In article
,
wrote:


Pragmatism vs. ideology:
A guy carries a briefcase into a bar, walks up to the prettiest girl,
opens the briefcase to reveal one million dollars, and asks the girl
if she will sleep with him for the million dollars. She thnks,
"Hmmm...For a million dollars? O.k.!". He then closes the briefcase
and pulls out a one dollar bill and says, "Will you sleep with me for
one dollar?" The girl immediately slaps him in the face and asks,
"What kind of girl do you think I am?" and he says, "We've figured out
what you are, now we're just negotiating the price!"

The basic storyline was originally from or at least attributed to George
Bernard Shaw, reportedly from a real encounter with a woman sitting next
to him at a dinner party:

"Madame, would you sleep with me for a million dollars?"

"A million dollars, yeah, I guess I would."

"Well then, would you sleep with me for ten dollars?"

"Sir, what kind of woman do you take me for?"

"Madame, what kind of woman you are has already been established; what
remains is just to agree on a price."


This story is too good to check.

Joe Gwinn

"Joseph Gwinn" wrote:

The basic storyline was originally from or at least attributed to
George
Bernard Shaw, reportedly from a real encounter with a woman sitting
next
to him at a dinner party:

There is also a version that attributes the story to Disreali and the
Queen.

Lew

On Jun 6, 2:27*pm, "Lew Hodgett" wrote:
"Joseph Gwinn" wrote:
The basic storyline was originally from or at least attributed to
George
Bernard Shaw, reportedly from a real encounter with a woman sitting
next
to him at a dinner party:

There is also a version that attributes the story to Disreali and the
Queen.

Lew

My favourite Disraeli:

Mr Disraeli, you will probably die by the hangman's noose or of a vile
disease.
- Gladstone
Sir, that depends upon whether I embrace your principles or your
mistress.
- Disraeli.

"Steve Turner" wrote in message
...
Too_Many_Tools wrote:
On Jun 4, 11:13 pm, "Hawke" wrote:
There seems to be a stereotype that "liberals" are the lazy sorts
of
people who interrupt TV viewing only to go to soup lines, or smoke
harmful substances, whereas "conservatives" are hard working, self
reliant people who are very well off due to their own perseverance
and
work ethic.
And yet, the few self proclaimed or suspected liberals and Obama
supporters of this newsgroup, seem to be very well off,
accomplished
people, whereas many conservatives, while intelligent and
interesting
people on many levels, are not exactly above that kind of level of
attainment.
Show us your data. IOW, you're talking out your a$$.
If that is the case, is that perhaps the time to reconsider our
stereotypes?
Perhaps you should reconsider yours.
i think what he is saying is that your stereotypes should be the
same as his...
Ah, yes. That is the leftist's way.
At least that is what you think the leftist's way is. What people are
forgetting is that there are stereotypes, which do have some truth to
them,
and then there is reality. There are concrete things that actually make
someone a liberal or a conservative. They each have their own ways and
beliefs. The problem is when one side makes claims about the other side
which are not true, which is usually the case. In this group, which is
filled with right wingers and republicans denigration of "liberals" are
posted constantly. That's because the "wingers" detest anyone who has
views
that are different from theirs (a conservative trait). Proof of this is
the
unending stream of criticism and invectives directed at liberals by
them.

Take one trait that is common among liberals; tolerance. This same
trait is
not shared or highly regarded by conservatives. A trait they like a lot
more
is authority or hierarchy. Each group has it's own group of attributes
and
they are not shared much by the other group. Both groups have a low
opinion
of the other group. But if you want to know the facts about one group
or the
other you don't ask the other side because most of what they think is
wrong.
Anyone can find the truth about liberals or conservatives if they want
but
for most people it's a lot easier to simply call the other group names
and
say nasty things about them. On this group, most of the people doing
that
are conservatives. That's is not an opinion. It's a fact.

Hawke

Well said.

I beg to differ; I thought what he said was a load of ****.


That's only because you're a right winger. You guys always dislike the
truth. Especially when it's said about you. I'm sure we could confirm that
by asking your wives or girlfriends.

Hawke

Take one trait that is common among liberals; tolerance. This same trait
is
not shared or highly regarded by conservatives. A trait they like a lot
more

I must call bull**** on that one.
I find tolerance to be about equally practiced by liberals and
conservatives, though you may find it preached more frequently by
(political) liberals.

It is a trait I rarely see displayed by pundits of either side.


The point is this, is the word tolerant one that is frequently used when
describing a conservative? There is just no denying the fact that tolerance
of other views, ideas, or lifestyles is not something that is commonly
associated with conservatives. You can deny that all you want but liberals
are always more associated with being tolerant than conservatives are.
That's just a fact.

Hawke

my favorite disraeli:





http://www.amazon.com/Disraeli-Gears.../dp/B0000067L2







On Sat, 6 Jun 2009 14:07:11 -0700 (PDT), Robatoy
wrote:

On Jun 6, 2:27*pm, "Lew Hodgett" wrote:
"Joseph Gwinn" wrote:
The basic storyline was originally from or at least attributed to
George
Bernard Shaw, reportedly from a real encounter with a woman sitting
next
to him at a dinner party:

There is also a version that attributes the story to Disreali and the
Queen.

