PILOT SPIN
Spin Zone => Spin Zone => Topic started by: Lucifer on October 08, 2016, 08:20:20 AM
-
Article makes good points. Points the MSM will vigorously attempt to cover up as they attempt to drag her across the finish line.
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/10/wheres_hillary.html
-
Why campaign when you opponent is busy self-destructing?
-
Why campaign when you opponent is busy self-destructing?
Because she has outspent her opponent 5 to 1 on attack ads, and she can't get any break away any further than 1 to 2% in the polls, which is the margin of error. Even Hillary was screeching "Why am I not 50 points ahead!" As she berated her audience.
The latest "scandal" will not gain her any traction, it will in fact backfire on her as she's opened a Pandora's box.
-
Because she has outspent her opponent 5 to 1 on attack ads, and she can't get any break away any further than 1 to 2% in the polls, which is the margin of error. Even Hillary was screeching "Why am I not 50 points ahead!" As she berated her audience.
The latest "scandal" will not gain her any traction, it will in fact backfire on her as she's opened a Pandora's box.
You are cherry-picking your polls. Most show a 5% or so advantage nationally, not that it matters. Trump would have to run the table on battleground states and he is behind in the polls in most all of them.
-
You are cherry-picking your polls. Most show a 5% or so advantage nationally, not that it matters. Trump would have to run the table on battleground states and he is behind in the polls in most all of them.
You are cherry picking, or simply don't understand how an election works.
Hillary can't pull ahead in several key states. She remains in the margin of error even after spending 5 to 1. Even Hillary has complained recently "Why am I not 50 points ahead?"
-
Interesting how Hillary got NBC to leak the Trump story to the Washington Post, just before the debate, and the same day wiki released her damaging emails. Trump is not self destructing, he is being assassinated by the liberal media.
-
Interesting how Hillary got NBC to leak the Trump story to the Washington Post, just before the debate, and the same day wiki released her damaging emails. Trump is not self destructing, he is being assassinated by the liberal media.
Exactly.
And I still predict their latest stunt to back fire on them. More and more people are waking up to just how corrupt the media is and in their desperation is trying to drag this tired old sick lady across the finish line, at any cost.
-
You are cherry picking, or simply don't understand how an election works.
Hillary can't pull ahead in several key states. She remains in the margin of error even after spending 5 to 1. Even Hillary has complained recently "Why am I not 50 points ahead?"
It is you who don't seem to understand how the election works. Hillary is five or more points ahead in enough states to give her 260 electoral votes. She needs ten more. There are eight or so states that are considered battleground states as the spread is less than 5%. They represent 118 electoral vote. The reality is that Hillary only needs one large state or two small ones to win. Trump needs to almost run the table. In virtually all those battleground states, Hillary holds a small lead. At the risk of pointing out the obvious, it is unlikely that all the polls, in all those states, are wrong, all in the same direction.
The country will stay red, white, and blue, and not turn orange.
-
It is you who don't seem to understand how the election works. Hillary is five or more points ahead in enough states to give her 260 electoral votes. She needs ten more. There are eight or so states that are considered battleground states as the spread is less than 5%. They represent 118 electoral vote. The reality is that Hillary only needs one large state or two small ones to win. Trump needs to almost run the table. In virtually all those battleground states, Hillary holds a small lead. At the risk of pointing out the obvious, it is unlikely that all the polls, in all those states, are wrong, all in the same direction.
The country will stay red, white, and blue, and not turn orange.
Cherry picking data doesn't make it believable.
But then again, with your legal background and ideology in liberalism you feel you are superior in thought even when you are speaking like a total buffoon.
-
The country will stay red, white, and blue, and not turn orange.
Hillary is red, white, and blue? A student of Saul Alinksy, and an advocate of Cloward Piven? Seriously? You are not anywhere near a Moderate. You are very liberal.
-
Hillary is red, white, and blue? A student of Saul Alinksy, and an advocate of Cloward Piven? Seriously? You are not anywhere near a Moderate. You are very liberal.
She's a "California moderate" which is just code for flaming liberal.
-
Interesting how Hillary got NBC to leak the Trump story to the Washington Post, just before the debate, and the same day wiki released her damaging emails. Trump is not self destructing, he is being assassinated by the liberal media.
Timing is everything. The collusion is disgusting.
