How to reduce cost of government[W:155]

[mmi]

I am more on your side than the other side

There's always room for you on our side, MR. Mr. Kasich would want it that way.

 

[Moderate Right]

There's always room for you on our side, MR. Mr. Kasich would want it that way.

Mr. Kasich was a Ronald Reagan conservative and not a liberal, although people like James would probably call him a liberal, probably Reagan too. Kasich would have cut government spending while helping those that truly needed help at the same time. He would have given hand ups, not permanent handouts. He would not favor income redistribution to fix income inequality, although he would probably have been ok with taxing the rich more. He was not even close to being an MMT'r. He would have cut deficits in an orderly fashion and then worked on the national debt. If you tried to explain MMT to him he would either laugh, roll his eyes, or humor you. I really am moderate right and the far right, such as James, makes me cringe just as much as the left does.

 

[mmi]

Mr. Kasich was a Ronald Reagan conservative and not a liberal

Was? Has something happened to him? Nah, I know what you mean — as a candidate. It can be awkward talking about politicians when they lose. I mean they aren't literally dead, but in a sense they are. So let's stand together for a few minutes at the coroner's table and then at his 2015-16 campaign grave and do a little autopsying and eulogising.

I'm sure you and I won't agree on the governor's intentions had he been elected. That's what allowed us both to support his candidacy.

>>Kasich would have cut government spending

I don't think he would have been able to, at least not in the ways you favour. You guys don't have enough votes in the Senate to get that done.

>>while helping those that truly needed help at the same time.

Yes, this was a major positive for me. But to be honest, I think both he and I are not exactly "sentimental" about this. Reforming the criminal justice and mental health systems are more than simply good ideas from a moral perspective. If that were all they had going for them, they'd be left for religious leaders to promote. Both of those monstrosities are disasters of our own making — they don't just destroy lives, they cost society a very large pile of money.

My feeling is that Kasich is misunderstood when he's characterised as someone whose political posture is motivated and directed by his moral and religious convictions. That's generally not the way successful professionals in this field operate. "Doing the right thing" doesn't get you elected. But it can be used to sell a policy, and that's what I figure he was doing in many ways in his campaign.

>>He would have given hand ups, not permanent handouts.

Permanent handouts are not available from gubmint income support programs.

>>He would not favor income redistribution to fix income inequality, although he would probably have been ok with taxing the rich more.

Taxing wealthy households more heavily is "income redistribution to fix income inequality."

>>He would have cut deficits in an orderly fashion and then worked on the national debt.

I disagree. I don't think he would have been able to do that, and I don't think it's even what he wants to see happen. He knows what sells in Republican circles, and he knows that he has a reputation as a deficit hawk that he can exploit. He built his career on it. He's a sharp cookie, and he's a winner. When it comes to the hardball world of presidential politics that I have such passion and enthusiasm for, I don't pay much attention to people who aren't. Obummer is a good example — he had a destiny of achievement written all over him.

>>He was not even close to being an MMT'r. If you tried to explain MMT to him he would either laugh, roll his eyes, or humor you.

I'm confident he wouldn't need to have it "explained" to him. My guess is that he would agree that it more or less makes sense analytically, but he would want nothing at all to do with it politically. More than anything, I figure he'd think of it as unimportant.

>>I really am moderate right and the far right … makes me cringe just as much as the left does.

I don't think you understand the Left. I can see yer feeling that way about the Far Left, which has little representation in today's environment. But imo yer rejection of the "moderate Left," of which I am a part, stems from yer belief that we want things like socialized medicine and very large deficits and oppressive regulations and "big gubmint." In my view, none of that is true.

Liberalism is the philosophy that has engendered just about everything that is truly valuable and worth fighting for in modern scoiety. All that freedom and all those liberties that we cherish as Americans and as human beings grew out of liberal thought. Conservatism plays a critical role in the process I'm describing — it reminds us to slow down and think carefully before we act (if that's possible), and to hold onto the progress we've made. It's like the bank that protects our investments, but that currency was earned through the long march, the sometimes painful and bitter struggle to move forward, to bring a decent life to all mankind.

