What Were We Fighting For?

[Synthaholic]

What deflection? That's a natural extension of the original point. Are you going to give us something other than your word about what liberals did or didn't do?

Yes, I gave you a list of the Liberal Senators. None of them voted for the Iraq War.

So is it safe to assume that your position is that anybody who voted for the Iraq war is disqualified from being a liberal?

You must do yoga, because you sure can twist!

Disqualified? No. Strange choice of words. It's just a fact that the Liberals did not vote for it, while centrist, corporate, and conservative Democrats did.

I don't know why you are having such a difficult time understanding that there is a Liberal wing of the Democratic Party, just as there is a teabagger wing of the Republican Party.

Here's the Budget compromise that ended the Tea Party Shutdown in November:

What distinguishes the Republican yes votes from the Republican no votes?

 

[Synthaholic]

You answered it by saying the exact same thing you said before. In other words, you didn't.

So wouldn't that make you a leftwing "wingnut," since you're essentially calling Hillary a DINO? Do you want to start a Liberal Party?

Hillary isn't a DINO, she's a Democrat. Not all Democrats are Liberals.

Just as not all Republicans are conservatives.

Why can't you grasp this?

I can grasp it, and have no problem with that assertion. If Hillary isn't a liberal, however, what is she?

She's a centrist Democrat who is progressive on a few social issues, like Gays and civil rights, while being a hawk on foreign policy and matters of the military, a corporatist on trade agreements and Wall Street, and a conservative on issues like marijuana legalization and the 2nd Amendment. She isn't even a staunch supporter of reproductive rights, when you look at her record.

 

[Synthaholic]

Hillary Clinton is a self-serving corporate tool. The correct term for her is "Neo-Liberal" which means, "Do whatever you can to make more money for yourself."

Hillary Clinton is not Progressive. Progressive does not mean liberal, and liberal does not mean Democrat. Hillary Clinton is a neo-liberal Democrat just like neo-liberal Republicans, and they work for their corporate financiers, not the People of the United States.

Now this is the type of explanation I've been trying to get out of Synth and Pogo regarding their position.

Oh, you've been trying to get me to insult her?

 

[LoneLaugher]

^^ which is why Elizabeth Warren will play the game and help nudge her to the left a bit^^

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Yes, I gave you a list of the Liberal Senators. None of them voted for the Iraq War.

So is it safe to assume that your position is that anybody who voted for the Iraq war is disqualified from being a liberal?

You must do yoga, because you sure can twist!

Disqualified? No. Strange choice of words. It's just a fact that the Liberals did not vote for it, while centrist, corporate, and conservative Democrats did.

I don't know why you are having such a difficult time understanding that there is a Liberal wing of the Democratic Party, just as there is a teabagger wing of the Republican Party.

Here's the Budget compromise that ended the Tea Party Shutdown in November:

What distinguishes the Republican yes votes from the Republican no votes?

There's no twisting, I'm merely asking you to clarify your comments. Does voting "Yes" to the Iraq war disqualify somebody from being a liberal? I'm merely trying to understand your classifications because I think most people would classify Hillary Clinton as a liberal. I can understand nuance, I'm merely asking you to explain yours so that I can understand your previous assertions. I don't think that's unreasonable.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Hillary isn't a DINO, she's a Democrat. Not all Democrats are Liberals.

Just as not all Republicans are conservatives.

Why can't you grasp this?

I can grasp it, and have no problem with that assertion. If Hillary isn't a liberal, however, what is she?

She's a centrist Democrat who is progressive on a few social issues, like Gays and civil rights, while being a hawk on foreign policy and matters of the military, a corporatist on trade agreements and Wall Street, and a conservative on issues like marijuana legalization and the 2nd Amendment. She isn't even a staunch supporter of reproductive rights, when you look at her record.

There we go. That's all I was asking you to do. Now earlier you said:

Liberals didn't vote for the Iraq War.

Now, I'll ask again, does voting for the Iraq war disqualify somebody from being a liberal, or is it merely a coincidence that no liberals voted for it?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Hillary Clinton is a self-serving corporate tool. The correct term for her is "Neo-Liberal" which means, "Do whatever you can to make more money for yourself."

Hillary Clinton is not Progressive. Progressive does not mean liberal, and liberal does not mean Democrat. Hillary Clinton is a neo-liberal Democrat just like neo-liberal Republicans, and they work for their corporate financiers, not the People of the United States.

Now this is the type of explanation I've been trying to get out of Synth and Pogo regarding their position.

Oh, you've been trying to get me to insult her?