-
Hillary is in hiding. She is carefully controlling her public appearances to minimize the fatigue and effects of her Parkinson's. The fewer times she appears in public, the fewer times she risks outing the disease before the elections.
-
She is resting up for the inaugural ball already. Won't that be a splendid, happy affair.
-
Interesting how Hillary got NBC to leak the Trump story to the Washington Post, just before the debate, and the same day wiki released her damaging emails. Trump is not self destructing, he is being assassinated by the liberal media.
You say that like she's making up things about trump. It's not an assassination, it's his own words. Trump's a dick, and has never been afraid of that. Now it's getting exposure. It just tends not to play as well on a national presidential stage as it does on Howard Stern et al.
-
You say that like she's making up things about trump. It's not an assassination, it's his own words. Trump's a dick, and has never been afraid of that. Now it's getting exposure. It just tends not to play as well on a national presidential stage as it does on Howard Stern et al.
How did everyone know "Trump's a dick" previously and yet "now it's getting exposure"?
-
They didn't. He just wanted to say dick and exposure in the same sentence.
-
Cherry picking data doesn't make it believable.
I used the averages of several polls as reported on 270towin and look at fivethirtyeight. All of which support that Trump is likely to loose the election.
But then again, with your legal background and ideology in liberalism you feel you are superior in thought even when you are speaking like a total buffoon.
Considering that you think anyone with intelligence and knowledge is a liberal, I will take that compliment coming from you.
-
Hillary is red, white, and blue? A student of Saul Alinksy, and an advocate of Cloward Piven? Seriously? You are not anywhere near a Moderate.
Patriotism is not limited to the Alt-Right segment of society.
You are very liberal.
Thank you! I try to stay well informed. You should try it sometime.
-
Patriotism is not limited to the Alt-Right segment of society.
Again, with the extremes. Typical Progressive. So, but you are patriotic if you are far, far left like Hilary and the entire Democrat party.
Thank you! I try to stay well informed. You should try it sometime.
Nice try.
-
I used the averages of several polls as reported on 270towin and look at fivethirtyeight. All of which support that Trump is likely to loose the election.
Considering that you think anyone with intelligence and knowledge is a liberal, I will take that compliment coming from you.
I don't see the intelligence and knowledge coming from you. What I do see is a California liberal that happens to be a bottom dwelling lawyer.
You don't impress me one bit.
-
How did everyone know "Trump's a dick" previously and yet "now it's getting exposure"?
Re-exposure? Maybe a better word. Folks now have a reminder. :)
-
I don't see the intelligence and knowledge coming from you. What I do see is a California liberal that happens to be a bottom dwelling lawyer.
You don't impress me one bit.
Again with the lobbing of ad hominems from behind your cloak of anonymity. Looks like that Liberal-induced lack of testosterone has really affected you. ;)
-
Again with the lobbing of ad hominems from behind your cloak of anonymity. Looks like that Liberal-induced lack of testosterone has really affected you. ;)
After her sleazy comment she made in regards to the women Bill Clinton raped and molested I don't have any use for her or her commentary.
If you don't like people here using anonymity I suggest you take that up with the board moderator.
-
They didn't. He just wanted to say dick and exposure in the same sentence.
Are you saying he is really 6PC?
-
Are you saying he is really 6PC?
The frequency of penis references in my posts is an order of magnitude less than would be required for that. ;D
-
I don't see the intelligence and knowledge coming from you.
I am not surprised. You are not well acquainted with either.
What I do see is a California liberal that happens to be a bottom dwelling lawyer.
I am a liberal in the classic sense.
You don't impress me one bit.
I take great comfort in that.
-
^^^^^Then why do you call yourself "militantly moderate" when you are a LIBERAL? False advertising?
-
^^^^^Then why do you call yourself "militantly moderate" when you are a LIBERAL? False advertising?
Do liberals care about honesty and integrity?
Given their nominee for president, I'd say the answer is: clearly no
-
Hilary Clinton appeals to many liberals simply because she is all pro abortion and try as they might to pretend otherwise, that is the key to their entire movement. Somehow abortion has become the holy grail of liberalism, to the point that their railings on the subject get more insane every week.
There are very few real hard-line liberals that even stop to ink about any of Hilary's scandals beyond blaming them on Fox news. Intelligent and thoughtful consideration of the damage she has done to the State Department and the country is a foreign concept to most liberals and would be met with screeds of make believe offense and outrage if it was suggested.
