Home     Contact Us    
Main Board Job Seeker's Board Job Wanted Board Resume Bank Company Board Word Help Medquist New MTs Classifieds Offshore Concerns VR/Speech Recognition Tech Help Coding/Medical Billing
Gab Board Politics Comedy Stop Health Issues
ADVERTISEMENT




Serving Over 20,000 US Medical Transcriptionists

When did "conservative" and "liberal" become insults?

Posted By: TechSupport on 2009-04-15
In Reply to:

It seems to serve the purposes of politicians very well to encourage their followers to label, demonize and fear those who belong to "the other" party, and to paint them all with whatever nutty ideas the true extremists in the other party happen to believe.


The truth is that most "ordinary" Democrats are only a little more liberal than most "ordinary" Republicans, and vice versa, but we are encouraged to hate one another because this serves the purposes of the parties.  Politics has become not a matter of which party offers the most persuasive platform of positive ideas, but seeing who can create the largest howling, mindless mob.


Put your "everyday" Democrat and Republican in a room together attending some nonpolitical function - say, for instance, a baby shower or a choir practice.  They don't happen to know which party anyone belongs to.  What kinds of things do you hear them talking about?  What aspirations do you hear them express?  You'll be amazed at how much they have in common, sharing concerns for good schools, safe streets, job security, affordable healthcare, and many other issues.  The Democrat will be no happier about the increase in the sales tax than the Republican, and the Republican will agree that the current system of healthcare leaves too many people without options.


You're a liberal, and I'll bet that you're a moderate liberal.  I'm a conservative, but I'm a moderate conservative.  If we could get together outside of Washington, we'd probably come to some pretty workable, livable and even affordable solutions to the common problems that we all share.


Let's recognize what's happening to us as those in power in Washington find it useful for us to hate one another.  Let's resist.  And let's all see if we can't find some moderates in both parties that we can send to Washington who will truly represent who the American people truly are and what the American people truly believe when we refuse to be manipulated into positions of hatred toward one another.


 




Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu


Other related messages found in our database

From the "Conservative Underground"
North American Union to Replace USA?







President Bush is pursuing a globalist agenda to create a North American Union, effectively erasing our borders with both Mexico and Canada. This was the hidden agenda behind the Bush administration's true open borders policy.

Secretly, the Bush administration is pursuing a policy to expand NAFTA politically, setting the stage for a North American Union designed to encompass the U.S., Canada, and Mexico. What the Bush administration truly wants is the free, unimpeded movement of people across open borders with Mexico and Canada.

President Bush intends to abrogate U.S. sovereignty to the North American Union, a new economic and political entity which the President is quietly forming, much as the European Union has formed.

The blueprint President Bush is following was laid out in a 2005 report entitled "Building a North American Community" published by the left-of-center Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). The CFR report connects the dots between the Bush administration's actual policy on illegal immigration and the drive to create the North American Union:



At their meeting in Waco, Texas, at the end of March 2005, U.S. President George W. Bush, Mexican President Vicente Fox, and Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin committed their governments to a path of cooperation and joint action. We welcome this important development and offer this report to add urgency and specific recommendations to strengthen their efforts.


What is the plan? Simple, erase the borders. The plan is contained in a "Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America" little noticed when President Bush and President Fox created it in March 2005:



In March 2005, the leaders of Canada, Mexico, and the United States adopted a Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP), establishing ministerial-level working groups to address key security and economic issues facing North America and setting a short deadline for reporting progress back to their governments. President Bush described the significance of the SPP as putting forward a common commitment "to markets and democracy, freedom and trade, and mutual prosperity and security." The policy framework articulated by the three leaders is a significant commitment that will benefit from broad discussion and advice. The Task Force is pleased to provide specific advice on how the partnership can be pursued and realized.

