why there are no conservatives on Oprano? (Thanks God!)

[Winetalk.com]

http://www.urbandictionary.com/defin...m=conservative

5)"Today's so-called 'conservatives' don't even know what the word means. They think I've turned liberal because I believe a woman has a right to an abortion. That's a decision that's up to the pregnant woman, not up to the pope or some do-gooders or the Religious Right. It's not a conservative issue at all." -- Barry Goldwater

Conservative :

2. A wealthy person who exploits the fears and predjudices of ignorant and uneducated individuals in order to further his own economic, social, and political interests (see 'economic conservative').

3. An ignorant and uneducated person so manipulated (see 'social conservative').

[Mike AI]

HAHAHA By traditional definitions it is Bush who is Progressive. Conservative means protecting status quo. Bush's dad and Clinton were conservative. W is progressive, he is trying to make major changes internationally, militarily, economicly.

You might not like what he is doing or attempting to do, but Bush is not statist. It is one reason I support him.

[TheLegacy]

Originally Posted by Winetalk.com

Conservative :

2. A wealthy person who exploits the fears and predjudices of ignorant and uneducated individuals in order to further his own economic, social, and political interests (see 'economic conservative').

3. An ignorant and uneducated person so manipulated (see 'social conservative').

because this isnt GFY

[Winetalk.com]

Originally Posted by Mike AI

HAHAHA By traditional definitions it is Bush who is Progressive. Conservative means protecting status quo. Bush's dad and Clinton were conservative. W is progressive, he is trying to make major changes internationally, militarily, economicly.

You might not like what he is doing or attempting to do, but Bush is not statist. It is one reason I support him.

Long love the Progressives!

By your definition W is in the good company of other Progressives:
Chengiz Khan,
King George,
Napoleon,
Hitler,
Saddam Hussein.

[Mike AI]

Originally Posted by Winetalk.com

Long love the Progressives!

By your definition W is in the good company of other Progressives:
Chengiz Khan,
King George,
Napoleon,
Hitler,
Saddam Hussein.

You remember their names don't you?

[TheEnforcer]

The political definitions that are todays standards are much different than what the words orginally meant.

[NickPapageorgio]

Originally Posted by Mike AI

You remember their names don't you?

I think it's what they tried to accomplish that strikes me as most impressive. Those guys were visionaries...

[Winetalk.com]

Originally Posted by Mike AI

You remember their names don't you?

Sure,
as much as we all remember the name of Herostrat who burned the famous gardens, one of the 7 Architectual World Wonder sites.

We also remember the name of Judas Iscariot.

Name recognition is GOOD in marketing, name recognition in History is a double edged sword

[Winetalk.com]

Originally Posted by NickPapageorgio

I think it's what they tried to accomplish that strikes me as most impressive. Those guys were visionaries...

..even if the execution sucked!

[NickPapageorgio]

Originally Posted by Winetalk.com

..even if the execution sucked!

My late grandfather has pictures he snapped of Mussolini's last "public appearance" while he was overseas up in the attic or stored away in a box somewhere. Gruesome.

People didn't seem to like him much there at the end for some reason.

[Winetalk.com]

Originally Posted by NickPapageorgio

My late grandfather has pictures he snapped of Mussolini's last "public appearance" while he was overseas up in the attic or stored away in a box somewhere. Gruesome.

People didn't seem to like him much there at the end for some reason.

They didn't like him because they were Comminists and Liberals!

[PornoDoggy]

Originally Posted by Winetalk.com

They didn't like him because they were Comminists and Liberals!

[NickPapageorgio]

I don't have access to his pictures at the moment (they are out of state) or I would scan them, but I'd imagine he's one of the "helmets" in this pic.

[Winetalk.com]

Originally Posted by NickPapageorgio

I don't have access to his pictures at the moment (they are out of state) or I would scan them, but I'd imagine he's one of the "helmets" in this pic.

I betcha those helmets were American Liberals who gathered there to protest something, right, Mike?

[Mike AI]

This thread is generating a lot of laughs on the web. Thanks guys!!

Another Mike AI "Liberal's Gone Wild" Production, Copyright 2006.

[Winetalk.com]

Originally Posted by Mike AI

This thread is generating a lot of laughs on the web. Thanks guys!!

Another Mike AI "Liberal's Gone Wild" Production, Copyright 2006.

Have you included
"Throw Liberals in the well,
make my country free.."
music in your copyrighted productions?

[JoesHO]

Originally Posted by Winetalk.com

Have you included
"Throw Liberals in the well,
make my country free.."
music in your copyrighted productions?

