to fight back or get even with spouse of divorce, for death, anger at the deceased, blaming them for leaving.
3-Bargaining-bargaining often takes place before the loss. Attempting to make deals with the spouse who is leaving, or attempting to make deals with God to stop or change the loss. Begging, wishing, praying for them to come back.
4-Depression-overwhelming feelings of hopelessness, frustration, bitterness, self pity, mourning loss of person as well as the hopes, dreams and plans for the future. Feeling lack of control, feeling numb. Perhaps feeling suicidal.
5-Acceptance-there is a difference between resignation and acceptance. You have to accept the loss, not just try to bear it quietly. Realization that it takes two to make or break a marriage. Realization that the person is gone (in death) that it is not their fault, they didn’t leave you on purpose. (even in cases of suicide, often the deceased person, was not in their right frame of mind) Finding the good that can come out of the pain of loss, finding comfort and healing. Our goals turn toward personal growth. Stay with fond memories of person. “
74. David.B.Schmidt | February 22nd, 2008 at 7:24 pm
SAR,
I guess your question should then be “Why does one have to work 2 or 3 jobs in order to survive?” Do you accept the offered rate or negotiate for wages when offered a position? Could it be a matter of education, abilities and even things like legality. I, too, had to work two jobs in the past but worked through that. That being said, I don’t want the government to take what I have worked for away. I help all of those (quite often to my own determent) that I can but I can see results. Most of them do not know it was me but I can see direct results within my community.
The deficit is just that—a deficit. Wish they would get them annoying phone calls when they are 15 minutes overdue. Nonetheless, as long as I can remember this country has run a deficit (and, please don’t try that crap about Pres. Cinton & the surplus—it is total bookkeeping B.S) and in quite a few respects (foreign trade for one) it is a good and solid policy. America can work itself out of this without taxing its people to death.
Healthcare was the last point you made but I can counter with my mother and another friend locally that both had extended stays in two different hospitals in different states for different reasons (broken femur & broken back, respectively) and both were left intact fiscally. My mother’s bills were paid through Medicare and part B while my friend has the same corporate insurance I do and paid $50 out of pocket for the hospital stay and 3 surgeries that were done on his spine. Can you say “specialists?” Also remind me when a congress critter or senator or maybe the President left America to be treated elsewhere? I can name several of their counterparts that have “Come to America” and it wasn’t to find a wife in Queens. (Does that date me?)
Medications were covered up to differencing amounts with my friend paying $25 / prescription (non-generic) as my mother paid closer to $100 for her two prescriptions. Wouldn’t break anything but the smallest piggy bank. I have helped out plenty of less fortunate people with no expectation of reciprocation; however, that has been a standard bearer of the conservatives versus the “safety net” liberals for as long as I can remember.
75. David.B.Schmidt | February 22nd, 2008 at 7:29 pm
Just a BTW, since Senator Obama wants to pull us out of Iraq, beef up in Afghanistan and attack Pakistan–How many of the (I believe) 132 of 150+ countries the US now has troops in will be afforded the relief from the evil US occupation and $$$.
Anyone want to bet over/under on this one?
76. Some Assembly Required | February 22nd, 2008 at 7:52 pm
David,
Those are valid questions, some answers can be found with the high cost of tuitions to get into colleges in order to better ones position. Also, when the bills are pilling up you do not have the luxury to pick and choose when it comes to employment and wages. Take for example a single mom trying to feed her kids. Since you have worked two jobs I’m sure your aware of the toll it takes on people. Though I do agree that ambition and motivation are the only way a person can get ahead and better themselves. This being said, there is the housing issue. People making money unable to pay their mortgages. When it comes to factors showing a possible recession, this one is on the list.
The way I see it, the Government will not take money away from you that you will not receive back when you truly need it. For middle class people this is huge. Especially considering how much kids will run a Dr.s bill. Not that I have any, but I know what I cost my parents.
77. plainjane | February 22nd, 2008 at 8:53 pm
Well after this past week the choice is even clearer in 2008. Who in their right mind want to continue with the Republican culture of sleaze, economic blunders, 100 year wars, incompetence, degradation of family values, fear and lobbyist corruption?