To that end, the Task Force proposes the creation by 2010 of a North American community to enhance security, prosperity, and opportunity. We propose a community based on the principle affirmed in the March 2005 Joint Statement of the three leaders that "our security and prosperity are mutually dependent and complementary." Its boundaries will be defined by a common external tariff and an outer security perimeter within which the movement of people, products, and capital will be legal, orderly and safe. Its goal will be to guarantee a free, secure, just, and prosperous North America.




The perspective of the CFR report allows us to see President Bush's speech to the nation as nothing more than public relations posturing and window dressing. No wonder President Vincente Fox called President Bush in a panic after the speech. How could the President go back on his word to Mexico by actually securing our border? Not to worry, President Bush reassured President Fox. The National Guard on the border were only temporary, meant to last only as long until the public forgets about the issue, as has always been the case in the past.

The North American Union plan, which Vincente Fox has every reason to presume President Bush is still following, calls for the only border to be around the North American Union -- not between any of these countries. Or, as the CFR report stated:



The three governments should commit themselves to the long-term goal of dramatically diminishing the need for the current intensity of the governments’ physical control of cross-border traffic, travel, and trade within North America. A long-term goal for a North American border action plan should be joint screening of travelers from third countries at their first point of entry into North America and the elimination of most controls over the temporary movement of these travelers within North America.


Discovering connections like this between the CFR recommendations and Bush administration policy gives credence to the argument that President Bush favors amnesty and open borders, as he originally said. Moreover, President Bush most likely continues to consider groups such as the Minuteman Project to be "vigilantes," as he has also said in response to a reporter's question during the March 2005 meeting with President Fox.

Why doesn’t President Bush just tell the truth? His secret agenda is to dissolve the United States of America into the North American Union. The administration has no intent to secure the border, or to enforce rigorously existing immigration laws. Securing our border with Mexico is evidently one of the jobs President Bush just won't do. If a fence is going to be built on our border with Mexico, evidently the Minuteman Project is going to have to build the fence themselves. Will President Bush protect America's sovereignty, or is this too a job the Minuteman Project will have to do for him?






Mr. Corsi is the author of several books, including "Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry" (along with John O'Neill), "Black Gold Stranglehold: The Myth of Scarcity and the Politics of Oil" (along with Craig R. Smith), "Atomic Iran: How the Terrorist Regime Bought the Bomb and American Politicians," and most recently, "Minutemen: The Battle to Secure America's Borders." He will soon author a book on the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America and the prospect of the forthcoming North American Union.



 

From the "Conservative Underground"
North American Union to Replace USA?







President Bush is pursuing a globalist agenda to create a North American Union, effectively erasing our borders with both Mexico and Canada. This was the hidden agenda behind the Bush administration's true open borders policy.

Secretly, the Bush administration is pursuing a policy to expand NAFTA politically, setting the stage for a North American Union designed to encompass the U.S., Canada, and Mexico. What the Bush administration truly wants is the free, unimpeded movement of people across open borders with Mexico and Canada.

President Bush intends to abrogate U.S. sovereignty to the North American Union, a new economic and political entity which the President is quietly forming, much as the European Union has formed.

The blueprint President Bush is following was laid out in a 2005 report entitled "Building a North American Community" published by the left-of-center Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). The CFR report connects the dots between the Bush administration's actual policy on illegal immigration and the drive to create the North American Union:



At their meeting in Waco, Texas, at the end of March 2005, U.S. President George W. Bush, Mexican President Vicente Fox, and Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin committed their governments to a path of cooperation and joint action. We welcome this important development and offer this report to add urgency and specific recommendations to strengthen their efforts.


What is the plan? Simple, erase the borders. The plan is contained in a "Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America" little noticed when President Bush and President Fox created it in March 2005:



In March 2005, the leaders of Canada, Mexico, and the United States adopted a Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP), establishing ministerial-level working groups to address key security and economic issues facing North America and setting a short deadline for reporting progress back to their governments. President Bush described the significance of the SPP as putting forward a common commitment "to markets and democracy, freedom and trade, and mutual prosperity and security." The policy framework articulated by the three leaders is a significant commitment that will benefit from broad discussion and advice. The Task Force is pleased to provide specific advice on how the partnership can be pursued and realized.

