Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [rice-for-president] Typical misunderstanding of the word "liberal"

Expand Messages
  • Eric and Kathy Craft
    Peter, There must be a totally different definition of the word Liberal across the pond. Here in the US the word Liberal has nothing to do with Liberty. Here
    Message 1 of 30 , Jan 10, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Peter,

      There must be a totally different definition of the word Liberal
      across the pond. Here in the US the word Liberal has nothing to do
      with Liberty. Here in the US, to be a Liberal is one notch away from
      being an outright Socialist and two notches away from being a Marxist
      in the Stalinist tradition.

      For a better understanding of American politics I suggest that you
      check out these radio shows.

      The Tony Snow Show. A three hour show starting at about 2PM 14.00
      your time on weekdays.
      http://www.foxnews.com/tonysnow/

      and

      The Sean Hannity Show. A three hour show starting at about 8PM 20.00 your time.
      http://www.hannity.com/
      The "listen live" link is about halfway down the page.

      and

      The John Gibson Show. A three hour show that runs about 1AM 01.00 to
      4AM 04.00 your time.
      http://www.foxnews.com/johngibsonradio/index.html


      Liberals who find this list will not be interested in honest debate,
      they will be interested in calling us and conservative politicians
      names, mining data from and spreading viruses through this list.
      Because that is who they are.

      I must ask you to please reconsider and protect this list.

      Eric...


      On 1/10/06, Peter Dow <peterdow@...> wrote:
      >
      > See what I mean by using the term "liberal" as an accusation?
      >
      > I just don't get that. What, is liberty wrong? Or is it a transatlantic misunderstanding?
      >
      > - Peter
    • spike angle
      Peter wrote: See what I mean by using the term liberal as an accusation? I just don t get that. What, is liberty wrong? Or is it a transatlantic
      Message 2 of 30 , Jan 10, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        Peter wrote:
        See what I mean by using the term "liberal" as an accusation?

        I just don't get that. What, is liberty wrong? Or is it a transatlantic
        misunderstanding?


        DEFINITELY a transatlantic misunderstanding.

        Allow me to dust off my semantics-lecturer hat for one mercifually brief
        moment:

        * Back when the US was founded, "liberal" meant "advocate of personal &
        political liberty" in Locke's Natural Law sense.

        * During our county's Great Depression, FDR (elected by "liberals") VASTLY
        expanded the scope of government, yet held tenaciously to his descriptor as
        "Liveral." The public bought it. Therefore, advocates of SMALLER govenment
        had to pick another name. "Classical Liberal," a term you'll sometimes still
        hear, while technically correct was just too confusing for Joe Q. Pulbic. So
        we came up with the linguistic abomination "libertarian."

        * Today in the U.S., "liberal" means what you across the pond would call
        socialist.

        * Those of us in the U.S. who still stick to the ideals of personal and
        political liberty that our Founding fathers stood for are now called
        "Paleo-Libertarians" (semantically, how unweildy can it get??!!) because
        "Modern Libertarians" are perceived to compromise with the machinery of big
        government.

        * Those of us who truly walk what we talk currently prefer the appellation
        "minarchist." CAN'T be corrupted or co-opted, because it means exactly what
        it says allaway back to the orginal Latin.

        spike
      • Peter Dow
        I just feel that some people might be going down a slippery slope that is going to make talking about politics very confusing. Why do we need a talk show radio
        Message 3 of 30 , Jan 29, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          I just feel that some people might be going down a slippery slope that is going to make talking about politics very confusing.
           
          Why do we need a talk show radio to define simple words - like liberal.
           
          Next someone will be telling us that "just" has got nothing to do with "justice" and "free" has got nothing to do with "freedom".
           
          Why not simplify and say - we know what the word means - now, is so-and-so as good as their word? Are they really for liberty when they say they are a "liberal"?
           
          Are they really "social" when they say they are a "socialist"?
           
          I believe I am as good as my word - but then I try to keep my words simple.
           
          I am social and I am for liberty - so that makes me a socialist and a liberal - if we keep things simple.
           
          - Peter Dow,
           
          Owner Rice for President Yahoo Group
           


          Eric and Kathy Craft <thecrafts@...> wrote:
          Peter,

          There must be a totally different definition of the word Liberal
          across the pond. Here in the US the word Liberal has nothing to do
          with Liberty. Here in the US, to be a Liberal is one notch away from
          being an outright Socialist and two notches away from being a Marxist
          in the Stalinist tradition.

          For a better understanding of American politics I suggest that you
          check out these radio shows.

          The Tony Snow Show. A three hour show starting at about 2PM 14.00
          your time on weekdays.
          http://www.foxnews.com/tonysnow/

          and

          The Sean Hannity Show. A three hour show starting at about 8PM 20.00 your time.
          http://www.hannity.com/
          The "listen live" link is about halfway down the page.

          and

          The John Gibson Show. A three hour show that runs about 1AM 01.00 to
          4AM 04.00 your time.
          http://www.foxnews.com/johngibsonradio/index.html


          Liberals who find this list will not be interested in honest debate,
          they will be interested in calling us and conservative politicians
          names, mining data from and spreading viruses through this list.
          Because that is who they are.

          I must ask you to please reconsider and protect this list.

          Eric...


          On 1/10/06, Peter Dow wrote:
          >
          > See what I mean by using the term "liberal" as an accusation?
          >
          > I just don't get that. What, is liberty wrong? Or is it a transatlantic misunderstanding?
          >
          > - Peter



          Yahoo! Groups Links

          <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
          http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rice-for-president/

          <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
          rice-for-president-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

          <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
          http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/





          To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre.

        • Eric and Kathy Craft
          If you are social and for liberty, the last things that you would be on this side of the pond would be a socialist or a liberal. No disrespect intended, but
          Message 4 of 30 , Jan 29, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            If you are social and for liberty, the last things that you would be
            on this side of the pond would be a socialist or a liberal. No
            disrespect intended, but considering that it is this side of the pond
            that Condi will hopefully be running for office, it's good to
            understand political termonology of the nation that she is running in.

            The meanings of words change. Sixty years ago gay meant happy not
            homosexual. So, at one point the word Liberal may have had something
            to do with Liberty, but I assure you that it has no such connection
            today.

            Dr. Rice is a Conservative. The absolute worst insult on Earth that
            one could do to her would be to call her a Liberal.

            Eric...


            On 1/29/06, Peter Dow <peterdow@...> wrote:
            >
            > I just feel that some people might be going down a slippery slope that is going to make talking about politics very confusing.
            >
            > Why do we need a talk show radio to define simple words - like liberal.
            >
            > Next someone will be telling us that "just" has got nothing to do with "justice" and "free" has got nothing to do with "freedom".
            >
            > Why not simplify and say - we know what the word means - now, is so-and-so as good as their word? Are they really for liberty when they say they are a "liberal"?
            >
            > Are they really "social" when they say they are a "socialist"?
            >
            > I believe I am as good as my word - but then I try to keep my words simple.
            >
            > I am social and I am for liberty - so that makes me a socialist and a liberal - if we keep things simple.
            >
            > - Peter Dow,
            >
            > Owner Rice for President Yahoo Group
          • spike angle
            BRAVO, ERIC!!!!! Let me add one more to the litany of perfectly good words the Left has hijacked to mean the exact opposite of their dictionary definition:
            Message 5 of 30 , Jan 30, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              BRAVO, ERIC!!!!!

              Let me add one more to the litany of perfectly good words the Left has
              hijacked to mean the exact opposite of their dictionary definition:
              Discrimination.

              The left now uses the words discrimination, prejudice, and bigotry
              interchangeably. But the true, original, dictionary meaning of "to
              discriminate" is "to recognize the differences between things." E.g., a
              discriminating music critic recognizes the difference between a virtuoso and
              an amateurish performance.

              Several years ago I published an op/ed column on such semantic hijackings if
              anyone's interested. You'll have to ask me for it backstream, however, since
              it currently resides in the Members-Only Archives of a high-IQ association
              to which I belong. FYI, I customarily grant appropriately credited
              reprint/electronic republication rights to whomever I send it to. What
              matters is getting the word out about how even the language of dissenting
              discourse has been yanked right out from under minarchists and
              conservatives alike by the U.S. radical Left.

              Peter just doesn't get it.

              spike


              >From: Eric and Kathy Craft <thecrafts@...>
              >Reply-To: rice-for-president@yahoogroups.com
              >To: rice-for-president@yahoogroups.com
              >Subject: Re: [rice-for-president] Typical misunderstanding of the word
              >"liberal", "socialist" etc.
              >Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 21:56:39 -0500
              >
              >If you are social and for liberty, the last things that you would be
              >on this side of the pond would be a socialist or a liberal. No
              >disrespect intended, but considering that it is this side of the pond
              >that Condi will hopefully be running for office, it's good to
              >understand political termonology of the nation that she is running in.
              >
              >The meanings of words change. Sixty years ago gay meant happy not
              >homosexual. So, at one point the word Liberal may have had something
              >to do with Liberty, but I assure you that it has no such connection
              >today.
              >
              >Dr. Rice is a Conservative. The absolute worst insult on Earth that
              >one could do to her would be to call her a Liberal.
              >
              >Eric...
              >
              >
              >On 1/29/06, Peter Dow <peterdow@...> wrote:
              > >
              > > I just feel that some people might be going down a slippery slope that
              >is going to make talking about politics very confusing.
              > >
              > > Why do we need a talk show radio to define simple words - like liberal.
              > >
              > > Next someone will be telling us that "just" has got nothing to do with
              >"justice" and "free" has got nothing to do with "freedom".
              > >
              > > Why not simplify and say - we know what the word means - now, is
              >so-and-so as good as their word? Are they really for liberty when they say
              >they are a "liberal"?
              > >
              > > Are they really "social" when they say they are a "socialist"?
              > >
              > > I believe I am as good as my word - but then I try to keep my words
              >simple.
              > >
              > > I am social and I am for liberty - so that makes me a socialist and a
              >liberal - if we keep things simple.
              > >
              > > - Peter Dow,
              > >
              > > Owner Rice for President Yahoo Group
            • Eric and Kathy Craft
              Another word that the Liberals hijacked is Progressive. Progressive no longer has anything to do with progress. It now means stone cold Socialist. A
              Message 6 of 30 , Jan 30, 2006
              • 0 Attachment
                Another word that the Liberals hijacked is Progressive. Progressive
                no longer has anything to do with progress. It now means stone cold
                Socialist.

                A candidate for national office in the United States has absolutely no
                chance of being elected, but if they call themselves a Progressive
                with in the Democrat party, all of a sudden they can make themselves
                look palatable to some voters.

