Author Topic: A Discussion Of “Liberal” and “Conservative"  (Read 2276 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Dali Llama

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2452
A Discussion Of “Liberal” and “Conservative"
« on: December 02, 2004, 07:53:30 AM »
Dali Llama say he present following for consideration... :twisted:  :twisted:  :twisted:

A Discussion Of The Meaning Of The Words “Liberal” and “Conservative”

 by JAMES M. KEHL

            A recent  discussion I had with a Bush voter  prompted me to write this article.  The subject of our discussion was Susan Schroeder’s “Letter To The People in The Red States”.  Susan’s letter was a heartfelt account of her feelings towards the people in the Red States who voted for George W. Bush for President

Susan eloquently expressed  the deep emotions felt by many of us regarding the abominable election of George W. Bush as President of the United States .  I responded to replies to Susan’s article from three readers who wrote that they voted for Bush.  In summary, I informed those voters that I would hold them and the approximately 59,500,000 other persons who allegedly voted for George W. Bush for President responsible for the future tragedies and days of darkness that will be experienced by the United States and its citizens as a result of their foolish votes.  One of the Bush voters responded by saying that if I was going to hold him responsible for the effects of his free, conscious decision, he would hold myself “ and other liberal voters” responsible for the alleged “1,500,000 babies” who “die at the hands of abortionists” every year.  He intimated that he was a “conservative” and that this would not “foster any type of bi-partisan spirit between liberals and conservatives.”  After explaining to him that the moral value of responsibility for one’s actions permits me to hold him accountable for the results of a decision he made and an action he executed whereas the same moral value prohibits he and his fellow conservatives from holding myself and others responsible for events we had nothing to do with, I decided to write a brief column which compares the adjective “liberal” with the adjective “conservative.”

            I began my comparison by consulting an abridgement of Funk & Wagnalls’ New Standard Dictionary of the English Language.  This abridgement was published in 1943 and has provided me with a scholarly resource for many years.  On page 461 of this book, I found the following definition of the word “liberal” which I will reproduce below:

Liberal-1.  Possessing or manifesting a free and generous heart; Bountiful .  2.  Appropriate or fitting for a broad and enlightened mind.  3. free from narrowness, bigotry or bondage to authority or creed, as in religion; inclined to democratic or republican ideas, as opposed to monarchical or aristocratic, as in politics; broad; popular; progressive. 4.  Bestowed without stint; abundant.  5.  Not restricted to the literal meaning.  6. Free by or from birth; hence, of high character; refined; Independent. 7.  Obsolete Definition- Unduly free; licentious. Synonyms-se AMPLE;CHARITABLE; GENEROUS.  11. Noun A member of a party which advocates liberty of thought, speech or action.          

I then turned to page 184 of the same dictionary to find the word conservative.  It was listed under the word “conserve” as an adjective:

 Conservative-1.  Adhering to the existing order of things; opposed to change or progress.  2.  Conserving; preservative. Noun- A conservative person.

For many years, the term “liberal” has been used pejoratively by many people.  However, I will let the reader decide which is the more preferable adjective.  Would you rather be described as being “appropriate or fitting for a broad and enlightened mind” or would you prefer to be described as “opposed to change or progress”?  Would you rather be described by someone as a person who is “free from narrowness, bigotry or bondage to authority or creed” or would you prefer to be described as a person who likes “adhering to the existing order of things”?  Would you like people to think of you as “free by or from birth; hence of high character, refined; independent”?  Isn’t it nice when someone describes you as “ample, charitable and generous” and as a person “possessing or manifesting a free and generous heart”?

The only thing I like about being described as a conservative is that the adjective describes someone who wants ”to keep something “from loss, decay, or injury “and is interested in preserving something.  I haven’t figured out what today’s self-described political conservatives want to preserve.  The Bush voters will assert that one of their top priorities is to defend the United States and its citizens.  They then manifest this priority by squandering the reputation and resources of the United States by attacking a nation who did not harm us on September 11 and by desisting in the attack on the outlaws who were responsible for attacking our country.   They sure don’t seem interested in preserving the earth when they try to enact legislation allowing drilling in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge. (By the way, that was a bill Senator Kerry helped to defeat in Congress.  He, not George Bush, led the fight to save something worthwhile.)  

