Ed, define "Liberal"

Ed,

I laugh everytime you call me a "Liberal", especially considering my
politics and voting record.

Would you please define what your warped view of a liberal is? Or is
it your simple mind just describing someone who disagrees with you?

And Ed, feel free to pontificate!

Enjoy,

Perry B

PS, sorry I top-posted!

Perry Butler wrote:
Ed,

I laugh everytime you call me a "Liberal", especially considering my
politics and voting record.

Would you please define what your warped view of a liberal is?...

Mr. Ed thinks a liberal is someone who exceeds 20 mph/~30 kph downhill
on a tadpole trike.

--
Tom Sherman - Fox River Valley (For a bit)

Apolitical greetings -

Tom opined:

Mr. Ed thinks a liberal is someone who exceeds 20 mph/
~30 kph downhill on a tadpole trike.

Actually, I suspect Ed's more likely to think a liberal
is someone who enjoys that experience. He might accept a
guy whose sweaty sphincter is clinching as a fellow
conservative. As usual, in both cases he's probably wrong.

Regards,
Wayne

wrote in message
oups.com...
Ed,

I laugh everytime you call me a "Liberal", especially considering my
politics and voting record.

Would you please define what your warped view of a liberal is? Or is
it your simple mind just describing someone who disagrees with you?

And Ed, feel free to pontificate!

Enjoy,

Perry B

PS, sorry I top-posted!

No, you did not top post since this message originated with you. Elementary,
my dear Watson!

Democrats of the Far Left persuasion, otherwise known as kooks, are who I
mean by liberal. The Democrats as they were following W.W.II were not all
that bad. At least they believed in defending this country against its
enemies, although they finally came to grief on the Vietnam War.

Basically, I am death on anyone who will not defend the United States of
America, the greatest nation God has ever seen fit to put on this earth. I
note that even Hillary is moving to the Right these days on the security
issue.

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

"LoGo USA" wrote in message
ps.com...
Apolitical greetings -

Tom opined:

Mr. Ed thinks a liberal is someone who exceeds 20 mph/
~30 kph downhill on a tadpole trike.

Actually, I suspect Ed's more likely to think a liberal
is someone who enjoys that experience. He might accept a
guy whose sweaty sphincter is clinching as a fellow
conservative. As usual, in both cases he's probably wrong.

Regards,
Wayne

I am against anyone going faster than about 20 mph on any kind of a bike
unless you are into racing. You are courting death when you undertake speed
on a bike. I urge all of you to proceed slowly on your bikes. You will live
longer that way.

"I grow old . I grow old .
I shall wear the bottoms of my trousers rolled."

T.S.Eliot - The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

Edward Dolan wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
Ed,

I laugh everytime you call me a "Liberal", especially considering my
politics and voting record.

Would you please define what your warped view of a liberal is? Or is
it your simple mind just describing someone who disagrees with you?

And Ed, feel free to pontificate!

Enjoy,

Perry B

PS, sorry I top-posted!

No, you did not top post since this message originated with you. Elementary,
my dear Watson!

Sucker!





Democrats of the Far Left persuasion, otherwise known as kooks, are who I
mean by liberal. The Democrats as they were following W.W.II were not all
that bad. At least they believed in defending this country against its
enemies, although they finally came to grief on the Vietnam War.

Basically, I am death on anyone who will not defend the United States of
America, the greatest nation God has ever seen fit to put on this earth. I
note that even Hillary is moving to the Right these days on the security
issue.



Eddie,

This is it? This is the best you can do? Why are you calling others
and myself "liberals"? You use the word "liberal," can't you define
"liberal" any better than this?

If that's your answer, there are very few "liberals" in the good old
USA!

Amazing, even the Great Eddie Dolan can't adequately define "liberal."
Or was it too much of a shock to find out that maybe Perry isn't a
"liberal"!

Cat got your tongue?

Was this question too much for your simple mind?

Christ Eddie, answer the question!

Let's face it Eddie, your mind is so shallow that a "liberal," to you,
is "anyone who disagrees with you." I can imagine this was the
definition used by your mommy and daddy. Yes Eddie, this is a simple
definition befitting of you!

Feel free to rant! Of course, when you do you won't answer the
questions above, but will just find some way to pass your
simplemindedness. You always do!

Enjoy,

Perry B

wrote in message
oups.com...
Edward Dolan wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
Ed,

I laugh everytime you call me a "Liberal", especially considering my
politics and voting record.

Would you please define what your warped view of a liberal is? Or is
it your simple mind just describing someone who disagrees with you?

And Ed, feel free to pontificate!

Enjoy,

Perry B

PS, sorry I top-posted!

No, you did not top post since this message originated with you.
Elementary,
my dear Watson!

Sucker!

???

Democrats of the Far Left persuasion, otherwise known as kooks, are who I
mean by liberal. The Democrats as they were following W.W.II were not all
that bad. At least they believed in defending this country against its
enemies, although they finally came to grief on the Vietnam War.

Basically, I am death on anyone who will not defend the United States of
America, the greatest nation God has ever seen fit to put on this earth.
I
note that even Hillary is moving to the Right these days on the security
issue.

