http://www.airamericaradio.com/
online streaming radio if out of range
the O'Franken Factor

Ingrid


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
List Manager: Puregold Goldfish List
http://puregold.aquaria.net/
www.drsolo.com
Solve the problem, dont waste energy finding who's to blame
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Unfortunately, I receive no money, gifts, discounts or other
compensation for all the damn work I do, nor for any of the
endorsements or recommendations I make.

wrote in message
...
http://www.airamericaradio.com/
online streaming radio if out of range
the O'Franken Factor

Ingrid

Just what I want to listen to, a bunch of liberal bigots.

wrote in message
...
http://www.airamericaradio.com/
online streaming radio if out of range
the O'Franken Factor

Ingrid

Just what I want to listen to, a bunch of liberal bigots.

"Elias Quinn" . wrote in message
...

wrote in message
...
http://www.airamericaradio.com/
online streaming radio if out of range
the O'Franken Factor

Ingrid

Just what I want to listen to, a bunch of liberal bigots.

And why would you call Franken a bigot when the right has the bastions of
bigotry such as O'Sullivan and drug head Limbaugh daily polluting the air
waves. I once listened to a tirade by Limbaugh against Janet Reno that made
me ashamed that I once voted a Republican ticket.

What precisely is wrong with being a liberal? I equate the term liberal with
being a caring, civil rights oriented group that truly cares about
individual rights, which includes those of the poor as well as the rich and
likes his/her taxes spent on schools, libraries, kids, and families. What am
I missing?

It really bothers me that the Republicans have turned "liberal" into a four
letter (okay seven) word.

John

I have to admit Air America IS ripping some right wingers a new asshole. They went
after Ann Coulter and needless to say, W. I do turn it off at times when all they
are doing is personal attacks instead of discussing the facts. At least Air America
IS discussing facts most of the time, unlike all the right wing Lush Rambo types that
are either in attack mode or lying.

I am a liberal. In addition to being all those virtues you enumerate, I am also a
true patriot of this country ..... I willingly pay taxes that support our troops,
unlike all the corporations, multi-nationals, and wealthy people looking for ANYWAY
they can to stop paying a penny of taxes including going off shore, etc.
Ingrid

"B & J" wrote:
And why would you call Franken a bigot when the right has the bastions of
bigotry such as O'Sullivan and drug head Limbaugh daily polluting the air
waves. I once listened to a tirade by Limbaugh against Janet Reno that made
me ashamed that I once voted a Republican ticket.

What precisely is wrong with being a liberal? I equate the term liberal with
being a caring, civil rights oriented group that truly cares about
individual rights, which includes those of the poor as well as the rich and
likes his/her taxes spent on schools, libraries, kids, and families. What am
I missing?

It really bothers me that the Republicans have turned "liberal" into a four
letter (okay seven) word.

John




~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
List Manager: Puregold Goldfish List
http://puregold.aquaria.net/
www.drsolo.com
Solve the problem, dont waste energy finding who's to blame
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Unfortunately, I receive no money, gifts, discounts or other
compensation for all the damn work I do, nor for any of the
endorsements or recommendations I make.

wrote in message
...

I am a liberal.

You have my sympathy.

On Wed, 7 Apr 2004 08:45:57 -0400, "Elias Quinn" . wrote:


wrote in message
...

I am a liberal.

You have my sympathy.

Yah know, liberals are viewed as Good Things(TM) in some other parts
of the world. An American Liberal is equivalent an old Canadian Red
Tory. Put _that_ in your pipe and smoke it, she said, baiting the
elephant.


Shirley Hicks
Cdn Zone 6B
Toronto, Ontario Canada*

*Canada, home of the balanced budget
and the one-payer medical system!

"Elias Quinn" . wrote in :


wrote in message
...

I am a liberal.

You have my sympathy.




More smarmy smerfling sound-bites. Hey look I can do it, too!

believe me when I say being a liberal is its own reward. I dont waste my life
pursuing the accumulation of money, I dont waste my life yearning after everything
"other" people have. I know for a fact that after the love and respect of family and
friends, good health, enough food and a roof over my head everything else is nice but
simply doesnt increase my happiness by any significant factor. Money is no
affirmation of my "worth", I am not defined by what I own. My security is in my
relationships with people, not in a bank account.
Maybe because I dont believe in a "hereafter" I am very concerned with people in the
here and now living in miserable poverty. I dont believe there is any future reward
for misery. So I am happy to pay the taxes that help those less fortunate, and
consider myself fortunate that I dont need help. I am happy to pay health insurance,
fortunate that I am healthy. I pity those who cannot contribute, those without a job
for working is ennobling, cheating and sloth are there own punishments.
Maybe cause I am not religious I dont need to be telling other people how to live.
Maybe because I am tolerant my life is rich and full of interesting people and I
cannot imagine having to constantly worry about "them" all the time.
Yes, life is very good being a liberal. Ingrid


"Elias Quinn" . wrote:
wrote in message
...

