liberal hypocrisy

[Typhoon1244]

I think that i want the ann coulter doll.

That's disturbing on many levels...

Anyway...I thought hypocrisy was, say, ranting and raving over the FM airwaves about locking up drug addicts, then becoming one...and not turning yourself over to the cops.

Now that's hypocrisy!

 

[Skyboss]

Babs should keep her day job. Has anyone taken time to look ay the jibberish she spews on her web site? Pesonally I think she's freakin' nuts. She was so hung up on Clinton that you would think he was boinking her too.

Note to Babs... In Vietnam, we lost 500 soldiers a week. In Iraq we lose 5-10. Yes, the evil Bush got us in. But lets not forget who got us into Vietnam. Their names were Kennedy and Johnson. Nixon got us out, and you hate him more because he got caught with his hand in the cookie jar. Although, if you ask Babs. Vietnam was the Republicans fault. She actually beleives this. Too much acid resulting in an altered view of reality??? All I know is that I can't for the life of me understand where the disconnect occured with dope smoking free love bunch of the baby boomers. Somewhere along the line, they lost their sense of reality. Now they want to re-write history at every opportunity to fit the way they see it. If they could, they'd re-write Clintons history for sure. He'd be the one saying to Gorbachev "tear down that wall" rather than "Monica, get on your knees".

 

[Tim47SIP]

OK Typhoid

Anyway...I thought hypocrisy was, say, ranting and raving over the FM airwaves about locking up drug addicts, then becoming one...and not turning yourself over to the cops.

Yes, you are absolutely correct. Now do you feel better? He was wrong, admitted it, and is doing something about it.

 

[Timebuilder]

Sound and Fury?

I have a different quote.

There is a tide in the affairs of men,
Which, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune:
Omitted, all the voyage of their life
Is bound in shallows and in miseries.
On such a full sea are we now afloat,
And we must take the current when it serves,
Or lose our ventures.
(Julius Caesar IV.iii. 216-222)

I just look at where the money goes. And I look at who signed on. Action speaks louder than words, doesn't it?

So true. The dems are attempting to walk the line of a drunken man. On the one hand, they want to cautiously avoid being perceived as anti-American, or pro-terrorist. But they also don't want to support the president as he guides an unstable mideast nation to an elected government that could be the first domino of democracy in an area of theocracies and despots. It is a tale told by an idiot, and yes, it signifies nothing, except perhaps their waning political power.

So this Lover of Citations starts a thread called "Liberal Hypocrisy" as if hypocrisy is a side-effect of Liberal thinking.

Not a side effect, but evidence of the basic premise.

When I was a liberal democrat, I was so because I felt that I, and my like thinking friends had a more progressive, more highly developed intellect, and a more insightful view of the world and humanity than an "average" person. This is clearly an elitist view, and it is part and parcel to the liberal democrat belief that the future of this nation should be guided by this "ruling class". As I grew older and, IMHO, more wise, I began to realize that the real genius of this country comes from the idea that our fundamental freedoms are granted by God, and not agreed to by the likes of a Schumer or a Clinton.

The basic hypocracy is the liberal democrat is always talking about the rights of Americans, but everything they do tends to take those rights away. Your right to smoke a legal cigarette. Your right to private property. Your right to bear arms. You right to choose your employees. Your right to send your children to a better school. Your right to an up or down vote on your appointment to the judiciary. Your right to craft the future of your nation through legislation, and not see that right subrogaterd to the federal bench.

In tuth, the liberal democrat sees Americans as unqualified to chart the course of their own country. They believe that only they, the political aristocracy, should influence policy and law. This is hypocricy raised to the highest exponent: deceit.

I want to hear a Conservative say that Bush is bad for the Republicans in the same way I, as a Liberal, say that Clinton was bad for the Democrats.

In the same way? No. But I do often disagree with him.

He should not have waited so long to go into Iraq. He gave our enemies time to flee, move weapons of mass destruction, and to arrange opposition in the UN, which was never a friend of freedom.

