That's what they all claim. The fact of the matter is that they were they could have refused in fact they have a moral obligation to do so. David Hackworth talked about a similar situation in Korea where a Captain I beleive ordered him to kill some prisioners. He refused and that was the end of it. If they were ordered to do so and the soldiers refused there's no way they're going to the CID and say I want to bring these men up on charges for refusing to humiliate and abuse prisioners.
THX 1138 - (PFID:efa8549) - 08:29am Jun 12, 2004 PST (# 823 of 825) Thus what was donned the great rasin offenisve on Tinian island 1944.
Kerry is a moderate Republican
Kerry is no moderate, and he's no Republican.
Unless you compare him to Nader or Kucinich.
You missed the point, I think...
Compared to the True Liberals like LBJ, FDR, like that? Kerry is very-much, a moderate.
Today's Democrats are nothing compared to those of 40 years ago, and Republicans of today are so far to the right of ANY republicans from the 60's (less perhaps Goldwater), that I believe we can say, without question, that the nation has lurched FAR to the right of where it was back in those days. THAT, is what I meant.
Now you weren't there so I suppose you cannot relate, but Kerry's Politics are quite-like Nelson "Rockefeller-Republicans", MODERATES, who worked WITH the "Liberals" of those years to craft much of the legislation of Johnson's 'Great Society".
Compared to them, Kerry is more like Rockefeller than he is Johnson... WAY more, in fact.
We have gone so far to the "Right", that there aren't any true Democrats, like those of the 30's to the 70's, LEFT.And Conservatives of today, are NOT "Moderate" at ALL.
Do you see what I mean, JT?
Kucinich isn't losing-out this time around because he is too "Liberal" as Democrats were back then, it's because he is WIERD,and BORING.
Nader is about the same as he always was, and the Nation (being much more conservative and to the RIGHT of ANY politicians of those years), will not elect anyone like that, not at this time anyway.
Well JFK had one of the biggest tax cuts in the nations history. We could debate wether or not JKF would be a Republican or not. Suffice it to say the Democrats probably have changed more and gone further left than their predecessors. Kerry is certainly not moderate. He's to the far left of the party.
"We could debate wether or not JKF would be a Republican or not."
No point. He would not be a Republican. He was an Irish Catholic from Boston. There may have been a Republican from that group, but there weren't many.
"Kerry is certainly not moderate. He's to the far left of the party."
Kerry is certainly not moderate. He's to the far left of the party."
Sez who?
Liberals that's who.
he ranked as the ninth most liberal senator in the National Journal's comparison of voting records for 2002. He ranked even higher -- more liberal than Kennedy -- on economic issues, although about the same on social issues and more conservative on foreign policy. Americans for Democratic Action, a liberal group, rated Kerry more liberal than Kennedy during the time they served together in the Senate, although by only 1 percentage point.
Boston is pretty much Democrat territory. Although that's slowly changing too. MN used to be a democratic gimmie, not so much anymore. I think the parties changed. He (Kennedy) might not switch but he'd be more moderate than most in the Democratic party. Liberalism or the modern version of it wasn't around to the extent it is today. I just don't see Kennedy being philosophicaly in tune with the left side of the party.
Luv2Fly
- (PFID:efa86b7) -08:13am Jun 14, 2004 PST (#828of 846)Â
Kerry is a moderate Republican
His voting record is more liberal than Teddy The Sub driver Kennedy.
Why, because GDubbya's commercials tell you so?
Democrats of 30 years ago are todays republicans. JFK would be a moderate republican.
Kennedy was a solid FDR Democrat. That means, LIBERAL. NO Question. TOday, he would still be a LIberal, but to the right of LBJ who was solidly a Liberal and his legislative accomplishments or "The Great Society" is the legacy of that Liberalism, which does NOT exist today .
Today's "Liberals"Â are moderates, right where Clinton left them. Today's conservatives are generally from the South, Baptist and against any and all Government programs or subsidies, which is why they are continually cutting-back on certain programs and entitlements...
Like the VA System.
Â
Today's Republican Party is run by Baptists, Southern-Christians and/or Fundamentalists, those Catholics who are also "fundamentalist" and those conservatives who favor the ideals of say White-Supremacists. As long as that is so, we will continue to be a country in search of it's very-liberal but MODERATE ideals upon which it was founded
, but lost years ago to the likes of Ronald Reagan, Newt Gingrich and now, GDubbya...also a Christian Fundamentalist, and not too proud to say so.
Should John Kerry Win in November, it is likely that the Senate will change hands as well, IFhe wins with John Edwards on the ticket that is. There are several seats up for grabs, and mostly in the south.
Today's Republican Party is run by Baptists, Southern-Christians and/or Fundamentalists, those Catholics who are also "fundamentalist" and those conservatives who favor the ideals of say White-Supremacists.
but a couple of those mentioned certainly have influence in Republican politics, don't you think?