78. phnx | February 22nd, 2008 at 10:10 pm
When I read some of the posts from our young leftists friends I am astonished by the lack of historical knowledge and perspective, not to mention the level of disinformation they take for fact. A few especially egregious posts:
“Needless to say I’m fairly well educated, or at least my employer thinks so.” SAR
So one might ask why you bother to say it.
“Just because a policy failed in the past does not mean it will in the future. What you fail to understand in your old age (Since you call me young) is that times change. What once may not have been possible can be because things change. That is the fundamental problem once you pass a certain point in your lives. Change goes out the window for tradition because it is familiar and easier. This happens to everyone, it’s only a matter of time. Also, more information is available to people like me now. We not only can learn about failed american policies but how similar policies are working for other governments in the world. The world is becoming smaller and smaller by the day. For instance, being able to speak two languages in Europe is almost a requirement now a days” SAR
How profound the wisdom of youth can be. “When I was a boy of fourteen, my father was so ignorant I could hardly stand to have the old man around. But when I got to be twenty-one, I was astonished at how much he had learned.”Mark Twain
“Its why I think the voting age should never be higher than 18.” SteaM
Sounds like a passage from Lord of the Flies.
“Capitalism helped Europe get to it’s feet, but they rejected that system for socialism… interesting.” SAR
The last time I checked, personal property rights were still respected in Europe, and most of the countries there are struggling to pay their social costs. Most are considering ways of reducing those benefits. Its one of the reasons there is astrike every other week in France. The suckling pigs are squeeling because the Government teet is going dry.
“The way I see it, the Government will not take money away from you that you will not receive back when you truly need it.” SAR
Talk about naive.
While there young leftist are craving a cradle to grave state, paid for by soaking the rich and corporations, Europe having seen the error of its way is trying to reduce the size of their nanny states. Corporate taxes in Ireland aer 12.5% and under 25% in most of Europe, while we have a 35% federal tax rate and up to 10% state tax on corporations. Go ahead and raise taxes, soak the Rich, go after those evil corporations. You babes in the woods are too young to remember inflation rates of 20%+, and mortgage rates of 14%. when did that occur you ask? Under the another one of your charismatic leaders who was for change…Jimmy Carter.
For your edification check out the following web site:
http://www.miseryindex.us/indexbymonth.asp
Look under the Carter years and you will learn what unbridled and naive change can do to the economy and to people.
79. Faceplant | February 22nd, 2008 at 11:24 pm
“I think what we are watching in the Democratic primary is historic. First, there has not been a candidate nominated for President more liberal than Barack Obama since George McGovern”
LOL! Maybe I’m mistaken but it seems to me that Republicans have been labeling EVERY Democratic Presidential nominee as the “Extreme Liberal” SINCE Walter Mondale.
Liberal, is not a dirty word anymore.
80. Lamb | February 23rd, 2008 at 3:37 am
Please don’t allow a Socialist President. For my family need bread, and milk.
“…For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ…”
L.
81. Yakki.PsD | February 23rd, 2008 at 6:24 am
26. TiredofLibBullSh** | February 22nd, 2008 at 1:23 pm
If “liberalism” wasn’t a dirty word, then why don’t liberals call themselves “liberals”?
Why do they insist on calling themselves “progressive” when their agenda is devoid of progress?
Stagnant is more like it.
I’m a Liberal,and damn proud of it. I’m completely unapologetic,and personally I don’t really care what anyone thinks about my “progressive” views. And I’m in my mid 30’s,not some green kid out of high school.
The only thing static in this political race,are the monolithic people who want to live back in 1950,instead of getting with the fact that it’s 2008. Times have changed and left a whole bunch of folks behind. It’s gonna be tough in this brave new world,but we’ll all adjust,or we won’t.
It’s sad,but that’s progress for you.
82. Yakki.PsD | February 23rd, 2008 at 6:26 am
Lamb
That’s funny.