JibJab has copyrighted all liberal sound tracks for 06

[Hell Puppy]

Originally Posted by Mike AI

HAHAHA By traditional definitions it is Bush who is Progressive. Conservative means protecting status quo. Bush's dad and Clinton were conservative. W is progressive, he is trying to make major changes internationally, militarily, economicly.

You might not like what he is doing or attempting to do, but Bush is not statist. It is one reason I support him.

By that definition, Reagan was not a conservative either.

[Winetalk.com]

Æsop. (Sixth century B.C.) Fables.
The Harvard Classics. 1909–14.

The Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing


A WOLF found great difficulty in getting at the sheep owing to the vigilance of the shepherd and his dogs. But one day it found the skin of a sheep that had been flayed and thrown aside, so it put it on over its own pelt and strolled down among the sheep. The Lamb that belonged to the sheep, whose skin the Wolf was wearing, began to follow the Wolf in the Sheep’s clothing; so, leading the Lamb a little apart, he soon made a meal off her, and for some time he succeeded in deceiving the sheep, and enjoying hearty meals.
“APPEARANCES ARE DECEPTIVE.”

[Mike AI]

Originally Posted by Hell Puppy

By that definition, Reagan was not a conservative either.

Exactly. Reagan was a progressive. He made major policy changes that we are still benefiting from now. I remember people treating Reagan the same way they are treating Bush - including Europeans. Funny to watch same people grovel at his casket!

If somehow we could combine Bush and Reagan together we would have the perfect leader!

[PornoDoggy]

Please.

Effecting change is not limited to "progressives." The people working for a reversal of Rowe v Wade are not the progressives. The people working to weaken the separation of Church and State are not progressives. The people working to undo a decent environmental record by Republican presidents from Roosevelt to Nixon are not progressives.

Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush described as progressives ...

George Orwell would be proud to know that newspeak is alive and living well in the 21st century.

[JoesHO]

Must be an election year, the right wing operatives are up to no good again .

[Jace]

i never quite understood what is exactly wrong with being a liberal?

Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry.
Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded.
Of, relating to, or characteristic of liberalism.
Liberal Of, designating, or characteristic of a political party founded on or associated with principles of social and political liberalism, especially in Great Britain, Canada, and the United States.

Tending to give freely; generous: a liberal benefactor.
Generous in amount; ample: a liberal serving of potatoes.
Not strict or literal; loose or approximate: a liberal translation.
Of, relating to, or based on the traditional arts and sciences of a college or university curriculum: a liberal education.

Archaic. Permissible or appropriate for a person of free birth; befitting a lady or gentleman.
Obsolete. Morally unrestrained; licentious.

you know, most of that is everything I hope to be as a human

and then there is Politcal Liberalism

Liberalism is an ideology, or current of political thought, which holds liberty as the primary political value.[1] Liberalism seeks a society characterized by freedom of thought for individuals, limitations on the power of government and religion, the rule of law, the free exchange of ideas, a free market economy that supports private enterprise, and a system of government that is transparent. This form of government favors liberal democracy with open and fair elections, where all citizens have equal rights by law, and an equal opportunity to succeed. Liberalism rejected many foundational assumptions which dominated most earlier theories of government, such as the divine right of kings, hereditary status, and established religion. Fundamental human rights that all liberals support include the right to life, liberty, and property. In many countries, modern liberalism differs from classical liberalism by asserting that government provision of some minimal level of material well-being takes priority over individual rights.

damn, i don't actually consider myself a liberal, but if that is what it means and if I had to choose something, I would say that what is described above seems the most rational

[nastyboy]

Originally Posted by Jace

Liberalism is an ideology, or current of political thought, which holds liberty as the primary political value.[1] Liberalism seeks a society characterized by freedom of thought for individuals, limitations on the power of government and religion, the rule of law, the free exchange of ideas, a free market economy that supports private enterprise, and a system of government that is transparent. This form of government favors liberal democracy with open and fair elections, where all citizens have equal rights by law, and an equal opportunity to succeed. Liberalism rejected many foundational assumptions which dominated most earlier theories of government, such as the divine right of kings, hereditary status, and established religion. Fundamental human rights that all liberals support include the right to life, liberty, and property. In many countries, modern liberalism differs from classical liberalism by asserting that government provision of some minimal level of material well-being takes priority over individual rights.

If thats liberalism then the Dems aren't liberals...more like communists and the Republicans have turned into the Taliban.