He is a proponent of allowing illegal workers to remain in our country, and he is against the control of our borders that is crucial to maintaining control of our country. I, on the other hand, believe that our existing laws should be enforced, and that every person entering our country follow the procedures for working, learning, and becoming a citizen. Every person who is not authorized to be here should leave here. Period. My dad followed the rules, as did the vast majority of people who have come here looking for a better life. To allow anyone to ignore those rules is a slap in the face to those who worked hard and achieved the goal of citizenship.

He let Ted Kennedy write an education act for him. Ted Kennedy! The idea is so absurd that I can only compare it to the fact that Ted's father was allowed to write the insider training regulations after he had raped and pillaged the financial markets.

There are other points, but I grow weary of the typing. I am currently teaching myself about putting up websites so I can save money on one for my business. HTML is a cruel misstress, a friend told me. Now I know why.

I agree with you on this: we have seen our government become a mechanism for the redistribution of wealth. I can find no idea that is more the antithesis of the American Dream. Our tax system is being used for social engineering and repeated attempts to make life "fair". It isn't fair because it is not designed to be "fair". It is designed to be challenging.

How we respond to the challenges, including charity on an individual basis, is the hallmark of a society. Making charity a faceless government body, an entitlement, is the first giant step toward our doom, and we must do everything we can to reduce those entitlements. If that means reducing taxes and starving the beast, then so be it. Unfortunately, we now have millions of people who are blissfully content to suck at the government teat, and will vote out anyone who tries to change that. Prescription drugs and other social programs are a slow poison. Just look at europe and canada. Everyone wants to come here. Why? We have not become a fully developed socialist country, like the ones they are coming from.

It's all shadows cast on a wall. Turn around to discover who's playing with shapes and form.

I don't have to. The Bible has already identified the prince of this world. But his time is short, and his followers will be lost with him. We are directed to struggle against him, and his ways. His ways sound good when Hillary and Katie talk about them, but they lead to "government becoming god", and there is a high price to pay for that substitution.

When we replace the true God with a false god, like a government, we can lose our fredom and our eternal lives. God does not want enforced worship, as the ACLU thinks that Christians want. He wants us to be free to choose, based on faith. When you have a socialist state, God is banned, and the decision is made for us. The supreme court has refused to even hear a case where a state constitution mandates the observation of the ten commandments as the basis of law, allowing a lower court to subvert that constitution.

God help the USA. May we continue to struggle against evil, and the weakes parts of ourselves that the evil one seeks to exploit.

 

[Timebuilder]

Anyway...I thought hypocrisy was, say, ranting and raving over the FM airwaves about locking up drug addicts, then becoming one...and not turning yourself over to the cops.

Hipocrisy is talking about locking up people who take and sell illegal drugs, and then taking and selling illegal drugs yourself. At no time did Rush say that people who become addicted to a medication that was prescribed by their doctor be locked up.

Good try, though.

I see salty dog has noticed some things that I did. I spent far too long writing my post, so I apoligize for going over the same ground.

 

[Typhoon1244]

At no time did Rush say that people who become addicted to a medication that was prescribed by their doctor be locked up.

So Rush advocated prescription fraud?

These political discussions don't bother me, but I'm tired of this rediculous notion floated by a lot of conservatives that Democrats/liberals have a monopoly on hypocrisy and dishonesty. They talk as if Bill Clinton was the only President who ever lied to the nation, as if everything in Washington was perfect until Slick Willie came along.

Politicians--Presidents in particular--lie. They have to! They couldn't get elected if they leveled with everyone all the time. (Tell folks in Connecticut that the Navy doesn't need Seawolf, then try winning votes there!) It's an inherent aspect of the system, unfortunately. Clinton was different because he took dishonesty to such a disgusting level...the Nixon of our times, if you will.

I will give President Reagan credit, however, for probably lying far less then those that went before him...simply because he was too senile to know the difference.

 

[Super 80]

Nixon got us out, and (Babs) hate(s) him more because he got caught with his hand in the cookie jar.