Lew

My favourite Disraeli:

Mr Disraeli, you will probably die by the hangman's noose or of a vile
disease.
- Gladstone
Sir, that depends upon whether I embrace your principles or your
mistress.
- Disraeli.
Regards,

Tom Watson
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/

On Sat, 06 Jun 2009 18:27:38 GMT, "Lew Hodgett"
wrote:

"Joseph Gwinn" wrote:

The basic storyline was originally from or at least attributed to
George
Bernard Shaw, reportedly from a real encounter with a woman sitting
next
to him at a dinner party:

There is also a version that attributes the story to Disreali and the
Queen.

I've always associated the story with Oscar Wilde, but that may have
more to do with my impression of him than the actual source.

One about Truman Capote that is probably also to good to be true.

At the height of his fame, a lady spotted him in a restaurant, rushed
over and asked him to autograph her breast. Capote did so. Her
husband, incensed, strode over, took out his penis and suggested
Capote might like to autograph that too.

“Well,” responded Capote, “perhaps I could initial it...”

--
Ned Simmons

wrote in message
...
On Jun 5, 11:40 am, "Ed Huntress" wrote:
"Doug Winterburn" wrote in message

...





Morris Dovey wrote:
Curious Man wrote:
There seems to be a stereotype that "liberals" are the lazy sorts of
people who interrupt TV viewing only to go to soup lines, or smoke
harmful substances, whereas "conservatives" are hard working, self
reliant people who are very well off due to their own perseverance and
work ethic.

And yet, the few self proclaimed or suspected liberals and Obama
supporters of this newsgroup, seem to be very well off, accomplished
people, whereas many conservatives, while intelligent and interesting
people on many levels, are not exactly above that kind of level of
attainment.

If that is the case, is that perhaps the time to reconsider our
stereotypes?

I've always thought that "conservative" meant "not in favor of changing
some established norm"; and that "liberal" indicated a willingness to
try new approaches...

I had a seventh grade teacher who gave my class some interesting
guidance: "I don't want you to have closed minds, nor do I want you to
have open minds," he said, "I want you to have /openable/ minds - to
hold to what you know to be true, and to be prepared to replace the old
ideas when you gave good reason to /decide/ that something is more true
or works better."

Does that make one a conservative liberal or a liberal conservative?

a difference in the meaning of "equality" - equal opportunity vs equal
outcome.

As should be clear from the last half-century of debates about human
rights,
that's a false dichotomy. It's another 18th-century Enlightenment conceit
that sounds good in theory, and that helps maintain the logic of
(classical)
liberal thought, but it falls apart in practice.

I liked the analogy made by someone back when affirmative action was first
being discussed, around 1970 or so. He said that breaking down legal
barriers to employment opportunity was like telling someone who had been
chained up for 20 years that, now that his chains were removed, he is
expected to compete in a 100-yard dash on an equal basis. "Now, go run,
and
no more complaints from you," it says.

--
Ed Huntress- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

If you believe in "reverse racism", then you believe in racism.

Irrational. Correcting an injustice caused by actual racists against a
particular class by providing that class an advantage or some kind of
benefit to mitigate the harm done is not "reverse racism". Which, by the
way, simply doesn't exist. There is either racism or there is not.

Hawke

"rjd" wrote in message
...
On Jun 4, 6:12 pm, Curious Man wrote:
There seems to be a stereotype that "liberals" are the lazy sorts of
people who interrupt TV viewing only to go to soup lines, or smoke
harmful substances, whereas "conservatives" are hard working, self
reliant people who are very well off due to their own perseverance and
work ethic.

And yet, the few self proclaimed or suspected liberals and Obama
supporters of this newsgroup, seem to be very well off, accomplished
people, whereas many conservatives, while intelligent and interesting
people on many levels, are not exactly above that kind of level of
attainment.

If that is the case, is that perhaps the time to reconsider our
stereotypes?

Curious Man

"If I liberally apply a protective finish to one of my wood projects to
conserve it, what does that make me?"

Prudent and wise.
LOL

JC

On Jun 4, 6:12*pm, Curious Man wrote:
There seems to be a stereotype that "liberals" are the lazy sorts of
people who interrupt TV viewing only to go to soup lines, or smoke
harmful substances, whereas "conservatives" are hard working, self
reliant people who are very well off due to their own perseverance and
work ethic.

And yet, the few self proclaimed or suspected liberals and Obama
supporters of this newsgroup, seem to be very well off, accomplished
people, whereas many conservatives, while intelligent and interesting
people on many levels, are not exactly above that kind of level of
attainment.

If that is the case, is that perhaps the time to reconsider our
stereotypes?

Curious Man

If I liberally apply a protective finish to one of my wood projects to
conserve it, what does that make me?

On Jun 6, 6:17*pm, rjd wrote:
On Jun 4, 6:12*pm, Curious Man wrote:





There seems to be a stereotype that "liberals" are the lazy sorts of
people who interrupt TV viewing only to go to soup lines, or smoke
harmful substances, whereas "conservatives" are hard working, self
reliant people who are very well off due to their own perseverance and
work ethic.