To that end, the Task Force proposes the creation by 2010 of a North American community to enhance security, prosperity, and opportunity. We propose a community based on the principle affirmed in the March 2005 Joint Statement of the three leaders that "our security and prosperity are mutually dependent and complementary." Its boundaries will be defined by a common external tariff and an outer security perimeter within which the movement of people, products, and capital will be legal, orderly and safe. Its goal will be to guarantee a free, secure, just, and prosperous North America.




The perspective of the CFR report allows us to see President Bush's speech to the nation as nothing more than public relations posturing and window dressing. No wonder President Vincente Fox called President Bush in a panic after the speech. How could the President go back on his word to Mexico by actually securing our border? Not to worry, President Bush reassured President Fox. The National Guard on the border were only temporary, meant to last only as long until the public forgets about the issue, as has always been the case in the past.

The North American Union plan, which Vincente Fox has every reason to presume President Bush is still following, calls for the only border to be around the North American Union -- not between any of these countries. Or, as the CFR report stated:



The three governments should commit themselves to the long-term goal of dramatically diminishing the need for the current intensity of the governments’ physical control of cross-border traffic, travel, and trade within North America. A long-term goal for a North American border action plan should be joint screening of travelers from third countries at their first point of entry into North America and the elimination of most controls over the temporary movement of these travelers within North America.


Discovering connections like this between the CFR recommendations and Bush administration policy gives credence to the argument that President Bush favors amnesty and open borders, as he originally said. Moreover, President Bush most likely continues to consider groups such as the Minuteman Project to be "vigilantes," as he has also said in response to a reporter's question during the March 2005 meeting with President Fox.

Why doesn’t President Bush just tell the truth? His secret agenda is to dissolve the United States of America into the North American Union. The administration has no intent to secure the border, or to enforce rigorously existing immigration laws. Securing our border with Mexico is evidently one of the jobs President Bush just won't do. If a fence is going to be built on our border with Mexico, evidently the Minuteman Project is going to have to build the fence themselves. Will President Bush protect America's sovereignty, or is this too a job the Minuteman Project will have to do for him?






Mr. Corsi is the author of several books, including "Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry" (along with John O'Neill), "Black Gold Stranglehold: The Myth of Scarcity and the Politics of Oil" (along with Craig R. Smith), "Atomic Iran: How the Terrorist Regime Bought the Bomb and American Politicians," and most recently, "Minutemen: The Battle to Secure America's Borders." He will soon author a book on the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America and the prospect of the forthcoming North American Union.



 

Since you seem to know, just what is the "conservative agenda", please? sm
..and kindly provide references from the conservative sources themselves, not from liberal sources that are a little too prone to misinterpretations and mischaracterizations.

Thank you. I apologize in advance if this request imposes a burden on you to get your facts straight, but you'll be better informed for having made the effort.
Ah, ever the generous "liberal." However...
you might want to examine your own "views" before calling someone else "jaded." But...sadly...that requires an open mind and I don't believe yours has been open for a very, very long time. Which is really sad. I'm sorry for you...truly.
About "Liberal Bias"
Study after study (if you don't count that moron Bernard Goldberg) have shown that if there's any bias in the media, it's Republican bias. Here's just the latest one:

http://newsinfo.iu.edu/news/page/normal/9993.html

Who do you think OWNS the mass media? It ain't liberals.
SP declared war on "liberal" media at RNC
in view of the NeoCons pathologic inability to ever own up to a mistake, we are likely in for a long haul on this alleged zealous media vendetta against the poor victimized VP pick. In the absence of pub diplomatic offer of an olive branch, there are a number of strategies they could employ to appease the scoundrels. Attacking them for being biased is not one of them. For example, she could actually make the rounds of the talk show circuit, stop running on the lipstick platorm and focus on pub platform, policies and issues in a substantive and compelling manner, thus forcing thoat attack dogs to choke on their own bones of contention. won't hold my breath on that one.

