Political Definitions

[Airman1270 0]

As the '04 election approaches, many people, who don't normally keep abreast of public policy discussions, are beginning to evaluate information presented in debates, campaign ads, etc. It would be useful if these people understand what is meant when politicians use certain words & phrases, which might not mean what ordinary Americans assume they mean. To facilitate intelligent evaluation of campaign rhetoric, here's a short list of useful political definitions:

CIVIC GROUP - A group of citizens who support your candidacy

LOBBY - A group of citizens who support your opponent's candidacy

SPECIAL INTEREST - A group of citizens whose political philosophy is shared by your opponent

"IN THE POCKET OF...(CORPORATIONS, etc.)" - Your opponent receives contributions from business groups, etc., which agree with his political philosophy and support his campaign

"ANTI-LABOR" - Is not hostile to business owners, and does not support the imposition of crushing taxes and regulations on businesses which employ people and provide products/services most of us want

"ANTI-EDUCATION" - Opposes throwing more money at a failed public school system which wastes taxpayer's money while maintaining a carefully-groomed facade of poverty, and which aggressively pushes an agenda hostile to the beliefs of most parents while claiming self-righteous concern for "the children"

"VOTED AGAINST (WOMEN, CHILDREN, THE POOR, etc.)" - Voted against ill-conceived legislation which wastes taxpayer's money on inefficient programs

EXTREMIST - Not a liberal

RELIGIOUS FANATIC - Not an atheist

RELIGIOUS EXTREMIST - Goes to church; is not a liberal

FUNDAMENTALIST - Actually believes & respects the Bible

OPEN-MINDED - Claims relationship with/respect for the Church while rejecting the fundamentals of one's religion

"FORCES BELIEFS DOWN MY THROAT" - Tells me what he thinks about spiritual matters

"WANTS A THEOCRACY" - Does not believe the government is obligated to demonstrate hostility to religion, nor offer knee-jerk support for anything the Church opposes

SEPARATION OF CHURCH & STATE - Vacuous claim used to justify efforts to restrict the right of non-liberal Christians from participating in the legislative process

PROGRESSIVE - Liberal

TOLERANT - Agress with liberals (usually used in conjunction with intolerant accusations toward non-liberals)

HATE - Disagreement with liberals

MEAN-SPIRITED - Disagrees with liberals

FREE SPEECH - Blasphemy, pornogaphy, profanity, slander against non-liberals

HATE SPEECH - Expression of support for moral standards

HATE CRIME - A crime in which the victim is not a straight, white, non-liberal

HEALTH CARE CRISIS - The government does not fully control the medical profession

WAR ON DRUGS - Erosion of Fourth Amendment protections & the expansion of police powers

TAX BREAKS FOR THE RICH - Tax breaks for everybody


Think carefully & vote wisely.

Cheers,

Jon S.

[kallend 2,150]

BAD INTEL - Lies told by conservatives

SMALLER GOVERNMENT - when a conservative administration increases the size of the government

SMALL AND SHORT LIVED DEFICIT - a record deficit with no end in sight.

LOW UNEMPLOYMENT - what you get when your administration presides over a net loss of jobs.

NO NATION BUILDING - spending $billions on nation building

FIXING SOCIAL SECURITY - doing absolutely nothing

SUPPORT FOR EDUCATION - buying your kid's admission to Yale

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Airman1270 0]

...

Quote

BAD INTEL - Lies told by conservatives...

Saying something you believe to be true, which later turns out to be false, is not a "lie."

...SMALLER GOVERNMENT - when a conservative administration increases the size of the government...

We have a conservative government??????

...SMALL AND SHORT LIVED DEFICIT - a record deficit with no end in sight...

We have a conservative goverment??????

...LOW UNEMPLOYMENT - what you get when your administration presides over a net loss of jobs...

The president cannot "create jobs." He can only support policies which encourage business activity, which creates jobs. Congress makes the laws. Policies which have been passed by liberal administrations, and which remain in effect today, have made it more difficult to operate businesses and employ people. Bush "presided over" several hurricanes this past summer, but there's nothing he could have done about them.

...NO NATION BUILDING - spending $billions on nation building...

We responded to an attack. I suppose we could just withdraw from Iraq, but can you imagine the accusations of "not caring' about the Iraqi people that would follow?

...FIXING SOCIAL SECURITY - doing absolutely nothing...

He's trying. He's got a plan (for real.) He's facing an uphill battle, thanks to liberals in the House & Senate.

...SUPPORT FOR EDUCATION - buying your kid's admission to Yale

...

Ummm... It's the liberals who have destroyed the education system, and Bush signed a "more-of-the-same" measure written by Ted Kennedy. (More proof he's not a true conservative.) Plenty there to criticize, but I don't see how paying your kid's college tuition destroys your credibility on the subject.

Thanks,
Jon

[TypicalFish 0]

You forgot:

STAYING THE COURSE: Continuing with a flawed strategy that, no matter how well intentioned, simply isn't working.

"I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

[wmw999 2,589]

DIVISIVE BULLSHIT: "daffynishions" (anyone else remember those?) which lead one into not just saying that an approach is OK for a group, but that all other approaches are, therefore, wrong.

There isn't just one right answer to many questions

Even in math, if you change your frame of reference, some calculations look way different. And you can't assume that everyone is using your frame of reference.

Wendy W.
(there are 10 kinds of people in the world -- those who can count in binary, and those who can't)

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[pajarito 0]

Quote

(there are 10 kinds of people in the world -- those who can count in binary, and those who can't)

I like it!

