What is it with this 'Liberal' thing?

[lazs2]

I don't want anyone regulating bussiness or my personal life.   My personal life does not revolve around whether I get to smoke pot or not tho.   It does revolve on if I get to drive hot rods, shoot and own and keep guns and sodomize my girlfriend...  those are all my rights.

if I have to live without pot I can do that easier than all the other things.
lazs

[Montezuma]

Originally posted by ravells
I don't understand why amongst many of the U.S. posters on these boards the word 'liberal' provokes frothing at the mouth and is used as a derogatory term.  

We have several Guns/Jesus/Trailer Park conservatives on this board who think that way.

[Hooligan]

I agree with Midnight target's assessment somewhat.  However even though both major politcal parties are keen on regulating things that Government has no business regulating, and they both cross over into the others' territory frequently (i.e. a conservative Senator will happly "regulate" a company that is stomping businesses in his home state) the liberals show a much greater propensity to do so.  Liberals cheerfully attempt to restrict all kinds of personal freedoms, free speech (non PC talk), firearms ownership, drug use etc. etc...

Hooligan

[rpm]

Originally posted by midnight Target
In my most humble unbiased opinion...

Conservatives want to deregulate business and regulate your personal life.

Liberals want to deregulate your personal life and regulate business.

Once again MT, you have hit the bullseye.

[Gunslinger]

Originally posted by Nilsen10
For me as someone from the "outside", i think Bill Clinton was a better president than bush is. So what if he had som "fun" with the staff...that was a problem for him and his wife imo.  

nilsen this may be an accurate veiw from the outside, and MT not all republicans got mad at clinton for getting head....

....what drives me to hate him is he lied in front of a federal grand jurry and got away with it...

....he cut military spending in half but increased deployments and commitments 300%...

...when roughly 18 US servicemen died in somalia he called them "insignificant losses" THATS A DIRECT QUOTE!...

these are just a FEW reasons

but I dont have an outright hatred for clinton like the democrats now have for bush.  I'm also not one of those republicans that calls somone a traitor if they disagree with what this country is doing EVEN IN  A TIME OF WAR.....(I just dont buy dixie chick albums).  Yet for my simple "small government, lower taxes, pro life, non gun-control" views  I'm considered a "Neo-Nazi"  

thats just how I see it and I'm just one person!

[Shuckins]

Monty,

Trailer park conservatives?  Do I detect a note of disdain in this reference to working class poor folks?

Be careful.  Because of this insensitivity to the downtrodden condition of others, your liberalistic brethren may bounce you from their membership rolls.

MT,

The political tone of this country was set by the hatchet jobs on Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas.  Before those events, both Democratic and Republican presidents' judicial nominees were routinely approved by the Senate.

By the way, I personally could not have cared less about Clinton's womanizing, except for the fact that it reflected badly on his home state.  Events like the 700 FBI files on Republicans turning up at the White House WERE serious, and never got the play in the press that they should have.  Don't try to convince me that Clinton wasn't capable of this kind of thing, because he did it, and got away with it, while he was governor of Arkansas.  If you weren't outraged by it, then you need to do a little soul-searching.  The list of his administration's unethical political machinations is lengthy and well documented.  Quite a number of his idealistic followers wound up being the fall-guys for these distasteful escapades.  There were too many of these episodes for them all to be so cavalierly dismissed.

Regards, Shuckins

[Nilsen]

Its abit worrying tho that Norway and Iran are the only countries in the world with a priest for a state leader

GO BEER !!

BOTTOMS UP!

[midnight Target]

Originally posted by Shuckins

MT,

The political tone of this country was set by the hatchet jobs on Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas.  Before those events, both Democratic and Republican presidents' judicial nominees were routinely approved by the Senate.


Regards, Shuckins

Oh no. THings haven't always been rosey for Presidential SC nominees.

At the Supreme Court level, presidents have made thirty-three of their 149 nominations when the opposition party controlled the Senate. [16] Of the thirty-three nominations, only eighteen were successful—a success rate of 54.5 percent. [17] This compares with a success rate of almost ninety percent when the same party controls the White House and the Senate (102 successful nominations out of 114 nominations). [18]

The tone was set by Newt and his gang of thugs.

[midnight Target]

Originally posted by Shuckins

MT,

The political tone of this country was set by the hatchet jobs on Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas.  Before those events, both Democratic and Republican presidents' judicial nominees were routinely approved by the Senate.


Regards, Shuckins

Oh no. THings haven't always been rosey for Presidential SC nominees.

At the Supreme Court level, presidents have made thirty-three of their 149 nominations when the opposition party controlled the Senate. [16] Of the thirty-three nominations, only eighteen were successful—a success rate of 54.5 percent. [17] This compares with a success rate of almost ninety percent when the same party controls the White House and the Senate (102 successful nominations out of 114 nominations). [18]

The tone was set by Newt and his gang of thugs.

[Nilsen]

Why dont you get jimmy carter back... he is a smart fella..abit old, but still..

[Ripsnort]

Originally posted by ravells
noun:   a person who favors a political philosophy of progress and reform and the protection of civil liberties

noun:   a person who favors an economic theory of laissez-faire and self-regulating markets
 
adjective:   having political or social views favoring reform and progress

adjective:   tolerant of change; not bound by authoritarianism, orthodoxy, or tradition

adjective:   showing or characterized by broad-mindedness

In the UK, that is pretty much what the word means. Is there some popular definition in the US of the word 'liberal' which means something else? What am I missing here?

Thanks in advance

Ravs [/B]

Sorry, in the USA, "liberal" literally means "How much can one tolerate".  

P.S. Tradition is good.  All the above descriptions can be found in both parties.

[lord dolf vader]

or they spent 40 plus million of my money to publicise a blowjob.
and other unproven or unimportant gossip.


your acting all patronizing is really funny.

im still laughin at you.

[Nilsen]

P.S. Dont mind me...im drunk again

[lord dolf vader]

wasn't aimed at your post ripsnort. i dont speak to you as you are beneath contempt.

[Shuckins]

I guess Kennedy and his thugs do not count.  Right?

By the way, how far back do those statistics you quoted run?  As I recall, there was very little rancour between the parties over federal court nominees prior to the 1970s.  

FDR made one of the most overt attempts at manipulating the nomination process for his own ends during the 1930s, when he attempted to get Congress to appoint several new judges so that he could weight the court with his own nominees.  His own party recoiled over so blatant an attempt to manipulate the country's highest court.

Regards, Shuckins