Have you checked the price of bread and milk lately? Or are you waiting on the Soylent Green?
Highest it’s been IN MY LIFE. Over $4 a gallon in my state,and that’s rediculous.
83. Canadian Observer | February 23rd, 2008 at 9:23 am
A Clear Choice in 2008
February 22nd, 2008 at 11:16am Mark Noonan
If Americans have the vision and wisdom to chose either Obama or Hilliary, there is no doubt y’all will regain some of the prestige that was lost during the Bush years.
It will show the world that, yes, the United States is a country that has put its nasty past behind it and has the ability to elevate the national character to greater heights.
If America makes the mistake of following the same old path; well I guess there will be no change in your current status.
84. js | February 23rd, 2008 at 9:28 am
Whats the truth here?
CO stands for consciencious objection, (canadian observer?)…
Ewww. I get it. You ran from Viet Nam and think that gives you some right to tell Americans about right and wrong?
LoL.
Sure glad we dont take your advice.
85. js | February 23rd, 2008 at 9:34 am
81. Yakki.PsD
I’m a Liberal,and damn proud of it. I’m completely unapologetic,and personally I don’t really care what anyone thinks about my “progressive” views.
I gotta laugh at that.
86. Sue | February 23rd, 2008 at 9:37 am
Felix: “Repeatedly, Mark comes across as someone who has just returned from Mount Siani to deliever absolute truth from the lips of an imagined god to the fearful and superstitious masses who lap up his every sylable. ……………Mark is not conservative at all. He is an authoriatrian and as such needs followers to obey his every command without question because to question means to doubt and to doubt or to have some sense of skepticisim is ?liberal? and liberalisim is the bucket of water to Mark?s witch of the west. Without getting into the symptoms of the psychological disease from which he suffers, let me add a few contemporary names of people who suffered from this malaise as well. Jim Jones. Charles Manson. Jim Baker. Tedd Haggard.”
This kind of rhetoric and judgementalism of Mark’s views on HIS blog are totally rediculous. When libs revert to personal attacks I (and many others) totally discount any truth coming out of one of their arguments. If you can’t argue with FACTS or state your OPINION as just that-opinion (and refrain from personal attacks) then its obvious that you have lost the debate.
And go ahead and say you weren’t debating. You’re lucky I’m not Mark because if you said that it would be proof you are not on here to discuss issues-only to disrupt and insult people you disagree with. And you’d be banned.
I guess Mark’s a bigger person than I am, because I would have been banned many of you long ago for personal attacks.
87. js | February 23rd, 2008 at 9:54 am
77. plainjane | February 22nd, 2008 at 8:53 pm
Well after this past week the choice is even clearer in 2008. Who in their right mind want to continue with the Republican culture of sleaze, economic blunders, 100 year wars, incompetence, degradation of family values, fear and lobbyist corruption?
If you really think about it…Our forefathers fought Muslims for over a hundred years to protect our country.
Simpletons today (oh, am I talking about YOU?) are as gulible as a cracker is fragile. They flock to the liberal parties because they are induced by simple minded concepts.
Its no wonder this Country is falling apart, liberals succumb to the very things our society rejected for 200 years. The Koran explicitly tells muslims they can have slaves. Slavery in this nation came from North Africa. ALL of North Africa was MUSLIM CONTROLLED. It took this nation 100 years to reject slavery, based on Christian principals.
Now Christian Principals are politically incorrect? Ancient ideals are “not good enough” for Americans? The very ideals that created this nation!!!
Liberalism is like a cancer. Its given us abortion, allowed deviant sexual behavior to become a civil right protected by the constitution, and now, attempts to turn America away from the very principals that created it by scrambling its meaning is a morass of legal technicalities and the convergence of immorality with justice.
Liberalism was the force that introduced socialism and communism into every nation under its influence today. Liberalism is the harbinger of Anti-Freedom. The road to destitution and tyrany.
88. Casper | February 23rd, 2008 at 10:29 am
js,
“If you really think about it…Our forefathers fought Muslims for over a hundred years to protect our country.”