Today’s conservatives do not seem interested in preserving the “existing order of things.”  They want to go backwards!  They want to repeal Social Security, take away civil liberties that better people than themselves have fought and died for, destroy the reputation the United States has for working in harmony with and leading other nations, stifle scientific research and Heaven only knows what else. I sometimes think they would rather go back to 1850 rather than forward to 2050.  Their favorite gear on a car must be “Reverse.” They get so many tickets because they have difficulty driving forward.

The next time someone uses the word “liberal” in a derogatory manner, please remember the dictionary definition of the word.  If someone calls you a liberal, smile and thank them for the compliment.
   
James M. Kehl jmk50@msn.com  is a partner in the firm of Meehan & Roby located in Timonium, Maryland.  He has over 32 years of experience in the field of public accounting.  James Kehl is a specialist in all types of federal and state income taxes and has been fortunate enough to have had articles he has written published in such prestigious professional magazines such as BNA's Daily Tax Report and CCH's Journal of Passthrough Entities.  he is a frequent speaker and lecturer on subjects related to taxation.  He serves clients who are located throughout the United States.
AKA "Blademan52" from Marlin Talk

Offline Hooker

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1581
A Discussion Of “Liberal” and “Conservative
« Reply #1 on: December 02, 2004, 08:30:57 AM »
#5 Not restricted to literal meaning :-D  :-D  :-D  Need he have said anymore?
Squandering resources? wouldn't leaving the oil in ANWR untouched be wanton waste of resources?
Sadly liberals will never understand that attacking Iraq was not about 9/11. It's about preventing it from happening again. But then again #5 Not restricted to literal meaning.

Pat
" In the beginning of change, the patriot is a brave and scarce man,hated and scorned. when the cause succeeds however,the timid join him...for then it cost nothing to be a patriot. "
-Mark Twain
"What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms."
-- Thomas Jefferson to William Stephens Smith, 1787. ME 6:373, Papers 12:356

Offline Dali Llama

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2452
A Discussion Of “Liberal” and “Conservative
« Reply #2 on: December 02, 2004, 08:33:49 AM »
[quote="Hooker
Sadly liberals will never understand that attacking Iraq was not about 9/11. It's about preventing it from happening again. [/quote]That be so true, comment Dali Llama.
AKA "Blademan52" from Marlin Talk

Offline Major

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 516
A Discussion Of “Liberal” and “Conservative
« Reply #3 on: December 02, 2004, 12:15:51 PM »
I think a quote from Winston Churchill is in order here.   I can not remember the exact words but this is very close:

He said that if you are not a liberal in your 20’s then you have no heart,
and if you are not a conservative by the time you reach your 40’s you have no brain.

 :D
Deactivated as trouble maker

Offline Dali Llama

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2452
A Discussion Of “Liberal” and “Conservative
« Reply #4 on: December 02, 2004, 12:55:22 PM »
Quote from: Major

if you are not a liberal in your 20’s then you have no heart,
and if you are not a conservative by the time you reach your 40’s you have no brain.

 
That be good one, say Dali Llama! :grin:  :D
AKA "Blademan52" from Marlin Talk

Offline Major

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 516
A Discussion Of “Liberal” and “Conservative
« Reply #5 on: December 02, 2004, 03:11:18 PM »
Churchill was a very wise man and had lots of these good sayings.    I just wish I could remember more of them.    Another man worth quoting was Will Rodgers.    Both those guys had good heads on their shoulders and a humor to go along with their smarts.
Deactivated as trouble maker