What a bunch of whiners. Obama was been dogged and hounded by the media for over 18 months. This was "really bad" on Focks network where they launched feeding frenzies of attack reporting for weeks and even months at a time, cramming antiObama propaganda down the throats of anyone within earshot. Pubs can take comfort in the fact that ultimately these smear campaigns really did not succeed in bringing Obama down, who went on to seize the nomination of his party.

If you guys are on the right side of history and if you have selected the best among you with the strongest appeal, the most credible policies and can convince voters that they should trust your candidate over the opposition to deliver real CHANGE, you have nothing to fear. Before that can happen, though, JM and SP will have to step up to the podium and talk about the debt we are passing onto our children and their children in the form of costs of the Iraq war and the rising number of obscene corporate bailouts, the latest being FMFM, their special interests and corruption. JM and SP will also need to effectively address how they plan to unify a deeply divided nation, the war and foreign policy, the diminishing quality of life for the middle class, gas prices and alternative fuels, the mortgage industry collapse, jobs creation, outsourcing, health care, education, the environment, global warming…well, I could go on, but you get the drift.
A lot of "liberal" healthcare administrators
who once believed all the democrat garbage until they got Obama into office. Now, after reviewing from some of Obama's top sources the info on what Medicare will stop letting elderly have at their own discretion, they are becoming livid. Well, they wanted him, they got him. So many to thank for all their free lunch for everyone thinking.............
A lot of "liberal" healthcare administrators
who once believed all the democrat garbage until they got Obama into office. Now, after reviewing from some of Obama's top sources the info on what Medicare will stop letting elderly have at their own discretion, they are becoming livid. Well, they wanted him, they got him. So many to thank for all their free lunch for everyone thinking.............
A lot of "liberal" healthcare administrators
who once believed all the democrat garbage until they got Obama into office. Now, after reviewing from some of Obama's top sources the info on what Medicare will stop letting elderly have at their own discretion, they are becoming livid. Well, they wanted him, they got him. So many to thank for all their free lunch for everyone thinking.............
Louis Farrakhan is a "conservative media outlet" sm
or a blog? I do believe the words came right from his very own mouth.
You miss the title of the file "Conservative extremism"?
xx
Ah, more insults
is that all you can do?
Keep your insults
I did not bother to read past the first 3 lines of your post because you began your response by misinterpreting my post and you apparently are interested only in inflammatory response. It is the value of basic humanity I was referring to. Many of us remember a kinder and gentler America, more unified, an America where taking care of each other is not perceived as some sort of weakness or threat to our American values or way of life. Also, you do not understand the difference between democratic platform principles and socialist ideology. They are not the same.
Time for new insults. These are getting old!

Your *information* was filled with insults...sm
Sorry I don't meet your level of debate.

Maybe she just had her fill of insults from the other side
Another lib's perspective.
Your insults persist, is your mind so tiny that you

..can't seem to debate or discuss?  So you pile on more bashing and insults?  You must be a very unpleasant person.


And by the way, I am an athlete and a weightlifter and my boyfriend says that with my mouth I don't need the muscle behind it.  I am definitely not a sissy.  Most of my liberal friends are athletes also and are definitely not sissies and we're not a bunch of fatsos either.   As for AG stating that it must "stink to be" us, well she's wrong.  It's actually really great!  Many of the libs in the blue states are among the most educated, best paid, longest-living and healthiest and SLIMMEST folks, we're likely to stay married and we generally smoke less.  So AG, you got it wrong about it stinking to be us -- kind of an unworldly and naive and cruel comment, I'd say.