-
Hilary Clinton appeals to many liberals simply because she is all pro abortion and try as they might to pretend otherwise, that is the key to their entire movement. Somehow abortion has become the holy grail of liberalism, to the point that their railings on the subject get more insane every week.
There are very few real hard-line liberals that even stop to ink about any of Hilary's scandals beyond blaming them on Fox news. Intelligent and thoughtful consideration of the damage she has done to the State Department and the country is a foreign concept to most liberals and would be met with screeds of make believe offense and outrage if it was suggested.
She even pulled that dog whistle out at the debate, stating that Trump, who once said that he was "pro-choice in every respect" would nominate justices who would overturn Roe v Wade.
They're panicking.
-
http://dailycaller.com/2016/10/11/emails-boston-globe-coordinated-how-to-maximize-hillarys-presence/
“It would be good to get it in on Tuesday, when she is in New Hampshire,” Pritchard says. “That would give her a big presence on Tuesday with the piece and on Wednesday with the news story. Please let me know.”
http://dailycaller.com/2016/10/11/nytcnbcs-john-harwood-advises-clinton-campaign-gloats-about-provoking-trump-at-debate/
In a December 2015 email to Podesta, Harwood bragged about his much-criticized debate performance in which he asked Trump “Let’s be honest, is this a comic book version of a presidential campaign?”
Harwood titled the email “I imagine…” and continued the sentence in the body of the email, writing, “…that Obama feels some (sad) vindication at this demonstration of his years-long point about the opposition party veering off the rails.”
“I certainly am feeling that way with respect to how I questioned Trump at our debate,” Harwood continued.
-
Smile damn you!
http://heatst.com/politics/wikileaks-hillary-clinton-speeches-include-cues-on-when-to-smile/
-
^^^^^Then why do you call yourself "militantly moderate" when you are a LIBERAL? False advertising?
How do you define "liberal"?
-
How do you define "liberal"?
I can't tell you. You have to look into your own heart.
-
Do liberals care about honesty and integrity?
Given their nominee for president, I'd say the answer is: clearly no
No, to a liberal (so-called) the ends ALWAYS justifies the means.
The use of the word "liberal" is so anachronistic. It's actually Orwellian. They is nothing involving "freedom" in the liberal (so-called) agenda, save for genitalia related issues.
-
They're panicking.
They are not panicking. They have no reason to. You will know they are in a panic when it gets close and they put Hillary back doing stump speeches full time. She isn't up to the rigors of the campaign, probably because of her health.
Until then - she is way ahead and likely to win this, currently 340-198 in the no-toss-up electoral vote count. That's based on imprecise polls and doesn't take into account those who don't want to response to polls and any voter fraud that may come out.
-
They are not panicking. They have no reason to. You will know they are in a panic when it gets close and they put Hillary back doing stump speeches full time. She isn't up to the rigors of the campaign, probably because of her health.
Until then - she is way ahead and likely to win this, currently 340-198 in the no-toss-up electoral vote count. That's based on imprecise polls and doesn't take into account those who don't want to response to polls and any voter fraud that may come out.
Make no mistake, the panic is there. This was suppose to be her coronation because it was "her turn". Everything was predicated on her running against a Jeb or Marco and being 20+ points ahead with the media running interference for her.
Trump is unpredictable and his campaign is unconventional. That and Wiki Leaks dumping on her, and you can see the panic in the campaign.
-
"Why aren't I 50 points ahead, you might ask."
-
"Why aren't I 50 points ahead, you might ask."
That video was so telling. You could see the disgust in her eyes and body language. This wasn't suppose to be happening.
-
That video was so telling. You could see the disgust in her eyes and body language. This wasn't suppose to be happening.
Precisely.
-
That video was so telling. You could see the disgust in her eyes and body language. This wasn't suppose to be happening.
She's royalty. How dare we not just allow her to succeed Obama. After all her husband was an impeached President who lied under oath, and lied to the American people. What better pedigree can you have? She's entitled to be President, plus she's a woman. It's historical.
-
She's royalty. How dare we not just allow her to succeed Obama. After all her husband was an impeached President who lied under oath, and lied to the American people. What better pedigree can you have? She's entitled to be President, plus she's a woman. It's historical.
It's interesting what motivates these political animals. It's not fame - she already has that. It's not money - she's worked that out quite well. It's a thirst for power. I think her defeat will utterly destroy her, which is why I'm encouraging everyone to vote for Trump. It will be an enjoyable thing to watch.