And yet, the few self proclaimed or suspected liberals and Obama
supporters of this newsgroup, seem to be very well off, accomplished
people, whereas many conservatives, while intelligent and interesting
people on many levels, are not exactly above that kind of level of
attainment.

If that is the case, is that perhaps the time to reconsider our
stereotypes?

Curious Man

If I liberally apply a protective finish to one of my wood projects to
conserve it, what does that make me?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

OT^2 ???

Hawke wrote:
"Steve Turner" wrote in message

That's only because you're a right winger. You guys always dislike the
truth. Especially when it's said about you. I'm sure we could confirm that
by asking your wives or girlfriends.

Hawke

Bull****.

--
If it ain't perfect, improve it...
But don't break it while you're fixin' it!
To reply, eat the taco.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bbqboyee/

|
| That's only because you're a right winger. You guys always dislike the
| truth. Especially when it's said about you. I'm sure we could confirm
that
| by asking your wives or girlfriends.
|
| Hawke
|

Political Correctness is a way to hide and misrepresent the truth.

Is that a Conservative or a Liberal concept?

"Hawke" wrote in message
...


Take one trait that is common among liberals; tolerance. This same trait
is
not shared or highly regarded by conservatives. A trait they like a lot
more

I must call bull**** on that one.
I find tolerance to be about equally practiced by liberals and
conservatives, though you may find it preached more frequently by
(political) liberals.

It is a trait I rarely see displayed by pundits of either side.


The point is this, is the word tolerant one that is frequently used when
describing a conservative? There is just no denying the fact that
tolerance
of other views, ideas, or lifestyles is not something that is commonly
associated with conservatives. You can deny that all you want but liberals
are always more associated with being tolerant than conservatives are.
That's just a fact.

Hawke



I think that in what you have said that a neutral person could reverse the
words "Conservative" and "Liberal" and it would ring true either way.

I believe your opinions of conservatives are based on a collage of the worst
traits of the far fringe right, as is true with some opinions of liberals by
some of the conservatives.

In reality, I think most people are somewhere closer to the center. In some
views, I have more liberal opinions than you and most liberals and you
probably have the reverse.

rjd wrote:

On Jun 4, 6:12 pm, Curious Man wrote:
There seems to be a stereotype that "liberals" are the lazy sorts of
people who interrupt TV viewing only to go to soup lines, or smoke
harmful substances, whereas "conservatives" are hard working, self
reliant people who are very well off due to their own perseverance and
work ethic.

And yet, the few self proclaimed or suspected liberals and Obama
supporters of this newsgroup, seem to be very well off, accomplished
people, whereas many conservatives, while intelligent and interesting
people on many levels, are not exactly above that kind of level of
attainment.

If that is the case, is that perhaps the time to reconsider our
stereotypes?

Curious Man

If I liberally apply a protective finish to one of my wood projects to
conserve it, what does that make me?


A woodworker.


--
You can't have a sense of humor, if you have no sense!

On Jun 4, 11:13*pm, "Hawke" wrote:
There seems to be a stereotype that "liberals" are the lazy sorts of
people who interrupt TV viewing only to go to soup lines, or smoke
harmful substances, whereas "conservatives" are hard working, self
reliant people who are very well off due to their own perseverance and
work ethic.

And yet, the few self proclaimed or suspected liberals and Obama
supporters of this newsgroup, seem to be very well off, accomplished
people, whereas many conservatives, while intelligent and interesting
people on many levels, are not exactly above that kind of level of
attainment.

Show us your data. *IOW, you're talking out your a$$.

If that is the case, is that perhaps the time to reconsider our
stereotypes?

Perhaps you should reconsider yours.

i think what he is saying is that your stereotypes should be the
same as his...

Ah, yes. *That is the leftist's way.

At least that is what you think the leftist's way is. What people are
forgetting is that there are stereotypes, which do have some truth to them,
and then there is reality. There are concrete things that actually make
someone a liberal or a conservative. They each have their own ways and
beliefs. The problem is when one side makes claims about the other side
which are not true, which is usually the case. In this group, which is
filled with right wingers and republicans denigration of "liberals" are
posted constantly. That's because the "wingers" detest anyone who has views
that are different from theirs (a conservative trait). Proof of this is the
unending stream of criticism and invectives directed at liberals by them.

Take one trait that is common among liberals; tolerance. This same trait is
not shared or highly regarded by conservatives. A trait they like a lot more
is authority or hierarchy. Each group has it's own group of attributes and
they are not shared much by the other group. Both groups have a low opinion
of the other group. But if you want to know the facts about one group or the
other you don't ask the other side because most of what they think is wrong.
Anyone can find the truth about liberals or conservatives if they want but
for most people it's a lot easier to simply call the other group names and
say nasty things about them. On this group, most of the people doing that
are conservatives. That's is not an opinion. It's a fact.

Hawke- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I have always noticed that people will never laugh at anything that is
not based on truth.
- Will Rogers

http://www.southparkstudios.com/guide/1002/

On Jun 4, 6:12*pm, Curious Man wrote:
There seems to be a stereotype that "liberals" are the lazy sorts of
people who interrupt TV viewing only to go to soup lines, or smoke
harmful substances, whereas "conservatives" are hard working, self
reliant people who are very well off due to their own perseverance and
work ethic.