                Eric...


                On 1/30/06, spike angle <ORIONaut@...> wrote:
                > BRAVO, ERIC!!!!!
                >
                > Let me add one more to the litany of perfectly good words the Left has
                > hijacked to mean the exact opposite of their dictionary definition:
                > Discrimination.
                >
                > The left now uses the words discrimination, prejudice, and bigotry
                > interchangeably. But the true, original, dictionary meaning of "to
                > discriminate" is "to recognize the differences between things." E.g., a
                > discriminating music critic recognizes the difference between a virtuoso and
                > an amateurish performance.
                >
                > Several years ago I published an op/ed column on such semantic hijackings if
                > anyone's interested. You'll have to ask me for it backstream, however, since
                > it currently resides in the Members-Only Archives of a high-IQ association
                > to which I belong. FYI, I customarily grant appropriately credited
                > reprint/electronic republication rights to whomever I send it to. What
                > matters is getting the word out about how even the language of dissenting
                > discourse has been yanked right out from under minarchists and
                > conservatives alike by the U.S. radical Left.
                >
                > Peter just doesn't get it.
                >
                > spike
                >
                >
                > >From: Eric and Kathy Craft <thecrafts@...>
                > >Reply-To: rice-for-president@yahoogroups.com
                > >To: rice-for-president@yahoogroups.com
                > >Subject: Re: [rice-for-president] Typical misunderstanding of the word
                > >"liberal", "socialist" etc.
                > >Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 21:56:39 -0500
                >
                > >
                > >If you are social and for liberty, the last things that you would be
                > >on this side of the pond would be a socialist or a liberal. No
                > >disrespect intended, but considering that it is this side of the pond
                > >that Condi will hopefully be running for office, it's good to
                > >understand political termonology of the nation that she is running in.
                > >
                > >The meanings of words change. Sixty years ago gay meant happy not
                > >homosexual. So, at one point the word Liberal may have had something
                > >to do with Liberty, but I assure you that it has no such connection
                > >today.
                > >
                > >Dr. Rice is a Conservative. The absolute worst insult on Earth that
                > >one could do to her would be to call her a Liberal.
                > >
                > >Eric...
                > >
                > >
                > >On 1/29/06, Peter Dow <peterdow@...> wrote:
                > > >
                > > > I just feel that some people might be going down a slippery slope that
                > >is going to make talking about politics very confusing.
                > > >
                > > > Why do we need a talk show radio to define simple words - like liberal.
                > > >
                > > > Next someone will be telling us that "just" has got nothing to do with
                > >"justice" and "free" has got nothing to do with "freedom".
                > > >
                > > > Why not simplify and say - we know what the word means - now, is
                > >so-and-so as good as their word? Are they really for liberty when they say
                > >they are a "liberal"?
                > > >
                > > > Are they really "social" when they say they are a "socialist"?
                > > >
                > > > I believe I am as good as my word - but then I try to keep my words
                > >simple.
                > > >
                > > > I am social and I am for liberty - so that makes me a socialist and a
                > >liberal - if we keep things simple.
                > > >
                > > > - Peter Dow,
                > > >
                > > > Owner Rice for President Yahoo Group
              • spike angle
                Eric, I see a bona fide publishing opportunity here ...ANY conservative press would pick it up... The Left-Hijacked Dictionary. Whaddaya think, worth
                Message 7 of 30 , Jan 30, 2006
                • 0 Attachment
                  Eric, I see a bona fide publishing opportunity here ...ANY conservative
                  press would pick it up..."The Left-Hijacked Dictionary." Whaddaya think,
                  worth collaborating?

                  YES I'm serious! We could make it even more saleable by soliciting
                  contributions from already-saleable opinion leaders, one word at a time.
                  Portion of proceeds to go to Rice for President efforts, of course :D

                  spike


                  >Another word that the Liberals hijacked is Progressive. Progressive
                  >no longer has anything to do with progress. It now means stone cold
                  >Socialist.
                  >
                  >A candidate for national office in the United States has absolutely no
                  >chance of being elected, but if they call themselves a Progressive
                  >with in the Democrat party, all of a sudden they can make themselves
                  >look palatable to some voters.
                  >
                  >Eric...
                  >
                  >
                  >On 1/30/06, spike angle <ORIONaut@...> wrote:
                  > > BRAVO, ERIC!!!!!
                  > >
                  > > Let me add one more to the litany of perfectly good words the Left has
                  > > hijacked to mean the exact opposite of their dictionary definition:
                  > > Discrimination.
                  > >
                  > > The left now uses the words discrimination, prejudice, and bigotry
                  > > interchangeably. But the true, original, dictionary meaning of "to
                  > > discriminate" is "to recognize the differences between things." E.g., a
                  > > discriminating music critic recognizes the difference between a
                  >virtuoso and
                  > > an amateurish performance.
                  > >
                  > > Several years ago I published an op/ed column on such semantic
                  >hijackings if
                  > > anyone's interested. You'll have to ask me for it backstream, however,
                  >since
                  > > it currently resides in the Members-Only Archives of a high-IQ
                  >association
                  > > to which I belong. FYI, I customarily grant appropriately credited
                  > > reprint/electronic republication rights to whomever I send it to. What
                  > > matters is getting the word out about how even the language of
                  >dissenting
                  > > discourse has been yanked right out from under minarchists and
                  > > conservatives alike by the U.S. radical Left.
                  > >
                  > > Peter just doesn't get it.
                  > >
                  > > spike
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > >From: Eric and Kathy Craft <thecrafts@...>
                  > > >Reply-To: rice-for-president@yahoogroups.com
                  > > >To: rice-for-president@yahoogroups.com
                  > > >Subject: Re: [rice-for-president] Typical misunderstanding of the word
                  > > >"liberal", "socialist" etc.
                  > > >Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 21:56:39 -0500
                  > >
                  > > >
                  > > >If you are social and for liberty, the last things that you would be
                  > > >on this side of the pond would be a socialist or a liberal. No
                  > > >disrespect intended, but considering that it is this side of the pond
                  > > >that Condi will hopefully be running for office, it's good to
                  > > >understand political termonology of the nation that she is running in.
                  > > >
                  > > >The meanings of words change. Sixty years ago gay meant happy not
                  > > >homosexual. So, at one point the word Liberal may have had something
                  > > >to do with Liberty, but I assure you that it has no such connection
                  > > >today.
                  > > >
                  > > >Dr. Rice is a Conservative. The absolute worst insult on Earth that
                  > > >one could do to her would be to call her a Liberal.
                  > > >
                  > > >Eric...
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >On 1/29/06, Peter Dow <peterdow@...> wrote:
                  > > > >
                  > > > > I just feel that some people might be going down a slippery slope
                  >that
                  > > >is going to make talking about politics very confusing.
                  > > > >
                  > > > > Why do we need a talk show radio to define simple words - like
                  >liberal.
                  > > > >
                  > > > > Next someone will be telling us that "just" has got nothing to do
                  >with
                  > > >"justice" and "free" has got nothing to do with "freedom".
                  > > > >
                  > > > > Why not simplify and say - we know what the word means - now, is
                  > > >so-and-so as good as their word? Are they really for liberty when they
                  >say
                  > > >they are a "liberal"?
                  > > > >
                  > > > > Are they really "social" when they say they are a "socialist"?
                  > > > >
                  > > > > I believe I am as good as my word - but then I try to keep my words
                  > > >simple.
                  > > > >
                  > > > > I am social and I am for liberty - so that makes me a socialist and
                  >a
                  > > >liberal - if we keep things simple.
                  > > > >
                  > > > > - Peter Dow,
                  > > > >
                  > > > > Owner Rice for President Yahoo Group
                • Eric and Kathy Craft
                  Spike, I only lack two things to be able to collaborate on a book; basic composition skills and talent. The Left-Hijacked Dictionary sounds like a great
                  Message 8 of 30 , Jan 30, 2006
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Spike, I only lack two things to be able to collaborate on a book;
                    basic composition skills and talent. "The Left-Hijacked Dictionary"
                    sounds like a great idea, but you may want to get someone a with a bit
                    more writing experience than I possess for the job.

                    Eric...


                    On 1/30/06, spike angle <ORIONaut@...> wrote:
                    > Eric, I see a bona fide publishing opportunity here ...ANY conservative
                    > press would pick it up..."The Left-Hijacked Dictionary." Whaddaya think,
                    > worth collaborating?
                    >
                    > YES I'm serious! We could make it even more saleable by soliciting
                    > contributions from already-saleable opinion leaders, one word at a time.
                    > Portion of proceeds to go to Rice for President efforts, of course :D
                    >
                    > spike
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > >Another word that the Liberals hijacked is Progressive. Progressive
                    > >no longer has anything to do with progress. It now means stone cold
                    > >Socialist.
                    > >
                    > >A candidate for national office in the United States has absolutely no
                    > >chance of being elected, but if they call themselves a Progressive
                    > >with in the Democrat party, all of a sudden they can make themselves
                    > >look palatable to some voters.
                    > >
                    > >Eric...
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >On 1/30/06, spike angle <ORIONaut@...> wrote:
                    > > > BRAVO, ERIC!!!!!
                    > > >
                    > > > Let me add one more to the litany of perfectly good words the Left has
                    > > > hijacked to mean the exact opposite of their dictionary definition:
                    > > > Discrimination.
                    > > >
                    > > > The left now uses the words discrimination, prejudice, and bigotry
                    > > > interchangeably. But the true, original, dictionary meaning of "to
                    > > > discriminate" is "to recognize the differences between things." E.g.,
                    > a
                    > > > discriminating music critic recognizes the difference between a
                    > >virtuoso and
                    > > > an amateurish performance.
                    > > >
                    > > > Several years ago I published an op/ed column on such semantic
                    > >hijackings if
                    > > > anyone's interested. You'll have to ask me for it backstream, however,
                    > >since
                    > > > it currently resides in the Members-Only Archives of a high-IQ
                    > >association
                    > > > to which I belong. FYI, I customarily grant appropriately credited
                    > > > reprint/electronic republication rights to whomever I send it to. What
                    > > > matters is getting the word out about how even the language of
                    > >dissenting
                    > > > discourse has been yanked right out from under minarchists and
                    > > > conservatives alike by the U.S. radical Left.
                    > > >
                    > > > Peter just doesn't get it.
                    > > >
                    > > > spike
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > > >From: Eric and Kathy Craft <thecrafts@...>
                    > > > >Reply-To: rice-for-president@yahoogroups.com
                    > > > >To: rice-for-president@yahoogroups.com
                    > > > >Subject: Re: [rice-for-president] Typical misunderstanding of the
                    > word
                    > > > >"liberal", "socialist" etc.
                    > > > >Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 21:56:39 -0500
                    > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > >If you are social and for liberty, the last things that you would be
                    > > > >on this side of the pond would be a socialist or a liberal. No
                    > > > >disrespect intended, but considering that it is this side of the pond
                    > > > >that Condi will hopefully be running for office, it's good to
                    > > > >understand political termonology of the nation that she is running
                    > in.
                    > > > >
                    > > > >The meanings of words change. Sixty years ago gay meant happy not
                    > > > >homosexual. So, at one point the word Liberal may have had something
                    > > > >to do with Liberty, but I assure you that it has no such connection
                    > > > >today.
                    > > > >
                    > > > >Dr. Rice is a Conservative. The absolute worst insult on Earth that
                    > > > >one could do to her would be to call her a Liberal.
                    > > > >
                    > > > >Eric...
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > >On 1/29/06, Peter Dow <peterdow@...> wrote:
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > I just feel that some people might be going down a slippery slope
                    > >that
                    > > > >is going to make talking about politics very confusing.
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > Why do we need a talk show radio to define simple words - like
                    > >liberal.
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > Next someone will be telling us that "just" has got nothing to do
                    > >with
                    > > > >"justice" and "free" has got nothing to do with "freedom".
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > Why not simplify and say - we know what the word means - now, is
                    > > > >so-and-so as good as their word? Are they really for liberty when
                    > they
                    > >say
                    > > > >they are a "liberal"?
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > Are they really "social" when they say they are a "socialist"?
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > I believe I am as good as my word - but then I try to keep my
                    > words
                    > > > >simple.
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > I am social and I am for liberty - so that makes me a socialist
                    > and
                    > >a
                    > > > >liberal - if we keep things simple.
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > - Peter Dow,
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > Owner Rice for President Yahoo Group
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > ________________________________
                    > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
                    >
                    >
                    > Visit your group "rice-for-president" on the web.
                    >
                    > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                    > rice-for-president-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                    >
                    > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
                    >
                    > ________________________________
                    >