I won't argue that they have influence. I'd rather have their influence than the pro-abortion, gay marriage, hug a tree, blame the oppressive middle aged white man for everything, rob from Peter to pay Paul communist, free dope for everyone crowd.
Is it because there are more of the -- "Baptists, Southern-Christians and/or Fundamentalists, those Catholics who are also "fundamentalist" and those conservatives who favor the ideals of say White-Supremacists -- than there are of the, pro-abortion, gay marriage, hug a tree, blame the oppressive middle aged white man for everything, rob from Peter to pay Paul communist, free dope for everyone crowd?
I'd rather have their influence than the pro-abortion, gay marriage, hug a tree, blame the oppressive middle aged white man for everything, rob from Peter to pay Paul communist, free dope for everyone crowd.
Today's Republican Party is run by Baptists, Southern-Christians and/or Fundamentalists, those Catholics who are also "fundamentalist" and those conservatives who favor the ideals of say White-Supremacists.
the party is not run by Christians or fundamentalists. they do have a home there. but of course fold was attempting to demean them by associating them with the white supremacists. but of course that is just not true. it is the talking points that he takes in without thinking.
If the Republicans are run by fundamental Christians, why is there a large portion of evengelical Christians who are upset with Bush and threatening to pull their votes ?
The fact is they are a faction within the Republican party. Just as the greens, professional protestors and far left socialist types. They all collectively guide the party.
And Kerry was voted the most the 9th most liberal senator on fiscal issues by a non partisan group. His record was even more liberal than Teddy the K on fiscal issues. That's not me doing the rankings.
Let me ask you this. Why shouldn't he be proud of that and stand up and say you're darn right I'm liberal and proud of it. Then again perhaps that's why he wanted to have a Republican on his ticket since he knew it would imrprove his odds of winning. If someone's a liberal they ought to stand up for it instead of trying to appear moderate come election time.
And not to get to far off topic but as for comparing todays liberals to todays liberals, there's no comparison. The FDR democrats like Lieberman are being pushed out because they are like FDR. They, like FDR beleived in helping the poor with temporary assistance. Temporary being the key word. Same with JFK. Did you know he had one of the largest tax cuts for the wealthy in the history of the country ?
He also was strong on defense and stood up to the Soviets. Would he switch parties ? Probably not I guess but FDR and JFK would be considered moderate or conservative democrats. And they'd be pushed out by the liberals like Kerry, Pelosi, Kennedy, Waters etc. Suffice it to say there would be some FDR or even JFK democrats I could vote for. Kerry aint it because he's way to far to the left. The Dems are run today by the far left. It doesn't work and that's why I predict Kerry losing handily and the Senate gaining more Republican seats. People can easily see a liberal when they spot one. Kerry is it. People who beleive in him ought ot be proud of that instead of running away from it.
Kerry is a moderate Republican
Kerry is no moderate, and he's no Republican.
Unless you compare him to Nader or Kucinich.
"Do we say the thugs at Abu Ghriab just got "caught up in the heat of the times"?'
They claim they were following orders.
Maybe Kerry isn't pinning Bush down on topics because he can't pin down his own stance on some of the topics.
That's what they all claim. The fact of the matter is that they were they could have refused in fact they have a moral obligation to do so. David Hackworth talked about a similar situation in Korea where a Captain I beleive ordered him to kill some prisioners. He refused and that was the end of it. If they were ordered to do so and the soldiers refused there's no way they're going to the CID and say I want to bring these men up on charges for refusing to humiliate and abuse prisioners.
yup
How are those quiz answers coming ? ;)
THX 1138 - (PFID:efa8549) - 08:29am Jun 12, 2004 PST (# 823 of 825) Thus what was donned the great rasin offenisve on Tinian island 1944.
Kerry is a moderate Republican
Kerry is no moderate, and he's no Republican.
Unless you compare him to Nader or Kucinich.
You missed the point, I think...
Compared to the True Liberals like LBJ, FDR, like that?
Kerry is very-much, a moderate.
Today's Democrats are nothing compared to those of 40 years ago, and Republicans of today are so far to the right of ANY republicans from the 60's (less perhaps Goldwater), that I believe we can say, without question, that the nation has lurched FAR to the right of where it was back in those days.
THAT, is what I meant.
Now you weren't there so I suppose you cannot relate, but Kerry's Politics are quite-like Nelson "Rockefeller-Republicans", MODERATES, who worked WITH the "Liberals" of those years to craft much of the legislation of Johnson's 'Great Society".
Compared to them, Kerry is more like Rockefeller than he is Johnson... WAY more, in fact.
We have gone so far to the "Right", that there aren't any true Democrats, like those of the 30's to the 70's,
LEFT. And Conservatives of today, are NOT "Moderate" at ALL.