We need conservatives, but we need conservatives who recognize where the bright light of the future is coming from. In my judgement, you see that light; you speak about it often. But I think you need to open yer heart and yer mind to liberalism. You can trust us — I give you my personal and heartfelt guarantee.

 

[Moderate Right]

Was? Has something happened to him? Nah, I know what you mean — as a candidate. It can be awkward talking about politicians when they lose. I mean they aren't literally dead, but in a sense they are. So let's stand together for a few minutes at the coroner's table and then at his 2015-16 campaign grave and do a little autopsying and eulogising.

I'm sure you and I won't agree on the governor's intentions had he been elected. That's what allowed us both to support his candidacy.

I'm not giving Obama any pats on the back but he has brought deficits down from where they were so why couldn't Kasich?

People do get permanent handouts, and it often spans generations.

Kasich would not have been for income redistribution to the levels that you liberals want and he would not be for doubling the minimum wage. At best you might have got $10 out of him and that's on a good day.

I do understand the left. I am sympathetic to some of their causes but they go way overboard with their causes, such as wanting to take care of those who really don't want to work when they can and saying that freeloaders and cheaters are just a Republican myth. Unfortunately, almost all of liberal's solutions are horrible and most do more harm than good but they don't even see that when it happens. They are simplistic in their thoughts as they act on pure emotions rather than thinking things through, exactly like Trump and his enthusiastic supporters. Example: being anti-war to the tune of allowing Hitler to take over Europe because it has nothing to do with us. Same thing with ISIS. Trump does the exact same thing in reverse by wanting to ban all Muslims from entering the country just because of some bad apples. Another example: gun control. There is tons of evidence that gun control laws already in place do almost nothing to stop gun violence or terrorist attacks but the left's solution is more gun control. They always want to double down on things that are already proven not to work or even backfire.

My parents were poor. I was a poor Democratic liberal when I was younger and I have been in close contact with the poor for decades. Many of them are the cause of their own problems and don't want to pay the price to get ahead, they just want it handed to them, but liberals refuse to believe this. They believe that it is the fault of the rich. I remember working for minimum wage and wanting and waiting for the minimum wage to go up until getting more mature (changing parties, like Reagan did) and realizing that even if the minimum wage went up I would still be in the same boat and that if I really wanted to improve my life I was going to have to do it myself. Younger Americans in particular don't want to pay the price and want a good life NOW without having to climb any ladders in order to get there. That's why many of Bernie supporters are younger. Every generation has less and less patience and wants to climb fewer and fewer ladders to improve their lives. They just want it handed to them NOW. There is a sense of satisfaction and accomplishment in climbing ladders to improve your life and it makes us better people for it. I'm all for giving the poor tools to climb up out of their holes but I am totally against robbing from the rich and just giving it to the poor with nothing expected in return, just because of the mentality that the rich owe it to society. I was poor and now I own my own business. I have not forgotten the poor or what it was like to be there but I'm not going to give any of my hard earned money to bums that really don't want to work and just want to mooch of society. I have helped several people financially to help them get ahead or give them an opportunity but they are always people that deserve to be helped, not the moochers.

 

[mmi]

Obama … has brought deficits down from where they were so why couldn't Kasich?

All Obummer did was get it down from the very high trillion dollar plus level. That was accomplished by keeping spending flat while the economy recovered and so revenues did as well. He's also done some tax raising recently. The question I'd ask is how are ya gonna get it down significantly from where it is now. We can keep a lid on it if as long as the economy does OK, and it could be chewed down if things get significantly better, but that's a tall order. I don't see any opportunity for sizeable cuts that would help. Do you?

>>People do get permanent handouts, and it often spans generations.

Could you elaborate?

>>Kasich would not have been for income redistribution to the levels that you liberals want

What levels are those?

>>he would not be for doubling the minimum wage.

Neither am I, but yer correct that some on the Left are. Ya think it will happen?

>>wanting to take care of those who really don't want to work when they can

Who wants that? Can you be specific?

>>saying that freeloaders and cheaters are just a Republican myth.

I think we say that's it's exaggerated by the Right, not that it doesn't exist. There are freeloaders and cheaters in the private sector as well, right?