This is it? This is the best you can do? Why are you calling others
and myself "liberals"? You use the word "liberal," can't you define
"liberal" any better than this?
[...]

My definition above is a masterpiece of conciseness and it is exactly what I
mean by a liberal. See Mr. Sherman's many political posts from a few years
ago on this newsgroup to get an idea of what I mean by liberal. You and he
are on the same page. You are against the Iraq War and you most likely do
want to do anything about Iran either. That is because like all liberals you
are a coward and do not have any guts for warfare. All you and your ilk know
how to do is to run to the UN and seek the approval of la belle France for
sanctions or some other absurd non-solution.

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

My definition above is a masterpiece of conciseness and it is exactly what
I mean by a liberal. See Mr. Sherman's many political posts from a few
years ago on this newsgroup to get an idea of what I mean by liberal. You
and he are on the same page. You are against the Iraq War and you most
likely do want to do anything about Iran either. That is because like all
liberals you are a coward and do not have any guts for warfare. All you
and your ilk know how to do is to run to the UN and seek the approval of
la belle France for sanctions or some other absurd non-solution.

I think the word coward has gotten a bad rap.

From dictionary.com

coward:
One who shows ignoble fear in the face of danger or pain.

Being cowardly seems like having some basic common sense. It is actually
much more ridiculous to place yourself in the face of danger or pain. Even
when the cause is noble it still defies common sense. We were equipped with
the ability to sense danger and pain so that we might avoid them.

I know that you mean the word as an insult but a real man will look deeper.

As for not having the guts for warfare, I personally, do not. I think that
the more of us who evolve away from having the guts for warfare, the better.
The problem with "live and let live" is how to deal with those who say "live
and let die". For the time being, the total avoidance of war may be
impossible. War, however, should always be the last resort.

Jeff Grippe
--Not a saint by any stretch but doesn't aspire to be one either

"Jeff Grippe" wrote in message
...

Edward Dolan wrote:

My definition above is a masterpiece of conciseness and it is exactly
what I mean by a liberal. See Mr. Sherman's many political posts from a
few years ago on this newsgroup to get an idea of what I mean by liberal.
You and he are on the same page. You are against the Iraq War and you
most likely do want to do anything about Iran either. That is because
like all liberals you are a coward and do not have any guts for warfare.
All you and your ilk know how to do is to run to the UN and seek the
approval of la belle France for sanctions or some other absurd
non-solution.

I think the word coward has gotten a bad rap.

From dictionary.com

coward:
One who shows ignoble fear in the face of danger or pain.

Being cowardly seems like having some basic common sense. It is actually
much more ridiculous to place yourself in the face of danger or pain. Even
when the cause is noble it still defies common sense. We were equipped
with the ability to sense danger and pain so that we might avoid them.

I know that you mean the word as an insult but a real man will look
deeper.

As for not having the guts for warfare, I personally, do not. I think that
the more of us who evolve away from having the guts for warfare, the
better. The problem with "live and let live" is how to deal with those who
say "live and let die". For the time being, the total avoidance of war may
be impossible. War, however, should always be the last resort.

Jeff means well, but if you put the destiny of this nation in his hands and
those of liberals like him, they will blow it big time. We simply cannot
afford any more Carter's in the White House.

This nation and all of the West is in mortal danger from the Muslim
terrorists. They will most likely get their hands on a nuclear weapon (maybe
from Iran or a chaotic Pakistan) sooner or later. All it would take for the
West to loose all of its precious freedoms is for one atom bomb to go off in
one major city. At that point we will all be living in a world of police
states. People will give up their freedom readily in order to live in
safety.

We conservatives want to track down and kill all the Muslim terrorists with
extreme prejudice and we do not want any rogue nation to have nuclear
weapons which the Muslin terrorists could get their hands on. This is a war
worth fighting for sure. The Dems (liberal persuasion) have no stomach for
this very necessary conflict and that is why I call them cowards. If they
had their way, we would surely be defeated in the end. They did not know how
to handle the Soviet Union when they were in power and they do know any
better how to handle the Muslim terrorists.

Jeff is like an ostrich who buries his head in the sand the better not to
see what is happening in the world. The World Trade Center fiasco was not
enough to convince him of the dire peril we are in. It will take an atom
bomb destroying Manhattan before Jeff will ever wake up. But by then, it
will be too late. The kind of world we are living in today demands
preemptive wars.

The best question that can be asked right now is what would you do about
Iran? Your answer to that question will determine whether you have any guts
and will tell me all I will ever have to know about you.

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

Edward Dolan wrote:

Basically, I am death on anyone who will not defend the United States of
America, the greatest nation God has ever seen fit to put on this earth.

But isn't it what everybody thinks about their own countries?

And what is your opinion of the poll results by - I forget exactly who
tracks public opinion in the US, I think it's University of Maryland,
the Council on Foreign Relations, and some others - according to which
both parties are significantly to the right of the majority public
opinion? (I tried to Google for the specifics but it looks like one
must subscribe ($) to these reports. IIRC some of the issues the
testers ask about are the US vs. the UN, health insurance, the Kyoto,
that sort of thing.)

--
Jan Bielawski