MRA,

Despite our being on opposite sides of the political fence, I think we agree on a lot more things than either of us thought at first. For instance, we both believe that it's unfortunate the terms "liberal" and "conservative" are so badly misused by both political parties.

My concern was actually a concession that the Republicans have been better at denigrating the term "liberal" than the Democrats have been at labeling anyone a "conservative." I have to give them credit. For instance, I listened to President Bush make a campaign speech a couple of days ago in which he opened by saying that John Kerry was the number-one most-liberal senator in Washington and that John Edwards was the fourth most liberal. He went on use this tactic a number of additional times throughout the five minutes I listened, each time pausing and smirking after the word "liberal," apparently to emphasize its connotation with Satan and all that is corrupt in the world. It annoyed hell out of me, but I must admit it's been a pretty effective ploy with a lot of people.

I give the Republicans credit. It's a pretty neat con job getting people to so wholly associate "liberal" with bad or evil; I just wish the Demos had beaten them to it by being as effective with the "conservative" angle. I'm a sore loser on this one, I guess.

Incidentally, having been a California English teacher for over thirty-seven years, I was never refrained from teaching the Bible as literature or teaching comparative religions. And our high school biology texts contain references to Creationism as well as all other major beliefs on the beginnings of life. The idea is that students should be exposed to all theories, not just one. It's when somebody preaches Creationism in public schools as the ONLY doctrine, or the Bible as the only word of the only God, that teachers get into trouble. But, then, California is pretty liberal.

It would be as if I as an English teacher were to have told my students that a given book had only one interpretation--mine, or that as a film critic I were to tell readers that they could only interpret a movie one way--my way. It would be unfair, unwise, and untrue.

Keep up the good fight, MRA. I may disagree with you, but I admire your conviction, and you're an eloquent spokesperson for your cause.

John

MRA,

Just because a lot of people subscribe to Christianity doesn't mean that Christianity can ride roughshod over everybody else. If anything, it means that Christianity should be protective of others' rights. You can see for yourself when one religion dominates a country's political environment--the Papal States, the German Protestant principalities, the Middle East, etc.--people get dicked over cruelly.

You're dismissing and distorting pro-enviroment arguments by mentioning a lot of hilarious horseshit. Prices of homes going up? LOL.

Besides, the point of denouncing dependency on foreign oil is to get us OFF of using so much gasoline. There are cars that can run on clean energy sources, yet the powerful lobbies paid for by oil and car companies keep the world enslaved to gas cars. That's awful, and if you can't see that, then you're a fool.

Eddie

Poster5,
>>>>Yes, and that teacher shouldn't teach ever again because religion has no place in a secular society.<<<<

These teachers believe in creation, but have NOT taught it in their classrooms. And they still get re-assigned. That's what you want??? If this is such a secular society, why do so many people believe in God and practice religion? Maybe you meant "secular schools"??? Also, some teachers have asked to teach their students that their are serious scientific problems with evolution. This almost always gets denied.

>>>...we learn what science has to offer... <<<

Unfortunately, there are many FACTS and theories which get banned by anti-Christian school administrators, judges, and the ACLU. Not because they are unscientific, but because they might weaken their own pet theories. I certainly believe science, it's just that scientists often take pride in their own beliefs, and dismiss facts which are contradictory.

Abortion and environment. Sigh.
Abortion is murder, and you can't change my mind.
I CARE about the environment. One example where the liberals have gone overboard to the detriment of the environment is banning logging in national forests. OBVIOUSLY, we need to take care of our forests. We need to regulate where, how, and how many trees to take. "Evil" logging companies submit proposals to selectively take trees, and to clear underbrush, and to create firebreaks. DENIED! So now we keep getting bigger and bigger forest fires. These fires put more pollutants into the air, burn down more homes, create misery, and kill people. This also causes the price of wood to go sky-high. This makes homes less-affordable, creating more misery, and more homelessness.
Reminds me of people who complain about our dependence on foriegn oil, but don't want to drill any new wells.

Kilgore,
I am sorry if people keep calling you a communist or a bleeding heart.
Although I don't remember hearing that phrase since "All in the Family". But I will take your word for it that it happens. Also, isn't it nice that some of these corporate corruptors of the 90's were caught in the last few years?

I know exactly what you mean. I, am sick of it too.
It goes both ways.
Heard any of these terms to LABEL conservatives lately?

Narrow-minded
Judgemental
Intolerant
bigot
racist
stupid
DANGEROUS!
radical
extreemist
homophobic
old-fashioned
uptight
nazi
fascist
hate monger
mean-spirited
anti-union
book burner
McCarthyite
tightwad
boring
partisan

or try these

only cares about the rich
wants to destroy the environment
wants to destroy education
wants to destroy social security
wants to destroy health care
wants to starve our kids
extreemly powerful gun lobby
marching in lock-step
.