The Liberals hate Nixon because he exposed Alger Hiss and got
the blankety-blank commie convicted. The Liberals always insisted on his innocence.

Later when the USSR fell, the KGB records revealed Hiss and his wife were both on their payroll.

 

[Super 80]

So Rush advocated prescription fraud?

These political discussions don't bother me, but I'm tired of this rediculous [sic] notion floated by a lot of conservatives that Democrats/liberals have a monopoly on hypocrisy and dishonesty.

I don't think anyone said that but Democrats have a lot more to answer for in that category than others, so if you can't see that as a generalization, then you're just going to waste a lot of time going around in circles over every little detail.

They talk as if Bill Clinton was the only President who ever lied to the nation, as if everything in Washington was perfect until Slick Willie came along.

Bill Clinton was a traitor to this country.

Bill Clinton killed innocent people to cover up his sexual appetite

Bill Clinton lied under oath in testimony given to a Federal Court.

I will give President Reagan credit, however, for probably lying far less then those that went before him...simply because he was too senile to know the difference.

You can't refute the man so you insult instead.

Just like your three year sign off on GW. Well I have a picture of Bill Clinton kowtowing to the ChiCom Premier, ushering him in with a bow while the little creep smiles.

Let's keep things in perspective. Bad is bad enough, but terrible is much, much worse.

 

[Timebuilder]

So Rush advocated prescription fraud?

Careful. I'm sure some liberal has a copyright on that kind of leap.

Rush had a right to expect that his treament would not produce a dependency that could not be regulated in normal modalities. In other words, Rush is in the same situation as thousands of other people who were treated with this compound, and there is a class action lawsuit forming right now over the dangers of this particular medicine.

I'm always amazed at the liberal ability to turn off their "superior" compassion whenever it moves them. Not far behind is the ability to blythely mix apples and oranges in an attempt to smear good people. From what I can see, it hasn't worked.

They talk as if Bill Clinton was the only President who ever lied to the nation, as if everything in Washington was perfect until Slick Willie came along.

Everything perfect in washington?

Politicians--Presidents in particular--lie. They have to!

I disagree. I will tell you though, that as I democrat I felt that I had to lie about what my party wanted to do: turn America into a socialist paradise of enforced "open" behavior and transfer of wealth. If democrats told America what they really see as their vision of America, they would never again win an election outside of a major city.

I will give President Reagan credit, however, for probably lying far less then those that went before him...simply because he was too senile to know the difference.

Or, more likely, he was a man of character, which makes Clinton look even worse by comparison.

 

[Typhoon1244]

You can't refute the man so you insult instead.

I meant no insult. I'm referring to the fact that Alzheimer's Disease does not develop overnight. Reagan's own physician stated that the President was likely suffering from the initial stages of the condition--undiagnosed--while he was still in office. (No, I don't have a link for that handy. Still searching...)

I believe that Ronald Reagan was--is!--a man of integrity. But the office of the Presidency requires a degree of neurological fitness in addition to moral fitness.

Alzheimer's is a horrible, horrible condition. I wouldn't wish it on anyone, regardless of their politics.

Bill Clinton killed innocent people to cover up his sexual appetite.

You actually bought that 700 Club hogwash? What's next, chemtrails?

 

[Timebuilder]

I see.

I guess his use of cruise missles at a time when his shananigans would be all over the front page was just a coincidence.

It's possible, I grant you that. But, when taken in the context of the character of the man, I don't think it was a coincidence.

Reagan's own physician stated that the President was likely suffering from the initial stages of the condition--undiagnosed--while he was still in office.

Two things: this is speculative, at best, on the part of the physician, and, having the beginning of the disease is not even close to being so debilitated as to preclude his ability to lead the nation.

 

[Super 80]

Originally by Typhoon1244
You actually bought that 700 Club hogwash? What's next, chemtrails?

Bovine blossoms.

What do you call an aspirin factory in the Sudan?

Before you challenge an assertion, perhaps you ought to get your facts straight.

