An Open Letter to True Centrists, Left Leaning Moderates, and Liberals

More times than we can count...

 

So all you know about liberals You picked up From a dictionary
Both liberals and conservatives in favor of maximum individual liberty
Where they differ is how that is Accomplished

 

Taxcutter says:
Tell us, sport. What is a "true centrist?"

What is the "true centrist" position on the size of the federal government? Particularly the bureaucracy.
What is the "true centrist" position on forward defense vs isolationism?
What is the "true centrist" position on taxation?
What is the "true centrist" position on government control of the economy?

 

No I know a lot more about liberalism, but I was accused of changing the definition by someone who apparently doesn't even know the definition of liberal. As I also pointed out, American democrats are not liberal--they are collectivist autocrats fixated on taking and forcing.

 

Democrats allowed all their "centrists" to get thrashed in 2010.

 

Liberals share that assessment, except with the parties reversed.

No argument here.

Same deal with left-wingers.

Liberals do the same thing.

Also true about Liberals to a certain extent.

That's how politics works.

It would be dishonest to say that Christianity did not have some influence, however we are, very much, a secular nation.

 

Don't even try to accuse ME of that! I am a VIOLENT OPPONENT of Affirmative Action, willing to go to war to end it! I'd don't care if minorities or women ever get even, not the least bit. I am looking for a SOCIALIST, maybe an OLD WHITE MAN like Bernie Sanders would be what I want. He wasn't available, azzz whole Obama said the right things, so there was no choice but to give it a try.

 

The farthest left Democrats are centrists in any other country. The USA has NO LEFT.

 

Thus, the flaw in the argument by the lefties on this site. We certainly do have leftist/socialist in this country. What do you think "progressives" are?

 

They are people NOT FAR ENOUGH LEFT to turn the USA into Scandanavia or at least Canada and make it a GOOD country, instead of the CRAP we have now.

 

How you leaped from that to affirmative action I will never know......

 

The best part about debating the occupy wall street contingent on this site is: Eventually you expose yourselves for the socialists you really aspire to be.

 

Surprise! Conservatives are more generous than liberals

In exploring the reaction to the consistent findings that conservatives are more charitable, one cannot help but chuckle at the left’s inability to accept the facts. In Dec. 2008, Ezra Klein attempted to dismantle Brooks’ findings. In addressing religiosity, Klein wrote, “A recent survey from Google similarly found that self-identified conservatives gave more to charity than did self-identified liberals. But they also found that ‘if donations to all religious organizations are excluded, liberals give slightly more to charity than conservatives do.’”

Klein goes on to question whether religious giving constitutes a “membership fee” of sorts. If more non-religious individuals on the left spent time working with churches and faith-based non-profits they’d realize that the vast majority serve populations in need and do, in fact, work in the charity realm. Dismissing all donations to “religious organizations” would be silly, as it would literally ignore an insanely large portion of the charity work that is conducted (and funded by conservatives) in America and beyond. During such difficult economic times, many of these charities are very literally preventing families from plunging into the abyss of poverty. Perhaps Klein’s most intriguing quip was, “Saying that conservatives give more to charity is another way of saying that conservatives are more religious.” How does one even begin to argue with that logic?

In a separate report for the Hoover Institution, Brooks explains that religious individuals are more likely (25 percentage points) than secular persons to give monies and 23 points “…more likely to volunteer time.” So, even if Klein’s downplay-religious-giving theory held, plenty of evidence shows that conservatives are more apt than liberals to, at the least, give their time.

Interestingly, Nicholas Kristof (a self-described liberal) of The New York Times wrote on this same subject back in 2008. Unlike others on the left who sought to dismiss Brooks’ data, Kristof wrote, “We liberals are personally stingy.” Kristof went on to cover other research that backs up Brooks’ findings. According to Kristof, “The ‘generosity index’ from the Catalogue for Philanthropy typically finds that red states are the most likely to give to nonprofits, while Northeastern states are least likely to do so.”

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2010/09/23/s...-more-generous-than-liberals/2/#ixzz38E5p4pL6

 

Bleeding Heart Tightwads



By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF
Published: December 20, 2008

This holiday season is a time to examine who’s been naughty and who’s been nice, but I’m unhappy with my findings. The problem is this: We liberals are personally stingy.
Fred R. Conrad/The New York Times

Nicholas D. Kristof
On the Ground

Nicholas Kristof addresses reader feedback and posts short takes from his travels.
Go to Columnist Page »

Liberals show tremendous compassion in pushing for generous government spending to help the neediest people at home and abroad. Yet when it comes to individual contributions to charitable causes, liberals are cheapskates.