Offline Dali Llama

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2452
A Discussion Of “Liberal” and “Conservative
« Reply #6 on: December 03, 2004, 01:30:59 AM »
Quote from: Major
Churchill was a very wise man and had lots of these good sayings.    I just wish I could remember more of them.    
Dali Llama say surely Major do not be suffering from old timer's disease at age 59? :lol:
AKA "Blademan52" from Marlin Talk

Offline williamlayton

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15415
A Discussion Of “Liberal” and “Conservative
« Reply #7 on: December 03, 2004, 04:13:52 AM »
This discussion has been had several times, at different sites. I would have to agree about labeling. The Constitution and Bill of Rights were very liberal when drafted, and, well, probably still are, as were those which drafted them.
Blessings
TEXAS, by GOD

Offline Mac11700

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (34)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6875
A Discussion Of “Liberal” and “Conservative
« Reply #8 on: December 03, 2004, 04:57:33 AM »
Quote
This abridgement was published in 1943


Well...that should tell you something right there...and as everyone knows...a liberal COULD be that meaning...but unfortunatly...their not...nor can they ever be...and the amzing thing is then...as now..they are saying
Quote
Appropriate or fitting for a broad and enlightened mind
...to have a enlightend mind..is other way of saying Brainwashed

Mac
You can cry me a river... but...build me a bridge and then get over it...

Offline Dali Llama

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2452
A Discussion Of “Liberal” and “Conservative
« Reply #9 on: December 03, 2004, 07:38:05 AM »
Quote from: williamlayton
The Constitution and Bill of Rights were very liberal when drafted, and, well, probably still are, as were those which drafted them.
That be correct, say Dali Llama.
AKA "Blademan52" from Marlin Talk

Offline unspellable

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 776
conservative vs liberal, definitions
« Reply #10 on: December 03, 2004, 08:22:15 AM »
Unfortunately this is yet another example of the word games the left play.  Today's "conservative", and even more so, "libertarian", is what was originally meant by the term "liberal" in a politcal context.  The conservatives are conservative in that they wish to maintain a liberal political structure.  The left, who wish to move towards an authoritarian and egalitarian political structure, have twisted the meaning out of all recognition to use it as their own label.  Now they object to being labeled with it in a pejorative manner.  Case of griping when they are hoisted by their own petard.

I have to laugh when they squawk about maintaining civil liberties.

Offline Major

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 516
Re: conservative vs liberal, definitions
« Reply #11 on: December 03, 2004, 10:10:21 AM »
Quote from: unspellable


The left, who wish to move towards an authoritarian and egalitarian political structure, have twisted the meaning out of all recognition to use it as their own label.


And nobody twists things easier than they do.
Deactivated as trouble maker

Offline williamlayton

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15415
A Discussion Of “Liberal” and “Conservative
« Reply #12 on: December 03, 2004, 11:06:50 PM »
I guess almost any change is liberal so it would be better to not have a label and just stick to the issues and your stance on them. That is asking for alot from all of them folks and I do not think they can stand under the burden of truth.
Blessings
TEXAS, by GOD

Offline williamlayton

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15415
A Discussion Of “Liberal” and “Conservative
« Reply #13 on: December 03, 2004, 11:54:03 PM »
I could have added this to the previous post but chose to put it in another as it is a different question.
I have read this thought many times and am more confused each time I read it. It is the topic of holding one responsible for the actions of those a person one chooses to support.
Mr. Kehl exclaims, as an argument, that he would hold Bush supporters accountable ( a noble thought, but, undoable without complete anarchy )for the actions of Mr. Bush.
The retort was, to the effect, That the responder says he would hold liberals accountable ( see previous reply ) for the death of X number of deaths by abortion.
Mr Kehl makes a statement that, on the surface seems to be a spin or at least, not thinking, when he responds that he could not be held responsible for events he had nothing to do with. adds the phrase "moral value of responsibility" several times.
It is a moot point I guess, or at least a bluff, that either has the ability to hold the other responsible for anything. The question is really what is he saying? I see he is saying he is not responsible for the actions of the guy he supports but his opponent IS responsible for the actions of his guy.
Someone with more intelligence than I clear this issue for me.
TEXAS, by GOD