                    --
                    Eric and Kathy Craft. Monaca, PA, USA
                  • Peter Dow
                    Thanks for trying to clear that up Spike, but I m wondering if you are not surrendering the simple version of liberal to someone else. Those who believe in
                    Message 9 of 30 , Feb 4, 2006
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Thanks for trying to clear that up Spike, but I'm wondering if you are not surrendering the simple version of "liberal" to someone else.
                       
                      Those who believe in true liberty should fight to reclaim the word "liberty" from those who hi-jacked the word - like Lloyd George, friend of Adolf Hitler.
                       
                      I find the only further explanation of the word that is useful is that, in politics, we are fighting for UNIVERSAL liberties - liberties that all people can have, in theory.
                       
                      So, for example, everyone can and should have the right to express controversial views - so long as their words don't imply action to take away someone else's liberties.
                      But the liberty, say, to commit murder, isn't a universal liberty otherwise we'd all end up in hell on earth.
                       
                      Also, the word democracy means "government by ALL the people".
                       
                      I am a democrat in the sense that I believe in government by all the people.
                       
                      Now, since a government consisting of ALL the people, is the biggest possible size of  government - what's all this complaining about BIG government, Spike?
                       
                      Surely, the problem is that government is too small and includes only the elites (that is certainly true in the United Kingdom) - surely we Britons and Scots should extend governing rights to ALL the people and go for the biggest government possible?
                       
                      You Americans are further down the path to a true democracy than us over here- well done!
                       
                      - Peter Dow, Owner Rice for President Yahoo Group
                       

                      spike angle <ORIONaut@...> wrote:
                      Peter wrote:
                      See what I mean by using the term "liberal" as an accusation?

                      I just don't get that. What, is liberty wrong? Or is it a transatlantic
                      misunderstanding?


                      DEFINITELY a transatlantic misunderstanding.

                      Allow me to dust off my semantics-lecturer hat for one mercifually brief
                      moment:

                      * Back when the US was founded, "liberal" meant "advocate of personal &
                      political liberty" in Locke's Natural Law sense.

                      * During our county's Great Depression, FDR (elected by "liberals") VASTLY
                      expanded the scope of government, yet held tenaciously to his descriptor as
                      "Liveral." The public bought it. Therefore, advocates of SMALLER govenment
                      had to pick another name. "Classical Liberal," a term you'll sometimes still
                      hear, while technically correct was just too confusing for Joe Q. Pulbic. So
                      we came up with the linguistic abomination "libertarian."

                      * Today in the U.S., "liberal" means what you across the pond would call
                      socialist.

                      * Those of us in the U.S. who still stick to the ideals of personal and
                      political liberty that our Founding fathers stood for are now called
                      "Paleo-Libertarians" (semantically, how unweildy can it get??!!) because
                      "Modern Libertarians" are perceived to compromise with the machinery of big
                      government.

                      * Those of us who truly walk what we talk currently prefer the appellation
                      "minarchist." CAN'T be corrupted or co-opted, because it means exactly what
                      it says allaway back to the orginal Latin.

                      spike



                      Yahoo! Messenger NEW - crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail

                    • Eric and Kathy Craft
                      There is and always will be a difference between what is and what should be. The political battleground in the US is what it is and not what we want it to be.
                      Message 10 of 30 , Feb 4, 2006
                      • 0 Attachment
                        There is and always will be a difference between what is and what
                        should be. The political battleground in the US is what it is and not
                        what we want it to be. It is truly a waste of time and effort to try
                        to regain the original meaning of words that have already evolved into
                        something else and are publicly accepted in their new meaning.

                        A major misunderstanding about America is that it is working toward
                        being a pure democracy. Pure democracy is literally "Mob Rules". The
                        United States is a representative democratic republic. It's not
                        everyone for himself, it's majority rule.

                        The complaints about big government are about the government sticking
                        it's nose where it doesn't belong such as redistribution of wealth.
                        That means taking money away from those who earned it and giving it to
                        those who didn't. Big government requires big taxes. A Conservative
                        ideal is a government that provides national defense, law enforcement
                        and roads leaving the rest to the private sector as it should be.

                        Liberals want to put taxes on every aspect of life from birth to death
                        to pay for massive entitlement programs that sound like a good idea in
                        theory but end up enslaving those that they claim to be helping. It
                        creates a people who rely on government for everything.

                        What the Liberals fail to tell their followers is that any government
                        that can give you everything that you need can also take it away.
                        Liberals do not want a representative democratic republic, they want a
                        benevolent dictator.

                        If you are looking for a government that will try to micro-manage the
                        needs of every last citizen, Dr. Rice is not your candidate. Dr. Rice
                        is a Conservative. Her way of government is to keep the government
                        out of the way of people so that they can manage their own needs.

                        Eric...
                      • spike angle
                        ... Totally agreed. When I was young & foolish I tired to fight that battle and only succeeded in raising my blood pressure to no good purpose. Now that I am
                        Message 11 of 30 , Feb 5, 2006
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Eric wrote:
                          >It is truly a waste of time and effort to try
                          >to regain the original meaning of words that have already evolved into
                          >something else and are publicly accepted in their new meaning.

                          Totally agreed. When I was young & foolish I tired to fight that battle and
                          only succeeded in raising my blood pressure to no good purpose. Now that I
                          am an older fool ;-) I try to exhibit at least enough good sense to pick
                          those battle there still exists a slim chance of winning.

                          >A major misunderstanding about America is that it is working toward
                          >being a pure democracy. Pure democracy is literally "Mob Rules". The
                          >United States is a representative democratic republic.

                          Slice out the "democratic," Eric, and you're doing fine. We are a
                          REPRESENTATIVE REPUBLIC and always have been. Thanks for saving me the
                          trouble of answering that one.

                          >The complaints about big government are about the government sticking
                          >it's nose where it doesn't belong such as redistribution of wealth.
                          >That means taking money away from those who earned it and giving it to
                          >those who didn't. Big government requires big taxes. A Conservative
                          >ideal is a government that provides national defense, law enforcement
                          >and roads leaving the rest to the private sector as it should be.

                          Even the legitimacy of infrastructure maintenance and law enforcement as
                          proper functions of government have been well debated by such prominent
                          anarchocapitalist praxeologists (so misleadingly nicknamed "Austrian
                          economists") as Murray Rothbard. Personally, I hang with Rand and early
                          Nozick in favoring "the night-watchman State."

                          >Liberals want to put taxes on every aspect of life from birth to death
                          >to pay for massive entitlement programs that sound like a good idea in
                          >theory but end up enslaving those that they claim to be helping. It
                          >creates a people who rely on government for everything.

                          Aye, there's the rub: he who pays the piper calls the tune. Sure, it's OUR
                          money originally...but the immediate disburser is the government, which can
                          therefore legislate virtually every aspect of our behavior, whether or not
                          such behavior is conducted on our own property behind closed doors.

                          >What the Liberals fail to tell their followers is that any government
                          >that can give you everything that you need can also take it away.
                          >Liberals do not want a representative democratic republic, they want a
                          >benevolent dictator.

                          Where THEY, of course, define "benevolent." ::shudder::

                          >If you are looking for a government that will try to micro-manage the
                          >needs of every last citizen, Dr. Rice is not your candidate. Dr. Rice
                          >is a Conservative. Her way of government is to keep the government
                          >out of the way of people so that they can manage their own needs.

                          Amen, and amen! -- spike
                        • Peter Dow
                          Well I think that Condi doesn t use liberal as an insult. She is more rigorous and careful in her use of words - very useful in the international sphere
                          Message 12 of 30 , Feb 8, 2006
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Well I think that Condi doesn't use "liberal" as an insult. She is more rigorous and careful in her use of words - very useful in the international sphere where a Secretary of State needs to be understood without assuming that an international audience will know that she is using "GOP-speak".
                             
                            I say GOP-speak rather than American because I have seen on the internet other AMERICAN websites and forums that speak about "liberal" meaning "for liberty" so I don't agree that it really be just a transatlantic misunderstanding.
                             
                            But I'm over here - and you are over there - so I can't rule out that transatlantic misunderstanding might be A factor. But I think there is a GOP-speak interpretation of "liberal" that is going on too. I think you may using partisan language rather than American nation terminology. No?
                             
                            If there was a "Statue of Gay" and gay was one of the few understood words for happy then I think I would make more of a stand on defending "gay" meaning "happy" not homosexual.
                             