>>almost all of liberal's solutions are horrible and most do more harm than good but they don't even see that when it happens. They are simplistic in their thoughts as they act on pure emotions rather than thinking things through, exactly like Trump and his enthusiastic supporters.

Sounds like rhetoric. Ahh, an example is next.

>>being anti-war to the tune of allowing Hitler to take over Europe because it has nothing to do with us.

Whoa there. The Left wanted in on that fight early. Some went to Spain to fight before things really got out of hand. It was the Right that opposed our involvement, that fought against our support for the UK. They said we could "do business" with the Nazis. And they saw Hitler as someone who would eliminate the Soviet Union.

>>Same thing with ISIS.

In what sense? Obummer wanted to go after Assad, which may actually have been counterproductive in fighting ISIL, but the Republicans in Congress wouldn't support him. My thought is that it would have strengthened the democratic opposition and helped them fight ISIL.

More importantly, we withdrew our military forces from Iraq, which made things easier for ISIL to get off the ground, because Mr. Bush signed the SOFA mandating it. And you know the Left wasn't behind the invasion and incompetent occupation that created the problem.

>>There is tons of evidence that gun control laws already in place do almost nothing to stop gun violence or terrorist attacks but the left's solution is more gun control.

That's simply not true. What is this evidence? I agree that current laws don't do enough, but that's why we need to expand them. Should it have been legal for that nut in Orlando to load up the way he did, without any delay? Do you think automatic rifles should be so easily obtained? How would Little Bill Daggett have dealt with this mess?

A book, huh? So I guess that means you boys can read. So I guess that means you saw the signs outside o' town sayin' "surrender your firearms." But like you told young Andy here, you're not armed, are ya, Bob.​

>>They always want to double down on things that are already proven not to work or even backfire.

I disagree. Any other examples?

>>the poor … many of them are the cause of their own problems and don't want to pay the price to get ahead, they just want it handed to them

I feel you exaggerate this.

>>liberals … believe that it is the fault of the rich.

Nah, where do you get that?

>>Younger Americans in particular don't want to pay the price and want a good life NOW without having to climb any ladders in order to get there. That's why many of Bernie supporters are younger.

How do you know that?

>>I am totally against robbing from the rich and just giving it to the poor with nothing expected in return

Who supports that?

>>I'm not going to give any of my hard earned money to bums that really don't want to work

Who's asking you to?

 

[mmi]

not the moochers

When I was looking after my disabled elderly mom, a hideously unprofessional social worker, the local abuse coordinator for my state's Department of Elderly Affairs, went around telling people saying that I was "mooching" off my mom's $900/mo SS benefit. I was earning about that much in my struggling small business, and I was delivering uncompensated caregiver services that had a market value of about $30K/yr. My brothers, with all their money, never provided a nickel of support to the household where the woman who sacrificed so much for them was living on not much.

I always knew when someone had been talking to this DEA pig when they used the word "mooching." I got it from the cops in the town where my mom lived briefly in a lousy nursing home that we were manipulated into having her go to. "They have excellent physical therapy, and she'll get back on her feet in no time." Predictably, she was warehoused and got less PT than I was getting for her at home.

I had called the police after the nursing home told me their staff physician had declared her mentally incompetent and that they were therefore going to ignore my demand that she be discharged. (Three years later, a year before she died, one of the leading geriatric psychologists in the state asked me why I had even brought her to his office to be evaluated, saying that she was clearly mentally competent.) One of the cops that responded more or less pushed me up against a wall in the hallway and said something like, "What's all this about you mooching off yer mom's Social Security?"

I tell you this long and perhaps irrelevant story because I'd say it's easy to see people as moochers when they may well not be.

 

[Moderate Right]

.....

I can't reply to you for two reasons:

1. The last time I did I got hit with the character limit again and I will again this time too. Too much work for me to deal with.

2. You blend in with the far left liberals all the time, defend far left liberals and their thoughts and ideas all the time, and then when I comment on what liberals believe in you say that it isn't so, even though what they write is right there in black and white for you and all to see. If your thoughts, ideas, and solutions to problems aren't as far left liberal as the others then don't blend in with them and defend them all the time when they spew their garbage. To me you sound just like one of those far left nutjobs due to these reasons and then you turn around and say that you aren't. It would be easier to debate with you if you weren't constantly defending everything they say and then turn around and say that's not what you believe. I'm tired of banging my head up against a brick wall like this. I still have you on ignore but thought maybe we could have a little conversation on this topic in this thread despite it. I guess I was wrong.