Offline Dali Llama

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2452
Re: conservative vs liberal, definitions
« Reply #14 on: December 04, 2004, 09:51:43 AM »
Quote from: unspellable
I have to laugh when they squawk about maintaining civil liberties.
Dali Llama say he feel same way.
AKA "Blademan52" from Marlin Talk

Offline ironglow

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (9)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31313
  • Gender: Male
A Discussion Of “Liberal” and “Conservative
« Reply #15 on: December 05, 2004, 01:28:48 AM »
As William and others aptly pointed out, the classical term "liberal" (small L") has nothing to do with today's Liberal (large L)...

  Only another Liberal could fall for that spin...

Let's see;

   1. A free and generous heart, bountiful:
   
       Why is it then that one doesn't see Liberals as the big donors to Salvation Army etc..
      How is it that Liberals like Kerry and the Hollyweird crowd wallow in their million$ and billion$ while the people they appeal to go hungry (their words) in the streets of NY, Chicago and LA ?

   How is it that old Teddy has thousands to spend on booze and parties in his estates...when there are migrant workers barely subsisting (his words) and unable to afford schooling...?

   2. A broad and enlightened mind:

   How is it their minds are so broad and enlightened that they want to jail people for what THEY THINK people are thinking (hate crimes).

    Howcum...they want to censor our speech with POLITICAL CORRECTNESS...

   Yes; they are so broadminded that they encourage the erection of nastivity scenes in public parks...in order to show their great acceptance of " diversity and multi-culturalism" (their words)
    ....how do you spell h-y-p-o-c-r-i-s-y..?

   3.Free from bigotry or bondage:

  We are hunters and shooters...do we sense any bigotry from the left?

  Does the Christian community sense any bigotry from the left?

   Surely they are free from bondage...they are not tied to Darwin, Marx, political correctness or any of the other dogmas of Liberalism...or are they..?


   4. Not restricted to literal meaning:
 
  This one I have to agree with.....

   The Libs are the ones that call for the US Constitution to be a "living document" ( words of Algore and others)..

   Surely we Conservatives should want our Constitution , when faced with a legal challenge to say..."well whatever!".
 
 Truly, the Libs are NOT bound by the literal meanings...that is why they hate Christianity so rabidly ( the more liberal, the more rabid).
  They cannot fathom TEN COMMANDMENTS....it should be simply TEN SUGGESTIONS...LOL

    I can recall an incident at Kent State U. (Ohio) when the National Guard troops said ..HALT!...to a bunch of "Liberal" students...
   They didn't believe that they should be held to the "literal" meaning of HALT....sadly, they learned that some commands are not open to debate!

   Curiously, at that time I was a parts manager for an equipment company and had a Kent State student helping me summers and weekends.
   He was helping me THAT weekend and told me that they were warned to either go home for the weekend or at least refrain from stupid demonstrations that some students were threatening to launch...

   That student is today a congressman, raised with values, pro-2nd amendment and VERY conservative...he's also first or second in line for Speaker-of the-House...

   Look for the name Tom Reynolds...he's a rising star and one Conservatives, Christians and gun owners should wish for...
If you don't want the truth, don't ask me.  If you want something sugar coated...go eat a donut !  (anon)

Offline gino

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 180
A Discussion Of “Liberal” and “Conservative
« Reply #16 on: December 05, 2004, 02:08:05 AM »
My Old Daddy once explained it to me. A liberal is a person who will watch a man drown while trying to form a committee to save him. A conservative is a person who will watch a man drown then send the widow a bill for his time.
gino  :)

Offline Dali Llama

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2452
A Discussion Of “Liberal” and “Conservative
« Reply #17 on: December 05, 2004, 05:15:01 AM »
Quote from: ironglow
  how do you spell h-y-p-o-c-r-i-s-y..?

