kegz.net
Contact me ·  Browse archives ·  Search this site:  

Thursday · July 29 2004

Today is going to be non-stop, so updates here are unlikely.

Feel free to discuss amongst yourselves.

What you had to say:
July 29 2004

I will vote for Kerry simply because he is not Bush. I think a lot of people will support Kerry for that very reason. My question is: Does anybody who reads this blog feel truely passionate about Kerry for president. Why? Have the Democrats done a good enough job "selling" Kerry in a positive manner instead of bashing Bush?

I'm not sure I'm feeling the love yet. Maybe his speech tonight will convince me to become more pro-Kerry rather than anti-Bush.

July 29 2004

Hmm. I'm with you JF. But I don't know if a speech is going to help. I, like many of the delegates at the convention, am a little more liberal than the candidates are. However, isn't being anti-Bush enough at this point?

July 29 2004

If you really think intalling a Senator rated the #1 most liberal in the Senate into the White House is what's best for America, then go ahead. Personally it doesn't work for me. Whatever happened to "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country?" Plus, sending a message to the world's terrorists that we give up and give in to them won't do anyone any good. Please visit sites like frontpagemag.com and townhall.com for the conservative viewpoint. Thank you.

July 29 2004

BG,
Irrespective of the flavor of your viewpoint, how does harkening for JFKs "Ask not..." line have anything to do with the point you're making about a liberal Senator being a poor choice as President? I don't follow the logic.

I don't think that electing Kerry sends a message to the world's terrorists that we give up, and, even if you do, is your vote influenced by what the world's terrorists will think? I will vote based on who I think will make the best leader for the country going forward.

July 29 2004

Just becasue something is labeled as conservative does not make it credible. I am beginning to overdose on politics and some blogs are beginning to look and sound like propaganda. Of course, major media long ago succumbed to being so much propaganda. As of this date, I am one of the undecided.

July 29 2004

I'll never understand why "liberal" has become such a dirty word in politics. I think it might be another example of how Republicans have spun ideas and concepts by their skilling use of language (also called "framing the issue"). NPR has an excellent audio segment on this topic: http://www.npr.org/features/feature.php?wfId=1667389
It's time liberals reclaim their name as a badge of honor.

July 29 2004

Just out of curiousity, who took the pole that rated Kerry as # liberal?

July 29 2004

Here's a link to the story about John Kerry being rated the #1 liberal in the Senate.

http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/0204/022704nj1.htm

With the quote from JFK I was referring to the idea that many people seem to believe the federal government exists as a source of non-stop handouts. Yes, I know the last Congressional budget under Bush was packed with pork, and I'm not happy with that. Hopefully he'll be given a second term and a chance to rein all that in over the next four years.

July 29 2004

"Many people seem to believe the federal government exists as a source of non-stop handouts." I agree, BG. Primary among them would be those who've received the biggest handouts in U.S. history - medical insurance companies, drug companies, oil companies, and the small sub-population of very rich Americans who are Bush's family and friends. For that reason you're absolutely right to invoke JFK's great, patriotic call to duty. It's pretty much exactly what inspired Kerry to a life of public service.

If you were talking about the very small and very needy group of Americans who receive public assistance, you're probably one of those conservatives who zeroes in on this tiny fraction of the federal budget and magnifies its importance and effect as a way to justify their own paranoia about classes and cultures different from their own.

BG - this site's political posters tend to be fairly sophisticated. I'm telling you for your own sake that using arguments like "everybody knows that liberals are bad" and "only Bush stands up to terrorists even though he seems to be ignoring al quaeda" without saying anything to justify them will only alienate readers here. Either try to make sense or go back to your paranoid conservative sheep websites and stay in the warm pile where you're safe.

July 30 2004

The poll was interesting, especially since they plugged in some pre-emptive defense at the end, saying nay-sayers would be sure to be looking for holes in the numbers. Of course, that is a given with any sort of survey. Numbers are wonderfully maleable things which can be used to justify all sorts of arguments (trust me, I should know. I work in finance.)

What would be more interesting would be to see how the extreme measures of liberalness and convervativeness were determined, and how they correlated over the years. I doubt you could say that the most extreme conservative or liberal issues in 1986 were exactly equal to the most extreme issues voted on in 1996 and so on.

August 04 2004

BG, here's a link refuting the completely bogus claim that Kerry's the Senate's #1 liberal. I find it hilarious that conservatives switch back and forth between calling Kerry a waffler and a left-wing liberal. Kinda impossible to be both, don't you think?

http://dailyhowler.com/dh072904.shtml

August 04 2004

That was a great link, Realist. Here's another with Jon Stewart going after Texas Rep. Henry Bonilla for spinning the same "liberal" point without understanding where the data came from.

http://fairshot.typepad.com/fairshot/2004/08/hey_koppel.html

August 05 2004

Isn't it funny yet kinda sad that Jon Stewart is doing a better job of finding the truth than those in our mainstream media?

© 2004 Jason Keglovitz