And yet, the few self proclaimed or suspected liberals and Obama
supporters of this newsgroup, seem to be very well off, accomplished
people, whereas many conservatives, while intelligent and interesting
people on many levels, are not exactly above that kind of level of
attainment.

If that is the case, is that perhaps the time to reconsider our
stereotypes?

Curious Man

Why not just make one sterotype for both, they are just different
sides of the same coin. Saying you are liberal or conservative means
you giving up on the thought process and rely on faith to guide your
life. It's an easy way to live your life though, imagine trying to
think about questions before answering them, instead of just
regurgitating the party line.

On Jun 6, 11:26*pm, "
wrote:


, imagine trying to
think about questions before answering them, instead of just
regurgitating the party line.

Now.. WHO in this crowd would belong to this group?.

Hawke wrote:


"Steve Turner" wrote in message
...
Too_Many_Tools wrote:
On Jun 4, 11:13 pm, "Hawke" wrote:
There seems to be a stereotype that "liberals" are the lazy sorts
of
people who interrupt TV viewing only to go to soup lines, or smoke
harmful substances, whereas "conservatives" are hard working, self
reliant people who are very well off due to their own perseverance
and
work ethic.
And yet, the few self proclaimed or suspected liberals and Obama
supporters of this newsgroup, seem to be very well off,
accomplished
people, whereas many conservatives, while intelligent and
interesting
people on many levels, are not exactly above that kind of level of
attainment.
Show us your data. IOW, you're talking out your a$$.
If that is the case, is that perhaps the time to reconsider our
stereotypes?
Perhaps you should reconsider yours.
i think what he is saying is that your stereotypes should be the
same as his...
Ah, yes. That is the leftist's way.
At least that is what you think the leftist's way is. What people are
forgetting is that there are stereotypes, which do have some truth to
them,
and then there is reality. There are concrete things that actually
make someone a liberal or a conservative. They each have their own
ways and beliefs. The problem is when one side makes claims about the
other side which are not true, which is usually the case. In this
group, which is filled with right wingers and republicans denigration
of "liberals" are posted constantly. That's because the "wingers"
detest anyone who has
views
that are different from theirs (a conservative trait). Proof of this
is
the
unending stream of criticism and invectives directed at liberals by
them.

Take one trait that is common among liberals; tolerance. This same
trait is
not shared or highly regarded by conservatives. A trait they like a
lot
more
is authority or hierarchy. Each group has it's own group of attributes
and
they are not shared much by the other group. Both groups have a low
opinion
of the other group. But if you want to know the facts about one group
or the
other you don't ask the other side because most of what they think is
wrong.
Anyone can find the truth about liberals or conservatives if they want
but
for most people it's a lot easier to simply call the other group names
and
say nasty things about them. On this group, most of the people doing
that
are conservatives. That's is not an opinion. It's a fact.

Hawke

Well said.

I beg to differ; I thought what he said was a load of ****.


That's only because you're a right winger. You guys always dislike the
truth. Especially when it's said about you. I'm sure we could confirm that
by asking your wives or girlfriends.

Hawke
This is such bull****! It's the Left Wingers that are always ****ed off
about something. They're never happy about anything. That's all I'm going
to say about this subject. Not going to drag me into this bull****.
--
"You can lead them to LINUX
but you can't make them THINK"
Running Mandriva release 2008.0 free-i586 using KDE on i586
Website Address http://rentmyhusband.biz/

Hawke wrote:
Take one trait that is common among liberals; tolerance. This same
trait is not shared or highly regarded by conservatives. A trait
they like a lot more

I must call bull**** on that one.
I find tolerance to be about equally practiced by liberals and
conservatives, though you may find it preached more frequently by
(political) liberals.

It is a trait I rarely see displayed by pundits of either side.


The point is this, is the word tolerant one that is frequently used
when describing a conservative? There is just no denying the fact
that tolerance of other views, ideas, or lifestyles is not something
that is commonly associated with conservatives. You can deny that all
you want but liberals are always more associated with being tolerant
than conservatives are. That's just a fact.

Liberals are just as intolerant as conservatives, what's different is the
things they find intolerable.

"J. Clarke" wrote:

Liberals are just as intolerant as conservatives, what's different is the
things they find intolerable.


Especially the ability to think for yourself.


--
You can't have a sense of humor, if you have no sense!

"Curious Man" wrote in message
...
There seems to be a stereotype that "liberals" are the lazy sorts of
people who interrupt TV viewing only to go to soup lines, or smoke
harmful substances, whereas "conservatives" are hard working, self
reliant people who are very well off due to their own perseverance and
work ethic.

And yet, the few self proclaimed or suspected liberals and Obama
supporters of this newsgroup, seem to be very well off, accomplished
people, whereas many conservatives, while intelligent and interesting
people on many levels, are not exactly above that kind of level of
attainment.

If that is the case, is that perhaps the time to reconsider our
stereotypes?