Damn. Got hit with the character limit again just by posting this.

 

[mmi]

I got hit with the character limit again and I will again this time too. Too much work for me to deal with.

Did you just get a new computer and are wondering about some of the basics? Don't worry, although it can be done in numerous ways, it is very simple to delete text on a computer.

• The BackSpace Key
• The Delete Key
• Highlight and Delete

— [URL="http://www.wikihow.com/Delete-Text-on-a-Computer"]3 Ways to Delete Text on a Computer[/URL]​

I don't mean to offend you, but if we're going to have serious conversations, yer gonna have to do better than that.

>>You blend in with the far left liberals all the time, defend far left liberals and their thoughts and ideas all the time, and then when I comment on what liberals believe in you say that it isn't so, even though what they write is right there in black and white for you and all to see.

Any examples? I mean like a specific and direct reference? You seem quite convinced of this so it shouldn't be difficult.

>>'m tired of banging my head up against a brick wall like this.

I wouldn't want you doing that.

>>I still have you on ignore but thought maybe we could have a little conversation on this topic in this thread despite it. I guess I was wrong.

I think you may indeed have been wrong. I do hope you don't decide to hide behind this nonsense about me changing my views. I am open to changing them, but this stuff about me "blending in with [the far Left] and defending them all the time when they spew their garbage" is absurd. Who in this community is far Left anyway? I've seen a few socialists but, well, what exactly is yer freaking problem, if I can possibly ask such a thing in at least a semi-polite manner?

>>Got hit with the character limit again just by posting this.

Are you serious? Yer not just taunting me?

 

[Moderate Right]

Did you just get a new computer and are wondering about some of the basics? Don't worry, although it can be done in numerous ways, it is very simple to delete text on a computer.

• The BackSpace Key
• The Delete Key
• Highlight and Delete

— [URL="http://www.wikihow.com/Delete-Text-on-a-Computer"]3 Ways to Delete Text on a Computer[/URL]​

I don't mean to offend you, but if we're going to have serious conversations, yer gonna have to do better than that.

>>You blend in with the far left liberals all the time, defend far left liberals and their thoughts and ideas all the time, and then when I comment on what liberals believe in you say that it isn't so, even though what they write is right there in black and white for you and all to see.

Any examples? I mean like a specific and direct reference? You seem quite convinced of this so it shouldn't be difficult.

>>'m tired of banging my head up against a brick wall like this.

I wouldn't want you doing that.

>>I still have you on ignore but thought maybe we could have a little conversation on this topic in this thread despite it. I guess I was wrong.

I think you may indeed have been wrong. I do hope you don't decide to hide behind this nonsense about me changing my views. I am open to changing them, but this stuff about me "blending in with [the far Left] and defending them all the time when they spew their garbage" is absurd. Who in this community is far Left anyway? I've seen a few socialists but, well, what exactly is yer freaking problem, if I can possibly ask such a thing in at least a semi-polite manner?

>>Got hit with the character limit again just by posting this.

Are you serious? Yer not just taunting me?

I was serious, not just taunting you. That short post I had put me over the character limit due to the length of your post I quoted. This happens all the time with you, not only to me but several others have said so to. I don't have a new computer. Don't know where on Earth you got that but I get on the site a few times a day for short periods. I don't have time to do a bunch of editing to your posts in order to stay within the character limit (don't have to do it with anyone else here) or looking up links to prove something. If I say something I feel needs backing up I'll post a link but trying to prove something that is posted about numerous times here over and over again is a complete waste of my time. I didn't mean you keep changing your views. I meant you keep on defending those with strongly liberal views, blending in with them as one, and then when I repeat what liberals views are you turn around and say that's not how you feel. I simply don't have the time to play games researching a bunch of stuff that has been posted by liberals numerous times. I have a life. By the way, all of you guys are far left liberals. Just because there are some who are farther left doesn't mean you are centrists. I never claimed to be a centrist. I am "Moderate Right". Just because I'm not a far right wacko loony tune doesn't mean I'm a centrist.