                            But the word "liberal" doesn't have that many understood alternatives for "for liberty" that I can think of. So I digging my heels in on this.
                             
                            Also, I didn't see Condi arguing to conserve Saddam Hussein's Stalinist dictatorship. She didn't conserve Saddam and I she doesnt want to conserve the dictatorships of the world.
                             
                            I see Condi as more of a democratic revolutionary or a radical (like the American revolutionaries and founding fathers of the American constitution) rather than as a conservative.
                             
                            Some things are worth conserving - like the meaning of the word "liberal". So to that extent, I too, am a conservative.
                             
                            No-one here is insulting Condi Rice.
                             
                            - Peter


                            Eric and Kathy Craft <thecrafts@...> wrote:
                            If you are social and for liberty, the last things that you would be
                            on this side of the pond would be a socialist or a liberal. No
                            disrespect intended, but considering that it is this side of the pond
                            that Condi will hopefully be running for office, it's good to
                            understand political termonology of the nation that she is running in.

                            The meanings of words change. Sixty years ago gay meant happy not
                            homosexual. So, at one point the word Liberal may have had something
                            to do with Liberty, but I assure you that it has no such connection
                            today.

                            Dr. Rice is a Conservative. The absolute worst insult on Earth that
                            one could do to her would be to call her a Liberal.

                            Eric...


                            On 1/29/06, Peter Dow wrote:
                            >
                            > I just feel that some people might be going down a slippery slope that is going to make talking about politics very confusing.
                            >
                            > Why do we need a talk show radio to define simple words - like liberal.
                            >
                            > Next someone will be telling us that "just" has got nothing to do with "justice" and "free" has got nothing to do with "freedom".
                            >
                            > Why not simplify and say - we know what the word means - now, is so-and-so as good as their word? Are they really for liberty when they say they are a "liberal"?
                            >
                            > Are they really "social" when they say they are a "socialist"?
                            >
                            > I believe I am as good as my word - but then I try to keep my words simple.
                            >
                            > I am social and I am for liberty - so that makes me a socialist and a liberal - if we keep things simple.
                            >
                            > - Peter Dow,
                            >
                            > Owner Rice for President Yahoo Group



                            Yahoo! Groups Links

                            <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
                            http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rice-for-president/

                            <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                            rice-for-president-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                            <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
                            http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/





                            To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre.

                          • Peter Dow
                            Spike, if you are arguing AGAINST semantic hijackings then you should be saying BRAVO to me - as I am the one who is arguing against the hijacking of the word
                            Message 13 of 30 , Feb 8, 2006
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Spike, if you are arguing AGAINST semantic hijackings then you should be saying BRAVO to me - as I am the one who is arguing against the hijacking of the word "liberal" which must obviously orginally mean "for liberty" as both words have the same root - and the same original meaning.
                               
                              - Peter

                              spike angle <ORIONaut@...> wrote:
                              BRAVO, ERIC!!!!!

                              Let me add one more to the litany of perfectly good words the Left has
                              hijacked to mean the exact opposite of their dictionary definition:
                              Discrimination.

                              The left now uses the words discrimination, prejudice, and bigotry
                              interchangeably. But the true, original, dictionary meaning of "to
                              discriminate" is "to recognize the differences between things." E.g., a
                              discriminating music critic recognizes the difference between a virtuoso and
                              an amateurish performance.

                              Several years ago I published an op/ed column on such semantic hijackings if
                              anyone's interested. You'll have to ask me for it backstream, however, since
                              it currently resides in the Members-Only Archives of a high-IQ association
                              to which I belong. FYI, I customarily grant appropriately credited
                              reprint/electronic republication rights to whomever I send it to. What
                              matters is getting the word out about how even the language of dissenting
                              discourse has been yanked right out from under minarchists and
                              conservatives alike by the U.S. radical Left.

                              Peter just doesn't get it.

                              spike


                              >From: Eric and Kathy Craft
                              >Reply-To: rice-for-president@yahoogroups.com
                              >To: rice-for-president@yahoogroups.com
                              >Subject: Re: [rice-for-president] Typical misunderstanding of the word
                              >"liberal", "socialist" etc.
                              >Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 21:56:39 -0500
                              >
                              >If you are social and for liberty, the last things that you would be
                              >on this side of the pond would be a socialist or a liberal. No
                              >disrespect intended, but considering that it is this side of the pond
                              >that Condi will hopefully be running for office, it's good to
                              >understand political termonology of the nation that she is running in.
                              >
                              >The meanings of words change. Sixty years ago gay meant happy not
                              >homosexual. So, at one point the word Liberal may have had something
                              >to do with Liberty, but I assure you that it has no such connection
                              >today.
                              >
                              >Dr. Rice is a Conservative. The absolute worst insult on Earth that
                              >one could do to her would be to call her a Liberal.
                              >
                              >Eric...
                              >
                              >
                              >On 1/29/06, Peter Dow wrote:
                              > >
                              > > I just feel that some people might be going down a slippery slope that
                              >is going to make talking about politics very confusing.
                              > >
                              > > Why do we need a talk show radio to define simple words - like liberal.
                              > >
                              > > Next someone will be telling us that "just" has got nothing to do with
                              >"justice" and "free" has got nothing to do with "freedom".
                              > >
                              > > Why not simplify and say - we know what the word means - now, is
                              >so-and-so as good as their word? Are they really for liberty when they say
                              >they are a "liberal"?
                              > >
                              > > Are they really "social" when they say they are a "socialist"?
                              > >
                              > > I believe I am as good as my word - but then I try to keep my words
                              >simple.
                              > >
                              > > I am social and I am for liberty - so that makes me a socialist and a
                              >liberal - if we keep things simple.
                              > >
                              > > - Peter Dow,
                              > >
                              > > Owner Rice for President Yahoo Group





                              Yahoo! Groups Links

                              <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
                              http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rice-for-president/

                              <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                              rice-for-president-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                              <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
                              http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/





                              Yahoo! Photos – NEW, now offering a quality print service from just 8p a photo.

                            • Peter Dow
                              If we are against hijacking of words then let us insist that liberal means for liberty and progressive means for progress . Keep it simple or people
                              Message 14 of 30 , Feb 8, 2006
                              • 0 Attachment
                                If we are against hijacking of words then let us insist that "liberal" means "for liberty" and "progressive" means "for progress".
                                 
                                Keep it simple or people won't be able to follow the debate.
                                 
                                - Peter

                                Eric and Kathy Craft <thecrafts@...> wrote:
                                Another word that the Liberals hijacked is Progressive. Progressive
                                no longer has anything to do with progress. It now means stone cold
                                Socialist.

                                A candidate for national office in the United States has absolutely no
                                chance of being elected, but if they call themselves a Progressive
                                with in the Democrat party, all of a sudden they can make themselves
                                look palatable to some voters.

                                Eric...


                                On 1/30/06, spike angle wrote:
                                > BRAVO, ERIC!!!!!
                                >
                                > Let me add one more to the litany of perfectly good words the Left has
                                > hijacked to mean the exact opposite of their dictionary definition:
                                > Discrimination.
                                >
                                > The left now uses the words discrimination, prejudice, and bigotry
                                > interchangeably. But the true, original, dictionary meaning of "to
                                > discriminate" is "to recognize the differences between things." E.g., a
                                > discriminating music critic recognizes the difference between a virtuoso and
                                > an amateurish performance.
                                >
                                > Several years ago I published an op/ed column on such semantic hijackings if
                                > anyone's interested. You'll have to ask me for it backstream, however, since
                                > it currently resides in the Members-Only Archives of a high-IQ association
                                > to which I belong. FYI, I customarily grant appropriately credited
                                > reprint/electronic republication rights to whomever I send it to. What
                                > matters is getting the word out about how even the language of dissenting
                                > discourse has been yanked right out from under minarchists and
                                > conservatives alike by the U.S. radical Left.
                                >
                                > Peter just doesn't get it.
                                >
                                > spike
                                >
                                >
                                > >From: Eric and Kathy Craft
                                > >Reply-To: rice-for-president@yahoogroups.com
                                > >To: rice-for-president@yahoogroups.com
                                > >Subject: Re: [rice-for-president] Typical misunderstanding of the word
                                > >"liberal", "socialist" etc.
                                > >Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 21:56:39 -0500
                                >
                                > >
                                > >If you are social and for liberty, the last things that you would be
                                > >on this side of the pond would be a socialist or a liberal. No
                                > >disrespect intended, but considering that it is this side of the pond
                                > >that Condi will hopefully be running for office, it's good to
                                > >understand political termonology of the nation that she is running in.
                                > >
                                > >The meanings of words change. Sixty years ago gay meant happy not
                                > >homosexual. So, at one point the word Liberal may have had something
                                > >to do with Liberty, but I assure you that it has no such connection
                                > >today.
                                > >
                                > >Dr. Rice is a Conservative. The absolute worst insult on Earth that
                                > >one could do to her would be to call her a Liberal.
                                > >
                                > >Eric...
                                > >
                                > >
                                > >On 1/29/06, Peter Dow wrote:
                                > > >
                                > > > I just feel that some people might be going down a slippery slope that
                                > >is going to make talking about politics very confusing.
                                > > >
                                > > > Why do we need a talk show radio to define simple words - like liberal.
                                > > >
                                > > > Next someone will be telling us that "just" has got nothing to do with
                                > >"justice" and "free" has got nothing to do with "freedom".
                                > > >
                                > > > Why not simplify and say - we know what the word means - now, is
                                > >so-and-so as good as their word? Are they really for liberty when they say
                                > >they are a "liberal"?
                                > > >
                                > > > Are they really "social" when they say they are a "socialist"?
                                > > >
                                > > > I believe I am as good as my word - but then I try to keep my words
                                > >simple.
                                > > >
                                > > > I am social and I am for liberty - so that makes me a socialist and a
                                > >liberal - if we keep things simple.
                                > > >
                                > > > - Peter Dow,
                                > > >
                                > > > Owner Rice for President Yahoo Group



                                Yahoo! Groups Links

                                <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
                                http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rice-for-president/

                                <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                rice-for-president-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                                <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
                                http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/





                                Yahoo! Photos – NEW, now offering a quality print service from just 8p a photo.

                              • Peter Dow
                                The way I see it - you two (Spike & Eric) would insist on using the hijacked version of the words. It is simpler to keep the simple version of the words and
                                Message 15 of 30 , Feb 8, 2006
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  The way I see it - you two (Spike & Eric) would insist on using the hijacked version of the words.
                                   
                                  It is simpler to keep the simple version of the words and never mind re-writing the dictionary.
                                   
