“You have to join the side you’re on.”
Midge Decter
The EU
Google says the EU requires a notice of cookie use (by Google) and says they have posted a notice. I don't see it. If cookies bother you, go elsewhere. If the EU bothers you, emigrate. If you live outside the EU, don't go there.
HA!! I actually LOVED the POTUS of West Wing. I agreed with a great deal of the thoughts he expressed. And, I could hardly wait each week to listen to Alan Shore's courtroom defenses in Boston Legal. James Spader's character is much more like me in terms of philosophical leanings.
I recall well the Rob Ritchie episodes and found that character quite distasteful...if only because it reflected much of the "good old boy" buffoonery that is American politics. For the record, I am not a Rick Perry fan and think his entrance into the fray only serves to distract and perhaps ultimately destroy any chance for an effective conservative candidate to win.
As for Obama, he is a chameleon with a liberal heart and soul. I am amazed that on one hand he pushes progressive objectives into reality and at the same time his adoring handlers pitch him as "really, a conservative" or at least "a centrist." I suppose one could accept centrist given the number of times he voted "present." Most cookies and coffee community organizers are centrist.....they are neither one way or the other...at least...until there is an established consensus. They are like a political weathervane.
History is going to cast Obama as the worst POTUS in the history of the US. He has actually vaulted Jimmy Carter into a much better position with respect to national acceptance.
Frankly, I think 4 more years of this guy will be a national disaster of epic proportions...and he WILL fundamentally change America. Unfortunately for America, I see nobody who would oppose him successfully.......yet.
Definitions, please. President Obama is hardly a Liberal as I understand the term (traditional definition, embodied in Maggie Thatcher) or is it as present-day US Democrats understand it? And what is that understanding. For bonus points, answer the question as to where Progressives are progressing.
As for Gov Rick Perry, in this house he may find favor with my Daughter, although I have my doubts, but otherwise the membership would like him to remain in Texas. That said, we don't object to his praying, even in public. We do think it may lack crossover appeal at this time. Is it a sign he lacks political savvy?
It's not as so much as disliking Obama, but many still love Bill. So a sincere regret not voting for Hilary, I believe is real. It was a two for one deal back in 92' and 96', and it would of been in 08'.
Ah Cliff...opening up an entirely new thread within the thread?? "Liberalism" has many forms, some of which today look curiously "conservative" at least, in terms of post modern definitions.
I would suggest strongly that what most folks (including me) define as "liberal" is what Wiki discusses as Modern American Liberalism. To wit: "Modern American liberalism is a form of liberalism developed from progressive ideals such as Theodore Roosevelt's New Nationalism, Woodrow Wilson's New Freedom, Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal, John F. Kennedy's New Frontier, and Lyndon Johnson's Great Society. It combines social liberalism and social progressivism with support for a welfare state and a mixed economy. American liberal causes include voting rights for African Americans, abortion rights for women, gay rights and government entitlements such as education and health care.[1]
Keynesian economic theory has played a central role in the economic philosophy of American liberals.[2] The argument has been that national prosperity requires government management of the macroeconomy, to keep unemployment low, inflation in check, and growth high.[2] John F. Kennedy defined a liberal as follows: “ ...someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people — their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties — someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a 'Liberal', then I’m proud to say I’m a 'Liberal'.[3] ”
Most American liberals support a mixed economy because they fear the extremes of wealth and poverty under unrestrained capitalism; they point to the widespread prosperity enjoyed under a mixed economy in the years since World War II.[4][5] They believe that all citizens are entitled to the basic necessities of life and they champion the protection of the environment.[6][7] Modern American liberalism is typically associated with the Democratic Party.[8]
As of June 2010, 40% of American voters identify themselves as conservatives, 36% as moderates and 22% as liberals.[8] There has been a high level of stability over the last two decades. For example, 40% of voters called themselves conservative, 35% moderate and 18% liberal in 1992.[9] However, when polled on individual policies voters have sided with notably liberal ideas.[10]"
IMHO, progressives are better called "utopians" and thus, "pure communists."