-
It's interesting what motivates these political animals. It's not fame - she already has that. It's not money - she's worked that out quite well. It's a thirst for power. I think her defeat will utterly destroy her, which is why I'm encouraging everyone to vote for Trump. It will be an enjoyable thing to watch.
While it would be wonderful, I'm, feeling more depressed as time moves on. Last night in the news, and today in the electronic media, it's almost 100% coverage of Donald and his past supposed transgressions on women, and nary a peep on Hillary, Bill, wikileaks emails, and anything that is mentioned makes Clinton look like an angel. The spin has been turned up to 11, it's disgraceful, and I now fear it's almost a certainty that the evil bitch will win. God help us all.
-
it's almost 100% coverage of Donald and his past supposed transgressions on women, and nary a peep on Hillary, Bill, wikileaks emails, and anything that is mentioned makes Clinton look like an angel. The spin has been turned up to 11, it's disgraceful, and I now fear it's almost a certainty that the evil bitch will win. God help us all.
Hillary will most likely win.
-
When they asked Jen Palmieri about her email dissing the Catholics her response was classic Clinton stuff. She essentially said it was likely fake and then turned to the Russians hacking stuff.
Now they would have us believe that a group of people are sitting around typing up thousands of fake emails to make them look bad.
Oh well, not like the MSM is going to cover it anyway.
-
While it would be wonderful, I'm, feeling more depressed as time moves on. Last night in the news, and today in the electronic media, it's almost 100% coverage of Donald and his past supposed transgressions on women, and nary a peep on Hillary, Bill, wikileaks emails, and anything that is mentioned makes Clinton look like an angel. The spin has been turned up to 11, it's disgraceful, and I now fear it's almost a certainty that the evil bitch will win. God help us all.
that's because all the corruption is old news.
a strategy the liberals have used for years. Most Americans have the attention span of a hyperactive gerbil.
-
I can't tell you. You have to look into your own heart.
Do you often use words which you don't know the meaning?
-
Do you often use words which you don't know the meaning?
Do you often make banal arguments?
There is no common agreement on what classic liberalism means. Do you believe in personal freedom? Against government regulation? Anti-tax? Pro rights? Pro guns? Pro-religious freedom to worship? Anti-restriction? Anti-big government? Are for for the right for gays to marry but against them forcing others to treat them nicely?
If so, then you might be what I call a liberal. But you have to look in your heart to see if that is your definition.
-
Do you often use words which you don't know the meaning?
Do you often become insulting, and needlessly argumentative? Do you know what Progressive means?
-
Do you often become insulting, and needlessly argumentative? Do you know what Progressive means?
She ought to, she is one.
-
Do you often make banal arguments?
There is no common agreement on what classic liberalism means. Do you believe in personal freedom? Against government regulation? Anti-tax? Pro rights? Pro guns? Pro-religious freedom to worship? Anti-restriction? Anti-big government? Are for for the right for gays to marry but against them forcing others to treat them nicely?
If so, then you might be what I call a liberal. But you have to look in your heart to see if that is your definition.
All of this is painfully irrelevant. Anthony calls me a liberal, and I ask him how he defines it. You jump in with your own schtick that is pretty irrelevant to my trying to figure out what Anthony means when he calls me a "LIBERAL".
-
Do you often become insulting, and needlessly argumentative? Do you know what Progressive means?
You call me something you think is an insult, i.e. "LIBERAL", so I ask what you mean by it, but I just get some BS runaround and others trying to butt in. I am just trying to figure out if I should feel insulted or not.
-
You call me something you think is an insult, i.e. "LIBERAL", so I ask what you mean by it, but I just get some BS runaround and others trying to butt in. I am just trying to figure out if I should feel insulted or not.
be careful what you ask for...
There is a great quote from an old William Holden film ("The Devil's Brigage")...
Pvt. Billy 'Bronc' Guthrie: [referring to Henri] One of them's a frog, boys. Why don't you say something, froggy!
Pvt. Henri Laurent: Merde.
Pvt. Rockwell 'Rocky' Rockman: What the hell does that mean?
Cpl. Wilfrid Peacock: [to Rocky] To most people, it's an insult. But to you, I'd say it's a compliment.
-
She ought to, she is one.