                                  - Peter


                                  spike angle <ORIONaut@...> wrote:
                                  Eric, I see a bona fide publishing opportunity here ...ANY conservative
                                  press would pick it up..."The Left-Hijacked Dictionary." Whaddaya think,
                                  worth collaborating?

                                  YES I'm serious! We could make it even more saleable by soliciting
                                  contributions from already-saleable opinion leaders, one word at a time.
                                  Portion of proceeds to go to Rice for President efforts, of course :D

                                  spike


                                  >Another word that the Liberals hijacked is Progressive. Progressive
                                  >no longer has anything to do with progress. It now means stone cold
                                  >Socialist.
                                  >
                                  >A candidate for national office in the United States has absolutely no
                                  >chance of being elected, but if they call themselves a Progressive
                                  >with in the Democrat party, all of a sudden they can make themselves
                                  >look palatable to some voters.
                                  >
                                  >Eric...
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >On 1/30/06, spike angle wrote:
                                  > > BRAVO, ERIC!!!!!
                                  > >
                                  > > Let me add one more to the litany of perfectly good words the Left has
                                  > > hijacked to mean the exact opposite of their dictionary definition:
                                  > > Discrimination.
                                  > >
                                  > > The left now uses the words discrimination, prejudice, and bigotry
                                  > > interchangeably. But the true, original, dictionary meaning of "to
                                  > > discriminate" is "to recognize the differences between things." E.g., a
                                  > > discriminating music critic recognizes the difference between a
                                  >virtuoso and
                                  > > an amateurish performance.
                                  > >
                                  > > Several years ago I published an op/ed column on such semantic
                                  >hijackings if
                                  > > anyone's interested. You'll have to ask me for it backstream, however,
                                  >since
                                  > > it currently resides in the Members-Only Archives of a high-IQ
                                  >association
                                  > > to which I belong. FYI, I customarily grant appropriately credited
                                  > > reprint/electronic republication rights to whomever I send it to. What
                                  > > matters is getting the word out about how even the language of
                                  >dissenting
                                  > > discourse has been yanked right out from under minarchists and
                                  > > conservatives alike by the U.S. radical Left.
                                  > >
                                  > > Peter just doesn't get it.
                                  > >
                                  > > spike
                                  > >
                                  > >
                                  > > >From: Eric and Kathy Craft
                                  > > >Reply-To: rice-for-president@yahoogroups.com
                                  > > >To: rice-for-president@yahoogroups.com
                                  > > >Subject: Re: [rice-for-president] Typical misunderstanding of the word
                                  > > >"liberal", "socialist" etc.
                                  > > >Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 21:56:39 -0500
                                  > >
                                  > > >
                                  > > >If you are social and for liberty, the last things that you would be
                                  > > >on this side of the pond would be a socialist or a liberal. No
                                  > > >disrespect intended, but considering that it is this side of the pond
                                  > > >that Condi will hopefully be running for office, it's good to
                                  > > >understand political termonology of the nation that she is running in.
                                  > > >
                                  > > >The meanings of words change. Sixty years ago gay meant happy not
                                  > > >homosexual. So, at one point the word Liberal may have had something
                                  > > >to do with Liberty, but I assure you that it has no such connection
                                  > > >today.
                                  > > >
                                  > > >Dr. Rice is a Conservative. The absolute worst insult on Earth that
                                  > > >one could do to her would be to call her a Liberal.
                                  > > >
                                  > > >Eric...
                                  > > >
                                  > > >
                                  > > >On 1/29/06, Peter Dow wrote:
                                  > > > >
                                  > > > > I just feel that some people might be going down a slippery slope
                                  >that
                                  > > >is going to make talking about politics very confusing.
                                  > > > >
                                  > > > > Why do we need a talk show radio to define simple words - like
                                  >liberal.
                                  > > > >
                                  > > > > Next someone will be telling us that "just" has got nothing to do
                                  >with
                                  > > >"justice" and "free" has got nothing to do with "freedom".
                                  > > > >
                                  > > > > Why not simplify and say - we know what the word means - now, is
                                  > > >so-and-so as good as their word? Are they really for liberty when they
                                  >say
                                  > > >they are a "liberal"?
                                  > > > >
                                  > > > > Are they really "social" when they say they are a "socialist"?
                                  > > > >
                                  > > > > I believe I am as good as my word - but then I try to keep my words
                                  > > >simple.
                                  > > > >
                                  > > > > I am social and I am for liberty - so that makes me a socialist and
                                  >a
                                  > > >liberal - if we keep things simple.
                                  > > > >
                                  > > > > - Peter Dow,
                                  > > > >
                                  > > > > Owner Rice for President Yahoo Group





                                  Yahoo! Groups Links

                                  <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
                                  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rice-for-president/

                                  <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                  rice-for-president-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                                  <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
                                  http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/





                                  To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre.

                                • Eric and Kathy Craft
                                  Too late, the Liberals have ruined the word liberal for all time. That battle is lost and not worth revisiting. There are too many real battles to fight like
                                  Message 16 of 30 , Feb 8, 2006
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    Too late, the Liberals have ruined the word liberal for all time.
                                    That battle is lost and not worth revisiting. There are too many real
                                    battles to fight like keeping the Liberals from ruining the United
                                    States of America. This is a battle to save America from becoming a
                                    sniveling whiff of what it used to be. This is a battle to keep
                                    America from becoming a welfare state. This is a battle to keep
                                    Champagne Socialists out of power in the United States.

                                    Eric...


                                    On 2/8/06, Peter Dow <peterdow@...> wrote:
                                    >
                                    > Well I think that Condi doesn't use "liberal" as an insult. She is more rigorous and careful in her use of words - very useful in the international sphere where a Secretary of State needs to be understood without assuming that an international audience will know that she is using "GOP-speak".
                                    >
                                    > I say GOP-speak rather than American because I have seen on the internet other AMERICAN websites and forums that speak about "liberal" meaning "for liberty" so I don't agree that it really be just a transatlantic misunderstanding.
                                    >
                                    > But I'm over here - and you are over there - so I can't rule out that transatlantic misunderstanding might be A factor. But I think there is a GOP-speak interpretation of "liberal" that is going on too. I think you may using partisan language rather than American nation terminology. No?
                                    >
                                    > If there was a "Statue of Gay" and gay was one of the few understood words for happy then I think I would make more of a stand on defending "gay" meaning "happy" not homosexual.
                                    >
                                    > But the word "liberal" doesn't have that many understood alternatives for "for liberty" that I can think of. So I digging my heels in on this.
                                    >
                                    > Also, I didn't see Condi arguing to conserve Saddam Hussein's Stalinist dictatorship. She didn't conserve Saddam and I she doesnt want to conserve the dictatorships of the world.
                                    >
                                    > I see Condi as more of a democratic revolutionary or a radical (like the American revolutionaries and founding fathers of the American constitution) rather than as a conservative.
                                    >
                                    > Some things are worth conserving - like the meaning of the word "liberal". So to that extent, I too, am a conservative.
                                    >
                                    > No-one here is insulting Condi Rice.
                                    >
                                    > - Peter
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > Eric and Kathy Craft <thecrafts@...> wrote:
                                    > If you are social and for liberty, the last things that you would be
                                    > on this side of the pond would be a socialist or a liberal. No
                                    > disrespect intended, but considering that it is this side of the pond
                                    > that Condi will hopefully be running for office, it's good to
                                    > understand political termonology of the nation that she is running in.
                                    >
                                    > The meanings of words change. Sixty years ago gay meant happy not
                                    > homosexual. So, at one point the word Liberal may have had something
                                    > to do with Liberty, but I assure you that it has no such connection
                                    > today.
                                    >
                                    > Dr. Rice is a Conservative. The absolute worst insult on Earth that
                                    > one could do to her would be to call her a Liberal.
                                    >
                                    > Eric...
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > On 1/29/06, Peter Dow wrote:
                                    > >
                                    > > I just feel that some people might be going down a slippery slope that is going to make talking about politics very confusing.
                                    > >
                                    > > Why do we need a talk show radio to define simple words - like liberal.
                                    > >
                                    > > Next someone will be telling us that "just" has got nothing to do with "justice" and "free" has got nothing to do with "freedom".
                                    > >
                                    > > Why not simplify and say - we know what the word means - now, is so-and-so as good as their word? Are they really for liberty when they say they are a "liberal"?
                                    > >
                                    > > Are they really "social" when they say they are a "socialist"?
                                    > >
                                    > > I believe I am as good as my word - but then I try to keep my words simple.
                                    > >
                                    > > I am social and I am for liberty - so that makes me a socialist and a liberal - if we keep things simple.
                                    > >
                                    > > - Peter Dow,
                                    > >
                                    > > Owner Rice for President Yahoo Group
                                  • spike angle
                                    ... Can you please post AT LEAST ONE URL as an example? ... Which is, of course, your right. Just be aware that you will be perpetually misunderdtood on this
                                    Message 17 of 30 , Feb 8, 2006
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      Peter wrote:

                                      > I say GOP-speak rather than American because I have seen on the internet
                                      >other AMERICAN websites and forums that speak about "liberal" meaning "for
                                      >liberty"

                                      Can you please post AT LEAST ONE URL as an example?

                                      > But the word "liberal" doesn't have that many understood alternatives
                                      >for "for liberty" that I can think of. So I digging my heels in on this.

                                      Which is, of course, your right. Just be aware that you will be perpetually
                                      misunderdtood on this side of the polnd unless you go through the same
                                      tedious explanation every time...and then you will be understood but
                                      dismissed by most Americans as "out of touch" with the political reality in
                                      the United States.

                                      Dunno 'bout you, but I were to take it into my head to go bloviating about
                                      UK politics I'd be damned sure to learn your lingo first.

                                      spike
                                    • orionaut
                                      ... that liberal ... Unfortunately -- and no-one laments it more than I! -- that ship has already sailed, that race has already been run, that battle has
                                      Message 18 of 30 , Feb 9, 2006
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        Peter wrote:

                                        >If we are against hijacking of words then let us insist
                                        that "liberal"
                                        >means "for liberty" and "progressive" means "for progress".<

                                        Unfortunately -- and no-one laments it more than I! -- that ship has
                                        already sailed, that race has already been run, that battle has
                                        already been fought and (at least from a linguistic purist's
                                        perspective) LOST.

                                        > Keep it simple or people won't be able to follow the debate.