 

[mmi]

I was serious, not just taunting you. That short post I had put me over the character limit due to the length of your post I quoted. This happens all the time with you, not only to me but several others have said so to. I don't have a new computer.

You find it difficult to delete text from a textbox? Really? And I'd say it's a few members, not several, only on the Right, and when I noted that, I was told that liberals don't read or respond to my posts because they just pass by them, knowing that I'm agreeing with them.

I will accept yer claim that yer not simply finding fault where there is none for some ideological reason. But how am I to understand that you can't highlight and delete?

>>I don't have time to do a bunch of editing to your posts in order to stay within the character limit

I can highlight and delete a block of text in about … three seconds, maybe two.

>>or looking up links to prove something.

Well, I can understand that. Sometimes evidence can be hard to find, and it's annoying to me at least on those occasions when I think it should be easy to find some number or set of numbers.

>>trying to prove something that is posted about numerous times here over and over again is a complete waste of my time.

When have I asked you to "prove something that is posted about numerous times"?

>>I meant you keep on defending those with strongly liberal views, blending in with them as one, and then when I repeat what liberals views are you turn around and say that's not how you feel.

In my experience, you seriously exaggerate or misrepresent liberal views. And I know I described myself as a "moderate liberal," but I'd also say I'm a "strong liberal." I wouldn't want to be a weak one. Yer not a weak conservative, are you? Yer just not extreme. And I don't see much extreme liberalism around here, but plenty of nutty reactionary BS, that's for sure.

>>I simply don't have the time to play games researching a bunch of stuff that has been posted by liberals numerous times.

Any examples?

>>I have a life.

As do I — being a pal to my coonhound friends. Sadly, my life on the diamond seems to have ended, barring some process that repairs my right hip. I guess that's about all the life I've had that's worth discussing.

>>all of you guys are far left liberals.

I see that as a telling comment, and I think it's sort of the problem yer having, if I can put it that way without sounding accusatory, when it comes to finding common ground. My read is that in yer heart yer someone we can work with, but you seem to be WAY overly suspicious about what liberals want to do. We want very big deficits and we don't care how high the national debt gets (ironic in that it's not liberal policies that caused all that debt to pile up, but rather RW SSE policies) and we want to provide endless handouts to low-income households (which aren't even available) and we want more gun laws when gun laws don't work but we can't see that (they do, we just need more of them) and so forth

>>Just because there are some who are farther left doesn't mean you are centrists.

No, but how are we "far Left"?

>>I never claimed to be a centrist. I am "Moderate Right".

Well, yer not ignorant and yer not a nut. I think yer perception of liberalism is distorted and, tbh, I think you accept too readily some RW ideas about poor people. But the important bottom line, imo, is that we agree that the poor need help with the tools that will bring them into the middle class. That's Kasichism. I think we should focus on that. You can wield yer sharp pencil and we'll push for spending in areas where we feel success has been demonstrated or looks promising.

>>Just because I'm not a far right wacko loony tune doesn't mean I'm a centrist.

Nothing wrong with being a centrist in practice. When it comes to cutting the deal, I'll move over to the center as far as I need to to get something rather than be left with nothing. Half a loaf? How about a slice if that's all that's available. Put together a dozen slices and you've got a decent-sized hunk o' bread.

 

[Senter]

By the way, all of you guys are far left liberals. Just because there are some who are farther left doesn't mean you are centrists.

You keep using the expression "far left liberal". But what is that? Can you provide some examples of what a "far left liberal" advocates that makes them "far left"?

 

[Moderate Right]

You keep using the expression "far left liberal". But what is that? Can you provide some examples of what a "far left liberal" advocates that makes them "far left"?

Being obsessed with the one percent, income inequality, and wanting income redistribution. Those who claim that the rich should pay there fair share of taxes while ignoring the fact that individual one percenters pay millions in taxes already while 43% pay absolutely zero. Those who are anti-business and treat all business as the enemy instead of being business friendly. Anyone wanting a $15 per hour minimum wage and a single payer healthcare system.