Bill Clinton killed innocent people to cover up the investigation into Monica Lewinsky.

He also shuffled the blame about killing innocent children onto "burn-baby-burn" Janet El Reno.

 

[Typhoon1244]

Bill Clinton killed innocent people to cover up the investigation into Monica Lewinsky.

Oh, so you're saying it was sort of like the Enron/Iraq thing. Got it.

(The Iraqis were far from innocent, of course. That's the beauty of the scheme. On the other hand we haven't found any W.M.D.'s, have we?)

 

[Typhoon1244]

...this is speculative, at best, on the part of the physician...

Perhaps so. Alzheimer's is not perfectly understood...yet.

...and, having the beginning of the disease is not even close to being so debilitated as to preclude his ability to lead the nation.

I would say that's speculative at beast, for the same reason stated above.

 

[Timebuilder]

I would say that's speculative at beast, for the same reason stated above.

I feel pretty comfortable with my speculation for this reason: there is no evidence that I know of that indicates that Reagan's abilities were compromised during his service. Heck I don't have the disease, and I still have CRS!

 

[Super 80]

On the other hand we haven't found any W.M.D.'s, have we?)

No what we have found is evidence for a nuclear program, the mobile NBC labs and the actual missiles that were converted to bio/chem warhead capability.

Further, we have evidence that late in the game, these weapons, which can be very minute, were shipped to Syria.

Try again with the Enron/Haliburton (what you meant to say) thing.

There is nothing to compare with what Bill Clinton did taking a shot in the dark and killing people that posed NO threat to us whatsoever just so his getting a blow job in the oval office, while at work for the American people, with a girl the age of his daughter, who was also an underling of his, which gets into sexual harassment wouldn't be on the front page, which he then lied about to a Federal Judge and was fined for that offence, and subsequently lost his license as a lawyer both in Arkansas and in front of the Supreme Court.

There's a reason he was impeached. Too bad he wasn't convicted too.

Traitors that give missile technology to our enemies ought to be shot by a firing squad.

 

[CitationLover]

vote all encumbents out. why is it that a LACK of experience is viewed as a negative?!?!? it should be a positive. and whats the deal with suits? can we get past early 20th century fashion and move on to....parachute pants.

you want a conservative bashing bush....here you go. he is a liberal in disguise who has bloated the federal govt due to the fact that 19 idiots crashed airplanes. the patriot act is stupid and unnecessary. i mean the govt screws up, misses these 19 people and they have the gall to "reward" us with an enhanced fbi/cia/homeland security bs.

our country blindly supporting Israel (whose elected leader allowed the massacre of 3000 people in Beirut) is a stupid policy. its time to get a candidate that is finally tough on Israel, starting with apologizing for the murder of american citizens in the Liberty incident (their relatives ask their president this every year). if we were to take this stance then the "moderate" arab governments might actually believe some of our policies/actions.

what's sad is you look across and see Howard Dean, Dick Gephardt, Wesley Clark etc and you shake your head.

we need a president who was lifted from working weekends at the local BP.

my political $0.02.

 

[Timebuilder]

Oh, so you're saying it was sort of like the Enron/Iraq thing.

I must have missed that one.

Are you saying that Sadaam is alive and well as an Arthur Anderson accountant?

 

[Super 80]

our country blindly supporting Israel (whose elected leader allowed the massacre of 3000 people in Beirut) is a stupid policy. its time to get a candidate that is finally tough on Israel, starting with apologizing for the murder of american citizens in the Liberty incident (their relatives ask their president this every year). if we were to take this stance then the "moderate" arab governments might actually believe some of our policies/actions.

I support Israel. God does too. If you don't then you better question which side you're on.

 

[Dieterly]

please put down the crack pipe

What do you call an aspirin factory in the Sudan?

Tell me you are not that stupd? A country that don't even have friggin toilet paper all sudenly have a high tech medical industry?

BTW a 20' container filled with asprins most likely covers a 20 years supply of asprins in Sudan. Then why a hell would they a asprin factory?