MRA,

Yes, and that teacher shouldn't teach ever again because religion has no place in a secular society. In fact, I'm one of those who believes that the ten Christian commandments shouldn't be posted in courthouses. You're more than welcome to believe in creationism, and everyone is more than entitled to believe whatever they want about how life came to be. However, science is the secular standard, and we learn what science has to offer because it is something that can be seen/experienced/applied by the vast majority of people on Earth (even if teaching science is a kind of dogma in its own way, but that's another can of worms).

John will be the first to tell you that I'm a political and moral conservative, but I believe in choice when it comes to abortion and that the Republicans are grinding the Earth into oblivion with their horrible attitudes towards the environment.

Eddie

Puccio,
>>>Senator Joseph McCarthy and the Hollywood black list <<<

So from 1955 to 1990, who else was there?
One of the issues he was trying to investigate and expose was the existence of communist spys in very influential positions of government. Recent examination of KGB files has proved him to be correct. Still, you'll get no argument from me about the black lists. However, did you ever notice how Nazi's show up as villins in (Hollywood) movies ten times more often than commies

>>>>By the way, I do believe there is a liberal bias in the press today because so many news people today are thinking human beings willing to look at more than one side of a story. <<<<

I am conservative on most issues, and I am a thinking human being willing to look at more than one side of a story. So your statement above was completely rediculous.:@

>>>>...turned the word "liberal"... ...[meaning] to be soft on defense, soft on crime, soft on terrorism, soft on personal values, and big on taxation and government spending. Kinda silly when you think about it, especially as Bush has run up the biggest national debt in the country's history.<<<<

I don't think it's the biggest when you compare it to the size of the economy. Still, I agree that there has been absolutely no spending discipline in the last few years, and I am extreemly disapointed. A democrat president would be better with this congress, on this issue, as the republicans would make a big deal of standing up to the "evil liberal democrat president" by not giving him anything he wants. Also, some of the deficits are a result of the recession which started at the end of Mr. C's stained service, not that was is his fault, as economic cycles often have a will of their own.

>>>>...liberal in its original context: generous, bountiful, tolerant, and not narrow in opinion or judgment. ...<<<<

Do you believe conservatives are intolerant, opinionated, judgemental tightwads?

Did you know that, if a teacher says (not even in the classroom) that he/she believes in creation instead of evilution, that teacher will probably never teach a science class at that school ever again? ...Tolerant?

It seems like liberals are always TELLING US to keep our religion out of our politics... Unless its *THE* REV. Jackson.

>>>>He's basically advocating isolationism, something that Bush and Co. wanted before 9/11 happened<<<<

Most of Mr. Bush's top advisors belong to organizations which aggressively promote internationalism. How do you see him (pre 9-11) as having been an isolationist?

I know exactly what you mean, John. I, for one, am sick of being called a communist whenever I complain about corporate corruption.

My favorite conservative anti-liberal remark is to call them "bleeding hearts", as if to suggest that having concern for the welfare of unfortunate people is inherently weak, when all these unfortunate people should do is just get off their arses, stop doing drugs, and get a job.

MRA:
I did get a little mad at you, in a civilized kind of way.
Sasha

JP,
>>>I'm proud to call myself a liberal in its original context...<<<
One of our local conservative radio hosts said the same thing, so I thought it was cool for you to say it too.8)
>>>...Smirking...<<<
I don't like that either, except for one time. A "reporter" was obviously trying to make "W" look bad. She listed all the things she likes about John Edwards, then said, how does Dick Cheeney stack up against him? "W" said "Dick Cheeney can be president!........next!"8)
>>>...I just wish the Demos had beaten them to it by being as effective with the "conservative" angle. <<<
Well, if you want to go back and remember how Goldwater was painted as an extreemist madman who was going to start a nuclear war...
Still, I remember J. Kerry as having one of the most "liberal" voting records in Washington long before he began running, so I hope no-one tries to say that the claim is based on "just a few votes" designed to make him look bad now that he is running for president. I believe that his very long voting record is a very good indication of what he would do as president.
>>>...It's when somebody preaches Creationism in public schools as the ONLY doctrine,...<<<
Actually, I was originally complaining about when somebody preaches evilutionism in public schools as the ONLY doctrine. I belive this happens far more often than the former. BTW, evidence for a "young" earth can be presented without even mentioning God.
Well, I am glad that everyone didn't mad at each other...so far

;)

John,

Wanna hear something hilarious? Australia just had an election for the Prime Minister position. Prior to the election, Bush wished the incumbent conservative candidate good luck.

You know what the Australian conservative party is called?

The Liberals. :D

Eddie