 
Dali Llama say that easy, as he spell it "Democrat." :)  :)  :)
AKA "Blademan52" from Marlin Talk

Offline Hooker

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1581
A Discussion Of “Liberal” and “Conservative
« Reply #18 on: December 05, 2004, 06:21:16 AM »
Always spell liberal and democrat with lower case letters.
They get enough of my capital with out my consent. :lol:  :lol:  :evil:

Pat
" In the beginning of change, the patriot is a brave and scarce man,hated and scorned. when the cause succeeds however,the timid join him...for then it cost nothing to be a patriot. "
-Mark Twain
"What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms."
-- Thomas Jefferson to William Stephens Smith, 1787. ME 6:373, Papers 12:356

Offline Dali Llama

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2452
A Discussion Of “Liberal” and “Conservative
« Reply #19 on: December 05, 2004, 06:29:02 AM »
Quote from: Hooker
Always spell liberal and democrat with lower case letters.
They get enough of my capital with out my consent.
Dali Llama say he merely adhering to rules of proper grammar, not implying deference or respect. :-)
AKA "Blademan52" from Marlin Talk

Offline ironglow

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (9)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31313
  • Gender: Male
A Discussion Of “Liberal” and “Conservative
« Reply #20 on: December 05, 2004, 03:54:27 PM »
Olemailman;
   Perhaps you had best refrain from talking about someone if you don't know them very well l!....LOL
If you don't want the truth, don't ask me.  If you want something sugar coated...go eat a donut !  (anon)

Offline williamlayton

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15415
A Discussion Of “Liberal” and “Conservative
« Reply #21 on: December 05, 2004, 09:03:26 PM »
Well now, lets confuse the issue even more. Remember folks, since we are not the Lord God, every thesis has a fault.
If the documents discussed, the Constitution and Bill of Rights, are heritage, are they to be defined/interpreted liberally or consevatively?
The Constition and Bill of Rights are (are? ) living documents and living things grow and change or is they not living things, jest things/ideas written on paper.
Blessings
TEXAS, by GOD

Offline Dali Llama

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2452
A Discussion Of “Liberal” and “Conservative
« Reply #22 on: December 06, 2004, 01:24:41 AM »
Quote from: williamlayton
Remember folks, since we are not the Lord God,
Dali Llama say he glad williamlayton have a bit of humility... :lol:  :lol:  :lol:
AKA "Blademan52" from Marlin Talk

Offline ironglow

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (9)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31313
  • Gender: Male
A Discussion Of “Liberal” and “Conservative
« Reply #23 on: December 06, 2004, 06:07:42 AM »
That little game called "living document"  that Libs such as Algore like to play ...is a big load of manure..
   Libs like to say that the Constitution is living (read:changing) so their activist judges can play free-wheeling games with it. They can rule at their whim, saying " today's values and morality demand otherwise".
 
  How would it be if all rules and documents were "living documents"?
 
  1) A football game where the ref changed the rules to fit his "current ideas". Touchdowns are now worth 2 points , field goals 8 points..
 
  2) You get stopped for speeding while doing 45 in a 55 zone...the traffic officer decided that 42 mph was more than reasonable limit.

  3) You re-register your car...usually costs $65, but the DMV clerk decides that you look like you could afford $880...the regisdtry rate being a "living document".

   4) Hillary becomes president...her toadie judges say the 2nd amendment is outdated...and the Constitution is a "living document".

  4) Perhaps some of the Liberal churches would like to say that Jesus was never crucified and cannot save us...they would appreciate it, were the Bible a "living document"!

   Some things such as the Bible, Bill of Rights and the Constitution should never be considered a "living document"

   Yes; where the constituition is concerned, the people can AMEND it after a long, drawn out process that is not usually successful....but the Constitution was never meant to be "evolved" by activist, liberal judges..

