Why Conservatives Should Vote for Kerry

Fred J. McCall ) wrote:
: "Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

: :
: :"Rand Simberg" wrote in message
: .. .
: : On Thu, 28 Oct 2004 04:21:04 GMT, in a place far, far away, Fred J.
: : McCall made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
: : such a way as to indicate that:
: :
: ::If you think being a conservative means voting for big government
: ::entitlement programs for every special interest group, a complicated
: ::tax code, trade barriers and concessions to big labor... I supose then
: ::you'd be right.
: :
: :Well, give that last paragraph of yours, what is it you think KERRY
: :offers again?
: :
: : Kerry offers a presidency that a Republican congress won't roll over
: : for. It's not that Kerry has any better ideas (almost all of them are
: : worse), but with a Republican congress, he won't be able to implement
: : them. Unfortunately, he doesn't seem to understand that we are war,
: : or with whom, so it's not sufficient reason to install him.
: :
: :Bingo! At least somebody understands.

: But a philosophy of "vote for gridlock no matter who the idiot is"
: often gives you an idiot like Clinton, who is willing to compromise on
: all the wrong issues and stands firm on all the wrong issues.

Yet Clinton was one of the better presidents we have had as of late.

And he got into power because Perot (anti gridlock). THERE is the irony!

Eric

: --
: "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
: territory."
: --G. Behn

"Eric Chomko" wrote in message
...

: The US national parks predate modern liberalism.

So?


So they are not a product of liberalism as it is understood today.


:
: Yellowstone was the first
: National Park, established in 1872. The Republicans were in power.

Teddy Rooselevlt was a liberal. He left the Republican Party and help form
the Bull Moose Party.


You're confusing modern liberalism with classic liberalism. They are polar
opposites.



The Republican Party you want to ignore is the one in which Harding was
president.


I thought the subject was conservatives?

"Eric Chomko" wrote in message
...

: It's a loser. While a Republican Congress can keep Kerry from driving
up
: spending it cannot force him to effectively prosecute the war against
: terrorists.

Like Bush has done anything great WRT terrorism.


He went to war to fight it.



9/11 happened on Bush's watch!


Does that make him responsible for it? How many terrorist attacks have
there been on US soil since 9/11? Was Clinton responsible for the first
terrorist attack on the WTC?



There is no proof that 9/11 would have happened while Gore was
president. None!


Nope, there certainly isn't. Nor is there any proof that it wouldn't have
happened while Gore was president.



You "repsonsibility party" types ought to try it some time.


We do. Always.

Scott M. Kozel ) wrote:
: h (Rand Simberg) wrote:
:
: "Tamas Feher" made
:
: gives you an idiot like Clinton
:
: What's your problem with Clinton? The USA was in much better shape by
: the time he left the Oral Office. The Clinton-Gore decade was a golden
: era for America. He will be in history as a great President. He created
: a truly 21st century USA, which GWB-Cheney-Rumsfeldmarsall sorrowfully
: rolled back to 1984.
:
: You're living in a fantasy land. His administration left us with a
: recession as a result of the popping of the dot.com bubble, and laid
: the groundwork for the attacks of September 11. That will be his legacy.

: The 1990s in the U.S. were as good economically as they were because of
: the "peace dividend" that resulted from the 1991 end of the Cold War,
: and it was presidents Ronald Reagan and GHW Bush that pushed the
: policies that defeated the Soviet Union.

That defeat created the modern terrorist movement. I have still yet to see
any spoils of that "victory".

: Clinton inherited that legacy, and himself did little more than party.

Which he still does better than any of the Republicans.

Eric

: --
: Scott M. Kozel Highway and Transportation History Websites
: Virginia/Maryland/Washington, D.C. http://www.roadstothefuture.com
: Philadelphia and Delaware Valley http://www.pennways.com

"Eric Chomko" wrote in message
...

: What is obvious is that you don't understand socialism, Republicans, or
US
: politics. I doubt you ever will.

And based upon your premise: Democrat = Socialist, you don't either.


Odd, I don't recall such a premise. Please provide a quote of me stating
that.

"Eric Chomko" wrote in message
...

: You're not oversimplifying, you're wrong. The Democrats were dominant
in
: the south.

...which was conservative.


Yes, this was before modern liberalism existed.



The Republicans, like Roosevelt, were the
liberals. The term Dixiecrat, which indicated a transition of party, was
reserved for the Democrats from the south that were still conservative
after the party tended to go liberal.


You're confusing modern liberalism with classic liberalism. They are polar
opposites.

"Eric Chomko" wrote in message
...

: They're not my meanings, they're the meanings of those terms as they are
: used in American politics.

Or, they're your interpretation of the meanings of those terms used in
American politics.


No, they truly are the meanings of those terms as they are used in American
politics.

"Eric Chomko" wrote in message
...

: Bingo! At least somebody understands.

If you're agreeing with Rand on politics, you lose...


Based on your input here that is not an observation you're capable of
making.

"Eric Chomko" wrote in message
...

: But a philosophy of "vote for gridlock no matter who the idiot is"
: often gives you an idiot like Clinton, who is willing to compromise on
: all the wrong issues and stands firm on all the wrong issues.

Yet Clinton was one of the better presidents we have had as of late.


Actually, Clinton was one of the worst presidents ever.

Steven P. McNicoll ) wrote:

: "Eric Chomko" wrote in message
: ...
:
: : The US national parks predate modern liberalism.
:
: So?
:

: So they are not a product of liberalism as it is understood today.

They are a product of socialism. So if liberalism = socialism as you have
defined it, then somewhere you are clearly lacking understanding. Because
NPS IS socialistic, as is the military and the interstate system.

: :
: : Yellowstone was the first
: : National Park, established in 1872. The Republicans were in power.
:
: Teddy Rooselevlt was a liberal. He left the Republican Party and help form
: the Bull Moose Party.
:

: You're confusing modern liberalism with classic liberalism. They are polar
: opposites.

And you're clueless! How can they be polar opposites?

:
: The Republican Party you want to ignore is the one in which Harding was
: president.
:

: I thought the subject was conservatives?

No, it is your indefensible defense for the Republican Party.

Eric