"Dave" wrote in message

On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 14:03:54 -0400, DSK said:

Hint- neither the whole Democratic Party nor "the Dem core" is far left,
pretty much by definition.

Only if you adopt a strained definition of "core." The term is understood
in
general parlance to mean those party members who not only belong to the
party and vote for its candidates, but who work actively for its
candidates
and provide their dollars. I think that core is generally pretty far left.
You may disagree based on your observations, but it's not a matter that
can
be arrived at axiomatically.

I think the "core" is not so far left as the media would have us believe,
Dave. To the contrary I think it is probably split 50-50 between moderates
and liberals, making it a melding pot of something in between. Most
democrat candidates for Congress and the Senate preach family values,
state's rights, and such. Few actually spew the liberal litany while on the
stump, with notable exceptions in NY and CA. And the liberal part of the
core votes for 'em because they are democrats, despite their centrist
positions. Presidential candidates tend to jump on the liberal bandwagon a
bit more for some reason which is anyone's guess. But even Gore backed down
on his liberal rhetoric as the campaign moved along, claiming every man's
right to own firearms and to hunt, for example. Clinton, if you recall,
promised everyone a tax cut. That it never materialized is
inconsequential--he campaigned largely as a centrist. And with NAFTA and
welfare reform he lived up to his claim.

Max

"Marty Feldman" wrote in message
om...
"Maxprop" wrote in message
hlink.net...


The reason I'm bitching about him is that I really dislike Bush/Cheney
and
wanted another ticket for whom to vote. Kerry is a disappointment and
Nader
is unelectable. John McCain could have been promising, but his party's
nomination is locked up. I'd have supported Lieberman or perhaps even
Gephardt, but Kerry is simply too far left and inconsistent to warrant
my
vote. My 2 cents worth.

Max


i've tried to stay away from these kind of issues because 1) it
doesn't interest me, and 2) i don't think it makes a significant
difference.

that said, within max's words of delusion, we have what i believe is
the best way of approaching the nader and veep issues:

1) nader is a fact. that means we've got to deal with him. maybe a
deal like this: dems will stop bashing him, if he takes more
conservative positions, and aims his message to as many
disenfranchised conservatives as possible.

2) nader is a kook more interested in himself than his country. so,
don't listen to him about the edwards recommendation. instead, look
at what maxi pad said above, he didn't even mention edwards but did
mention gephardt. gephardt will be a far better fighter against
cheney in the debates (good for conservatives), and far more capable
in getting health care passed through congress (good for dems). also,
gephardt is just plain tougher than most, and will have broader appeal
to recovering republicans. with a kerry/gephardt combo, they will not
convert conservatives to the dem party, but these two just might
convince them to stay at home and THAT is the way to win this
election. (...along with gotv.

Talk about delusion . . .

Terry McAuliffe really isn't interested in hearing from you, sock puppet.

Max

Maxprop wrote:
See above. And somehow I knew you'd wander from the discussion and resort
to personal attacks. You have a good mind, Doug, and you are knowledgeable.
But you can be a boor.

No, I just don't suffer fools gladly. Your repeating Limbaugh & Hannity,
thinking it is some profound truth, gets very old very quick. And you
may not have noticed this, but the universe operates by a fairly
consistent set of principles... that fact that you can't write two
paragraphs without contradicting yourself ought to be a clue.

No doubt you take this as a personal attack. I am just pointing out some
logical flaws.


As soon as you provide a scintilla of evidence that you possess any
conservative ideals, my viewpoint of you might change. I'm waiting. . .

OK. Hold your breath.

Did it occur to you that I don't give a rat's hindpart what you think?
How's that for conservative?

DSK

"DSK" wrote in message

Maxprop wrote:
See above. And somehow I knew you'd wander from the discussion and
resort
to personal attacks. You have a good mind, Doug, and you are
knowledgeable.
But you can be a boor.

No, I just don't suffer fools gladly. Your repeating Limbaugh & Hannity,
thinking it is some profound truth, gets very old very quick. And you
may not have noticed this, but the universe operates by a fairly
consistent set of principles... that fact that you can't write two
paragraphs without contradicting yourself ought to be a clue.

No doubt you take this as a personal attack. I am just pointing out some
logical flaws.


As soon as you provide a scintilla of evidence that you possess any
conservative ideals, my viewpoint of you might change. I'm waiting. . .

OK. Hold your breath.

Did it occur to you that I don't give a rat's hindpart what you think?
How's that for conservative?

LOL. Accusing you of being a liberal is certainly a hot button, innit? I
believe they have a 12 step program for you:

Doug: "Hi. My name is Doug. I'm a . . . . . um, liberal.

Group: "Hello, Doug."

Max

I'm a liberal. What's your point?

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Maxprop" wrote in message
ink.net...

"DSK" wrote in message

Maxprop wrote:
See above. And somehow I knew you'd wander from the discussion and
resort
to personal attacks. You have a good mind, Doug, and you are
knowledgeable.
But you can be a boor.

No, I just don't suffer fools gladly. Your repeating Limbaugh & Hannity,
thinking it is some profound truth, gets very old very quick. And you
may not have noticed this, but the universe operates by a fairly
consistent set of principles... that fact that you can't write two
paragraphs without contradicting yourself ought to be a clue.

No doubt you take this as a personal attack. I am just pointing out some
logical flaws.


As soon as you provide a scintilla of evidence that you possess any
conservative ideals, my viewpoint of you might change. I'm waiting. .
..

OK. Hold your breath.

Did it occur to you that I don't give a rat's hindpart what you think?
How's that for conservative?

LOL. Accusing you of being a liberal is certainly a hot button, innit? I
believe they have a 12 step program for you:

Doug: "Hi. My name is Doug. I'm a . . . . . um, liberal.

Group: "Hello, Doug."

Max

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message

I'm a liberal. What's your point?

Only that Doug claims to be conservative, but he isn't. Not sure why he's
in denial.

See, Doug--Jon admits to it. What's the big deal?

Max

On Thu, 24 Jun 2004 16:54:14 -0700, "Jonathan Ganz"
wrote this crap:

I'm a liberal. What's your point?

Your's is at the top of your head.





Pathetic Earthlings! No one can save you now!

I'd rather have a point at the top of my head than
your tits.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Horvath" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 24 Jun 2004 16:54:14 -0700, "Jonathan Ganz"
wrote this crap:

I'm a liberal. What's your point?

Your's is at the top of your head.





Pathetic Earthlings! No one can save you now!

Maxprop wrote:
Only that Doug claims to be conservative, but he isn't.

If you think that I am "a liberal," then it shows your lack of
perception & intelligence.

I suggest you check a list of the fundamental axioms of conservatism and
liberalism, apparently you don't know what they are. But that's OK many
people have faith in things they don't understand. Many people are even
more comfortable remaining ignorant.

DSK

DSK wrote:

Maxprop wrote:

Only that Doug claims to be conservative, but he isn't.


If you think that I am "a liberal," then it shows your lack of
perception & intelligence.

I suggest you check a list of the fundamental axioms of conservatism and
liberalism, apparently you don't know what they are. But that's OK many
people have faith in things they don't understand. Many people are even
more comfortable remaining ignorant.

DSK


I think Maxprop should come to Canada: Conservative and Liberal are relative terms, by our standards the far left of the 'mercan political spectrum
are right wing whackos, conversely by your standards, our Conservatives are Pinkos!

Cheers
Marty