       Don't let the Libs pull the " wool over our eye" by such a subterfuge!!!
If you don't want the truth, don't ask me.  If you want something sugar coated...go eat a donut !  (anon)

Offline Dali Llama

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2452
A Discussion Of “Liberal” and “Conservative
« Reply #24 on: December 06, 2004, 07:54:04 AM »
Quote from: ironglow
Hillary becomes president...her toadie judges say the 2nd amendment is outdated...and the Constitution is a "living document".

 
Dali Llama say that likely what would transpire if carpetbagger from New York be elected President.  Dali suggest ironglow read following:

Everyone Knows This Senator, and for 2008, That May Be Precisely the Trouble

By RAYMOND HERNANDEZ

Published: December 5, 2004


ASHINGTON, Dec. 4 - In a race for the presidency, Hillary Rodham Clinton faces a problem that has dogged her since her days as first lady: an entrenched bloc of voters who simply do not like her.

And her experience as a senator in New York shows that despite vigorous campaigning around the state since taking office, she remains an extremely polarizing figure who is unable to sway these voters to her side.

One poll after another shows that roughly one of three New Yorkers has an unfavorable opinion of Mrs. Clinton, a statistic that has not changed since she took office in 2001.

Nationally, her standing is worse, even as her aides prepare for what is emerging as a possible bid for president in 2008. Roughly 4 of 10 Americans disapprove of her, according to a recent poll by the Marist College Institute for Public Opinion.

The voters who disapprove of Mrs. Clinton are numerous and unshakable, and they have been around so long that they even have a name in political circles. Hillary haters.

Mrs. Clinton offered a revealing answer when asked recently whether Republicans might be hoping that she becomes the Democratic presidential nominee in 2008, since it would give the G.O.P. a divisive figure to run against.

Mrs. Clinton - who studiously avoids answering questions about her presidential ambitions - quickly responded. "We have a president who is quite polarizing - and very successful, I might add," Mrs. Clinton said during an appearance on NBC's "Today."

Mrs. Clinton's high unfavorability ratings may help explain why a discussion has begun among her advisers over whether she should skip a Senate re-election campaign in 2006 and instead focus all her energies on a race for the White House.

The most obvious challenge that Mrs. Clinton faces in running for both jobs is a compressed political calendar that leaves her very little room to maneuver: The Iowa presidential caucuses are held just 14 months after Election Day in 2006.

If Mrs. Clinton stuck to the schedule that John Kerry followed during this presidential election cycle, she would have to give a clear indication of her desire to run for the presidency a mere month after her Senate race was over.

But that seems unlikely, some political analysts say, because the timing would be awkward.

Yet some people close to Mrs. Clinton maintain that the tight calendar should not be a problem because she is such a big celebrity, and any presidential campaign she embarks upon would instantly attract a huge amount of attention.

But other Democrats and independent political strategists say that her celebrity is a double-edged sword: While Mrs. Clinton does indeed enjoy a level of name recognition other politicians crave, she has earned a reputation that, fairly or not, makes her a polarizing figure among moderate swing voters, an important bloc nationally.

"There's work for her to do nationally," said Lee M. Miringoff, the director of the Marist institute. "Beyond her appeal to the Democratic base, there is a need for her to build bridges to reach out to moderate Republicans and independent voters if she hopes to succeed."

The so-called Hillary haters became a harsh reality of political life for Mrs. Clinton when she ran for the Senate. Republicans built much of their campaign on trying to tap anti-Clinton sentiments in New York State.

No one factor accounts for the deep misgivings many voters express for Mrs. Clinton, but to some degree it stems from a view that has taken hold, fairly or not, that she is a hugely ambitious woman with a liberal agenda that was most significantly illustrated in her efforts to overhaul the nation's health care system during her husband's presidency.

Mrs. Clinton sought to counteract the damage posed by the anti-Clinton feeling by spending nearly two years traveling around the state in a calculated effort to force voters to re-examine what, if anything, is so objectionable about her.

Many Democrats and independent political strategists contend that Mrs. Clinton may have to do much the same nationally.