No, I said that was the type of explanation I was looking for, not necessarily the exact same explanation. Your previous post was an example of the same type, but not the same content.

 

[whitehall]

About 36% of democrats voted for American Troops to enforce about a hundred UN sanctions against Iraq. President Bush gave Saddam almost a year to comply with the restrictions but Saddam called America's bluff and he paid for it by swinging from a noose. Democrats saw a chance to make political points and they extended the mission by undermining the Military every way they could. Republicans didn't pay 10 grand for a full page ad in the NY Times calling the US commander "betray-us". It was a democrat party initiative. The democrat senate majority leader tried to influence the morale of the Troops when he told them "the war is lost" just before the Troop Surge. Cindy Sheehan's nut case anti-war demonstrators were all over the place making front page headlines with insults and filth and they suddenly disappeared when a democrat was elected.

 

[Synthaholic]

^^ which is why Elizabeth Warren will play the game and help nudge her to the left a bit^^

I don't think so. She's not interested.

 

[LoneLaugher]

^^ which is why Elizabeth Warren will play the game and help nudge her to the left a bit^^

I don't think so. She's not interested.

I don't think she will run....but she will push.

 

[Synthaholic]

So is it safe to assume that your position is that anybody who voted for the Iraq war is disqualified from being a liberal?

You must do yoga, because you sure can twist!

Disqualified? No. Strange choice of words. It's just a fact that the Liberals did not vote for it, while centrist, corporate, and conservative Democrats did.

I don't know why you are having such a difficult time understanding that there is a Liberal wing of the Democratic Party, just as there is a teabagger wing of the Republican Party.

Here's the Budget compromise that ended the Tea Party Shutdown in November:

What distinguishes the Republican yes votes from the Republican no votes?

There's no twisting, I'm merely asking you to clarify your comments. Does voting "Yes" to the Iraq war disqualify somebody from being a liberal? I'm merely trying to understand your classifications because I think most people would classify Hillary Clinton as a liberal. I can understand nuance, I'm merely asking you to explain yours so that I can understand your previous assertions. I don't think that's unreasonable.

Incorrect.

Most people who listen to conservative media would classify Hillary Clinton as a Liberal.

Most Liberals would not. Same for Bill.

It's - of course - in the interests of simpleton thinkers like Rush and Sean to classify anyone who isn't a conservative as a Liberal. It's a catch-all insult for the extreme fringe.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

You must do yoga, because you sure can twist!

Disqualified? No. Strange choice of words. It's just a fact that the Liberals did not vote for it, while centrist, corporate, and conservative Democrats did.

I don't know why you are having such a difficult time understanding that there is a Liberal wing of the Democratic Party, just as there is a teabagger wing of the Republican Party.

Here's the Budget compromise that ended the Tea Party Shutdown in November:

What distinguishes the Republican yes votes from the Republican no votes?

There's no twisting, I'm merely asking you to clarify your comments. Does voting "Yes" to the Iraq war disqualify somebody from being a liberal? I'm merely trying to understand your classifications because I think most people would classify Hillary Clinton as a liberal. I can understand nuance, I'm merely asking you to explain yours so that I can understand your previous assertions. I don't think that's unreasonable.

Incorrect.

Most people who listen to conservative media would classify Hillary Clinton as a Liberal.

Most Liberals would not. Same for Bill.

It's - of course - in the interests of simpleton thinkers like Rush and Sean to classify anyone who isn't a conservative as a Liberal. It's a catch-all insult for the extreme fringe.

I think if a scientific poll was conducted asking simply, "Do you believe Hillary Clinton is a liberal," most Americans would answer in the affirmative.

 

[Synthaholic]

I can grasp it, and have no problem with that assertion. If Hillary isn't a liberal, however, what is she?

She's a centrist Democrat who is progressive on a few social issues, like Gays and civil rights, while being a hawk on foreign policy and matters of the military, a corporatist on trade agreements and Wall Street, and a conservative on issues like marijuana legalization and the 2nd Amendment. She isn't even a staunch supporter of reproductive rights, when you look at her record.

There we go. That's all I was asking you to do. Now earlier you said:

Liberals didn't vote for the Iraq War.

Now, I'll ask again, does voting for the Iraq war disqualify somebody from being a liberal, or is it merely a coincidence that no liberals voted for it?

Neither.

It's just a fact that going to war based on flimsy evidence is not a Liberal tendency. Going to war, period, is not a Liberal tendency. Liberals value diplomacy over military might.

I feel like I'm explaining this to someone who just landed here on earth.