I dont know what I am anymore...
Pro Choice (gets me in trouble with the Rebublicans)

Pro Sex (gets me in trouble with the Rebublicans)

Pro Separation of Church/State - support, teach, accept it all or support, teach, accept none of it (gets me in trouble with the Rebublicans)

Pro Business (gets me in trouble with the Dems)

Pro Military (gets me in trouble with the Dems)

Anti Welfare, Afermative Action (gets me in trouble with the Dems)

Moderate on the environment...for God sakes drill in Alaska, build the nuke power plants and develop effective alternative fuels. (Gets me in trouble with both parties)

[Jace]

Originally Posted by nastyboy

If thats liberalism then the Dems aren't liberals...more like communists and the Republicans have turned into the Taliban.

I dont know what I am anymore...
Pro Choice (gets me in trouble with the Rebublicans)

Pro Sex (gets me in trouble with the Rebublicans)

Pro Separation of Church/State - support, teach, accept it all or support, teach, accept none of it (gets me in trouble with the Rebublicans)

Pro Business (gets me in trouble with the Dems)

Pro Military (gets me in trouble with the Dems)

Anti Welfare, Afermative Action (gets me in trouble with the Dems)

Moderate on the environment...for God sakes drill in Alaska, build the nuke power plants and develop effective alternative fuels. (Gets me in trouble with both parties)

you sound about like me man...aside from the affirmative action (i actually just don't know where I stand on that one, it is pretty complicated with me living in a mixed race family)

i also believe in the right to own guns and legalization and taxation of drugs

[nastyboy]

Originally Posted by Jace

you sound about like me man...aside from the affirmative action (i actually just don't know where I stand on that one, it is pretty complicated with me living in a mixed race family)

i also believe in the right to own guns and legalization and taxation of drugs

yup...I like guns and although I dont use (every drug I have ever tried except steroids has fucked me up royal) ....I'm all for legalizing.

Totally understand your position on the Affermative Action thing bro..good arguments on both sides of that one.

[Jace]

Originally Posted by nastyboy

yup...I like guns and although I dont use (every drug I have ever tried except steroids has fucked me up royal) ....I'm all for legalizing.

Totally understand your position on the Affermative Action thing bro..good arguments on both sides of that one.

I love me some guns....fun times haha

yeah, I was a partier back in the day, but I rarely do any drugs at all anymore, occasionally about once every 3 months we will have a fun night on the town....

[PornoDoggy]

The Democrats are only "anti-business" if you assume that the interest of capital overrides all others.

I'm all for more nuclear power when we have a method of using it that doesn't generate waste that will last unto the 95th century. Wouldn't mind waiting a while longer for Alaska drilling, since I'm secure enough in my masculinity to not need a Hummer or Escalade, and the extraction technology will only get cleaner over time. Also would regulate the fucking hell out of whoever is extracting it.

The Democrats are only "anti-military" if you think that the first answer to any disagreement between the U.S. and another country should be resoved by force. I don't know any Democrats who are anti-military. I know many who rather strongly disagree with the way the current Cocksucker-In-Chief is employing them.

If you are a fucking subhuman, and deny that racial problems ever existed in America and/or what did was justified, then you aren't worth talking to. If you believe that the effects of 200+ years of a system of oppression bit as pervasive as South Africa's aparthied has been overcome in the 40 years since the civil rights acts of the 1960s, then I want a hit of whatever you are smoking. There is still a need for some forms of Affirmative Action in this country.

I think comparing the two parties with Communists and the Taliban is wrong. Everybody has moved right. Eisenhower, Nixon, and Ford would be extremist liberals in today's Republican Party, and even Barry Goldwater - in part responsible for the resurgence of the far right - would have no more honor in his party than McCain does.

[Winetalk.com]

Originally Posted by nastyboy

If thats liberalism then the Dems aren't liberals...more like communists and the Republicans have turned into the Taliban.

I dont know what I am anymore...
Pro Choice (gets me in trouble with the Rebublicans)

Pro Sex (gets me in trouble with the Rebublicans)

Pro Separation of Church/State - support, teach, accept it all or support, teach, accept none of it (gets me in trouble with the Rebublicans)

Pro Business (gets me in trouble with the Dems)

Pro Military (gets me in trouble with the Dems)

Anti Welfare, Afermative Action (gets me in trouble with the Dems)

Moderate on the environment...for God sakes drill in Alaska, build the nuke power plants and develop effective alternative fuels. (Gets me in trouble with both parties)

You and me, we are the men without the party.
The time is ripe for a third major political party in this country.