                                        "Simple" is bowing to the inevitable and conducting our
                                        conversations in terms that are CURRENTLY commonly understood.
                                        Having to explain over and over again in each new conversation that
                                        we are using words in an eccentric (=obsolete, albeit original)
                                        fashion is anything BUT simple, and will instantly marginalize our
                                        otherwise worthy contribution to ongoing policy discourse.

                                        In fact, having to repeatedly argue THIS point with a supposed
                                        ideological bedfellow is already derailing productive discourse
                                        HERE, so whether or not you choose to persist in your error (as is
                                        your right!) I will say nothing further about it.

                                        spike

                                        "I disapprove of what you say, but I defend to the death
                                        your right to make an ass of yourself by saying it."
                                        -- with apologies to Voltaire
                                      • Peter Dow
                                        Eric, For those who are for liberty - we need a simple word to explain that - and liberal is the simplest one - having the same linguistic root. Eric, you
                                        Message 19 of 30 , Feb 9, 2006
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          Eric,
                                           
                                          For those who are "for liberty" - we need a simple word to explain that - and "liberal" is the simplest one - having the same linguistic root.
                                           
                                          Eric, you say "publicly" accepted. Well I am a not a member of the American public but speaking as a member of the international English-speaking public, I don't find your use of the word "liberal" appropriate - not that you've actually given anything approaching a coherent definition for your version of the word "liberal".
                                           
                                          It seems to mean for you a catch-all description for people you don't like. A criminal steals your car and I guess you'd want to attach the word "liberal" to the car-thief somehow?
                                           
                                          If a dog barks at you rather than wags its tail - it's a "liberal" dog - right?
                                           
                                          The only sense in which such a non-definition of a word can have common currency is in the witch-hunt sense. In the olden days "witches" were hunted for. More recently, we had the McCarthy-ite hunt for "communists" or in the past we've seen church sponsored witch-hunts for "heretics". Or Stalinist witch-hunts for "counter-revolutionaries".
                                           
                                          GOP witch-hunters for "liberals" maybe have had their days in the American sun Eric but it shouldn't last and hopefully it won't.
                                           
                                          So the sensible thing to do is to ridicule and disapprove the use of any such abuse-term. I do ridicule your witch-hunt Eric and I can only assume that this sort of language is being encouraged in the less-enlightened parts of the GOP.
                                           
                                          America, never having been there, is like other places I guess - it is what the people there make of it. And history testifies to the onward march of freedom and democracy in America and elsewhere in the world - often thanks to Americans.
                                           
                                          Sure history doesn't mean that every American is today signed up to making an ever purer democracy - yet!
                                           
                                          Pure democracy is NOT literally "Mob Rules". It is literally "government by all the people". Other words are used for government by some of the people only - for example, "plutocracy" - government by the wealthy people. Or over here, we have "monarchy" government by the one person - the monarch (presently Queen Elizabeth). (Or we do until someone gets round to chopping her head off, like was done to King Charles I.)
                                           
                                          "Mob rule" implies a brutal dictatorship of the assembled crowd - such as, say, a lynching mob - to hang someone in contradiction of their democratic right to be part of the government and to have due process of law, justice and a fair hearing for their case.
                                           
                                          I suggest that mob rule is the very opposite of democracy.
                                           
                                          But then you go on to say "The United States is a representative democratic republic." Well that's my hopeful view and my best wishes for the US too, but how you equate democracy with mob rule and the US at the same time somewhat escapes me.
                                           
                                          "Everyone for himself" would be anarchy - without rule or law - and we agree that that isn't the state of affairs in the US or on the agenda thankfully.
                                           
                                          I kind of got the GOP drift about "big government" being interpreted as do-more, interventionist, decide-everything type state but I was questioning the use of the words "big" and "government" to try to express that idea.
                                           
                                          I think it is useful to distinguish between -
                                           
                                          "the state" - the enforcement arms of the government - the police, the courts, the prisons, the military and the law-making and executive parts of the state (on the one hand)
                                           
                                          and
                                           
                                          "the government" - in the widest sense of "they who govern" (on the other hand).
                                           
                                          The fascist view of government and the state is that they are ALWAYS the same thing - only the state may govern - no-one else may govern - and certainly the people can go to hell if ever they think for one minute that they are going to be allowed to govern and SO WHAT! if the people have elections now and then? That's the fascist view - NOT my view.
                                           
                                          The democratic view of government (my view) is that government is properly a matter for ALL the people - and the state had better watch out that it doesn't usurp the people's supremacy in matters of government.
                                           
                                          I think it is worth noting that the biggest government possible -
                                          government by all the people, or democracy - doesn't necessarily imply what, if any, taxes or wealth distribution the state enforces.
                                           
                                          Maybe a BIG government could decide to have small, low taxes? I don't see why necessarily a government so big that it included all the people would have to have big taxes. It might do, but then it might not.
                                           
                                          Instead of jumping in using the wrong words - why not use the correct words? If you wish to oppose high-taxes then say so. OK you are saying so NOW - but why not start off saying "low-tax, good", "high-tax, bad" rather than start by saying "BIG government, bad" and "small government, good"?
                                           
                                          The reason I make that point is that the real danger is politics is not the high or low taxation (that is a fair-enough choice for the people to make) - the real danger are the fascists - who want to keep the mass of the people well away from government - reduce government to government by the monarch only, or government by the wealthy only, government by the police or the courts only, or government by some other elite only.
                                           
                                          So there is a very important sense in which BIG (inclusive) government is a good thing, and I think that point might get lost with the casual use of the words "big government".
                                           
                                          I think wealth redistribution from the wealthy to the poor is another matter, not necessary tied to taxation. For example, Bill Gates of Microsoft fame is a wealthy person who also redistributes a lot of his wealth to the needy. Nice one Bill.
                                           
                                          But imagine if all the wealthy people were mean people, unlike Bill Gates, then taxation as a way to distribute wealth would seem to me be the best option.
                                           
                                          Anyway that's a whole other discussion - my main point of complaint just now is that you Eric insist on sticking the label "liberal" on someone who wants to tax a lot. A liberal is "for liberty", and you'd have to ask each liberal what their view on tax was.
                                           
                                          I have given you my view but my view is probably quite different to say President Bush, who is, I hope, "for liberty" - a liberal in that sense - but he would not be in favour of taxing the wealthy so much, so I've heard.
                                           
                                          As for massive entitlement programmes, well, over here, we have a (British/Scottish) National Health Service, free at the point of need, as of right, to all the people - and it is one of the best things about Britain or Scotland. I remember when Hillary Clinton tried to do something for American's right to health care - I applauded her efforts and I'm sorry that they didn't work out.
                                           
                                          Neither the Britons nor the Scots have been enslaved by the National Health Service - but it does need to be paid for via taxation - that is true.
                                           
                                          Again however, a "liberal" is "for liberty" and you'd have to ask each liberal what their view on health entitlements is.
                                           
                                          But all that doesn't matter for you Eric. Anything you don't like - it's a "liberal" according to you and presumably other GOP-bashers-of-the-English-language.
                                           
                                          Do you like ketchup (tomato sauce) with your freedom-fries Eric? If you do then perhaps you think that those who don't are "liberals". If you don't then are those who do "liberals"?
                                           
                                          Then finally, you say that "liberals" according to you, are for a
                                          "benevolent dictatorship".
                                           
                                          Liberty and dictatorship are exact opposites. Exact Eric. You could hardly be more wrong - and that is because you are insisting on using tribal-GOP-style-insults instead of careful and clear arguments.
                                           
                                          With language "skills" like yours - if that is how skilful a person you are - I imagine that if you were trying to be an ice-skater like Condi, you would just have fallen on your arse (sorry "ass" as you Americans say).
                                           
                                          Now Eric - pick yourself up off the ice, so to speak, and let's see something a bit more graceful in future.
                                           
                                          Presidents don't have the time to micro-manage any part of society - taking the big decisions and getting the principles right are all that can ever be expected.
                                           
                                          "Liberty" is the principle - for Americans, for Iraqis, for Britons and for people everywhere - and that's why people should be seeing Condoleezza Rice as their candidate for president. Condi is an exemplary champion of liberty - the liberal's liberal, you might say - and if she won't run willingly, she'll have to be drafted.
                                           
                                          Rice for President.
                                           
                                          Peter Dow, Owner Rice for President Yahoo Group
                                           
                                           


                                          Eric and Kathy Craft <thecrafts@...> wrote:
                                          There is and always will be a difference between what is and what
                                          should be. The political battleground in the US is what it is and not
                                          what we want it to be. It is truly a waste of time and effort to try
                                          to regain the original meaning of words that have already evolved into
                                          something else and are publicly accepted in their new meaning.

                                          A major misunderstanding about America is that it is working toward
                                          being a pure democracy. Pure democracy is literally "Mob Rules". The
                                          United States is a representative democratic republic. It's not
                                          everyone for himself, it's majority rule.

                                          The complaints about big government are about the government sticking
                                          it's nose where it doesn't belong such as redistribution of wealth.
                                          That means taking money away from those who earned it and giving it to
                                          those who didn't. Big government requires big taxes. A Conservative
                                          ideal is a government that provides national defense, law enforcement
                                          and roads leaving the rest to the private sector as it should be.

                                          Liberals want to put taxes on every aspect of life from birth to death
                                          to pay for massive entitlement programs that sound like a good idea in
                                          theory but end up enslaving those that they claim to be helping. It
                                          creates a people who rely on government for everything.

                                          What the Liberals fail to tell their followers is that any government
                                          that can give you everything that you need can also take it away.
                                          Liberals do not want a representative democratic republic, they want a
                                          benevolent dictator.

                                          If you are looking for a government that will try to micro-manage the
                                          needs of every last citizen, Dr. Rice is not your candidate. Dr. Rice
                                          is a Conservative. Her way of government is to keep the government
                                          out of the way of people so that they can manage their own needs.

                                          Eric...