Arthur Brooks, the author of a book on donors to charity, “Who Really Cares,” cites data that households headed by conservatives give 30 percent more to charity than households headed by liberals. A study by Google found an even greater disproportion: average annual contributions reported by conservatives were almost double those of liberals.

Other research has reached similar conclusions. The “generosity index” from the Catalogue for Philanthropy typically finds that red states are the most likely to give to nonprofits, while Northeastern states are least likely to do so.

The upshot is that Democrats, who speak passionately about the hungry and homeless, personally fork over less money to charity than Republicans — the ones who try to cut health insurance for children.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/opinion/21kristof.html?_r=0

 

Just wanted to make it clear that I didn't vote for Obama because he's black. I never cared if we ever had a black president or not, that meant NOTHING to me. Like I don't care if we ever have a woman president. I'd support Elizabeth Warren, for her supposed beliefs, not because she's a woman, but I wouldn't support Hillary, unless there was no other choice but her or ********** Nation or a Republican that would need to consider the feelings of ********** Nation .

- - - Updated - - -

It doesn't need to be "exposed", I PROUDLY admit it. You can't lump me with OWS either. There's a lot of crap they care about that I don't care about at all.

 

Classic 'I'm OK, You're Not OK' drivel.

No wonder this country is so screwed up.

 

Conservatives walk the walk, unlike Liberals that only talk the talk.
The report says:

“The single biggest predictor of whether someone will be charitable is his or her religious participation.
Religious people are more likely to give to charity, and when they give, they give more money: four times as much. And Arthur Brooks told me that giving goes beyond their own religious organization:
“Actually, the truth is that they’re giving to more than their churches,” he says. “The religious Americans are more likely to give to every kind of cause and charity, including explicitly non-religious charities.”

http://therooftopblog.wordpress.com...-conservatives-give-more-to-charity-abc-says/

 

partisan peeing contests yield nothing except reinforce the partisan's own position.

Such stupid sweeping generalizations are to be expected when real political discourse is demoted to bumpersticker ideological label spewing.

Conservatives are not demons intent on destroying the nation and neither are liberals.

Obama is neither the incompetent that some seem to believe nor is he the greatest thing since sliced bread.

Of course both sides have incredibly short memories, sometimes completely contradicting previous positions and often bereft of fact.

But I suppose the "holier than thou" attitude of entrenched partisans (regardless of subject) is here to stay.

 

What is it about the Tea Party's values Liberals don't like?




1. Illegal aliens are here illegally.
2. Pro-domestic employment is indispensable.
3. A strong military is essential.
4. Special interests must be eliminated.
5. Gun ownership is sacred.
6. Government must be downsized.
7. The national budget must be balanced.
8. Deficit spending must end.
9. Bailout and stimulus plans are illegal.
10. Reducing personal income taxes is a must.
11. Reducing business income taxes is mandatory.
12. Political offices must be available to average citizens.
13. Intrusive government must be stopped.
14. English as our core language is required.
15. Traditional family values are encouraged.

 

An open letter to true centrists? It looks like simply another liberal attack on conservatives and Christians.

 

I disagree with you.

Lets look at much of Obama's foreign policy. He started off backing the over throw of Syrian President, then went wishy washy on what to do. We still don't know where America stands with Syria, except it's a big mess and created the most terrifying terrorist group to come out since Al-Qaeda.


Libya. He helped topple the government in Libya and then walked away. Unlike Bush, there was no plans to put in place another government. Then when our embassy got attacked, we had no one in Libya to call for help for them.

Iraq, I don't blame Obama for not leaving some troops in Iraq, the Prime minister wanted complete control to try our troops for war if innocent people got murdered by American troops. But I do blame him for not trying to convince Iraq to change their mind in all those years, or give the Sunnis more power in the government knowing how fighting was still flaring up there for lack of a say in the government by Sunnis. I blame him most of all, when the ISIS began attacking cities in force and taking them over one by one and Iraq asked for air power to help defeat them, Obama refused. He is still refusing to help and this group of terrorist is so bad, even the Al-Qaeda is even afraid of them. Are we going to lose Iraq to this group with all their oil wells and nuclear power plant? They could buy all the nuclear tech. they need from N. Korea and be a danger to the whole world. But does thought seem to bother Obama? It doesn't seem so, maybe he's afraid of losing his Nobel Peace Prize? No one in the Middle East trust us anymore. Surly not Israel. They know Obama isn't going to do what it takes to put real pressure on Iran to stop them from developing nuclear weapons. They are (*)(*)(*)(*)(*) footing around in their support for both Israel and Hamas. Jordan is flooded with refugees, fleeing both Iraq and Syria. Saudi Arabia is afraid Obama will back the opposition as he did in Egypt.