I'm a slow learner. At age 60 I still don't immediately know what another person means when they use a term like "liberal" or "conservative" - and those are pretty common, while "progressive", well, I have problems defining that term in any useful way. So if questions about terminology yields these kinds of exchanges, I'm normally inclined to stay away because good old fashioned antagonism is probably at play, not an attempt to persuade or argue. That said, debates about terminology reminds me of when Reason (a libertarian magazine) did an opinion survey in 2014 of millennials (https://reason.com/assets/db/2014-millennials-report.pdf (https://reason.com/assets/db/2014-millennials-report.pdf)); turns out that group generally didn't know what "socialism" meant, but had a favorable view of it until a concrete definition was supplied:
Millennials May Not Know What Socialism Means
Millennials appear to be more favorable toward socialism than a government-managed economy, even though the latter is arguably less interventionist. This raises the question: Do millennials know what socialism means?
Perhaps not. A 2010 CBS/New York Times survey found that when Americans were asked to use their own words to define the word “socialism” millennials were the least able to do so. Accord to the survey, only 16 percent of millennials could define socialism as government ownership, or some variation thereof, compared to 30 percent of Americans over 30 (and 57% of tea partiers, incidentally).36
This may explain why socialism garners greater support than a government-managed economy. Interestingly, millennial support for a government-managed economy (32%) mirrors national favorability toward the word “socialism” (31%).37 Millennial preferences may not be so different from older generations once terms are defined. Indeed, millennials’ preferred economic system becomes more pronounced when it is described precisely. Language about capitalism and socialism is vague, and using these terms assumes knowledge that millennials may not have acquired yet. Moreover, these words may have taken on different meaning in the minds of most millennials, especially for a cohort who didn’t grow up during the Cold War and came of political age during the worst economic recession since the Great Depression. For instance, capitalism may imply government favoritism instead of a free market, and socialism may imply protecting the vulnerable.
-
You call me something you think is an insult, i.e. "LIBERAL", so I ask what you mean by it, but I just get some BS runaround and others trying to butt in. I am just trying to figure out if I should feel insulted or not.
Methinks thou dost protest too much.
-
That is scary, Jim's article about millennials. I can see where the terminology could be misinterpreted. My generation was clearly and, it seemed, fairly incessantly taught that socialism was awful. Reagan hated it with a particular passion.
I hate labels, and find "leftist" more descriptive and perhaps less vitriolic than "liberal."
But for purposes of the Kristin discussion, I would say that anyone voting for or supportive of HRC could be accurately described as liberal.
;)
-
But for purposes of the Kristin discussion, I would say that anyone voting for or supportive of HRC could be accurately described as liberal.
;)
It's an odd election year and even some conservative Republicans have said they will vote her. So I'm not sure that is a good gauge, though maybe good enough for now.
Also, you do realize that Hillary once described herself as a Goldwater girl? As in, she once considered herself a conservative Republican? Of course she was only a high school kid and says she changed over time to a liberal Democrat. Of course that allegedly became complete when she met Bill.
-
All of this is painfully irrelevant. Anthony calls me a liberal, and I ask him how he defines it. You jump in with your own schtick that is pretty irrelevant to my trying to figure out what Anthony means when he calls me a "LIBERAL".
It is a common discussion board. If you want private conversation, take it private. But don't talk in public and then go play the victim when I or others jump in, it is unbecoming.
How do you define classic liberalism? You claim to be one, what does that mean to you?
-
Someone who claims to be a moderate is very likely to be quite left of center.
-
Someone who claims to be a moderate is very likely to be quite left of center.
Depends.
If that person is from the south or Midwest, then moderate is indeed someone in the center.
A California or Northeast "moderate" typically is to the left of Marx or Lenin. ::)
-
Liberal means different things to different people. However, the term has changed meanings over the past 50 years or so. It has been hijacked by the Democrats to mean PROGRESSIVE which is just a code word for socialist/communist/totalitarian fascist.
-
Liberal has been redefined over the last generation to the point that it is absolutely indistinguishable from what an actual liberal was in the sixties. An actual liberal would despise the politics of those that think of themselves as liberal to day because the modern liberal is all in on the concept of cradle to grave life manipulation by a small group of thugs who call themselves progressives and are nothing but hard line communists in the Stalin model.
The modern liberal hates freedom to choose except to choose abortion because that is still the holy grail of the communists who call themselves liberal.