I am a liberal.

You have my sympathy.




~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
List Manager: Puregold Goldfish List
http://puregold.aquaria.net/
www.drsolo.com
Solve the problem, dont waste energy finding who's to blame
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Unfortunately, I receive no money, gifts, discounts or other
compensation for all the damn work I do, nor for any of the
endorsements or recommendations I make.

wrote in message
...
believe me when I say being a liberal is its own reward. I dont waste my
life
pursuing the accumulation of money,

Of course not...others have accumulated it for you and you can use the
government as your instrument of plunder to feed your lofty goals.

"It is thus necessary that the individual should come to realize that his
own ego is of no importance in comparison with the existence of his nation;
that the position of the individual ego is conditioned solely by the
interests of the nation as a whole ... that above all the unity of a
nation's spirit and will are worth far more than the freedom of the spirit
and will of an individual. .... This state of mind, which subordinates the
interests of the ego to the conservation of the community, is really the
first premise for every truly human culture .... we understand only the
individual's capacity to make sacrifices for the community, for his fellow
man." [Adolph Hitler, 1933]

I dont waste my life yearning after everything "other" people have.

I like that too...living in the moment, not basing your happiness on things
not yet acheived...yet there is nothing inherently evil about acheiving
monetary goals.

I know for a fact that after the love and respect of family and
friends, good health, enough food and a roof over my head everything else
is nice but
simply doesnt increase my happiness by any significant factor. Money is
no
affirmation of my "worth", I am not defined by what I own. My security is
in my
relationships with people, not in a bank account.

Healthy outlook if sincere, yet a strawman attack on conservatives motives.
Liberals never accuse you of 'greed' for wanting other people's money ---
only for wanting to keep your own money.

Maybe because I dont believe in a "hereafter" I am very concerned with
people in the
here and now living in miserable poverty.

so don't subsidize it and take away their will to pursue their own bounty in
this amazing world of plenty

I dont believe there is any future reward
for misery. So I am happy to pay the taxes that help those less
fortunate, and
consider myself fortunate that I dont need help.

Shouldn't charity be a personal issue? Instead of a wasteful government
program that is taken as an entitlement?


"The government consists of a gang of men exactly like you and me. They
have, taking one with another, no special talent for the business of
government; they have only a talent for getting and holding office. Their
principal device to that end is to search out groups who pant and pine for
something they can't get and to promise to give it to them. Nine times out
of ten that promise is worth nothing. The tenth time is made good by looting
A to satisfy B. In other words, government is a broker in pillage, and every
election is sort of an advance auction sale of stolen goods."[H. L. Mencken]


I am happy to pay health insurance,
fortunate that I am healthy. I pity those who cannot contribute, those
without a job

the truly inapacitated should be helped by private charities formed by
caring persons like yourself. If the income tax were eliminated we would
all have more money to put into these organizations.

for working is ennobling, cheating and sloth are there own punishments.

then why reward cheating and sloth?

Maybe cause I am not religious I dont need to be telling other people how
to live.

But you are telling me I have to give a high percentage of my income and
freedom away to your choices.

Maybe because I am tolerant my life is rich and full of interesting people
and I
cannot imagine having to constantly worry about "them" all the time.

Wow you are so lofty.

Yes, life is very good being a liberal. Ingrid

I'm pretty happy being a libertarian.

wrote:
believe me when I say being a liberal is its own reward. I dont waste my life
pursuing the accumulation of money, I dont waste my life yearning after everything
"other" people have. I know for a fact that after the love and respect of family and
friends, good health, enough food and a roof over my head everything else is nice but
simply doesnt increase my happiness by any significant factor. Money is no
affirmation of my "worth", I am not defined by what I own. My security is in my
relationships with people, not in a bank account.
Maybe because I dont believe in a "hereafter" I am very concerned with people in the
here and now living in miserable poverty. I dont believe there is any future reward
for misery. So I am happy to pay the taxes that help those less fortunate, and
consider myself fortunate that I dont need help. I am happy to pay health insurance,
fortunate that I am healthy. I pity those who cannot contribute, those without a job
for working is ennobling, cheating and sloth are there own punishments.
Maybe cause I am not religious I dont need to be telling other people how to live.
Maybe because I am tolerant my life is rich and full of interesting people and I
cannot imagine having to constantly worry about "them" all the time.
Yes, life is very good being a liberal. Ingrid


The lower one's level of education, the more likely one is to be a
liberal. The less education one has, the lower one's average income is
likely to be.