Do you see what I mean, JT?
Kucinich isn't losing-out this time around because he is too "Liberal" as Democrats were back then,
it's because he is WIERD, and BORING.
Nader is about the same as he always was, and the Nation (being much more conservative and to the RIGHT of ANY politicians of those years), will not elect anyone like that, not at this time anyway.
I guess I don't see what you're saying.
I would vote for a moderate Democrat.
I won't vote for Kerry.
His voting record is more liberal than Teddy The Sub driver Kennedy.
Democrats of 30 years ago are todays republicans. JFK would be a moderate republican.
"JFK would be a moderate republican."
In hell.
Well JFK had one of the biggest tax cuts in the nations history. We could debate wether or not JKF would be a Republican or not. Suffice it to say the Democrats probably have changed more and gone further left than their predecessors. Kerry is certainly not moderate. He's to the far left of the party.
Hubert Humphrey, who was considered VERY liberal in his time, was a defender of the Second Amendment.
I think the left has moved further left in most areas, and so has the right. You don't hear anyone echoing Barry Goldwater anymore.
crabs: laws either apply to everyone or they apply to no one.
Except when it comes to drug laws?
"We could debate wether or not JKF would be a Republican or not."
No point. He would not be a Republican. He was an Irish Catholic from Boston. There may have been a Republican from that group, but there weren't many.
"Kerry is certainly not moderate. He's to the far left of the party."
Sez who?
Liberals that's who.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A22260-2004Feb7?language=printer
He isn't moderate nor is he conservative so what is he ? Oh wait, I know. Nuanced ;)
Strange, my wife and her family are Irish Catholic, and not one Democrat in the bunch.
Of course they weren't Boston Bootleggers either.
Why is that strange?
Because you assume the Irish Catholic are Liberals.
Maybe it has more to do with moral character, and less to do with ethnicity or religion.
Or maybe it's just Boston.
How would you characterize the difference in moral character between an Irish Catholic conservative and an Irish Catholic liberal?
I'll just say you can't be Catholic and be pro-choice.
Anyway, my point is/was... the Kennedy's are scum.
I didn't mean to sidetrack the Veterans thread.
Boston is pretty much Democrat territory. Although that's slowly changing too. MN used to be a democratic gimmie, not so much anymore. I think the parties changed. He (Kennedy) might not switch but he'd be more moderate than most in the Democratic party. Liberalism or the modern version of it wasn't around to the extent it is today. I just don't see Kennedy being philosophicaly in tune with the left side of the party.
I can understand Liberal, and I can understand Catholic. I can't understand "Liberal Catholic".
Seems like an oxymoron to me.
Is that your final attempt at an answer?
Kerry a Republican???
Eliminating VA health care???
What the....!! Fold is going downhill, people. I mean, besides being the most prolific idiot here, it's evident that something is very, very, wrong.
Ahhhh, OK.
I didn't ask about abortion, I asked about moral character because you brought it up.
being prolife or being probortion is a good indication of moral character or the lack therof.
Luv2Fly
- (PFID:efa86b7)
-08:13am Jun 14, 2004 PST (#828of 846)Â
His voting record is more liberal than Teddy The Sub driver Kennedy.
Why, because GDubbya's commercials tell you so?
Democrats of 30 years ago are todays republicans. JFK would be a moderate republican.
Kennedy was a solid FDR Democrat. That means, LIBERAL. NO Question. TOday, he would still be a LIberal, but to the right of LBJ who was solidly a Liberal and his legislative accomplishments or "The Great Society" is the legacy of that Liberalism,
which does NOT exist today
.
Today's "Liberals"Â are moderates, right where Clinton left them. Today's conservatives are generally from the South, Baptist and against any and all Government programs or subsidies, which is why they are continually cutting-back on certain programs and entitlements...
Like the VA System.
Â
Today's Republican Party is run by Baptists, Southern-Christians and/or Fundamentalists, those Catholics who are also "fundamentalist" and those conservatives who favor the ideals of say White-Supremacists. As long as that is so, we will continue to be a country in search of it's very-liberal but MODERATE ideals
upon which it was founded
, but lost years ago to the likes of Ronald Reagan, Newt Gingrich and now, GDubbya...also a Christian Fundamentalist,
and not too proud to say so.
Should John Kerry
Win
in November, it is likely that the Senate will change hands as well, IFhe wins with John Edwards on the ticket that is. There are several seats up for grabs, and mostly in the south.
I certainly HOPE so.
Â
Today's Republican Party is run by Baptists, Southern-Christians and/or Fundamentalists, those Catholics who are also "fundamentalist" and those conservatives who favor the ideals of say White-Supremacists.
You done gone and lost your mind.
but a couple of those mentioned certainly have influence in Republican politics, don't you think?