Curious Man

Some 35 years ago or so I read some stuff in the Bible that was to happen in
the end times that I never thought I'd see the day such things would happen.
One of these is that people would call good evil and call evil good, today
this is called modern liberalism. Another is that the Bible says that God
would turn men and women over to homosexuality, you'd have to stick your
head in the sand to not see that being fulfilled. And then the Bible also
says in the last days God would send a great delusion that would cause many
to turn from faith in God, and even the elect if that were possible. Now we
have great "scientific" evidence that people anxiously interpret to believe
all things came into existence without a creator. Richard Dawkins even
titled his book "The God Delusion", perhaps believing Richard Dawkins is the
delusion sent by God told about in the Bible.

But anyway, I found the following searching for those who call good evil and
evil good.

"Ann Coulter took some heavy artillery from the left this past week. Her new
book, Godless: The Church of Liberalism, has ignited the outrage of
liberals. You go girl! The media particularly has overreacted to such an
extent it is almost comical. When NBC, as only one example, reported the
release of her book on June 6, 2006, (666) they painted her with the same
colors that a rational person would paint Adolf Hitler, Osama bin Ladin, or
Jeffrey Dahmer. If I had not known what I was watching I might have guessed
that I was watching a Saturday Night Live skit.


This type of reaction is actually normal for liberals. When Ann Coulter in
the spirit of a Toto pulls back the curtain and exposes the real wizard they
know the game is up. They cannot stand being seen for who they are. They
cannot tolerate having opposing viewpoints and they are terrified of truth
when it doesn't line up with their worldview.[1] Trust me, truth has no
place in the liberal worldview. If you don't believe me then just watch the
liberal of your choice over time. Match up what they say with what they do.
You'll be convinced sooner rather than later.



Liberals have adopted some of the same tactics that communists have used for
years. They don't have a pure philosophy of law. Right and wrong are not the
focus of concern. It is only what advances their cause that counts. This is
why when the popular votes goes against them on an issue they often
circumvent the will of the people and get a liberal judge to rule in their
favor. Californians are well aware of this practice in their state.



I stated in my headline that liberals are evil, wrong, and nuts. Let me
address these charges one by one. My points are aimed at radical liberals
who, by the way, dominate the leadership of all the major institutions in
this nation. Their influence reaches far beyond the political sphere where
we seem to focus most of our attention. We need to look in the bushes too.



Liberals dominate the media. They rule the schools. Liberals stack the
leadership of the American Medical Association and the American Bar
Association. They control most of the major foundations and they manage some
of the most influential companies in America. Liberals line the ranks of the
environmental groups, animal rights groups, and anti-war organizations. And
don't forget Hollywood which cannot turn out a movie, it seems, without an
anti-war message, a gratuitous homosexual theme, or an end-of –the world
scenario caused by global warming.



We must remember that liberalism is not just a system of bad ideas. It is a
religion with its priests, creeds, confessions, and dogmas. Liberals worship
the system, their church. They gladly sacrifice themselves and anyone else,
friend or foe, who gets in the way of the cause. They are more religious
than most Christians. They are more dedicated than most Christians. I'm
sorry, it's just a fact and I'll bet 99% of pastors will agree with me.



I truly believe with all my heart that liberals are our enemies. They are
enemies of what is good. They are God's enemies. Now before anyone starts
judging me let me finish building my case. My standard is going to be
Scripture and hopefully you will agree with my reasoning.



Can we agree up front that if God calls something evil, then it is? Can we
agree that if God says don't do something, then we shouldn't do it? And
finally, if God says we should do something then there is no other option?
If we can agree on these basics, let's see if my charges are valid.



My first charge is that liberals are evil. Isaiah 5:20 says: Woe to those
who call evil good, and good evil, who put darkness for light, and light for
darkness. Scripture also says we can judge a tree (or a person) by their
fruit. A good tree bears good fruit and a bad tree bad fruit. This is simple
enough.



Since we don't use the word "evil" much anymore I want to submit a
definition for my purposes here. This comes from Webster's 1828 Dictionary.



E'VIL, n. Evil is natural or moral. Natural evil is any thing which produces
pain, distress, loss or calamity, or which in any way disturbs the peace,
impairs the happiness, or destroys the perfection of natural beings. Moral
evil is any deviation of a moral agent from the rules of conduct prescribed
to him by God, or by legitimate human authority; or it is any violation of
the plain principles of justice and rectitude. There are also evils called
civil, which affect injuriously the peace or prosperity of a city or state;
and political evils, which injure a nation, in its public capacity.



Modern liberalism in America qualifies as evil under every part of the above
definition. It is disturbing that we don't see it as such.



God says murder is evil. The essence of murder is striking out at the image
of God found in man. It is the worst of human crimes. In fact, God thinks
murder so heinous He determined that the only satisfaction for the crime is
the death of the perpetrator.[2] Liberals believe in abortion and abortion
is the cold-blooded murder of babies, the most innocent among us.[3] You
tell me, are liberals evil? Call it what you will, terminating a pregnancy,
dilation and evacuation, or premature delivery. It's still murder. A wig by
any other name is still a wig.



By the way liberals disagree with God's use of the death penalty. They
routinely support murderers and ignore their victims. Regardless of the
crime or the number of dead bodies, liberals side with the criminal.