You could also say our forefathers fought Christians to protect our country, since the majority of our wars were fought with other Christian nations (England, Mexico, Spain, etc.).
“Slavery in this nation came from North Africa.”
Actually, most of the slaves brought here came from West Africa. The first slaves transported across the Atlantic were Native Americans kidnapped by Columbus and shipped back to Spain.
89. js | February 23rd, 2008 at 10:54 am
89. Casper
You could also say our forefathers fought Christians to protect our country, since the majority of our wars were fought with other Christian nations (England, Mexico, Spain, etc.).
Were you born last night?
I guess so. Why dont you present us with a detailed thesis of how we fought Christianity, ecspecially since the Ten Commandments are in our Supreme Court.
Check it out:
Ellison’s use of Jefferson’s Quran as a prop illuminates a subject once well-known in the history of the United States, but, which today, is mostly forgotten - the Muslim pirate slavers who over many centuries enslaved millions of Africans and tens of thousands of Christian Europeans and Americans in the Islamic “Barbary” states.
Over the course of 10 centuries, Muslim pirates cruised the African and Mediterranean coastline, pillaging villages and seizing slaves.
The taking of slaves in pre-dawn raids on unsuspecting coastal villages had a high casualty rate. It was typical of Muslim raiders to kill off as many of the “non-Muslim” older men and women as possible so the preferred “booty” of only young women and children could be collected.
Young non-Muslim women were targeted because of their value as concubines in Islamic markets. Islamic law provides for the sexual interests of Muslim men by allowing them to take as many as four wives at one time and to have as many concubines as their fortunes allow.
http://www.usvetdsp.com/jan07/jeff_quran.htm
90. js | February 23rd, 2008 at 11:21 am
89. Casper
The first slaves transported across the Atlantic were Native Americans kidnapped by Columbus and shipped back to Spain.
oooooooo
Whats this, the ghost of Indian Slaves? It was a huge business, right? Flocks of ships from Europe would line up in American Harbors, and transport tens of thousands of American Indians to the EU. Is it in the history books? As a matter of fact, the only reason European immigrants could “make” America was because whites enslaved the Indians and made them work for free….
Ya right.
It was directly because of Christian Principal that Slavery ended. Its really of little use to represent anything beyond that in this dispute. You can spit watermelon seeds as far as you can, and that fact will not change.
Conservative Christians are the reason Slaves are free world wide. The Democrats, then as now, were liberals, and are still slaves of sin.
91. js | February 23rd, 2008 at 11:23 am
we were so busy fighting against Christianity, that our congress did this;
September 10, 1782:
The Continental Congress recognized a need for Bibles in our young country. They granted approval to print “… a neat edition of the Holy Scriptures for the use of schools.”
(Notice that these were to be used in the schools.)
This edition has come to be known as the Bible of the Revolution. The following Endorsement of Congress was printed on its front page.
“Whereupon, Resolved, That the United States in Congress assembled… recommended this edition of the Bible to the inhabitants of the United States, and hereby authorize [Robert Aitken] to publish this recommendation in the manner he shall think proper.”
92. js | February 23rd, 2008 at 11:24 am
casper;
I really dont know why you post here, except of course, to make a fool of yourself.
93. liberalT | February 23rd, 2008 at 11:31 am
Deleted - off topic.
94. Mark Noonan | February 23rd, 2008 at 11:50 am
TiredOf,
SAR and Felix both get more pathetic the longer they comment here - for a couple of people who are not shy about telling us how smart they are, they sure seem wary of actually engaging on an intellectual level.
95. Mark Noonan | February 23rd, 2008 at 11:51 am
Sue,
Its not really hard - I feel sorry for them, living in their narrow, closed-minded world, darkened by liberal “thought”. I pray for their eventual enlightenment.
96. Retired Spook | February 23rd, 2008 at 11:57 am
September 10, 1782: The Continental Congress recognized a need for Bibles in our young country. They granted approval to print “… a neat edition of the Holy Scriptures for the use of schools.”
js, you didn’t find that in a contemporary public school history book, did you?