I would also posit that in 2011, most of the ideals as expressed in Modern American Liberalism are embodied in BOTH parties. How those ideals are achieved is the rub.....in shades.
Although, nothing is that simple...or at least...as simple or simplistic as it seems.
That is perhaps why Americans vote with their feelings rather than their intellect.
It's quite an insult to Hillary to say that Bill would be riding shotgun on her presidency. It's like a surrogate penis, which obviously the presidency needs. How about stating that someone needs to be there to keep her level headed when she is on her period?
What's odd, is that I've talked to some younger women that turned away from Hillary because she didn't kick Bill to the curb.
Umm.. nothing was insulting was said. Reread my statement Jack. Hilary was Bill's surrogate vagina. Bill couldn't win without Hilary. But the fact is her spouse was a popular president and still is, objecively helps. Geesh.
Re Jack's last comment, menorrhea has never been a concern for me. And, trying to be as delicate as I can, isn't Hillary Clinton and the others beyond that point anyway. Frankly, in my limited sample (Mother, Wife, Daughter) this has not been an issue, has not raised itself to the level of noticeable.
OK...Jack and Cliff have opened the door. In Taxachusetts, the talk radio heads along the the Glob and the Herald are going berserk about Tom Brady's 2 year old son photographed in Brazil playing in the water Full Monty. Apparently, many of the commentary from the male and female heads are quite impressed...or perhaps even envious. One proclaimed that Tom should be very proud. Of course, the vast majority of listeners and readers think that Brady's AND anyone who defends the whole dustup as a big deal about nothing should be locked up in a concrete cell with no windows for the balance of their natural lives.
Does this mean that Brady's son is destined for political prominence....solely on the basis of his.....er.....prominence?
Apparently so if we follow modern day political careers.
12 comments:
Here we go again. This ploy was tedious during the 2008 general election.
Notice how, just after bin Laden takes a bullet to his noodle, Obama becomes "feckless" to the point Dems are having regrets?
This is Jedi minds tricks. Rather lame ones, at that.
I'm going to take some liberty with this thread to show you this clip from the TV drama, The West Wing.
It's eerie how the character "Gov. Rob Ritchie" captures real life character, Gov. Rick Perry.
And Ritchie's derisions of the fictional POTUS are, almost verbatim, the slices Neal takes at Obama and liberals.
PS. It should be noted, Obama is hardly liberal. That is a lie being spread by opponents.
HA!! I actually LOVED the POTUS of West Wing. I agreed with a great deal of the thoughts he expressed. And, I could hardly wait each week to listen to Alan Shore's courtroom defenses in Boston Legal. James Spader's character is much more like me in terms of philosophical leanings.
I recall well the Rob Ritchie episodes and found that character quite distasteful...if only because it reflected much of the "good old boy" buffoonery that is American politics. For the record, I am not a Rick Perry fan and think his entrance into the fray only serves to distract and perhaps ultimately destroy any chance for an effective conservative candidate to win.
As for Obama, he is a chameleon with a liberal heart and soul. I am amazed that on one hand he pushes progressive objectives into reality and at the same time his adoring handlers pitch him as "really, a conservative" or at least "a centrist." I suppose one could accept centrist given the number of times he voted "present." Most cookies and coffee community organizers are centrist.....they are neither one way or the other...at least...until there is an established consensus. They are like a political weathervane.
History is going to cast Obama as the worst POTUS in the history of the US. He has actually vaulted Jimmy Carter into a much better position with respect to national acceptance.
Frankly, I think 4 more years of this guy will be a national disaster of epic proportions...and he WILL fundamentally change America. Unfortunately for America, I see nobody who would oppose him successfully.......yet.
Definitions, please. President Obama is hardly a Liberal as I understand the term (traditional definition, embodied in Maggie Thatcher) or is it as present-day US Democrats understand it? And what is that understanding. For bonus points, answer the question as to where Progressives are progressing.
As for Gov Rick Perry, in this house he may find favor with my Daughter, although I have my doubts, but otherwise the membership would like him to remain in Texas. That said, we don't object to his praying, even in public. We do think it may lack crossover appeal at this time. Is it a sign he lacks political savvy?