[Vick]

Affirmative action is terrible, it hurts everyone

The best person for the job should get the position regardless of race, nor should anyone ever get a job, a loan or anything due to race

[NickPapageorgio]

Originally Posted by Vick

Affirmative action is terrible, it hurts everyone

The best person for the job should get the position regardless of race, nor should anyone ever get a job, a loan or anything due to race

Amen to that Vick.

[nastyboy]

Originally Posted by Winetalk.com

You and me, we are the men without the party.
The time is ripe for a third major political party in this country.

Amen to that...how about the Common Sense Party.

[Winetalk.com]

bad name...it is destined to fails, as Common Sence is not in high regards in this country

[JoesHO]

Originally Posted by nastyboy

Amen to that...how about the Common Sense Party.

I agree 100%!!!!

The problem is, niether party will allow a third to get the proper funding to make it a peer party of any significance ( or threat ) depending on how you look at it .

We need a complete overhaul of political system in this country ( just not the one Bush is doing now )

[nastyboy]

Originally Posted by Winetalk.com

bad name...it is destined to fails, as Common Sence is not in high regards in this country

Isn't that the truth!

[Hell Puppy]

Originally Posted by Mike AI

Exactly. Reagan was a progressive. He made major policy changes that we are still benefiting from now. I remember people treating Reagan the same way they are treating Bush - including Europeans. Funny to watch same people grovel at his casket!

If somehow we could combine Bush and Reagan together we would have the perfect leader!

My guess is Ronnie would smack G.W. on the back of the head if he were alive and given the opportunity.

Both were catalysts for change, but G.W. spends our tax money like a new england democrat. The answer to everything for him is more government.

Reagan progressive? Yeah, he pushed a lot of change thru as well, but he tried to push the country back to it's root. He reduced the size of the federal government and pushed power back to the states. He believed in trusting the people to spend the money they earned instead of allocating larger and larger chunks of it to the government to spread around to those too lazy or stupid to work and live within their means.

And foreign policy? G.W. pussy foots. This is where Reagain did use the federal government and tax money....he spent so much on building up our strength that the soviets went broke just trying to keep up.

[gonzo]

All Night Party!

Free George The Bartender!!!

[PornoDoggy]

Originally Posted by Hell Puppy

My guess is Ronnie would smack G.W. on the back of the head if he were alive and given the opportunity.

Both were catalysts for change, but G.W. spends our tax money like a new england democrat. The answer to everything for him is more government.

Reagan progressive? Yeah, he pushed a lot of change thru as well, but he tried to push the country back to it's root. He reduced the size of the federal government and pushed power back to the states. He believed in trusting the people to spend the money they earned instead of allocating larger and larger chunks of it to the government to spread around to those too lazy or stupid to work and live within their means.

And foreign policy? G.W. pussy foots. This is where Reagain did use the federal government and tax money....he spent so much on building up our strength that the soviets went broke just trying to keep up.

Reagan was just as good at don't tax but spend anyway as GW is.

Reagan talked the talk.

What Ronald Reagan proved is that even a 2nd-rate actor who co-starred with a monkey could play the role of President of the United States.

He did spend the Soviet Union into submission, but probably only accelerated the inevitable by 5-10 years. Your children will be paying for that - theirs will start to pay for GW's expenditures.

Aside from that, what did he do in foreign policy? He threw a temper tantrum at Ghadafi - a plan so lame that the French refused us use of their air space because they did not want to participate in what was obviously only a publicity stunt.

He also sent peacekeepers into Leabanon, and we all know how well that worked out.

IMHO, an objective history of his Presidency written 25-30 years hence will show him to be an average president.

[Hell Puppy]

Originally Posted by PornoDoggy

Reagan was just as good at don't tax but spend anyway as GW is.

Reagan talked the talk.

What Ronald Reagan proved is that even a 2nd-rate actor who co-starred with a monkey could play the role of President of the United States.

He did spend the Soviet Union into submission, but probably only accelerated the inevitable by 5-10 years. Your children will be paying for that - theirs will start to pay for GW's expenditures.

Aside from that, what did he do in foreign policy? He threw a temper tantrum at Ghadafi - a plan so lame that the French refused us use of their air space because they did not want to participate in what was obviously only a publicity stunt.

He also sent peacekeepers into Leabanon, and we all know how well that worked out.

IMHO, an objective history of his Presidency written 25-30 years hence will show him to be an average president.

I'll always be a fan for how he handled the air traffic controller strike.