The modern liberal claims to hate the 1% who own and control almost everything, but never actually live up to their make believe antipathy because they LOVE 1%'ers as long as they are properly pro abortion and as long as they have TOLD to ignore the abject hypocrisy of everything they say, do and pretend.
The modern liberal rails about the environment but adores the 1%ers who fly in private jets, spewing into the environment the very thing they claim is killing the planet, as long as those people are pro abortion and as long as they have been TOLD to exempt those people from their rants.
The modern liberal hates thinking for themselves, preferring to be TOLD what to think and then they run out demanding everyone else think exactly the same way or be unceasingly attacked for their free thought.
The modern liberal thinks that black ghetto thugs burning American cities over supposed civil rights violations that the majority of the thugs can't accurately describe, but believes that the TEA Party is evil because they think the government should be forced to spend only what they take in. The real truth is that modern liberals HATE us because they've been TOLD to hate us and lack the moral or mental fiber to do otherwise.
The modern liberal thinks their iPhone is wonderful and can't live without it, while attacking the company that makes it for being successful.
The modern liberal hates success in others because it makes them 'feel' less and feelings are so much more important that actions to a modern liberal.
Kristin hates us because that's all she's got.
-
It is a common discussion board. If you want private conversation, take it private. But don't talk in public and then go play the victim when I or others jump in, it is unbecoming.
There was nothing private about it, but I was asking Anthony a question, not you. How you define the word "liberal" was not of interest to me.
How do you define classic liberalism? You claim to be one, what does that mean to you?
As it was used in the 18th Century. See John Milton, et al.
-
Liberal has been redefined over the last generation to the point that it is absolutely indistinguishable from what an actual liberal was in the sixties. An actual liberal would despise the politics of those that think of themselves as liberal to day because the modern liberal is all in on the concept of cradle to grave life manipulation by a small group of thugs who call themselves progressives and are nothing but hard line communists in the Stalin model.
The modern liberal hates freedom to choose except to choose abortion because that is still the holy grail of the communists who call themselves liberal.
The modern liberal claims to hate the 1% who own and control almost everything, but never actually live up to their make believe antipathy because they LOVE 1%'ers as long as they are properly pro abortion and as long as they have TOLD to ignore the abject hypocrisy of everything they say, do and pretend.
The modern liberal rails about the environment but adores the 1%ers who fly in private jets, spewing into the environment the very thing they claim is killing the planet, as long as those people are pro abortion and as long as they have been TOLD to exempt those people from their rants.
The modern liberal hates thinking for themselves, preferring to be TOLD what to think and then they run out demanding everyone else think exactly the same way or be unceasingly attacked for their free thought.
The modern liberal thinks that black ghetto thugs burning American cities over supposed civil rights violations that the majority of the thugs can't accurately describe, but believes that the TEA Party is evil because they think the government should be forced to spend only what they take in. The real truth is that modern liberals HATE us because they've been TOLD to hate us and lack the moral or mental fiber to do otherwise.
The modern liberal thinks their iPhone is wonderful and can't live without it, while attacking the company that makes it for being successful.
The modern liberal hates success in others because it makes them 'feel' less and feelings are so much more important that actions to a modern liberal.
Kristin hates us because that's all she's got.
Obviously you cut and pasted all but the last sentence from something else. The sentences are too complete to be your original.
-
There was nothing private about it, but I was asking Anthony a question, not you. How you define the word "liberal" was not of interest to me.
And I answered it. See post #61.
-
Obviously you cut and pasted all but the last sentence from something else. The sentences are too complete to be your original.
Your sophomoric response is typical of a progressive who was told what to believe and lost because my post wasn't covered in your indoctrination
-
be careful what you ask for...
There is a great quote from an old William Holden film ("The Devil's Brigage")...
Pvt. Billy 'Bronc' Guthrie: [referring to Henri] One of them's a frog, boys. Why don't you say something, froggy!
Pvt. Henri Laurent: Merde.
Pvt. Rockwell 'Rocky' Rockman: What the hell does that mean?
Cpl. Wilfrid Peacock: [to Rocky] To most people, it's an insult. But to you, I'd say it's a compliment.
Best WWII movie, IMO, but the least shown on TV.
-
There was nothing private about it, but I was asking Anthony a question, not you. How you define the word "liberal" was not of interest to me.
As it was used in the 18th Century. See John Milton, et al.
It was used in the 19th century and the 20th century by many, many people.