 

[Senter]

Being obsessed with the one percent, income inequality, and wanting income redistribution.

That's "far left"? Income inequality was a big concern about 90 years ago and it was resolved with positive results. And income redistribution? If a country has a system of taxation, it has "income redistribution". How "left" is that?

Those who claim that the rich should pay there fair share of taxes while ignoring the fact that individual one percenters pay millions in taxes already while 43% pay absolutely zero.

But "far left"? That is "progressive taxation" and has been the norm in the U.S. forever. "Far left" suggests something extreme, and so far there's nothing extreme here.

Those who are anti-business and treat all business as the enemy instead of being business friendly.

Ok, that would be extreme, and characteristic of about 0.01% of the population. Maybe as much as 0.1%. So in either case it would be negligible and like most cases of extreme views, not worth considering.

Anyone wanting a $15 per hour minimum wage and a single payer healthcare system.

The minimum wage has always been periodically adjusted. It has been neglected now for a while and should be somewhere around $10/hour if it had been kept up with inflation. And everyone but Obama seems to know that when you go into a negotiation you should first ask for the sky, and then settle for what you really wanted in the first place, like $10/hour. And single-payer healthcare? Medicare has been around for a long time and was signed into law by a guy who boasted that he saved capitalism. Is that really "extreme"? I think you have "opinions"... extreme "opinions".

 

[mmi]

individual one percenters pay millions in taxes already while 43% pay absolutely zero.

How many of the top one percent do you think pay "millions in taxes"? The average income for that group is $1.7 million, and they pay an average of $413K in federal taxes annually.

And that's just FIT. Last year, the bottom quintile paid 19.2% of its income in federal, state, and local taxes, while the top one percent paid 32.6%.

everyone but Obama seems to know that when you go into a negotiation you should first ask for the sky, and then settle for what you really wanted in the first place, like $10/hour.

These things aren't one-on-one negotiations. Presidents need to sell their ideas to the public and get its support to create pressure on the other side in Congress.

>>Medicare has been around for a long time and was signed into law by a guy who boasted that he saved capitalism.

You may be thinking of Social Security. Johnson signed the Medicare bill.



LBJ did save a few hundred Jews from Hitler's death camps, and made the lives of many American blacks and Hispanics a lot better than they were before. Think about that the next time you have a glass of grapefruit juice.

 

[Moderate Right]

That's "far left"? Income inequality was a big concern about 90 years ago and it was resolved with positive results. And income redistribution? If a country has a system of taxation, it has "income redistribution". How "left" is that?



But "far left"? That is "progressive taxation" and has been the norm in the U.S. forever. "Far left" suggests something extreme, and so far there's nothing extreme here.



Ok, that would be extreme, and characteristic of about 0.01% of the population. Maybe as much as 0.1%. So in either case it would be negligible and like most cases of extreme views, not worth considering.



The minimum wage has always been periodically adjusted. It has been neglected now for a while and should be somewhere around $10/hour if it had been kept up with inflation. And everyone but Obama seems to know that when you go into a negotiation you should first ask for the sky, and then settle for what you really wanted in the first place, like $10/hour. And single-payer healthcare? Medicare has been around for a long time and was signed into law by a guy who boasted that he saved capitalism. Is that really "extreme"? I think you have "opinions"... extreme "opinions".

You can weasel out of it all you want but liberal ideas do not make someone a centrist. That's the problem with liberals. They deny being liberals. I don't claim to be a centrist even though I am not far right. I still have conservative values.

 

[Senter]

You can weasel out of it all you want but liberal ideas do not make someone a centrist. That's the problem with liberals. They deny being liberals. I don't claim to be a centrist even though I am not far right. I still have conservative values.

Fine. Describe the world to suit your tastes, but you said "far left" and what you identified was not "far" but just common "left".

You say we deny being liberals. That's because the right has redefined "liberal" to mean "that which is ignorant and ugly" to put it simply. Your definition of "liberal" is at odds with the dictionary definition. I don't claim to be your definition of "liberal". I could play that same game with righties but I don't. Want to challenge this? Go ahead and list some "liberal" positions and see if I will claim them or argue against them.

So it still stands that your "far left" (which isn't a liberal) isn't so far. It's mainstream left. I suspect you don't really know what "far left" would be.