"To be successful nationally, she will have to defuse some of the negative feelings," Mr. Miringoff said. "One way to attempt that is to replicate what she did in with New York with her Listening Tour."

A Democratic political strategist on Capitol Hill agreed. "She may have 100 percent name recognition," the strategist said. "But it comes with a certain amount of baggage."

Even after her victory in New York, Mrs. Clinton has taken nothing for granted, continuing to travel around the state constantly, as if running a perpetual campaign.

The strategy has yielded dividends: Her popularity rating among New Yorkers reached a notable 61 percent in September, compared with 38 percent in February 2001, according to a Quinnipiac University Poll.

Mrs. Clinton's approach has been particularly effective with undecided voters. The number of people who told Quinnipiac pollsters that they had no opinion of her has been dropping - to 7 percent in September from 33 percent in February 2001.

But tellingly enough, her tireless efforts around the state have done little to assuage the misgivings of many. The number of New Yorkers expressing an unfavorable opinion of her has been about the same - roughly one in three - in the 22 polls Quinnipiac University has conducted since 2001.

But Mrs. Clinton's advisers contend that the poll findings have, in fact, been very good news for her, saying that many undecided voters became supporters once they got to know her.

"Show me a poll where she has lost ground," said one Democrat who is close to Mrs. Clinton. "You can't. They don't exist. She has been gaining supporters both in New York and nationally since she took office by virtue of her hard work."
AKA "Blademan52" from Marlin Talk

Offline williamlayton

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15415
A Discussion Of “Liberal” and “Conservative
« Reply #25 on: December 06, 2004, 10:38:43 PM »
Ironglow-
I like what you say, however; it is a fact that all things do change. Football has changed, baseball has changed, ect, and our interpretation of our constitution has changed to meet changing times. It, at least to this point, has proven to be a most resilient document. Well, we the people, may be the ones resilient. At any rate WE have changed it around, and in one case ( no pun intended on the word choice "case" intended ) re-changed it around.
Folks there is no doubt that we can screw this whole process up. There aint no guarantees. I just find fault letting a supreme court do it for ME when I can do it so well on my own.
Gotta be careful folks.
Now Ms. Clinton is a whole different subject and our thinking of her has to be examined. This lady could be dangerous OR a blessing. There are a couple of things about her that I do have to admit to admire. There is an attitude that leaves me cold, but a mind that I do kinda admire. I just can't get past her political leaning. If she were at least more middle of the road, but she is not.
Mostly she scares me.
Blessings
TEXAS, by GOD

Offline Dali Llama

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2452
A Discussion Of “Liberal” and “Conservative
« Reply #26 on: December 07, 2004, 01:37:58 AM »
Quote from: williamlayton
Ms. Clinton is a whole different subject... There are a couple of things about her that I do have to admit to admire.
 What about Hillary engender such admiration, ask Dali Llama? :?
AKA "Blademan52" from Marlin Talk

Offline unspellable

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 776
Baseball? Football?
« Reply #27 on: December 07, 2004, 02:24:23 AM »
Baseball and football have changed because the rules have been changed.  But note that they were not changed in the middle of the game.

In the case of the federal government the rules have remained the same.  It's the so called "interpretation" that has changed.

If the rules mean whatever "somebody" says they mean then in the long run that "somebody" will be in the same mold as Stalin, Hitler, Saddam, etc.

Offline Dali Llama

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2452
Re: Baseball? Football?
« Reply #28 on: December 07, 2004, 07:45:18 AM »
Quote from: unspellable
If the rules mean whatever "somebody" says they mean then in the long run that "somebody" will be in the same mold as Stalin, Hitler, Saddam, etc.
That be correct, respond Dali Llama.
AKA "Blademan52" from Marlin Talk

Offline williamlayton

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15415
A Discussion Of “Liberal” and “Conservative
« Reply #29 on: December 07, 2004, 08:00:21 AM »
Just giving her credit for having a good mind, which she does.
Blessings
TEXAS, by GOD