                                          Yahoo! Groups Links

                                          <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
                                          http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rice-for-president/

                                          <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                          rice-for-president-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                                          <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
                                          http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/





                                          Yahoo! Cars NEW - sell your car and browse thousands of new and used cars online search now

                                        • Peter Dow
                                          SPIKE - Yuck! It sickens me somewhat when you (Spike) appease Eric in his misuse of language. Fair enough if you were his wife or something - but why here?
                                          Message 20 of 30 , Feb 9, 2006
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            SPIKE -
                                             
                                            Yuck! It sickens me somewhat when you (Spike) appease Eric in his misuse of language. Fair enough if you were his wife or something - but why here?
                                             
                                            (Sorry my apologies in advance for the tone of this reply but the more Spike appeases Eric, the tougher I feel I should be, just to balance things up.)
                                             
                                            The trouble with cowards (like you Spike) who won't tackle the witch-hunters head on, is that you end up as no more than hand-wringing by-standers as they whip up a mob against anyone they think of as insult-worthy.
                                             
                                            (Not that "liberal" is much of an insult - but that is what Eric means by his use of the word - to insult.
                                            When they threw Christians to the lions - no doubt those doing the throwing meant "Christian" as an insult - as was the word "Jew" when uttered by the Nazis.
                                            Eric's misuse of the word "liberal" is in the disgraceful tradition of persecutors from the past.
                                            Know the malice of men's intentions, not merely the semantics of their words.)
                                             
                                            Don't think you can save yourself (or anyone) Spike by appeasing witch-hunters..
                                             
                                            All liberals, libertarians, all for liberty could be forced into the Nazi-style gas chambers if being a liberal is to become illegal – a law which is the fascist extension of "liberal" as a political insult.
                                             
                                            (The fight for supremacy between liberals and fascists has a tendency to become a fight to the death. Imagine if an anti-liberal congress or parliament tries to impose even a small fine for being a liberal or tries to force liberals to wear the equivalent of a yellow star on their clothes - then that would be seen as an attack on civil liberties enshrined in the constitution and the whole matter could quickly conflagrate into all-out civil war.)
                                             
                                            (I presume, Spike that you DON'T want Nazi-style gas chambers exterminating liberals, as they once did?)
                                             
                                            The anti-liberal Gestapo will of course reassure us that the reason we are being exterminated as liberals is because they believe that as liberals, we are actually for a dictatorship and that is clearly bad, so that's why we all have to be killed!
                                             
                                            Oh and Spike, leaving it until we liberals are choking on poison gas will be a bit late to check your IQ scores in case there's been a error there.
                                             
                                            Eric and any similar "if-we-don't-like-you,-you-are-an-evil-liberal"-GOP-Neanderthals need to be challenged and confronted.
                                             
                                            (OK Neanderthals IS an insult – I am retaliating, having had my liberalness insulted!)
                                             
                                            Spike, you obviously don't have the courage or the wisdom to confront Eric. I'm rather too far away and of no consequence to deliver a meaningful political rebuke in the American political arena but someone needs to do it. Maybe that is what the Democrats are good for?
                                             
                                            Anyway, I never wanted to be a diplomat. (Just as well then.)
                                             
                                            - Peter
                                             


                                            spike angle <ORIONaut@...> wrote:
                                            Eric wrote:
                                            >It is truly a waste of time and effort to try
                                            >to regain the original meaning of words that have already evolved into
                                            >something else and are publicly accepted in their new meaning.

                                            Totally agreed. When I was young & foolish I tired to fight that battle and
                                            only succeeded in raising my blood pressure to no good purpose. Now that I
                                            am an older fool ;-) I try to exhibit at least enough good sense to pick
                                            those battle there still exists a slim chance of winning.

                                            >A major misunderstanding about America is that it is working toward
                                            >being a pure democracy. Pure democracy is literally "Mob Rules". The
                                            >United States is a representative democratic republic.

                                            Slice out the "democratic," Eric, and you're doing fine. We are a
                                            REPRESENTATIVE REPUBLIC and always have been. Thanks for saving me the
                                            trouble of answering that one.

                                            >The complaints about big government are about the government sticking
                                            >it's nose where it doesn't belong such as redistribution of wealth.
                                            >That means taking money away from those who earned it and giving it to
                                            >those who didn't. Big government requires big taxes. A Conservative
                                            >ideal is a government that provides national defense, law enforcement
                                            >and roads leaving the rest to the private sector as it should be.

                                            Even the legitimacy of infrastructure maintenance and law enforcement as
                                            proper functions of government have been well debated by such prominent
                                            anarchocapitalist praxeologists (so misleadingly nicknamed "Austrian
                                            economists") as Murray Rothbard. Personally, I hang with Rand and early
                                            Nozick in favoring "the night-watchman State."

                                            >Liberals want to put taxes on every aspect of life from birth to death
                                            >to pay for massive entitlement programs that sound like a good idea in
                                            >theory but end up enslaving those that they claim to be helping. It
                                            >creates a people who rely on government for everything.

                                            Aye, there's the rub: he who pays the piper calls the tune. Sure, it's OUR
                                            money originally...but the immediate disburser is the government, which can
                                            therefore legislate virtually every aspect of our behavior, whether or not
                                            such behavior is conducted on our own property behind closed doors.

                                            >What the Liberals fail to tell their followers is that any government
                                            >that can give you everything that you need can also take it away.
                                            >Liberals do not want a representative democratic republic, they want a
                                            >benevolent dictator.

                                            Where THEY, of course, define "benevolent." ::shudder::

                                            >If you are looking for a government that will try to micro-manage the
                                            >needs of every last citizen, Dr. Rice is not your candidate. Dr. Rice
                                            >is a Conservative. Her way of government is to keep the government
                                            >out of the way of people so that they can manage their own needs.

                                            Amen, and amen! -- spike





                                            Yahoo! Groups Links

                                            <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
                                            http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rice-for-president/

                                            <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                            rice-for-president-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                                            <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
                                            http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/





                                            To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre.

                                          • Eric and Kathy Craft
                                            Peter, As I said before, I believe that you mean well, but it appears that you really do not have a good grasp on what is going on in politics over here. I
                                            Message 21 of 30 , Feb 9, 2006
                                            • 0 Attachment
                                              Peter,

                                              As I said before, I believe that you mean well, but it appears that
                                              you really do not have a good grasp on what is going on in politics
                                              over here. I would normally never force an American perspective this
                                              hard, but the 2008 election in the United States is an American
                                              matter. I would never dare to stick my nose into an election in the
                                              UK because I do not fully understand the politics there and Sir, you
                                              do not seem to have a very clear understanding of the politics over
                                              here.

                                              The word liberal, in it's modern American definition is only an insult
                                              when it is used to describe a Conservative Republican such as Condi
                                              Rice. Senator Ted Kennedy's nic-name is "The Liberal Lion" and trust
                                              me, he not only is not insulted by it, he revels in it.

                                              I find it very offensive the way that you dumped on Spike and the way
                                              that you insinuated that I am some kind of witch hunting Fascist
                                              because I understand the political climate in the land in which I
                                              live.


                                              Eric...
                                            • spike angle
                                              Eric wrote: As I said before, I believe that you [Peter] mean well, but it appears that you really do not have a good grasp on what is going on in politics
                                              Message 22 of 30 , Feb 9, 2006
                                              • 0 Attachment

                                                Eric wrote:

                                                >As I said before, I believe that you [Peter] mean well, but it appears that you really do not have a good grasp on what is going on in politics over here.<

                                                Concurred.

                                                Eric et al, since Peter has been kind enough recently to post such a (surely unintentionally) glowing recommendation for the good work being done by Americans For Rice --
                                                http://www.americansforrice.com
                                                -- I humbly propose that those of us on this list who "speak American" unsub here and sign on over there. I have already signed on there, and remain here for a minute only in hope of influencing the cream of this list to do likewise.

                                                Sorry, Peter. As Eric has repeatedly stated, no doubt you mean well.

                                                In fact, your intransigence regarding obsolete usages of otherwise perfectly good words has slapped me upside the head about another word entirely, and in fact has inspired my next op/ed column for the ORION site: regarding why we must permanently jettison the otherwise perfectly good word "eugenics" (literally and "correctly" = "bred well") because it has been irrevocably redefined by the Nazis and their ideological ilk as necessarily COERCIVE, obsoleting its otherwise useful description of "breeding well" undertaken by voluntary individual action.

                                                So perhaps, all unknowing, you have done some good here after all.

                                                Regretfully,
                                                spike
                                                 
                                                p.s. I am delighted to report that my adoptive brother and the woman he will wed within 6 months have within the past 36 hours given birth to their first child (of a planned three) in accordance with EVERY principle of voluntary individual "breeding well": selection of each other as mates with the projected/probable health and intelligence of future offspring a major factor; commitment to a stable family unit in which to raise said offspring; meticulous prenatal care & parental education; and a rock-solid commitment to pro-active parenting (e.g., the mother is a degreed, working Early Childhood Education specialist...and both parents are members of The ORION Initiative, a high-IQ membership association devoted to upbreeding and appropriately educating the next generation of our best & brightest through VOLUNTARY parental and likeminded Intentional Community action).  

                                                Pamela "Spike" Cheney Angle, CBC, M.Ed. in progress
                                                Executive Director
                                                The ORION Initiative
                                                ~ launching an off-Earth future for the gifted & talented since 1996 ~
                                                http://members.tripod.com/orionaut-ivil

                                                I'm a Condista!
                                                Custom Smiley 

                                              • dan rice
                                                What are the reasons (again) that I should quit this group and join the group American for Rice? Thank you. Dan Rice
                                                Message 23 of 30 , Feb 10, 2006
                                                • 0 Attachment
                                                  What are the reasons (again) that I should quit this group and join the
                                                  group American for Rice? Thank you. Dan Rice
                                                • spike angle
                                                  ... This group is owned by a foreign national who has continued to insist throughout a long and increasingly tedious thread that Rice, Bush, and any other
                                                  Message 24 of 30 , Feb 10, 2006
                                                  • 0 Attachment
                                                    Dan wrote:
                                                    >What are the reasons (again) that I should quit this group and join the
                                                    >group American for Rice? Thank you. Dan Rice


                                                    This group is owned by a foreign national who has continued to insist
                                                    throughout a long and increasingly tedious thread that Rice, Bush, and any
                                                    other American conservative who is "for liberty" must be referred to as "a
                                                    liberal."

                                                    Under that constraint this group cannot possibly be effective contributors
                                                    to policy discourse IN AMERICA. I therefore have personally chosen to
                                                    affiliate myself with a group which not only speaks intelligible AMERICAN
                                                    English but has already begun to receive national attention and media
                                                    coverage. But that's just me. Anyone who wants to meander along here calling
                                                    a giraffe a zebra has, of course, every right to do so ;-)

                                                    spike

                                                    "I disapprove of what you say, but I defend to the death your right
                                                    to make an ass of yourself by saying it." -- with apologies to Voltaire
                                                  • C.D.Hoit
                                                    Once again, we are nit-picking ourselves to death over semantics and dissension. How about dealing with the Positive aspects of promoting Condi, for example?
                                                    Message 25 of 30 , Feb 11, 2006
                                                    • 0 Attachment
                                                      Once again, we are nit-picking ourselves to death over semantics and dissension. How about dealing with the Positive aspects of promoting Condi, for example?
                                                       
                                                      Davyd


                                                      From: rice-for-president@yahoogroups.com [mailto:rice-for-president@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of spike angle
                                                      Sent: Friday, February 10, 2006 2:15 PM
                                                      To: rice-for-president@yahoogroups.com
                                                      Subject: RE: [rice-for-president] Re: Typical misunderstanding of the word "liberal"

                                                      Dan wrote:
                                                      >What are the reasons (again) that I should quit
                                                      this group and join the
                                                      >group American for Rice?  Thank you. 
                                                      Dan Rice


                                                      This group is owned by a foreign national who has continued to insist
                                                      throughout a long and increasingly tedious thread that Rice, Bush, and any
                                                      other American conservative who is "for liberty" must be referred to as "a
                                                      liberal."

