Hillary Clinton called it a Ã¢â‚¬Å“vast right-wing conspiracy.Ã¢â‚¬Â Conservatives call it Ã¢â‚¬Å“message discipline.Ã¢â‚¬Â Others call it the Ã¢â‚¬Å“right-wing noise machine.Ã¢â‚¬Â Here at TheLiberalOC.com we call it Ã¢â‚¬Å“crap.Ã¢â‚¬Â And from time to time, we will bring their swill to you in our forum calledÃ¢â‚¬Â¦
It’s pretty tough to have a constructive debate or dialogue with Republicans about anything without compromise coming from both sides. The looming budget crisis is hitting our state hard in a number of areas. It will require compromise from both sides of the political spectrum and will likely include a combination of painful spending cuts and unwanted but necessary tax increases or fee increases. I, for one, would like all the money back that we spent on the 2003 recall election and the 2005 special election, money foolishly wasted by Republicans.Ã‚Â Ã‚Â Ã‚Â Ã‚Â Ã‚Â
Today’s Flash Report commentary (go find it, I’m not linking to it) hits State Senate Don Perata with both barrels and Jon Fleischman must be using Dick Cheney’s rifle, because the spray deliberately hits Liberals as a category.
It must be so easy to be a liberal. After all, you are freed up from notions such as “individual liberty” — “limited government” – “freedom” — instead Democrats who want to take America (and in this case California) down the road towards socialism are quite content calling for a higher tax burden here in the Golden State (where taxes are already dangerously high).
In fact, as the spending went up and up, I am sure that many conversation have taken place amongst liberal leaders, chuckling that their very overspending would increase the pressure to increase taxes.
Jon, as usually, has no idea what he’s talking about when it comes to liberals and, in respect to his second paragraph, he’s making it up. Lord knows, Matt Cunningham would never let me get away with that last sentence.
Since Jon leaps beyond the firewall of California to include Liberals’ plans for America, let’s turn this all around on him, shall we?
It must be easy to be a conservative because they say they’re for individual liberty but they openly promote discrimination and the inequity of rights for gays and lesbians. Gays and Lebsians can’t marry because they really don’t like the idea of two men sharing a bed, so its individual liberty for them, but no one else (at least no one…gay).
Its easy to be a conservative to say they are for limited government but in all the while, no conservative has actually shrunk government in any way (unlike the successful Clinton/Gore ReGo initiative that shrunk the federal government to the same size it was during the Kennedy administration). Meanwhile, their record of limited government includes things like pitching and passing the Patriot Act, or abusing FISA to spy on Americans, or asking Telecoms to monitor American phone calls even before 9/11, or blowing what experts will say will amount to nearly $3 trillion on a failed war and paying for it with money borrowed from the Japanese, the Saudis and the Communist Chinese. Limited imagination.
And it must be easy to be a conservative because they say they are for freedom without ever really defining what freedom is. I have to guess its the freedom to run up budget deficits and massive public debt, the freedom to treat the Constitution like a “Goddamn piece of paper,” or the freedom to out CIA covert operatives in a time of war. What did Janis Joplin say” “Freedom’s just another word for nothing left to lose.” It was a song; you’re weren’t supposed to take it literally.
Bi-partisan means both sides come together and compromise. As a taxpayer, there are things I am willing to pay more for in exchange for no cuts to certain programs. For example, I’m willing to pay more taxes for public education provided there are fewer restrictions on how the money is spent. I don’t want to see the public safety budget cut. But I have no problem closing a tax “sloop-hole” on luxury boat owners who do support the California economy but not as much as Republican lawmakers say they do.
Speaking solely for myself, since other Liberals will surely have a different opinion, I believe Liberals lead the fight for the civil rights movement, affirmative action, the ERA, and GLBT rights. Liberals promote voting rights, true campaign-finance reform, and more vigorous forms of free speech and free expession.
Liberals believe government rules with the consent of the governed, and government leaders ignore “We, The People” at their peril. I count of the freedom of the press to be a watchdog of government. I’m for protecting individuals from unwarranted government intrusion, and a woman’s right to choose what she does with her body. Government needs to protect liberty, equality and dignity of each person no matter what their race, ethincity or faith or sexual identity is. I believe government must help those who are less fortunate whether its through healthcare, higher education opportunities, public safety and economic assistence. This is not a handout but instead a helping hand (Hubert H. Humphrey had it right). Everyone does better when everyone does better.
Courts must protect individual liberties. Just because a judge decides against a conservative doe not make that judge an “activist.” While I believe the government has a role in protecting th American people, they must do so within the realm of the U.S. Constitution of the US.
If conservatives like Jon want to define us as Liberals, I can define for Jon what conservatives are for us. Partisan of me? Damn straight.