97. Casper | February 23rd, 2008 at 12:23 pm
js,
I never said that our country fought against Christianity, only that we have had wars against other Christian countries. Religion had nothing to do with it. When we fought the Barbary Pirates, we fought them because they were pirates, not because they were Muslim.
As for Columbus shipping slaves back to Europe, I didn’t get that from a history book. I got it from a translation of Columbus’ journal for his second voyage. I don’t see why he would lie about it. Do you? If you don’t believe me try googling Columbus and slaves. You will find hundreds of articles.
Frankly js, you might want to take some history classes. Your ignorance on the subject is embarrassing.
98. Casper | February 23rd, 2008 at 12:28 pm
Retired Spook,
You will find there are a lot of things missing from our history textbooks. That’s why I prefer to do my own research from original sources when posible. If you would like to read a good book on the subject, I would suggest “Lies My Teacher Told Me” by James W. Loewen.
99. Tractatus | February 23rd, 2008 at 2:36 pm
they sure seem wary of actually engaging on an intellectual level.
When have you ever engaged on an intellectual level? You go out of your way to avoid it, proclaiming your opinion to be fact, never citing any actual facts, and hiding behind religious dogma.
100. Retired Spook | February 23rd, 2008 at 2:48 pm
Retired Spook, You will find there are a lot of things missing from our history textbooks.
I was trying to make a similar point earlier in this thread, Casper. Even back in the 50’s and early 60’s it was evident to me, based on the extensive outside reading I did, that school history text books were woefully lacking in both detail and accuracy. And they haven’t gotten better with time. From the time I found my first arrowhead digging in my back yard when I was around 6 or 7, I’ve always had an interest in History. I took so many history courses in college that I ended up with an “accidental” minor in history. Back in the 70’s I portrayed several area historical figures in a series of local historical theatrical productions, and I did substantial research for the parts. (back in the pre-Internet days when the public library was the only resource).
That’s why I prefer to do my own research from original sources when possible.
Good for you, Casper — your students are fortunate and will be rewarded with the knowledge later in life. At least when they get in discussions like this, they’ll be able to argue from a position of truth and knowledge instead of spouting drivel that only makes them look ignorant and foolish.
Speaking of “Lies My Teacher Told Me”, I ran across this after I read your first comment about Columbus taking slaves back to Europe. I knew that was true, but it had been a while since I had read anything about it. I have no problem teaching an “ugly” truth like that to students, just as long as you keep the perspective that it didn’t detract from Columbus’ historical exploratory accomplishments.
The Internet is such an awesome tool, but you have to keep an open mind and not just read material that dovetails with your personal ideological, political and philosophical beliefs. I have learned more in the last 10 years just from “surfing” than I did during 16 years of formal education.
101. Casper | February 23rd, 2008 at 3:15 pm
Retired Spook,
“I have no problem teaching an “ugly” truth like that to students, just as long as you keep the perspective that it didn’t detract from Columbus’ historical exploratory accomplishments.”
I agree. Columbus changed the world with his voyage, and he showed a great deal of bravery doing so. Yet he also did some pretty bad things (by our standards).
One of the biggest joys in life is sponsoring a History Day Club in which students research different events and people throughout history. It allows me to learn along with my students and to explore parts of history you don’t find in the history books. Right now I have a couple of students working on a project about Grace O’Malley and Queen Elizabeth I. Others that are doing the Titanic, Different aspects of the Viet Nam War, and the Lewis and Clark Expedition. Very interesting.
102. Retired Spook | February 23rd, 2008 at 4:05 pm
and the Lewis and Clark Expedition.
An historical event of which I am in the utmost awe.
103. Mark Noonan | February 23rd, 2008 at 5:20 pm
Casper,
I think a good part of the problem of modern history teaching is the manner in which the negative is dwelt upon at the expense of the good things which happened - sure, by our standards Columbus shouldn’t have shipped back to Spain captured natives…but by the standards of 1492, such a thing was natural and acceptable (Moslems were at that time conducting slave raids into Russia and Hungary on a regular basis - because it was “ok” back then to enslave people who were not of your religion). To darken the magnificent story of Columbus with our pet causes is, well, foolish. As it turns out, I’m in the process of reading Morrison’s “Admiral of the Ocean Sea”, and it is splendid to read a book which leaves off harping on modern ideas of race and imperialism and just concentrates on the great achievement of a brave and intelligent man who wanted to do well by doing good.