[kallend 2,150]

Lame excuses for a failed administration.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[skydyvr 0]

Quote

BAD INTEL - Lies told by conservatives

SMALLER GOVERNMENT - when a conservative administration increases the size of the government

SMALL AND SHORT LIVED DEFICIT - a record deficit with no end in sight.

LOW UNEMPLOYMENT - what you get when your administration presides over a net loss of jobs.

NO NATION BUILDING - spending $billions on nation building

FIXING SOCIAL SECURITY - doing absolutely nothing

SUPPORT FOR EDUCATION - buying your kid's admission to Yale

Pretty good Kallend.

You're like a shipboard Navy cook -- you continually find creative new ways to package up the same old smelly fare . . .

. . =(_8^(1)

[kallend 2,150]

Quote

Quote

BAD INTEL - Lies told by conservatives

SMALLER GOVERNMENT - when a conservative administration increases the size of the government

SMALL AND SHORT LIVED DEFICIT - a record deficit with no end in sight.

LOW UNEMPLOYMENT - what you get when your administration presides over a net loss of jobs.

NO NATION BUILDING - spending $billions on nation building

FIXING SOCIAL SECURITY - doing absolutely nothing

SUPPORT FOR EDUCATION - buying your kid's admission to Yale

Pretty good Kallend.

You're like a shipboard Navy cook -- you continually find creative new ways to package up the same old smelly fare . . .

Umm the "smelly fare" is what GWB supplied to be served up. This is merely a reminder since Bush supporters tend to have selective amnesia when it comes to his failures.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[billvon 3,120]

You've listed the conservative definitions; someone else will list the democratic definitions, I'm sure. But at a more general level:

RHETORIC - what your opponent uses

LOGIC - what your candidate uses

OUTRAGE - what you feel when your opponent does something questionable

WHINING - what you hear from the opposition when your candidate does something questionable

TAX HIKE - any tax proposal put forth by your opponent

TAX CUT - any tax proposal put forth by your candidate

FREEDOM - what your candidate stands for

OPPRESSION - what your opponent stands for

FLIP-FLOP - a term used to describe your opponent's change of direction

TIMELY RE-EVALUATION - a term used to describe your candidate's change of direction

THUGS, MURDERERS AND RAPISTS - terrorists your opponent supports

FREEDOM FIGHTERS - terrorists your candidate supports

[wmw999 2,589]

That would be inflammatory rhetoric; simple rhetoric is OK as long as you believe in multisyllabic words
And don't forget:

MIS-STATEMENT: when your candidate RE-EVALUATES something he said, generally because he was provided BAD INTEL

DECEIT: when your opponent FLIP-FLOPS in something he said, generally because he's STUPID

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Airman1270 0]

Thanks, guys - interesting variety of responses... Not to troll for more-of-the-same, but there seems to be some blind acceptance of the carefully-created myth that G.W. is not an intelligent man. Can anyone back this up? It's one thing to disagree with policy decisions, but do people really think it's possible for a stupid man to earn an MBA from Harvard, fly fighter jets, run a major league baseball team, and serve as governor of one of the largest states in the nation?

I'm not stupid, but neither am I a good debater nor a polished public speaker. Even so, if I had the ability to "impose" my political priorities through legislation you'd all end up with more money and more freedom. Vote for me - my campaign slogan will be "I will leave you alone!"

Cheers,
Jon

[wmw999 2,589]

In my opinion, while not stupid, he's not much over average in intelligence. I'd rather have someone who is significantly more than average in intelligence as president.

Yes, I do think you can make it through Yale and Harvard MBA without being a genius. But his biggest failing is his unwillingness to seek or even acknowledge dissenting opinion when he's set his mind to a course.

That's part of what the CAIB said was wrong with the NASA culture, and, well, the Presidency is more important than NASA.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Airman1270 0]

Quote

In my opinion, while not stupid, he's not much over average in intelligence. I'd rather have someone who is significantly more than average in intelligence as president.

Yes, I do think you can make it through Yale and Harvard MBA without being a genius. But his biggest failing is his unwillingness to seek or even acknowledge dissenting opinion when he's set his mind to a course...
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Fair enough.

I'd rather have someone in there with average intelligence & common sense, who will pursue a libertarian/conservative agenda, than a highly-brilliant mind that seeks to restrict Constitutional rights and micro-manage the way we live our lives.

According to all available evaluations, Bill Clinton is an exceptionally intelligent man. But every time he got what he wanted we lost more money and more freedom. He aggressively pushed for tax increases, restrictions on gun rights, and appointed judges who leaned toward making law from the bench. Far worse than that, he is a blatantly dishonest man whose entire adult life has been a continuous pattern of deception. He won election in '92 by misleading Americans as to his intentions. Since their late teens, he & his wife have been focused on the goal of gaining power and authority over us so they could force us to do things we don't want to do.

I don't accuse John Kerry of the same motives, but he has clearly demonstrated a desire to increase taxes, emasculate the military, and subordinate U.S. authority to the U.N. (Then, when Bush used military force to enforce U.N. resolutions, he criticized the effort...)

Where is the evidence that Bush did not seek dissenting opinions? And once a course of action has been determined, what is there to gain by endless hand-wringing over options which have already been considered & overruled?

Whatever the issue du jour, it appears he carefully considered the facts, made a decision, and stayed with it. I imagine that if he later thinks he made a wrong choice he'd say so and seek to make the correction. (The "No Child..." education thing, and the restrictions on campaign spending could use some reconsideration...) I don't know this, but I base my ASSumption on the fact that he's proven himself to be a man of integrity.

Kerry appears to be unwilling to state firmly what he thinks about any issue, and is reluctant to place himself in a position where he might have to answer hard questions. To me, this renders irrelevant any claims regarding his alleged superior intelligence.

Thanks,
Jon

• Quote