Hilary and Fox News, what a beautiful marriage

[whitster]

"Look at it simply, Hillary is pro-choice, pro-healthcare, pro-environment. She has been mostly right wing on Iraq, "

zzz... continues to repeat this canard, this false dichotomy:

right wing = proiraq war
left wing = antiiraq war

which has already been proved false

fact: tony blair, a SOCIALIST (pretty darn leftwing) for iraq war.

fact: TONS of rightwingers against iraq war, generally from the paleocon side of the conservative fence.

tons of leftists, liberals, and democrats for: koch, clinton, lieberman, dershowitz, weisel, etc. etc. etc.. not to mention chris hitchens.

it's a false dichotomy. a bogus way to try to pigeonhole the iraq war, which has supporters and detractors from various levels of the spectrum

the fact is this. hillary is HAWKISH.

being pro-iraq war does not mean you are, or aren't a liberal.

Hillary is clearly a liberal. Bill, otoh, was clearly NOT a liberal

also note zzz...'s use of rhetoric. Hillary is pro-NATIONALIZED healthcare, whereas he says she is "pro-healthcare"

those are not necessarily the same thing. everybody is PRO healthcare. nobody wants people to be sick. the divergences come in what is the best way to promote health, and what is the role of govt. in doing so.

but to believe that hillary isn't a liberal merely because she supports the iraq war shows that 1) you don't understand what liberal means, and 2) you are intent (as is demonstrated ad nauseum) in misuing terms to promote an ideological agenda

 

[ZZZzzzzzzz]

Hey dopey!

I said Hillary was mostly liberal in her policy suggestions.

Doh!

Look at it simply, Hillary is pro-choice, pro-healthcare, pro-environment. She has been mostly right wing on Iraq, that is about the extent of her non "liberal" position.

She is not as liberal as Howard Dean, but neither is she as moderate as say Joe Lieberman.

This whole classification system is so silly anyway, designed for people who can't think for themselves, can't decide who to vote for on the total picture of all of their positions, so they need some remedial decision making process.

Oh, he is liberal---bad.

Oh, she is conservative---good.

Damn silly, damn stupid, very much par for the course.....

And yes, war, especially a preemptive war where the majority of our long time allies don't support such a war, is not considered a liberal peace loving position....

Quote from whitster:

"Look at it simply, Hillary is pro-choice, pro-healthcare, pro-environment. She has been mostly right wing on Iraq, "

zzz... continues to repeat this canard, this false dichotomy:

right wing = proiraq war
left wing = antiiraq war

which has already been proved false

fact: tony blair, a SOCIALIST (pretty darn leftwing) for iraq war.

fact: TONS of rightwingers against iraq war, generally from the paleocon side of the conservative fence.

tons of leftists, liberals, and democrats for: koch, clinton, lieberman, dershowitz, weisel, etc. etc. etc.. not to mention chris hitchens.

it's a false dichotomy. a bogus way to try to pigeonhole the iraq war, which has supporters and detractors from various levels of the spectrum

the fact is this. hillary is HAWKISH.

being pro-iraq war does not mean you are, or aren't a liberal.

Hillary is clearly a liberal. Bill, otoh, was clearly NOT a liberal

also note zzz...'s use of rhetoric. Hillary is pro-NATIONALIZED healthcare, whereas he says she is "pro-healthcare"

those are not necessarily the same thing. everybody is PRO healthcare. nobody wants people to be sick. the divergences come in what is the best way to promote health, and what is the role of govt. in doing so.

but to believe that hillary isn't a liberal merely because she supports the iraq war shows that 1) you don't understand what liberal means, and 2) you are intent (as is demonstrated ad nauseum) in misuing terms to promote an ideological agenda

 

[whitster]

she is not "mostly right wing" vis a vis iraq

for the umpteenth time

hawkish vis a vis iraq war =/= rightwing

it is NOT mutually inconistent to be

liberal and hawkish.

it is not COMMON, but hawkishness, especially considering one particular war, does not mean =/= liberal

and it doesn't mean rightwing either.

TONS of rightwingers are totally against the iraq war. many are isolationist in general, and against most wars

 

[ZZZzzzzzzz]

Doh!

Hey dopey!