God says stealing is wrong. The eighth commandment says, "You shall not
steal." No interpretation needed here. Therefore, stealing is wrong, evil.
Liberals believe in stealing. Theft is the very foundation of their corrupt
socialistic worldview. They take (steal) from the rich and give to the poor.
The more one makes, the more liberals want to take and redistribute.



Liberals fight any attempt at tax relief. They are still crying over the
Bush tax cuts. They continue to claim it only benefits the rich. I got my
tax cut and I'm not rich. Did you ever think the time would come, as it has,
when the President of the United States would have to tour the nation in
order to convince Americans that they should keep their money? He actually
had to sell us on a tax cut. What is wrong with us?



Liberal thinking is so far gone on this that they actually promised tax
increases as part of their platform in the last two presidential elections.
You would think they would at least take the lead from Bill Clinton and lie.
He promised a middle-class tax cut and then reneged a few days after he was
elected. Thank God they lost.



In the name of compassion,[4] liberals steal the quality and dignity of life
from the poorest among us. They do this by hooking them on the welfare
system and then writing rules which make it nearly impossible for them to
escape.



Liberals rob employers of the benefit of offering apprenticeships and young
workers from learning a valuable skill. This is done through the minimum
wage laws and employment rules. They also cause more unemployment. Minimum
wage laws force employers to pay some workers more than they are worth. They
must make up the difference by eliminating workers, reducing hours, or
raising prices. People are robbed on all levels.



In the First Commandment, God says, "You shall have no other gods before
Me." Liberals like any god but the true on. Those in the liberal
establishment, especially those in organizations like the ACLU and
American's United for the Separation of Church and State, have worked
feverishly to eject God permanently out of public consciousness. They are
succeeding.



Who was it that got Bible reading in government schools halted? Who was it
that had prayer in government schools banished? Thanks to liberal efforts,
every god known to man is now welcomed into our children's classrooms. The
devil himself has been given a hall pass and our God is shamelessly declared
persona non grata. Are liberals evil? You tell me.



Liberals support evil people too. Jimmy Carter went to Havana to dine with
Fidel Castro. Rush Limbaugh said some years ago that there wasn't a dictator
that Jimmy Carter didn't like. Hillary Clinton commended Saddam Hussein on
his treatment of women while condemning the U.S. for the Iraq war. Bill
Clinton helped restore Haiti dictator Jean-Bertrand Aristide to power. Those
who wield brutal power apparently fascinate Liberals.



Col. Oliver North reports on his website, www.freedomalliance.org:



"Castro was one of the few tyrants who failed to grace William Jefferson
Blythe Clinton's social calendar, though Mr. Clinton made it a habit to meet
regularly with the Dictator-of-the-Month while in office. Yasser Arafat
visited 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue no less than eleven times. Be it Fidel
Castro, Yasser Arafat or former Soviet dictator Mikhail Gorbachev, it seems
American liberals crave the affection of brutal authoritarians whose regimes
have brought nothing but agony and cruelty to their people."

Are you with me so far?

Part II, coming soon….

Ralph C. Barker"

http://www.worldviewtimes.com/article.php/articleid-795

Ed Pawlowski wrote:

As a registered "non partisan" voter, I've had people tell me I'm
wrong and should make a commitment. Fact is,neither of our two major
parties deserve my commitment and support. I wish the Libertarians
could get their stuff together because in principle, I agree with
them. Less government is better government

Heh! The "independent" voter is actually the most dependent of all. At
election time, he gets to choose between only two candidates. He had no say
in who the candidates were, no influence in the platforms, policies, or
preferences of the party, and virtually no influence with the ultimate
elected official. He can claim no pride, no power, and no profit.

The best course is to pick a party that most closely conforms to your ideals
and work from within the system. Knock on doors, raise money, attend
political meetings.

As for Libertarians, they closely resemble the Celtic warriors hired by the
English kings of old to augment the armies. Fierce, unafraid, and fearless.
You just wouldn't want them to actually, you know, run things.

Doug Winterburn wrote:

As my dear old departed mum told me almost 50 years ago - "When you're
young, you're idealistic and liberal, then you got to work and start
paying taxes and become a conservative, then you get old and start
looking for help because you didn't plan ahead and you become liberal
again".

Or "a conservative is a former liberal who's been robbed."

One maxim that floated around New York during the Guiliana years:

"A Republican is a Democrat who suddenly realizes he hasn't been mugged
lately."

Too_Many_Tools wrote:

LOL...tell me...what will the millions of Americans do in the next few
years for retirement when their 401Ks are worth nothing, their houses
are worth much, much less and with millions living off what savings
they might have?

Get a job?


Or the damning fact that 60% of bankruptcies are medical related...and
you incur most of your medical costs after retirement.

No biggie. Bankruptcies have to be caused by something, else there wouldn't
be any.


And you do realize that this deep, deep recession has a long way to go
yet. Best estimates that the economy MAY bottom out late next year. So
how deep of pockets do you have..especially if government payments are
cut?

You're right. One will just have to cut back on expenses.


The truth in life is that you can do everything right and still arrive
at retirement penniless.