I offered you my definition as an example. You offered nothing before "See Milton and others". Should we understand that you think the government should mandate church attendence in order to build and preserve the moral character of the people so that they may enjoy the freedom provided by God Almighty? That is the basis of Milton's Puritan based understanding of how Man achieves liberty, a view which I believe was shared by George Washington.
You answer was very flippant, so I am asking this question to make sure that Milton actually represents what you think he does. Or if you disagree with this, which others? Ayou more of a Franklin bohemian sort of liberal, maybe a Jefferson thinking liberal? An Adams firebrand liberal?
You see, "et al" is a confusing expansion and by it you are evading an answer.
Since you said Milton, I think we will have to go with the stiff backed moralistic liberal unless you correct it.
-
And I answered it. See post #61.
I asked how YOU defined it as you used it to describe me. I didn't ask your opinion on the evolution of the meaning of the word.
-
It was used in the 19th century and the 20th century by many, many people.
I offered you my definition as an example. You offered nothing before "See Milton and others". Should we understand that you think the government should mandate church attendence in order to build and preserve the moral character of the people so that they may enjoy the freedom provided by God Almighty? That is the basis of Milton's Puritan based understanding of how Man achieves liberty, a view which I believe was shared by George Washington.
You answer was very flippant, so I am asking this question to make sure that Milton actually represents what you think he does. Or if you disagree with this, which others? Ayou more of a Franklin bohemian sort of liberal, maybe a Jefferson thinking liberal? An Adams firebrand liberal?
You see, "et al" is a confusing expansion and by it you are evading an answer.
Since you said Milton, I think we will have to go with the stiff backed moralistic liberal unless you correct it.
More Jeffersonian, ala power derives from the people, hence minimal government and maximum personal freedom. That is the general principle, obviously the world is a somewhat different place and the minimum necessary federal government today is way more than Jefferson would have tolerated.
-
More Jeffersonian, ala power derives from the people, hence minimal government and maximum personal freedom. That is the general principle, obviously the world is a somewhat different place and the minimum necessary federal government today is way more than Jefferson would have tolerated.
Ok, so not Milton. Why did you say Milton then? Milton believed power comes from the people too. Communists believe the people are the souce of power. Even progressives believe that the people have the power (and must therefore be manipulated into doing what affords the most freedom for all).
I agree minimal government is a good thing. How about minimal law?
-
You call me something you think is an insult, i.e. "LIBERAL", so I ask what you mean by it, but I just get some BS runaround and others trying to butt in. I am just trying to figure out if I should feel insulted or not.
There is no such thing as "butting in" on a public forum.
-
Ok, so not Milton. Why did you say Milton then? Milton believed power comes from the people too. Communists believe the people are the souce of power. Even progressives believe that the people have the power (and must therefore be manipulated into doing what affords the most freedom for all).
I agree minimal government is a good thing. How about minimal law?
I answered too quickly. It really should have been Locke et al, but I had a senior moment. It has been awhile since I was studying up on the thinkers that influenced the founding fathers.
Minimal law and minimal government would seem to go hand in hand. I am in favor of minimal both. I wish that our founding fathers and though to put a requirement in the Constitution that all laws had a sunset provision.
-
though to put a requirement in the Constitution that all laws had a sunset provision.
I think there's an argument to be made that they did with regards to financial allocations. But nobody is interested in using the Constitution to rule how we do things today and they're certainly not going to overturn social security and welfare based on a strict reading of the Constitution.
That we've screwed it up is our fault - our parent's fault, their parents.
-
I think there's an argument to be made that they did with regards to financial allocations. But nobody is interested in using the Constitution to rule how we do things today and they're certainly not going to overturn social security and welfare based on a strict reading of the Constitution.
That we've screwed it up is our fault - our parent's fault, their parents.
Sad to say that you are correct. Franklin Delirious Roosevelt set us on this path. I would kill SS, Medicare, and all other federal forms of welfare if it were up to me. Those are for the states. That is my liberal rant for the day.
-
"Where's Hillary?" is a glaringly telling issue. She is literally in hiding. It is unprecedented for a candidate in a race this close to vanish for days at a time as the election draws near.
I am seeing several reasons. She wants to avoid a health incident being videoed. She knows people don't like seeing her so wants to just hold the base. Her rallies are small and enthusiasm tepid.
-
Hillary is in an oxygen tent somewhere, probably Chappaqua, recovering from the debate. She's on an I.V. of Vicodin, saline solution, and white wine.