Please point out the insults and I will address those posts. sm
In reading the board, I am not sure who the one poster you are referring to is. As far as Nina's post, I saw no insults.   Please point them out.  Until a poster identifies themselves as a certain political persuasian, how do you know who they are?  I'd like a clue. 
Sick of your insults - stop with the name calling
I'm sick of hearing "rabid republicans". You've said it in more than one or two posts. We have objective conversations on this board, but you don't want to hear anything that differs from your viewpoint. And whenever we bring up anything positive about McCain we are instantly cut down and called a bunch of names. All you want is to hear everyone praise Obama. We know you support Obama and in your own words "I don't. Big deal". The media is biased towards Obama and independent newcasters have even said so (and not on Fox only). However, Fox news interviews both sides and they are fair to both sides (and at least they look everyone in the eye - unlike liberals who interview McCain and won't even look at him). We understand the Obama supporters refuse to watch Fox because all they want to hear is praise for Obama and insults and cut downs for McCain. There is no tolerance on MSNBC, CNN and others liberal stations for anyone with a difference of opinions and nobody can have a decent conversation with them. I stopped watching a long time ago (and I was an avid watcher for the past 8 years but the constant put downs and lies just got to be too much).

I get a bit tired of hearing the same ol retoric of the republicans this or the republicans that and the "rabid republics". I have a few names myself for the other side but at least I have some respect for people with other viewpoints than my own. I listen, I research and if I ever find myself wrong I admit it. I find no tolerance on the democratic side with the exception of a few. I have relatives who are voting for Obama and you ask them what part of his plan do they support the most and they cannot tell you. They want to change the subject. That's what I find about most Obama supporters. Most cannot even explain what his plans are. Most keep shouting the same party line "Hope" hope, hope, hope, hope. Hope for what? Obama has not even explained what the "hope" is and nobody else can. Change? Change what? Change our constitution? Change our way of life? Change is not always for the better. "Yes we can". Yes you can what? Nobody can explain that either. The republicans at least have the foresight to know what McCains plans are about. The democrats in Washington have messed up the economy and they don't even have the you know what to admit it. They know it too. The republicans will be the first to admit its both sides fault because it is, the democrats just like to throw blame to the other side, but we all know the truth.

As for McCain getting in...we are all hoping that will happen and nobody will know til Tuesday.
Those ain't insults, they are observations! Man you guys R thin-skinned! LOL! NM

Insults do not an effective campaign strategy make.
nm
Certified graduate of the *How to Insult like a kindergartener* school of insults. SM

Wow, the vitriolic statements, insults, and downright hate being shown....sm

on this board today (not unlike any other day, really), is amazing.  Okay, we all have our ideals, our belief system, etc.  But this board is a sad, tragic, IF very minute microcosm of why this country is so far in the dirt.........educated adults who will hate, insult, stamp their feet, stick out their tongues, and spew garbage rhetoric, RATHER THAN join with the country, the new president, the senate, congress, etc., and try to be part of the SOLUTION  instead of the PROBLEM.  We will NEVER fix this country, whether we have a democrat, republican, or independent in office, with pure hate and spite.  This is a chance for a new start.  Why not wait and see, why not pray for the president, teh cabinet, the Congress, and the whole nation, and try to work in our own ways for change.  While we are busy hating each other, we are strengthening the real enemies out there who truly want to harm us.  Everybody grow up.  Both my parents went through the Great Depression, and I grew up knowing and seeing it written on their faces just how awful it was to try to live through.  Instead of arguing and namecalling while the country teeters on the egde, why not TRY, why not wait to see before condemnining, why not see what each one of us, in our little lives, can do to help???


It is cold comfort to point fingers and laugh at the "other side" when both sides are falling into the abyss that is the growing national debt, growing unemployment, plunging stock market, while still mired in wars we cannot pay for.  Discussing political ideologies, hopes, fears, and issues is great, pure scathing hate and animosity will insure more failure.  Can you all not put our beautiful country ahead of everything else, the future of our kids and grandkids, stop childish fighting, and become part of the SOLUTION instead of the PROBLEM?   Please?