Yep.

rjd wrote:

If I liberally apply a protective finish to one of my wood projects to
conserve it, what does that make me?

A politician?

snip of hysterical rant about the coming end times

A fine example of intolerance -- well done! Who is the
loony you quoted?

-- Andy Barss

Michael A. Terrell wrote:
"J. Clarke" wrote:

Liberals are just as intolerant as conservatives, what's different
is the things they find intolerable.


Especially the ability to think for yourself.

Uh, both sides are intolerable of such and have their shining lights of
idiocy.

HeyBub wrote:
Too_Many_Tools wrote:

LOL...tell me...what will the millions of Americans do in the next
few years for retirement when their 401Ks are worth nothing, their
houses are worth much, much less and with millions living off what
savings they might have?

Get a job?

So what kind of job does someone in his eighties who has been retired for
twenty years get?

Hint--there's not enough work to go around right now. A common problem
throughout history. Those big pointy things in the Egyptian desert are
monuments to the Egyptian WPA as much as they are to the pharaohs who were
buried in them.

Or the damning fact that 60% of bankruptcies are medical
related...and you incur most of your medical costs after retirement.

No biggie. Bankruptcies have to be caused by something, else there
wouldn't be any.


And you do realize that this deep, deep recession has a long way to
go yet. Best estimates that the economy MAY bottom out late next
year. So how deep of pockets do you have..especially if government
payments are cut?

You're right. One will just have to cut back on expenses.

And when one doesn't have enough income to pay for food?

The truth in life is that you can do everything right and still
arrive at retirement penniless.


Yep.

HeyBub wrote:

snip an obvious troll

Lew

On Jun 6, 4:27*pm, "Hawke" wrote:
"Steve Turner" wrote in message

...



Too_Many_Tools wrote:
On Jun 4, 11:13 pm, "Hawke" wrote:
There seems to be a stereotype that "liberals" are the lazy sorts
of
people who interrupt TV viewing only to go to soup lines, or smoke
harmful substances, whereas "conservatives" are hard working, self
reliant people who are very well off due to their own perseverance
and
work ethic.
And yet, the few self proclaimed or suspected liberals and Obama
supporters of this newsgroup, seem to be very well off,
accomplished
people, whereas many conservatives, while intelligent and
interesting
people on many levels, are not exactly above that kind of level of
attainment.
Show us your data. *IOW, you're talking out your a$$.
If that is the case, is that perhaps the time to reconsider our
stereotypes?
Perhaps you should reconsider yours.
i think what he is saying is that your stereotypes should be the
same as his...
Ah, yes. *That is the leftist's way.
At least that is what you think the leftist's way is. What people are
forgetting is that there are stereotypes, which do have some truth to
them,
and then there is reality. There are concrete things that actually make
someone a liberal or a conservative. They each have their own ways and
beliefs. The problem is when one side makes claims about the other side
which are not true, which is usually the case. In this group, which is
filled with right wingers and republicans denigration of "liberals" are
posted constantly. That's because the "wingers" detest anyone who has
views
that are different from theirs (a conservative trait). Proof of this is
the
unending stream of criticism and invectives directed at liberals by
them.

Take one trait that is common among liberals; tolerance. This same
trait is
not shared or highly regarded by conservatives. A trait they like a lot
more
is authority or hierarchy. Each group has it's own group of attributes
and
they are not shared much by the other group. Both groups have a low
opinion
of the other group. But if you want to know the facts about one group
or the
other you don't ask the other side because most of what they think is
wrong.
Anyone can find the truth about liberals or conservatives if they want
but
for most people it's a lot easier to simply call the other group names
and
say nasty things about them. On this group, most of the people doing
that
are conservatives. That's is not an opinion. It's a fact.

Hawke

Well said.

I beg to differ; I thought what he said was a load of ****.

That's only because you're a right winger. You guys always dislike the
truth. Especially when it's said about you. I'm sure we could confirm that
by asking your wives or girlfriends.

Hawke

And their boyfriends.

TMT

On Jun 7, 11:52*am, "J. Clarke" wrote:
HeyBub wrote:
Too_Many_Tools wrote:

LOL...tell me...what will the millions of Americans do in the next
few years for retirement when their 401Ks are worth nothing, their
houses are worth much, much less and with millions living off what
savings they might have?

Get a job?

So what kind of job does someone in his eighties who has been retired for
twenty years get?

Hint--there's not enough work to go around right now. *A common problem
throughout history. *Those big pointy things in the Egyptian desert are
monuments to the Egyptian WPA as much as they are to the pharaohs who were
buried in them.

Or the damning fact that 60% of bankruptcies are medical
related...and you incur most of your medical costs after retirement.

No biggie. Bankruptcies have to be caused by something, else there
wouldn't be any.

And you do realize that this deep, deep recession has a long way to
go yet. Best estimates that the economy MAY bottom out late next
year. So how deep of pockets do you have..especially if government
payments are cut?

You're right. One will just have to cut back on expenses.

And when one doesn't have enough income to pay for food?

The truth in life is that you can do everything right and still
arrive at retirement penniless.

Yep.

Now you have done it...you are confusing a conservative with reality.

They would gain more respect from me if they would clean up their own
messes.