                                                      Under that constraint this group cannot possibly be effective contributors
                                                      to policy discourse IN AMERICA. I therefore have personally chosen to
                                                      affiliate myself with a group which not only speaks intelligible AMERICAN
                                                      English but has already begun to receive national attention and media
                                                      coverage. But that's just me. Anyone who wants to meander along here calling
                                                      a giraffe a zebra has, of course, every right to do so ;-)

                                                      spike

                                                      "I disapprove of what you say, but I defend to the death your right
                                                      to make an ass of yourself by saying it." -- with apologies to Voltaire



                                                    • spike angle
                                                      ... PRECISELY. But if we promote her as a liberal, people will dismiss us as lunatics. spike
                                                      Message 26 of 30 , Feb 11, 2006
                                                      • 0 Attachment
                                                        Davyd wrote:
                                                        >Once again, we are nit-picking ourselves to death over semantics and
                                                        >dissension. How about dealing with the Positive aspects of promoting Condi,
                                                        >for example?


                                                        PRECISELY. But if we promote her as a "liberal," people will dismiss us as
                                                        lunatics.

                                                        spike
                                                      • C.D.Hoit
                                                        Well, a little lunacy goes a long way.......HOWEVER, the best way to delete the L word from our list is using it ONLY in the proper context (if that is
                                                        Message 27 of 30 , Feb 11, 2006
                                                        • 0 Attachment
                                                          Well, a little lunacy goes a long way.......HOWEVER, the best way to delete the "L" word from our list is using it ONLY in the proper context (if that is possible) instead of trying to define it. And, I don't see us promoting her as a ......well, you know........
                                                           
                                                          Davyd


                                                          From: rice-for-president@yahoogroups.com [mailto:rice-for-president@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of spike angle
                                                          Sent: Saturday, February 11, 2006 10:45 AM
                                                          To: rice-for-president@yahoogroups.com
                                                          Subject: [-2.30] RE: [rice-for-president] Re: Typical misunderstanding of the word "liberal"

                                                          Davyd wrote:
                                                          >Once again, we are nit-picking ourselves to
                                                          death over semantics and
                                                          >dissension. How about dealing with the Positive
                                                          aspects of promoting Condi,
                                                          >for example?


                                                          PRECISELY. But if we promote her as a "liberal," people will dismiss us as
                                                          lunatics.

                                                          spike

                                                        • Peter Dow
                                                          Eric, Well maybe you Eric have surrendered your dictionary and any capacity for articulate political discourse Eric, but the web is big battleground - it is
                                                          Message 28 of 30 , Feb 12, 2006
                                                          • 0 Attachment
                                                            Eric,
                                                             
                                                            Well maybe you Eric have surrendered your dictionary and any capacity for articulate political discourse Eric, but the web is big battleground - it is the size of the whole world - and here in cyber-space, the battle to define the word "liberal" is not lost now and it is certainly not lost for all time.
                                                             
                                                            Genuine liberals would not ruin the United States - they founded the US and only fascists could ruin it. Would that be you then Eric - being an anti-liberal would make you a fascist of some kind, taking your words literally?
                                                             
                                                            So the US federal and local states don't do some welfare already? I think they do, though maybe not so much as over here. Some welfare is good idea Eric - "a hand up", if you prefer to “a hand-out” - but leaving people to starve, freeze or turn to crime in a desperate attempt to survive is a stupid policy.
                                                             
                                                            Don’t you think stupid people have ruined the idea of stupid politics for all time?
                                                             
                                                            Or do you hanker for the days of goose-stepping, torch-lighted parades and swastikas flying high?
                                                             
                                                            The champagne is optional as is the “socialist” label Eric but I’d strongly advise a social dimension in politics. What, you want anti-social?
                                                             
                                                            Condi Rice is not anti-social, and neither is this group, not while I am the owner anyway.
                                                             
                                                            - Peter


                                                            Eric and Kathy Craft <thecrafts@...> wrote:
                                                            Too late, the Liberals have ruined the word liberal for all time.
                                                            That battle is lost and not worth revisiting. There are too many real
                                                            battles to fight like keeping the Liberals from ruining the United
                                                            States of America. This is a battle to save America from becoming a
                                                            sniveling whiff of what it used to be. This is a battle to keep
                                                            America from becoming a welfare state. This is a battle to keep
                                                            Champagne Socialists out of power in the United States.

                                                            Eric...


                                                            On 2/8/06, Peter Dow wrote:
                                                            >
                                                            > Well I think that Condi doesn't use "liberal" as an insult. She is more rigorous and careful in her use of words - very useful in the international sphere where a Secretary of State needs to be understood without assuming that an international audience will know that she is using "GOP-speak".
                                                            >
                                                            > I say GOP-speak rather than American because I have seen on the internet other AMERICAN websites and forums that speak about "liberal" meaning "for liberty" so I don't agree that it really be just a transatlantic misunderstanding.
                                                            >
                                                            > But I'm over here - and you are over there - so I can't rule out that transatlantic misunderstanding might be A factor. But I think there is a GOP-speak interpretation of "liberal" that is going on too. I think you may using partisan language rather than American nation terminology. No?
                                                            >
                                                            > If there was a "Statue of Gay" and gay was one of the few understood words for happy then I think I would make more of a stand on defending "gay" meaning "happy" not homosexual.
                                                            >
                                                            > But the word "liberal" doesn't have that many understood alternatives for "for liberty" that I can think of. So I digging my heels in on this.
                                                            >
                                                            > Also, I didn't see Condi arguing to conserve Saddam Hussein's Stalinist dictatorship. She didn't conserve Saddam and I she doesnt want to conserve the dictatorships of the world.
                                                            >
                                                            > I see Condi as more of a democratic revolutionary or a radical (like the American revolutionaries and founding fathers of the American constitution) rather than as a conservative.
                                                            >
                                                            > Some things are worth conserving - like the meaning of the word "liberal". So to that extent, I too, am a conservative.
                                                            >
                                                            > No-one here is insulting Condi Rice.
                                                            >
                                                            > - Peter
                                                            >
                                                            >
                                                            > Eric and Kathy Craft wrote:
                                                            > If you are social and for liberty, the last things that you would be
                                                            > on this side of the pond would be a socialist or a liberal. No
                                                            > disrespect intended, but considering that it is this side of the pond
                                                            > that Condi will hopefully be running for office, it's good to
                                                            > understand political termonology of the nation that she is running in.
                                                            >
                                                            > The meanings of words change. Sixty years ago gay meant happy not
                                                            > homosexual. So, at one point the word Liberal may have had something
                                                            > to do with Liberty, but I assure you that it has no such connection
                                                            > today.
                                                            >
                                                            > Dr. Rice is a Conservative. The absolute worst insult on Earth that
                                                            > one could do to her would be to call her a Liberal.
                                                            >
                                                            > Eric...
                                                            >
                                                            >
                                                            > On 1/29/06, Peter Dow wrote:
                                                            > >
                                                            > > I just feel that some people might be going down a slippery slope that is going to make talking about politics very confusing.
                                                            > >
                                                            > > Why do we need a talk show radio to define simple words - like liberal.
                                                            > >
                                                            > > Next someone will be telling us that "just" has got nothing to do with "justice" and "free" has got nothing to do with "freedom".
                                                            > >
                                                            > > Why not simplify and say - we know what the word means - now, is so-and-so as good as their word? Are they really for liberty when they say they are a "liberal"?
                                                            > >
                                                            > > Are they really "social" when they say they are a "socialist"?
                                                            > >
                                                            > > I believe I am as good as my word - but then I try to keep my words simple.
                                                            > >
                                                            > > I am social and I am for liberty - so that makes me a socialist and a liberal - if we keep things simple.
                                                            > >
                                                            > > - Peter Dow,
                                                            > >
                                                            > > Owner Rice for President Yahoo Group



                                                            Yahoo! Groups Links

                                                            <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
                                                            http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rice-for-president/

                                                            <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                                            rice-for-president-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                                                            <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
                                                            http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/





                                                            Yahoo! Messenger NEW - crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail

                                                          • Davyd
                                                            Spike, Right on. I started a new group as well, but have no problem with the Americans for Rice group. It has a major link on my Condi for President web site.
                                                            Message 29 of 30 , Feb 18, 2006
                                                            • 0 Attachment
                                                              Spike,

                                                              Right on. I started a new group as well, but have no problem with the
                                                              Americans for Rice group. It has a major link on my Condi for
                                                              President web site.

                                                              Davyd

                                                              P.S. Giraffes are NOT zebras? Dang! Oh well....



                                                              --- In rice-for-president@yahoogroups.com, "spike angle"
                                                              <ORIONaut@...> wrote:
                                                              >
                                                              > Dan wrote:
                                                              > >What are the reasons (again) that I should quit this group and join the
                                                              > >group American for Rice? Thank you. Dan Rice
                                                              >
                                                              >
                                                              > This group is owned by a foreign national who has continued to insist
                                                              > throughout a long and increasingly tedious thread that Rice, Bush,
                                                              and any
                                                              > other American conservative who is "for liberty" must be referred to
                                                              as "a
                                                              > liberal."
                                                              >
                                                              > Under that constraint this group cannot possibly be effective
                                                              contributors
                                                              > to policy discourse IN AMERICA. I therefore have personally chosen to
                                                              > affiliate myself with a group which not only speaks intelligible
                                                              AMERICAN
                                                              > English but has already begun to receive national attention and media
                                                              > coverage. But that's just me. Anyone who wants to meander along here
                                                              calling
                                                              > a giraffe a zebra has, of course, every right to do so ;-)
                                                              >
                                                              > spike
                                                              >
                                                              > "I disapprove of what you say, but I defend to the death your right
                                                              > to make an ass of yourself by saying it." -- with apologies to Voltaire
                                                              >
                                                            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.