Regards — Cliff
It's not as so much as disliking Obama, but many still love Bill. So a sincere regret not voting for Hilary, I believe is real. It was a two for one deal back in 92' and 96', and it would of been in 08'.
Ah Cliff...opening up an entirely new thread within the thread?? "Liberalism" has many forms, some of which today look curiously "conservative" at least, in terms of post modern definitions.
I would suggest strongly that what most folks (including me) define as "liberal" is what Wiki discusses as Modern American Liberalism. To wit:
"Modern American liberalism is a form of liberalism developed from progressive ideals such as Theodore Roosevelt's New Nationalism, Woodrow Wilson's New Freedom, Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal, John F. Kennedy's New Frontier, and Lyndon Johnson's Great Society. It combines social liberalism and social progressivism with support for a welfare state and a mixed economy. American liberal causes include voting rights for African Americans, abortion rights for women, gay rights and government entitlements such as education and health care.[1]
Keynesian economic theory has played a central role in the economic philosophy of American liberals.[2] The argument has been that national prosperity requires government management of the macroeconomy, to keep unemployment low, inflation in check, and growth high.[2] John F. Kennedy defined a liberal as follows:
“ ...someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people — their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties — someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a 'Liberal', then I’m proud to say I’m a 'Liberal'.[3] ”
Most American liberals support a mixed economy because they fear the extremes of wealth and poverty under unrestrained capitalism; they point to the widespread prosperity enjoyed under a mixed economy in the years since World War II.[4][5] They believe that all citizens are entitled to the basic necessities of life and they champion the protection of the environment.[6][7] Modern American liberalism is typically associated with the Democratic Party.[8]
As of June 2010, 40% of American voters identify themselves as conservatives, 36% as moderates and 22% as liberals.[8] There has been a high level of stability over the last two decades. For example, 40% of voters called themselves conservative, 35% moderate and 18% liberal in 1992.[9] However, when polled on individual policies voters have sided with notably liberal ideas.[10]"
IMHO, progressives are better called "utopians" and thus, "pure communists."
I would also posit that in 2011, most of the ideals as expressed in Modern American Liberalism are embodied in BOTH parties. How those ideals are achieved is the rub.....in shades.
Although, nothing is that simple...or at least...as simple or simplistic as it seems.
That is perhaps why Americans vote with their feelings rather than their intellect.
It's quite an insult to Hillary to say that Bill would be riding shotgun on her presidency. It's like a surrogate penis, which obviously the presidency needs. How about stating that someone needs to be there to keep her level headed when she is on her period?
What's odd, is that I've talked to some younger women that turned away from Hillary because she didn't kick Bill to the curb.
Gender roles are so subjective.
Umm.. nothing was insulting was said. Reread my statement Jack. Hilary was Bill's surrogate vagina. Bill couldn't win without Hilary. But the fact is her spouse was a popular president and still is, objecively helps. Geesh.
Re Jack's last comment, menorrhea has never been a concern for me. And, trying to be as delicate as I can, isn't Hillary Clinton and the others beyond that point anyway. Frankly, in my limited sample (Mother, Wife, Daughter) this has not been an issue, has not raised itself to the level of noticeable.
Regards — Cliff
whew!!!
Bill Clinton won, in large part, due to Ross Perot.
I guess it is fair to say, genitalia has always been a major aspect of the Clinton's political noteriety.
Sarkozy is down with all of this, btw.
OK...Jack and Cliff have opened the door. In Taxachusetts, the talk radio heads along the the Glob and the Herald are going berserk about Tom Brady's 2 year old son photographed in Brazil playing in the water Full Monty. Apparently, many of the commentary from the male and female heads are quite impressed...or perhaps even envious. One proclaimed that Tom should be very proud. Of course, the vast majority of listeners and readers think that Brady's AND anyone who defends the whole dustup as a big deal about nothing should be locked up in a concrete cell with no windows for the balance of their natural lives.
Does this mean that Brady's son is destined for political prominence....solely on the basis of his.....er.....prominence?
Apparently so if we follow modern day political careers.
Post a Comment