Erollisi Marr - The Nameless

Go Back   Erollisi Marr - The Nameless > NON EQ Stuff (Real life, other games, etc.) > Steam Vent


Reply
 
Add/Share Add/Share Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-17-2004, 12:43 PM   #1
Lurikeen
Freaky
 
Lurikeen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 17,873
Default Question about flip-flopping

Republicans have claimed that Kerry's voting record in congress proves he is the most liberal of all Senators. Right?

Well, how can Kerry be on both sides of all issues (flip-flopper) if he is the most liberal of those in the senate? If he was a flip-flopper wouldn't that mean he isn't the most liberal, but rather a moderate?
__________________
"All I said was... that bit of halibut is good enough for Jehovah." óMonty Python's "Life of Brian"
Lurikeen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2004, 12:45 PM   #2
LairdRagna
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: New York
Posts: 1,308
No, his reputation is saying one thing and voting another... or for trying to weasel his way out of taking responsibility for his votes. His voting record is clear, what is laughable is his explanations of how he votes as he tries to appeal to both sides.

Cute, and nice try, but your premise is fundamentally flawed my friend.
LairdRagna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2004, 12:54 PM   #3
Lurikeen
Freaky
 
Lurikeen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 17,873
His voting record is clear? So did he flip-flop on his votes, or is he the most liberal of all senators? You can't be consistent and have it both ways. If he is the "most liberal" then he certainly can't be "flip-flopping".
__________________
"All I said was... that bit of halibut is good enough for Jehovah." óMonty Python's "Life of Brian"
Lurikeen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2004, 01:02 PM   #4
LairdRagna
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: New York
Posts: 1,308
You raise an excellent point... his votes are consistently liberal and his public statements are all over the place depending on his audience. So that makes him less a flip flop and more a pathological liar and opportunist... Thanks for helping me clear that up Lurikeen.
LairdRagna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2004, 01:08 PM   #5
Lurikeen
Freaky
 
Lurikeen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 17,873
LOL, Laird are so naieve to think that any Senator is going to publicly take a stance against one of their own votes unless they can clearly point out where they think they had been mistaken in the past? Yeah, that will get them re-elected real fast.

Besides, I don't see Kerry's statements "all over the place" depending upon audience. What I do see is spin masters taking statements out of context and lieing to the American people about what has been said by Kerry and tossing out little soundbites.
__________________
"All I said was... that bit of halibut is good enough for Jehovah." óMonty Python's "Life of Brian"
Lurikeen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2004, 02:16 PM   #6
Rheaton
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 6,366
Originally Posted by Lurikeen
Republicans have claimed that Kerry's voting record in congress proves he is the most liberal of all Senators. Right?

Well, how can Kerry be on both sides of all issues (flip-flopper) if he is the most liberal of those in the senate? If he was a flip-flopper wouldn't that mean he isn't the most liberal, but rather a moderate?
Because this is the very nature of a liberal. A liberal goes with the "feel" and the emotion of the issue...which can change daily.
__________________
"But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned." (1st Corinthians 2:14)
:9
Rheaton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2004, 05:03 PM   #7
Kaltana
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 65
Originally Posted by Rheaton
Because this is the very nature of a liberal. A liberal goes with the "feel" and the emotion of the issue...which can change daily.
Oy...this is the kind of thing that really irritates people who consider themselves liberal. Would you like me to respond that the very nature of a conservative is to be averse to any change whatsoever and to staunchly defend the status quo, regardless of what that status quo might be? See how silly that was?

Frankly, yes, Kerry does play toward the middle. That's what politicians who want to get re-elected do. Bush does it too - it was most notable in his 2000 campaign. I don't think most people realized, based on his campaign at the time, just how socially and financially conservative his policies would be. (I know I certainly didn't.) Frankly, this is one of the reasons I dislike politics and don't trust politicians in general. What they say often has little relevance to what they actually think or plan to do, and I certainly never trust any excuses or explanations made after the fact (this goes for both "sides," by the way). I only feel that I can judge them based on what they've actually done in terms of policies made and votes cast, this kind of thing. Everything else is all too often just meaningless publicity.

Khalynn
Kaltana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2004, 05:51 PM   #8
bumbleroot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 7,756
Because this is the very nature of a liberal. A liberal goes with the "feel" and the emotion of the issue...which can change daily.
This shows that your view of what liberalism is is tainted. This is the very essence of stereotyping.
Have you seen my view on the war change? NO
Can you give examples of us libs on these boards being all over the place on our issues? We are staunchly opposed to a lot of things you guys are in favor of. So if we are changing you would be as well.
The only reason you said this is because you have been told that this is what a liberal is. It is not. Why don't you check the party platforms.


his votes are consistently liberal and his public statements are all over the place depending on his audience
His votes are not consistently liberal. His votes on social issues tend to be liberal. The votes the Republicans have used to say he is weak on the military are the same votes that many of them have voted against as well. He has always been a supporter of strong militaries and weapon systems that are sensible and not pork. He has always been against pork. There was a day when this was a conservative value but not anymore. He is a fiscal conservative and always has been one.
As far as his statements being all over the board. They have not been. He has been consistent. The RNC etc. takes his words out of context and paint him this way for political purposes. But you they know you cons are lazy and will not look up the facts so they feed them to you out of context. In fact, the very statement "I was for this bill before I was against it" is the very opposite stance that Bush took on the same bill. Bush threatened to veto the spending bill if it did not include grants instead of loans. He was against it at first and then was for it. Kerry was for it if it included loans instead of grants. If you can remember, the bill was originally composed of loans instead of grants (you can probably find a discussion on that on these boards). Once we gave grants to Iraq, Kerry opposed it. He was what we call FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE.