Liberalism is a refuge for those living in envy of the accomplishments
of others.

Spinner & Lugnut wrote in
:

The lower one's level of education, the more likely one is to be a
liberal. The less education one has, the lower one's average income
is likely to be.

Liberalism is a refuge for those living in envy of the accomplishments
of others.

mwhahahahaha, LMAO!

The grain of truth is if you equate being educated with being well
trained, the corollary is true. The higher one's level of training (like
a dog adept at performing tricks), the more likely one is to be a
conservative. The higher the level of indoctrination, the higher one's
average income is likely to be. Obedience is richly rewarded ... and if
you are disobedient or disloyal, well then, like fish in the sea, there
are plenty of dogs in the country. You don't need any education for
that, you just need to be a good dog. Likely, you, being well trained,
but poorly educated, aren't able to differentiate.

Smerfs like to make (and smerflings like to repeat) grandiose
generalizations that appear plausible but upon inspection, aren't truly
representative of reality, being true only in specific senses contrived
for their own sake. The higher one's level of education (which implies
being able to think for one's self and not merely vomit back someone
else's ruminations), the less likely one is going to be conned by the
propaganda.

Exactly how did you come to the conclusion you shared above, or were you
just repeating something you heard? If you really are 'educated', you'll
be able to provide some basis for you claims or at least have a
discussion on the topic.

"Salty Thumb" wrote in message
...
Spinner & Lugnut wrote in
:

The lower one's level of education, the more likely one is to be a
liberal. The less education one has, the lower one's average income
is likely to be.

Liberalism is a refuge for those living in envy of the accomplishments
of others.

mwhahahahaha, LMAO!

The grain of truth is if you equate being educated with being well
trained, the corollary is true. The higher one's level of training (like
a dog adept at performing tricks), the more likely one is to be a
conservative. The higher the level of indoctrination, the higher one's
average income is likely to be. Obedience is richly rewarded ... and if
you are disobedient or disloyal, well then, like fish in the sea, there
are plenty of dogs in the country. You don't need any education for
that, you just need to be a good dog. Likely, you, being well trained,
but poorly educated, aren't able to differentiate.

Gratuitous grandious generalization

Smerfs like to make (and smerflings like to repeat) grandiose
generalizations that appear plausible but upon inspection, aren't truly
representative of reality, being true only in specific senses contrived
for their own sake. The higher one's level of education (which implies
being able to think for one's self and not merely vomit back someone
else's ruminations), the less likely one is going to be conned by the
propaganda.

It's my sense that liberal propoganda is rampant in higher education and
that it takes independent thinking and analysis to overcome it.

Exactly how did you come to the conclusion you shared above, or were you
just repeating something you heard? If you really are 'educated', you'll
be able to provide some basis for you claims or at least have a
discussion on the topic.

And yet you present no evidence for your opposite claims.



Statistically, you're more likely to be a Republican and/or conservative if
you'

a.. a man
b.. a college graduate
c.. in the top income bracket
d.. an evangelical Christian
e.. living in a rural area
f.. a Thinker-Sensor
Statistically, you're more likely to be a Democrat and/or liberal if you'

a.. a woman
b.. a senior citizen
c.. gay
d.. nonwhite
e.. living in an urban area
f.. a Feeler-Intuitor
Here are the references used for the list above and other resources for
further reading on this subject.

The Harris Poll: Party Affiliation
Results of year 2000 survey of 13,000 adults.

2000 Exit Polling
Demographic data from exit polling during the 2000 elections.

Republican Voting Trends
Regression analysis.

U.S. Demographics
Major demographic groupings in the United States.

Party Negativity or Neutrality?
Research paper analyzes long-term trends in party alignment.

An Alternative Analysis of Mass Belief Systems: Liberal, Conservative,
Populist, and Libertarian
Policy analysis from the Cato Institute.

The Party of the Rich?
Commentary from Dean Esmay.

Preserve, Protect, Defend
Commentary from Michael Spencer: "Republicans seek to preserve what is
essential about American life, while Democrats seek to replace what is
essential with their own liberal brand of tyranny. There are many, many
other differences, but this is the persuasive one."

Communication Styles and the Florida Ballot Flap
Scott Hogenson links politics and the Myers-Briggs analysis of personality
and communication styles.