Hawkish=right wing

Dove=letft wing

Doh!

You must be a too young to remember the 60s....

"All we are saying, is give Peace a chance."

---John and Yoko---

War mongering is not a liberal position....

Doh!

Quote from whitster:

she is not "mostly right wing" vis a vis iraq

for the umpteenth time

hawkish vis a vis iraq war =/= rightwing

it is NOT mutually inconistent to be

liberal and hawkish.

it is not COMMON, but hawkishness, especially considering one particular war, does not mean =/= liberal

and it doesn't mean rightwing either.

TONS of rightwingers are totally against the iraq war. many are isolationist in general, and against most wars

 

[jem]

first of all liberals have changed, they used to stand for something, now they do not. That is what I have pointing out to you. Liberals in the proud sense of the word would be Libertarian today -- many of their positions would be indistiguishable for a good conservative nowadays, Not a Neocon --- a good conservative.

Liberalism in the democratic party has given way to Left appeasers. Politicians with no compass, no sense of core values, just a bunch of pandering to the wackiest group that will bring primary votes. Liberals then had ideas, a sense of direction a plan for the future. Liberals today are valueless vote scroungers.

 

[ZZZzzzzzzz]

Such sanctimonious horsepoop.

You sound like you are reading right off of the Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, etc flash cards.....

Quote from jem:

first of all liberals have changed, they used to stand for something, now they do not. That is what I have pointing out to you. Liberals in the proud sense of the word would be Libertarian today -- many of their positions would be indistiguishable for a good conservative nowadays, Not a Neocon --- a good conservative.

Liberalism in the democratic party has given way to Left appeasers. Politicians with no compass, no sense of core values, just a bunch of pandering to the wackiest group that will bring primary votes. Liberals then had ideas, a sense of direction a plan for the future. Liberals today are valueless vote scroungers.

 

[jem]

Another substantive response by zzzz. When are you going to learn that I could care less if part of troll playbook is trash the messenger when you cant beat the message. Look at your last 3 troll plays. No substance all attacks on the messenger instead of the substance.

It must suck to be a troll without without the power to aggravate.

Pure entertrollment. We have trolls and troll owners.

 

[jem]

Quote from dddooo:

What facts? Your party elects Bush senior and when he proves to be a miserable failure you start claiming he is a liberal. Your party elects Bush Junior, gives him full 100% support for 6 years and when he ruins everything he touches and proves to be 100 times worse than his dad you start claiming he is a liberal. Bush and republicans govern from the far right but run to the center during election campaigns, claim to be compassionate conservatives, make centrists like Ahnold, McCain and Giuliani keynote speakers of the gop convention. But you accuse liberals not your own party of having no principles and "moving to the center in an attempt to get elected". What facts are you talking about jem?


Reagan raised taxes too, that's a fact. How liberal was Reagan?

Bush senior was a liberal. The republicans used to have a liberal wing. It was the eastern establishment. Check your history.

 

[whitster]

leaving aside the inflammatory rhetorical term of "war mongering" lots of liberals are, and have been hawkish

john kennedy, scoop jackson, moynihan, hillary clinton, ed koch, etc. etc. etc

if ur litmus test for the terms "liberal" and "leftwing" = pacifist, then u fail to understand basic political terminology, but i already knew that

to repeat, for example, tony blair is a SOCIALIST

he makes many in our dem party, and many who call themselves liberal in the US , look positively CONSERVATIVE by comparison

you can conflate, confuse, and misunderstand terms as much as possible

but i;'ll stick to reality

 

[dddooo]

Quote from whitster:

lots of liberals are, and have been hawkish

john kennedy, scoop jackson, moynihan, hillary clinton, ed koch, etc. etc. etc

You are using a few exceptions which of course always exist to muddy the waters, the reality is quite simple - overwhelming majority of liberals are against Iraq, overwhelming majority of right-wingers are bush dittoheads on iraq and other issues.

Quote from whitster:

but i;'ll stick to reality

Yeah, right, in reality we use exceptions to "prove" a point (see above), in reality we compare american politicians to Tony Blair to find out if they are liberal enough. This kind of reality exists in your imagination only, then again I am sure when you voted for Bush twice you also thought you were sticking to reality.