Last edited by bumbleroot; 08-17-2004 at 05:57 PM.
bumbleroot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2004, 06:21 PM   #9
Rheaton
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 6,366
Originally Posted by Kaltana
Oy...this is the kind of thing that really irritates people who consider themselves liberal. Would you like me to respond that the very nature of a conservative is to be averse to any change whatsoever and to staunchly defend the status quo, regardless of what that status quo might be? See how silly that was?
Honestly, Kal, your right. I feel that most conservatives feel they are answering to a "higher moral authority" most of the time and this is why they are "staunch".. or hard-headed. I think a "common liberal" relies on the current mood of the populace. Anyway... your right. Both sides try to pander to the other a little, but when pressed into a corner you either get a solid conservative yes or no, a solid liberal yes or no... or a Kerry type "yes and no".
__________________
"But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned." (1st Corinthians 2:14)
:9
Rheaton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2004, 06:59 PM   #10
bumbleroot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 7,756
I think a "common liberal" relies on the current mood of the populace. Anyway... your right. Both sides try to pander to the other a little,
You are so out of touch. Both sides don't try to pander. Neither side does. Both sides try to move towards the middle. The right however feels it has been emboldened and doesn't need to move to the middle. They forget they never had a mandate.
As for a liberal relying upon the mood. It was on these boards that you cons claimed America is primarily conservative or that the Dem party is a dieing party. This goes against your very point. The truth is that currently what is considered by you cons to be liberal is not even liberal, it is moderate. You guys are just so far to the right you can't see it. In fact this administration has been repeatedly called the farthest right of all administrations and you cons have followed it to a fault.
bumbleroot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2004, 07:27 PM   #11
Zolspaz
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 619
Originally Posted by bumbleroot
You are so out of touch. Both sides don't try to pander. Neither side does. Both sides try to move towards the middle.

I would call that pandering, Bumbleroot. But I would like to correct Rheaton on
the majority of panderer's on either side. The left panders only to take power
while
the right sticks with a goal and stay's the course, while making limited changes
that both sides can agree with for an ultimate goal for the betterment of America and society as a whole. Including lowering Taxes btw..


The right however feels it has been emboldened and doesn't need to move to the middle. They forget they never had a mandate.

As I emphasized above, what's best for our nation is what comes first. Not to gain
power, or hold power. Trust me, many die hard repubs are angry at Bush.
And Bush isn't a staunch conservative like Reagan was. And not closer too moderate either IMO.


As for a liberal relying upon the mood. It was on these boards that you cons claimed America is primarily conservative or that the Dem party is a dieing party. This goes against your very point. The truth is that currently what is considered by you cons to be liberal is not even liberal, it is moderate. You guys are just so far to the right you can't see it. In fact this administration has been repeatedly called the farthest right of all administrations and you cons have followed it to a fault.
Wrong again Bumbleroot. With respect to your opinions, what you think about
your party is incorrect. The far-Leftist-radicals have taken over the Democratic party.
You will understand when the election draws nearer. Personally I miss the old Democrats.
They cared more about America then, than now. Now it's all about power. Sad really.



God Bless America
Zol.
Zolspaz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2004, 08:01 PM   #12
Rheaton
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 6,366
Originally Posted by bumbleroot
The right however feels it has been emboldened and doesn't need to move to the middle.
So wait a second.. You are saying we have the dems working the left and middle and the repubs really only working the right...and in 2000 it was virtually 50/50?
__________________
"But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned." (1st Corinthians 2:14)
:9
Rheaton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2004, 08:04 PM   #13
bumbleroot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 7,756
Not all Repubs are on the right. Rockefeller, Kemp, Dole type Republicans are more moderate. This admin and its followers are far right.
bumbleroot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2004, 08:09 PM   #14
Rheaton
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 6,366
Originally Posted by bumbleroot
Not all Repubs are on the right. Rockefeller, Kemp, Dole type Republicans are more moderate. This admin and its followers are far right.
WTF does 3 people have to do with this? You said there is no "mandate", and while it could be debated on how many it takes to receive a mandate, by what you suggested, we are 50% "right" and 50% left plus middle. And with the polls still stifting back and forth, you are still suggesting that the "followers" of this admin make up 50%+ of the American voters. Why pander to the left and middle?
__________________
"But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned." (1st Corinthians 2:14)
:9
Rheaton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2004, 09:35 AM   #15
Kaltana
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 65
Originally Posted by Zolspaz
The left panders only to take power while the right sticks with a goal and stay's the course, while making limited changes that both sides can agree with for an ultimate goal for the betterment of America and society as a whole.
Okay, this is the first and last time I will ever say anything to Zolspaz, because I can already see that there is nothing I have to say that he will listen to. My friend, there are people on these boards that I trust to see reason and to not let themselves be blinded by the propaganda of their parties, and whose posts I consider seriously and give some thought to, even if I don't agree with them. You, unfortunately, are not one of them, and this particular post just serves to illustrate that admirably. If you truly believe that all liberals only want power and all conservatives only have the "betterment of America" at heart, then I honestly pity you.

Khalynn, who knows that Zolspaz doesn't really care what she thinks of him but felt she wanted to say something anyway because hey, why not?
Kaltana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2004, 09:44 AM   #16
Bludysky
Professional Twitch B*tch
 
Bludysky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 616
^
|
|



Couldn't have said it any better.
__________________
Attachment 171

"Many a man's reputation would not know his character if they met on the street."
- Elbert Hubbard
Bludysky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2004, 05:08 PM   #17
Zolspaz
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 619
Originally Posted by Kaltana
If you truly believe that all liberals only want power and all conservatives only have the "betterment of America" at heart, then I honestly pity you.
Please don't pity me, pity the Dem's.



Z..
Zolspaz is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:01 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.