104. Yakki.PsD | February 23rd, 2008 at 5:36 pm
Try me. I’m not ashamed to be a free thinker.
And if you think I am,I say again,try me sir and find out.
105. Casper | February 23rd, 2008 at 6:20 pm
“I think a good part of the problem of modern history teaching is the manner in which the negative is dwelt upon at the expense of the good things which happened”
I disagree. I think the problem with teaching history, or learning about history on your own, is when you only look at it from one viewpoint, whether that be positive or negative. Anytime you lack balance, you have a tendency to judge a person or a culture too positively or too negatively. I can admire a man like Columbus for his courage and his persistence, but I also know he was far from an angel. And while his voyage led to the American Civilization we have today, it also led to the destruction of other civilizations, some highly developed.
106. SteaM | February 23rd, 2008 at 8:51 pm
Balance is so important. I don’t want to learn about a subject or person, past or present, and ignore the negative. I might focus on the positive with one individual and the negative as a natural bias depending on where they stand with me regarding credibility based my views and style of life.
However, to ignore the positive of someone I may not like too much is rather close-minded. To ignore the negative aspects of someone I respect and really like is also close-minded and can be trouble when I realize their are issues I had ignored that were serious and should have been addressed but were not and there were consequences.
107. lilly06 | February 24th, 2008 at 7:52 am
‘Our liberal friends are already convinced that they’ve won in November by a massive landslide - this is because liberals live in a dream world entirely divorced from reality (and in a really ironic twist, they call themselves the “reality based community”);’
——————————————————-
Mark,
This post alone just goes to show that instead of calling this website ‘blogs for victory’, you should call it ‘Mark Noonan’s dream world’.
I mean you actually have a website devoting your time and efforts to George W Bush. You must be the one living in a world devoid of realilty. George Bush is America’s worst president EVER. His performance is certainly not worthy of you (as delusional as you come across) and the American people deserve better than a corrupt and immoral Republican party who has lost its way from the moral high ground that it preaches.
The Republicans have to go. Young troops need to stop dying. Even when they come back, with the cuts in veteran spending I just hope there is enough support to offer the physiological and psychological treatment they will need for the horrible things they have seen and the things some of them have been forced to do!! Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis die and no-one even really mentions it.
The economy needs an administration of professionals who actually make decisions based on the economic stability of America not because of the decisions of a president who hasn’t the faintest idea about the economy and how his decisions affect capital markets.
More attention need to be drawn to the educational system. The ‘No Child Left Behind’ system has left virtually all inner city children behind.
We need to provide our children with sex education offering all options rather than preaching a faith based ‘abstinence only’ program. Fact is there is sex on tv, in adverts, on the internet, basically everywhere, if we want to preach abstinence then lets ban sex (even implied sexual undertones) from all the avenues I’ve mentioned so that teenagers actually have a fighting chance in suppressing their sexual urges.
Fact is, this president is a disaster and until you face the music Mark, you are the only one living in a dream world.
If these comments make me liberal then I embrace it, it doesn’t devalue the importance of the points I have mentioned.
108. Mark Noonan | February 24th, 2008 at 2:03 pm
lilly06,
The really amusing thing is that everyone who isn’t a kook lefty will read your comment and say, “geesh, Mark hit the nail on the head”…
109. Weight Loss Pill Identifi&hellip | March 29th, 2008 at 4:15 am
Weight Loss Pill Identifier Pills
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
110. Prom Dresses Hat Holliste&hellip | March 30th, 2008 at 10:51 am
Prom Dresses Hat Hollister Clothing
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
111. gay twinkies&hellip | April 21st, 2008 at 9:32 am
baraboo casino chunk ho wi
filipino gay sex