The truth is that this Country and its people will be fixing the
damage done by the conservatives for decades to come.

TMT

On Jun 7, 11:05*am, "HeyBub" wrote:
Doug Winterburn wrote:

As my dear old departed mum told me almost 50 years ago - "When you're
young, you're idealistic and liberal, then you got to work and start
paying taxes and become a conservative, then you get old and start
looking for help because you didn't plan ahead and you become liberal
again".

Or "a conservative is a former liberal who's been robbed."

One maxim that floated around New York during the Guiliana years:

"A Republican is a Democrat who suddenly realizes he hasn't been mugged
lately."

So what does that make the Republicans that just robbed this Country
of TRILLIONS?

TMT

On Jun 7, 11:09*am, "HeyBub" wrote:
Too_Many_Tools wrote:

LOL...tell me...what will the millions of Americans do in the next few
years for retirement when their 401Ks are worth nothing, their houses
are worth much, much less and with millions living off what savings
they might have?

Get a job?



Or the damning fact that 60% of bankruptcies are medical related...and
you incur most of your medical costs after retirement.

No biggie. Bankruptcies have to be caused by something, else there wouldn't
be any.



And you do realize that this deep, deep recession has a long way to go
yet. Best estimates that the economy MAY bottom out late next year. So
how deep of pockets do you have..especially if government payments are
cut?

You're right. One will just have to cut back on expenses.



The truth in life is that you can do everything right and still arrive
at retirement penniless.

Yep.

Yeah...I thought you might know.

Wingers only know how to make a mess.

TMT

J. Clarke wrote:

Get a job?

So what kind of job does someone in his eighties who has been retired
for twenty years get?

* Medical experimentation?
* Not much skill required to panhandle.
* Here's one that's a hoot. I read about a guy who picked up a large trash
bag full of crap from a retail store's parking lot. Took about an hour. He
then took the bag to the manager and offered to sell him the bag of trash
for $20. If the manager was not inclined to go for the deal, the man said
he'd be glad to put the trash back where he found it.

Too_Many_Tools wrote:
On Jun 7, 11:05 am, "HeyBub" wrote:
Doug Winterburn wrote:

As my dear old departed mum told me almost 50 years ago - "When
you're young, you're idealistic and liberal, then you got to work
and start paying taxes and become a conservative, then you get old
and start looking for help because you didn't plan ahead and you
become liberal again".

Or "a conservative is a former liberal who's been robbed."

One maxim that floated around New York during the Guiliana years:

"A Republican is a Democrat who suddenly realizes he hasn't been
mugged lately."

So what does that make the Republicans that just robbed this Country
of TRILLIONS?

Uh, no. Every single Republican in the Congress voted AGAINST the
multi-trillion dollar bailouts. The thing the Republicans supported - in the
last administration - was less than a trillion ($837 billion if I recall
correctly).

On Jun 7, 10:17*pm, "HeyBub" wrote:

. The thing the Republicans supported - in the
last administration - was less than a trillion ($837 billion if I recall
correctly).

....and made most of it disappear.

"Andrew Barss" wrote in message
...
snip of hysterical rant about the coming end times

A fine example of intolerance -- well done! Who is the
loony you quoted?

That's a good question. Obviously he's nobody anyone ever heard of. But I
have to feel sorry for the Roger though. Here it is in the 21st century and
he's still reading the fairy tale called the Bible and believes it like it
really came from a supernatural being when it was obviously written and
printed by other men. That puts him in the same boat as the Taliban loonies
and other Muslims who think the same think about the Koran. They all fall
for the same line of bull. Believe this book and don't believe what science
or reason says. Heaven is up in the sky. Guys like him still believe that
even when we all know there is nothing in the heavens but outer space. It
can't help but make you wonder how anyone with even an average IQ believe
such nonsense. But damn, they sure do and by the millions. Lucky for us the
trend is for people to drop those ancient beliefs more and more as time
passes. In another 20 years people like him will be rare as hen's teeth.

Hawke

Robatoy wrote:
On Jun 7, 10:17 pm, "HeyBub" wrote:

. The thing the Republicans supported - in the
last administration - was less than a trillion ($837 billion if I recall
correctly).

...and made most of it disappear.

So much unlike the nearly $4T Our Dear Leader at present a flushed in
less than 6 months.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/

In article ,
"HeyBub" wrote:

J. Clarke wrote:

Get a job?

So what kind of job does someone in his eighties who has been retired
for twenty years get?

* Medical experimentation?
* Not much skill required to panhandle.
* Here's one that's a hoot. I read about a guy who picked up a large trash
bag full of crap from a retail store's parking lot. Took about an hour. He
then took the bag to the manager and offered to sell him the bag of trash
for $20. If the manager was not inclined to go for the deal, the man said
he'd be glad to put the trash back where he found it.

#3: Good one!

You gotta be careful about that some places. That trash is valuable! Ya
can get arrested for stealing it!

Some locales support the idea that anything on property belongs to the
property owner and can only be legally collected by his permission. It's
applied to dumpster-diving, so it's not unthinkable it might be applied
to collecting trash.

Scrap metal is just about always treated so.

Besides, you'd be putting some poor illegal immigrant outta work.