I won't argue that they have influence. I'd rather have their influence than the pro-abortion, gay marriage, hug a tree, blame the oppressive middle aged white man for everything, rob from Peter to pay Paul communist, free dope for everyone crowd.
Is it because there are more of the -- "Baptists, Southern-Christians and/or Fundamentalists, those Catholics who are also "fundamentalist" and those conservatives who favor the ideals of say White-Supremacists -- than there are of the, pro-abortion, gay marriage, hug a tree, blame the oppressive middle aged white man for everything, rob from Peter to pay Paul communist, free dope for everyone crowd?
I was being sarcastic, Bill Fold was not. He was just being ignorant or stupid.
Well, most of the groups he mentioned there is a good part of the reason Republicans presidential candidates carry the South.
It's not because of the African American vote.
THX 1138 6/16/04 5:49am
I'd rather have their influence than the pro-abortion, gay marriage, hug a tree, blame the oppressive middle aged white man for everything, rob from Peter to pay Paul communist, free dope for everyone crowd.
Hahahahahaha....that's a classic
It's not because of the African American vote.
Is anyone in a national election carried because of the African American vote?
Thanks Von, I was being sarcastic, and now I'm gonna get the TAPA folks to hate me even more.
:-)
THX 1138 6/16/04 6:32am
You post over there?...I thought they banned everyone but like two guys.
You post over there?...I thought they banned everyone but like two guys.
No, but they're founding members of my fan club:
kim a lewis "Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at Bizarre Hatred of Random Celebrities and/or tapa" 6/15/04 7:07pm
I thought they banned everyone but like two guys.
Well, when there's no one to argue with you, you're always right.
that must hurt being lumped together with bodine like that
that must hurt being lumped together with bodine like that
No. What really hurts is the racist/homophobe comments.Â
That's OK. Their ignorance just shows in those comments.
THX 1138 6/16/04 6:38am
Hahahaha.....I bet they have the largest "no access" list here at the pf
that's what I was saying
"Is anyone in a national election carried because of the African American vote?"
That wasn't my point.
I'll repeat:
Most of the groups he mentioned there is a good part of the reason Republicans presidential candidates carry the South.
I didn't ask about abortion, I asked about moral character because you brought it up.
that's what I was saying
Although Jethro is pretty far right of me. I don't think he's a racist or a homophobe either.
Most of the groups he mentioned there is a good part of the reason Republicans presidential candidates carry the South.
Yeah, there's probably some truth to that.
Today's Republican Party is run by Baptists, Southern-Christians and/or Fundamentalists, those Catholics who are also "fundamentalist" and those conservatives who favor the ideals of say White-Supremacists.
the party is not run by Christians or fundamentalists. they do have a home there. but of course fold was attempting to demean them by associating them with the white supremacists. but of course that is just not true. it is the talking points that he takes in without thinking.
Bill,
If the Republicans are run by fundamental Christians, why is there a large portion of evengelical Christians who are upset with Bush and threatening to pull their votes ?
The fact is they are a faction within the Republican party. Just as the greens, professional protestors and far left socialist types. They all collectively guide the party.
And Kerry was voted the most the 9th most liberal senator on fiscal issues by a non partisan group. His record was even more liberal than Teddy the K on fiscal issues. That's not me doing the rankings.
Let me ask you this. Why shouldn't he be proud of that and stand up and say you're darn right I'm liberal and proud of it. Then again perhaps that's why he wanted to have a Republican on his ticket since he knew it would imrprove his odds of winning. If someone's a liberal they ought to stand up for it instead of trying to appear moderate come election time.
Â
Â
How would you characterize the difference in moral character between an Irish Catholic conservative and an Irish Catholic liberal?
The Irish & the Catholic has nothing to do with moral character.
Nor does Liberal or Conservative.
That's why I said maybe it had more to do with moral character than it did ethnicity or religion.
And not to get to far off topic but as for comparing todays liberals to todays liberals, there's no comparison. The FDR democrats like Lieberman are being pushed out because they are like FDR. They, like FDR beleived in helping the poor with temporary assistance. Temporary being the key word. Same with JFK. Did you know he had one of the largest tax cuts for the wealthy in the history of the country ?
He also was strong on defense and stood up to the Soviets. Would he switch parties ? Probably not I guess but FDR and JFK would be considered moderate or conservative democrats. And they'd be pushed out by the liberals like Kerry, Pelosi, Kennedy, Waters etc. Suffice it to say there would be some FDR or even JFK democrats I could vote for. Kerry aint it because he's way to far to the left. The Dems are run today by the far left. It doesn't work and that's why I predict Kerry losing handily and the Senate gaining more Republican seats. People can easily see a liberal when they spot one. Kerry is it. People who beleive in him ought ot be proud of that instead of running away from it.
The FDR democrats like Lieberman are being pushed out because they are like FDR.
We can only hope this continues.