Subject:
|
Re: Government's role [Was: Re: What happened?]
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 16 Jul 1999 16:37:14 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
lpieniazek@novera.comIHATESPAM
|
Viewed:
|
1347 times
|
| |
|
|
Scott Edward Sanburn wrote:
> Maybe I associate most liberals to be on the Democratic side rather than the
> Republican side. I despise everything liberalism is and what it stands for. I am
> and always will be a moral, and economic conservative. That is what I meant.
It's unfortunate that the labels have become so skewed. I am a liberal
because I believe in liberty. I am not a conservative because I think
the present system needs to be changed. Yet if I claim to be liberal it
means I support income transfer!
No.
I am a Jeffersonian Liberal.
If you must apply the one dimensional political spectrum (1) the closest
you can come to pigeonholing the LP is to say that we are economically
conservative and socially liberal.
1 - which I reject, there is more than one dimension involved... see the
World's Smallest Political Quiz at the http://www.lp.org site, which is
admittedly a propaganda tool.
--
Larry Pieniazek larryp@novera.com http://my.voyager.net/lar
- - - Web Application Integration! http://www.novera.com
fund Lugnet(tm): http://www.ebates.com/ Member ref: lar, 1/2 $$ to
lugnet.
NOTE: I have left CTP, effective 18 June 99, and my CTP email
will not work after then. Please switch to my Novera ID.
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
 | | Re: Government's role [Was: Re: What happened?]
|
| To all (Larry & Chris and others); Ugh. Let me see if I can clear up what appears to be people's confusion about me. (...) In today's terms, yes. I think the system needs to be changed, and I don't support income transfer. (...) I would say I am (...) (25 years ago, 19-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: Government's role [Was: Re: What happened?]
|
| (...) I'd go along with that. I'm not too happy with the idea of positive discrimination. Occasionally it can bring about benefits if it's applied for a limited period of time - eg. in order to make sure that there are enough members of some group (...) (25 years ago, 20-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: Government's role [Was: Re: What happened?]
|
| Scott: The fact that you and I have to explain what we mean by L and C merely proves the point (which we are in violent agreement on, by the way) that definitions have been skewed all out of recognizability. I have only inconsequentially minor (...) (25 years ago, 20-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Government's role [Was: Re: What happened?]
|
| (...) It's a simplified definition, I think you are talking about direct democracy, I was talking more of a constitutional democracy, where the people have certain rights (a.k.a. Bill of Rights) and protection from being murdered and so forth. A (...) (25 years ago, 16-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
433 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