 

[Moderate Right]

Fine. Describe the world to suit your tastes, but you said "far left" and what you identified was not "far" but just common "left".

You say we deny being liberals. That's because the right has redefined "liberal" to mean "that which is ignorant and ugly" to put it simply. Your definition of "liberal" is at odds with the dictionary definition. I don't claim to be your definition of "liberal". I could play that same game with righties but I don't. Want to challenge this? Go ahead and list some "liberal" positions and see if I will claim them or argue against them.

So it still stands that your "far left" (which isn't a liberal) isn't so far. It's mainstream left. I suspect you don't really know what "far left" would be.

I agree that everyone has their own definitions but, as I said, just because I am not a far right wing nutjob does not make me a centrist, just as the opposite is true. Just because someone is not as far left as Bernie Sanders doesn't mean they aren't "far left". Liberals is what I refer to, no matter what other terminology you want to call them. Maybe instead of calling them far left I should just refer to them as liberals. Obama and Hillary are both farther left then just plain left of center. They are liberals, even if they aren't as liberal as Bernie.

 

[Senter]

... Just because someone is not as far left as Bernie Sanders doesn't mean they aren't "far left".

What is "far left" about Bernie's positions? He stands for correcting what's wrong by actually fixing it. He advocates what has been U.S. policy long ago.

"Far left" is communism. And few there be who advocate it today. Bernie is not "far left". He is left, like FDR was. I agree to that.

 

[mmi]

That's the problem with liberals. They deny being liberals.

It's a shame that you can't see the mental gymnastics yer going through to hold onto yer negative attitude towards liberalism. "Liberals deny being liberals." Well, I sure don't. So what are you talking about?

Oh that's right, I "blend in with the far left liberals all the time" and "constantly defend everything they say and then turn around and say that's not what I believe." As a result, yer "tired of banging my head up against a brick wall."

Well, the wall is inside yer head. It simply must be true that liberals are dangerously deceptive, that they try to "weasel out" of their views. I'm thinking there may be nothing I can do to help you with this.

>>I don't claim to be a centrist even though I am not far right. I still have conservative values.

I'm happy to be a centrist when it's required to make progress. I am not far Left. I still have liberal values, and I always will.

 

[Moderate Right]

What is "far left" about Bernie's positions? He stands for correcting what's wrong by actually fixing it. He advocates what has been U.S. policy long ago.

"Far left" is communism. And few there be who advocate it today. Bernie is not "far left". He is left, like FDR was. I agree to that.

That's ridiculous. I'm talking about Democrats and Republicans, not communism. Bernie is a far left Democrat and Obama and Hillary aren't far behind. You can't claim to not be far left just because you're not a communist.

 

[James972]

Bernie is a far left Democrat .

more accurately he's a self-described socialist. A socialist is someone who accepts an intermediate point on the way to communism. Never forget that our liberals spied for Stalin and gave him the bomb when he was slowly starving 60 million to death. Sanders honeymooned in the USSR. What does that teach you?

 

[James972]

I still have liberal values, and I always will.

if so why be so afraid to tell us what your most significant liberal view is. What do you learn from your fear?

 

[James972]

He [Sanders] stands for correcting what's wrong by actually fixing it.

actually we all stand for that, obviously!!!!! Sanders is a commie and that killed 120 million through slow starvation so its doubtful Sanders will correct anything!!

 

[mmi]

I still have liberal values, and I always will.

if so why be so afraid to tell us what your most significant liberal view is.

So "afraid"? When was I ever asked?

This seems to be part of some inane pattern to yer posts — claiming that yer opponents are "afraid." I don't see how it accomplishes anything other than further revealing the worthless content of yer comments.

My "most significant liberal view"? Hard t' say. Maybe "liberty and justice for all." It's kind of a shame that so many in the country work so hard to oppose that view.

>>What do you learn from your fear?

Learn? Can't think of anything. But of course it's another meaningless question, so who cares?

 

[James972]

My "most significant liberal view"? Hard t' say. Maybe "liberty and justice for all."

so in your world conservatives and libertarians are opposed to liberty and justice???? See how foolish that is?