The Gender Gap's Back
Two factors explain almost all of the gender gap in presidential politics.

People throw a lot of statistics around to make their point. Here is a
breakdown by the National Review (a very conservative publication) of the
voters in the 2000 election:
http://www.findarticles.com/cf_dls/m.../article.jhtml
I have put the words from the National Review article in quotation marks to
distinguish them from my comments, and to show their take on the statistics
they gathered.

"The voters who graduated from college went better (51) for the GOP than for
the Democrats (45) -3 went to Nader."

We'll have to add Nader's voters to the Democrats as liberal, so apparently
48+% of college graduates are liberals - not exactly a knockout for those
conservatives who want to prove that most people with higher-education are
conservative.

"What irritates is that those who go on to postgraduate education head out
in the wrong direction (52-44)."
(Meaning that they voted for Gore, not Bush.)
Whoops - this seems to directly contradict what the poster below implies
about education and political philosophy. Apparently, the MORE educated you
are, the more likely you are to have a liberal political philosophy.

"because voters who didn't even graduate from high school are stoutly
(59-39)Democratic."
This would support the view that the Democratic party has traditionally been
supportive of laborers and minorities, who, as a rule, have attained fewer
years of higher education.

"When you reach incomes over $50,000, the Republicans are strong (52), but
not overwhelming. And that margin of 52 climbs a mere two points for voters
who make over $100,000. Forty-three percent of the very affluent voted
Democratic, which raises the question: If you're so rich, why aren't you
smart?"

Makes one wonder who's defining "smart" and what the criteria are for making
that determination......
It also makes one wonder if we should identify those VERY AFFLUENT
Democrats (43% of the VERY AFFLUENT voting block) with the statement that
"liberalism is a refuge for those living in envy of the accomplishments of
others". I wouldn't say that the case is ironclad, would you?

"Spinner & Lugnut" wrote in message
...




The lower one's level of education, the more likely one is to be a
liberal. The less education one has, the lower one's average income is
likely to be.

Liberalism is a refuge for those living in envy of the accomplishments
of others.

It also makes one wonder if we should identify those VERY AFFLUENT
Democrats (43% of the VERY AFFLUENT voting block) with the statement that
"liberalism is a refuge for those living in envy of the accomplishments of
others". I wouldn't say that the case is ironclad, would you?



Sure it isn't an overwhelming statistic, and the original claim against
liberalism is a sweeping generalization, but to completely discount it might
be as bad.

The more important question is "What works?". It may be interesting to
argue why certain groups believe one set of ideals over another, or vote one
party into office; but has a nation ever taxed itself into prosperity?

....or to break it down.

Corruption in politics:

Should we eliminate special rights and privileges for elected or appointed
government officials?

Should we revise any law or regulation that exempts the government or its
officials from compliance?


Should we end government funding of any political party or candidate?


Should we revise state and federal laws to enable all candidates for
elective office to be included on election ballots?

Crime:

Should we respect the victim's rights and make criminals pay full
restitution?

Should we hold all criminals responsible for their actions.?

Should we double the police resources available for crime prevention without
any additional government spending?

Should we reduce the number of criminals at large on our streets?

Should we defend the most effective crime deterrent available, the private
ownership of guns.?

Should we create jobs, end welfare dependence, and improve education?

Unemployment:

Should we stop taking money consumers and businesses would otherwise use to
purchase goods and services?


Should we stop taking money individuals and companies would otherwise use
for investment?


Should we stop subsidizing foreign governments, foreign businesses, and
foreign citizens?


Should we stop financing our massive budget deficit with borrowed money that
otherwise could be used for business expansion and job creation?


Should we stop smothering workers, business people, and investors with
endless regulations and bloated bureaucracy?


Should we stop restricting commerce and trade?

Education:

Should we support a true market in education -- one in which parents and
students would not be stuck with a bad local school, because they could
choose another?

Should we implement measures such as tax credits so that parents will have
the financial ability to choose among schools?



Should we provide financial incentives for businesses to help fund schools
and for individuals to support students other than their own children?


Should we eliminate the U.S. Department of Education, which spends billions
on education and educates no one?

Health care and costs:

Should we establish medical savings accounts, strengthening the role of the
individual health care consumer?


Should all health care expenditures should be 100% tax deductible?

Should we deregulate the health care industry? ...eliminating mandated
benefits, repealing Certificate-of-Need program, and expanding the scope
of practice for non-physician health professionals.

Should we replace the FDA?

Should we privatize Medicare and Medicaid?


I better knock it off. Time for work.


PS: Liberals tend to be top posters.