Russia seems to do what they want, knowing Obama won't really put enough pressure on them to hurt them.

We all know what a mess he has made of our immigration problem. He never tried to get a hold of the Mexican President and demand he not let those bus loads of illegals stop near our border. As a matter of fact, Obama and the Liberals have made this mess in the first place by their words and actions of make these people think that all they have to do is cross over our border and they won't be turned away. We will not only allow them in, but make them citizens.

Yes, Obama will leave a lasting impression on America and the world. One he most likely won't like and neither will the world. Even Palin couldn't screw things up as bad as Obama has.

 

We shall have to agree to disagree.

Personally I think history will look up Obama rather favorably.

 

Well show me where I'm wrong. He might be looked on favorably for starting a health care plan if it doesn't break the nation, and people can afford to go have medical treatment with those high deductibles. Only time will tell how that works out. But everything else I said is true unless you can prove me wrong.

 

Sorry I haven't heard of any Tea Partier being arrested for disrespecting anyone. I have heard of plenty of the Wall Street protesters being arrested for that.

Show me. Is it any worse than this intimidation? http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-s...dnt-care-about-protest-signs-threatening-bush

None have ever been arrested for violance I know. They were hundreds arrested at the 2008Republican National Convention. Two of them were arrested with Molotov Cocktails

Mass arrests of protesters at Republican National Convention

www.wsws.org/en/articles/2008/09/rnc-s04.html

Mass arrests of protesters at Republican National Convention. By Jerry White 4 September 2008. Authorities have carried out a ... The police fired tear gas, beanbags and used tasers to arrest hundreds of protesters. Also targeted were ...

No, they hate intrusive government. Like those that listen into your phone call, tell you how big of a drink you can have. What you can feed your kids. etc.

No, I think those thinking their opinion is the only thing that matters is Liberals.

Compromise goes two ways. Libs don't want to give in either.

Does Liberals follow their own guildlines. You call on helping the poor, but it's been proven Cons help the poor more. Libs expect government to do it all.

They except diversity. But don't expect people to go against their moral beliefs.

 

Well, the objective of American involvement in Libya was to prevent a genocide by Ghadaffi. It wasn't at all about regime change.

Withdrawing from Iraq was because the Iraqi government wouldn't agree to basic pre-requisite terms. They did so willingly and deliberately.

The only issue with Syria was the mistake of the "red line" comment.

ISIS is not Obama's fault in any way shape or form. Blaming Obama for not wanting to get involved militarily in Iraq for a third time is hardly a fair criticism.

Iraq does not have a nuclear power plant.

Is it surprising that nobody in the middle east trust the US anymore? That didn't start with Obama at all.

Sanctions against Iran are working to contain their nuclear weapons program. They are feeling the effects and recently headed off the next round by agreeing to certain provisions.

The US (Obama) does not support Hamas in any way and is unwavering in its support for Israel.

Obama acted rather swiftly in imposing sanctions against Russia. for some reason Americans think that they can intimidate the world into doing what it considers in america's best interest. It doesn't work like that. But you may have noticed that Russia appears to be altering its position.

Obama didn't make a mess of the immigration problem at all and he sure as hell didn't cause it.
In fact it is really up to CONGRESS to fix the mess.
And he is upholding the law when it comes to these kids - a law created to protect children from human traffickers implemented in 2005/6Your accusations of his and liberal culpability are not supported by the facts of the matter, which makes them ideal republican talking points.

He will be seen to have introduced Obamacare, ended two wars, steered the nation thru the worst economic crisis since the depression, reclaimed some american prestige overseas, stared down threats of US debt default, got Bin Ladin, killed hundreds of AQ and taliban operatives without losing a single american soldier and drastically reduced the deficit.

OTOH, he'll also be remembered for the NSA spying scandal that broke on his watch but which certainly was not of his doing. As to the litany of other "scandals" currently being promoted by the right, NONE of them are particularly relevant to history let alone reality.