Posted on 08/06/2004 6:47:56 AM PDT by mhking
There they go again. Devoid of ideas, running from the record of failure on the economy and national security, President Bush and his campaign are going negative again, trying to label John Kerry rather than level with Americans.
Now the refrain is that Kerry and Edwards are too ''liberal'' for America. Democrats tend to duck when such charges are leveled. Clinton dressed up as a ''New Democrat,'' trying to separate himself rhetorically. Reformers now call themselves ''progressives,'' trying to avoid the label. Frankly, I think it's time for people to stand up.
Think about it: A conservative Christian is a contradiction in terms. Christ wasn't a conservative. He fed the hungry simply because they were hungry. He didn't require that they go to work first. He healed the sick, simply because they were sick. He didn't push them into an insurance company, or let the drug companies gouge them on prices. Jesus was a liberal; Herod was the conservative.
Moses was the liberal; Pharaoh was the conservative. Abolitionists were liberals; slave owners were the conservatives. Mandela is a liberal; the South African apartheid leaders were the conservatives. That's why conservative Dick Cheney supported apartheid over Mandela, and approved of keeping Mandela in prison.
The Suffragettes were liberals; those who opposed the vote for women were conservatives. Martin Luther King was a liberal; the segregationists were conservatives. He wanted to end racial discrimination; they wanted to conserve it.
Advocates of national health care are liberals; George W. Bush, the HMOs and drug companies are the conservatives. They profit from the current system and want to conserve it from reforms that would make health care affordable for all Americans.
America was a liberal idea. Washington and Jefferson were the liberals; King George was the conservative. America was founded on the proposition that ''We the people'' were endowed with inalienable rights -- including life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. And when oppressed by an unjust ruler, we had the right to declare our independence and establish our own form of government.
And America was built by liberals -- by dissenters, by those persecuted for their religion or their race. The Statute of Liberty doesn't say, ''Send me your privileged, your wealthy, your powerful yearning to conserve their fortunes.'' It says, ''Send me your tired, your poor, your humble yearning to breathe free.''
Today the choices are equally clear. Bush and Cheney argue for tax cuts for the wealthy; they want to consolidate the wealth and power of the ''have mores'' that the president calls ''my base.''
Liberals are for rolling back tax cuts for the rich and investing in education so every child gets a fair shot. Conservatives would conserve the two Americas: one system of education, health care and retirement security for the powerful, and one for the rest of us. Liberals would make certain that everyone has the right to a high-quality education, to affordable health care, to a decent retirement.
Bush wants to cut guaranteed benefits under Social Security while privatizing it; liberals want to save Social Security so that all Americans have a basic floor beneath their feet.
Bush is against a minimum wage; liberals want to raise the minimum wage. Bush wants to weaken the 40-hour week and reduce those eligible for overtime; liberals want to make certain workers get paid overtime if they have to work more than 40 hours a week.
You can pick your side -- liberal or conservative, for change or for the status quo, for the poor or for the privileged. For me, I stand with Christ against Herod; Moses against the Pharaoh; the abolitionists against the slaveholders; King against the segregationists, the Suffragettes against the male politicians; the many against the few, and liberals against this crowd in the White House.
But whatever you choose, the next time Bush and Cheney rail about Kerry being too liberal, remember that America was a liberal idea from the start.
This poor excuse for a man is totally irrelevant now. Even librals don't listen to him.
Hey Jesse, spit in any white peoples' burgers today?
How is your love child doing Reverend?
Would Jesus have done any of the stuff you've done?
Oh, THIS is too good!
I just pulled up the Declaration of Independence, and went to the petition part, where the Founding Fathers (un-PC, I know) "let facts be submitted to a candid world." And here's what we have - substitute JF'nK for German George, and with almost no redaction, we have the following:
He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences: (the ICC)
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless ... Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.
In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.
Jesus promised to have "disciples that look like America" < /sarcasm>
Jesus was a liberal???
Matthew 5:17 says, "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them."
Clearly a conservative
That about covers it.
So many targets ... so little ammo ... Hey you guys ... Could you line up in a row?
Jesus was also a Jew. He fed the hungry,healed the sick, chased demons away, went into a rage in the temple courtyard at the money lenders and crooks. Not because they were crooks or money lenders but rather that they soiled the sancrosact temple. He chased them out. He did not persue them. He showed compassion and love and yes, that is what conservative Christains do when they are not totally involved in being totally judgemental.
"Yeah whatever. He also said that Mary was a single mother too."
And that Jesus, Mary and Joseph were homeless. He knows as much about religion as a doorknob.
Jesse Jackson lying and trying to rewrite history and he is doing so by Lying to the ignorant.
There's no brain in being a liberal. I wonder if Jesse spits when he types.
It reads like one.
I think Jesse HiJackson has lost his mind.
Well Jesse, maybe not, but there should be shame in being willfully ignorant, overtly socialist, and demonstrably stupid - all of which are true of most liberals.
Ping
Come on..give Jesse a break..he's very depressed..sjust got back from Boston..had to watch Rev Al and Barak get big prime time gigs..huge applause..he got on opposite "As the World Turns"...no one was watching, listening..
False. He did it to demonstrate His power and authority.
True, but not from his standpoint. Abolitionists were more of the classical liberal type. Not socialist/communist like Jackson and his ilk are.
Martin Luther King was a liberal; the segregationists were conservatives.
I don't know how liberal King was. That's left up to interpretation, I guess. But the segregationist Dixiecrats did indeed want to conserve their unconstitutional nonsense.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