 

[Synthaholic]

About 36% of democrats voted for American Troops to enforce about a hundred UN sanctions against Iraq. President Bush gave Saddam almost a year to comply with the restrictions but Saddam called America's bluff and he paid for it by swinging from a noose.

False.

 

[Synthaholic]

^^ which is why Elizabeth Warren will play the game and help nudge her to the left a bit^^

I don't think so. She's not interested.

I don't think she will run....but she will push.

I agree. So will Brian Schweitzer, who may actually run. So will Bernie Sanders, but his voice is a lone one, in the wilderness.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

She's a centrist Democrat who is progressive on a few social issues, like Gays and civil rights, while being a hawk on foreign policy and matters of the military, a corporatist on trade agreements and Wall Street, and a conservative on issues like marijuana legalization and the 2nd Amendment. She isn't even a staunch supporter of reproductive rights, when you look at her record.

There we go. That's all I was asking you to do. Now earlier you said:

Liberals didn't vote for the Iraq War.

Now, I'll ask again, does voting for the Iraq war disqualify somebody from being a liberal, or is it merely a coincidence that no liberals voted for it?

Neither.

It's just a fact that going to war based on flimsy evidence is not a Liberal tendency. Going to war, period, is not a Liberal tendency. Liberals value diplomacy over military might.

I feel like I'm explaining this to someone who just landed here on earth.

So would you say then that Woodrow Wilson and FDR were not liberals? How about Harry Truman? I won't insult you and ask whether you think LBJ was.

 

[Synthaholic]

There's no twisting, I'm merely asking you to clarify your comments. Does voting "Yes" to the Iraq war disqualify somebody from being a liberal? I'm merely trying to understand your classifications because I think most people would classify Hillary Clinton as a liberal. I can understand nuance, I'm merely asking you to explain yours so that I can understand your previous assertions. I don't think that's unreasonable.

Incorrect.

Most people who listen to conservative media would classify Hillary Clinton as a Liberal.

Most Liberals would not. Same for Bill.

It's - of course - in the interests of simpleton thinkers like Rush and Sean to classify anyone who isn't a conservative as a Liberal. It's a catch-all insult for the extreme fringe.

I think if a scientific poll was conducted asking simply, "Do you believe Hillary Clinton is a liberal," most Americans would answer in the affirmative.

Most Americans can't tell you who the Majority Leader is in the Senate. Or who the Speaker is. A good percentage couldn't name the VP.

Americans are politically ignorant, by choice.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Incorrect.

Most people who listen to conservative media would classify Hillary Clinton as a Liberal.

Most Liberals would not. Same for Bill.

It's - of course - in the interests of simpleton thinkers like Rush and Sean to classify anyone who isn't a conservative as a Liberal. It's a catch-all insult for the extreme fringe.

I think if a scientific poll was conducted asking simply, "Do you believe Hillary Clinton is a liberal," most Americans would answer in the affirmative.

Most Americans can't tell you who the Majority Leader is in the Senate. Or who the Speaker is. A good percentage couldn't name the VP.

Americans are politically ignorant, by choice.

That doesn't disprove what I said.

 

[whitehall]

Every Military adventure in the bloody 20th century happened during a liberal democrat administration. Academic professor Woodie Wilson told Americans that he would never send Americans to fight in a foreign war and then he had a stroke and his wife apparently sent Americans to bail out France from the usual threat of the Hun invader. We lost about 100,000 Troops. FDR apparently didn't have a clue about foreign policy or National defense. We lost about 500,000 Troops in a war fraught with mistakes, intelligence failures and the wanton murder of civilians. Harry Truman wasn't the smartest president and he was blindsided just when the little timid bean counter former senator was downsizing the Military. His mistakes cost 50,000 American Troops in three years in Korea and we ended up the same place we started. LBJ thought he had a better idea and he rigged the rules so that Americans could win every battle in Vietnam and still lose the war. All in all it seems that George W. Bush's Military adventure in Iraq was a profound victory and democrats just couldn't let the perception stand.

 

[Synthaholic]

There we go. That's all I was asking you to do. Now earlier you said:



Now, I'll ask again, does voting for the Iraq war disqualify somebody from being a liberal, or is it merely a coincidence that no liberals voted for it?

Neither.

It's just a fact that going to war based on flimsy evidence is not a Liberal tendency. Going to war, period, is not a Liberal tendency. Liberals value diplomacy over military might.

I feel like I'm explaining this to someone who just landed here on earth.

So would you say then that Woodrow Wilson and FDR were not liberals? How about Harry Truman? I won't insult you and ask whether you think LBJ was.

American Liberals didn't start WWI or WWII. But they sure as hell finished them.