From: thyat@sdf.lonestar.org (Tom Hyatt)
Subject: Re: The Difference Between Conservatives and Liberals
Organization: Best lil' ol' Pubnix in Texas
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 05:58:54 GMT

In article <1992Oct1.145222.18647@nntpserver.chevron.com> jviv@usmi01.midland.chevron.com (John Viveiros) writes:
>In article <1992Sep29.191810.18502@anasazi.com> you write:
>>Individual rights do not supercede the good of society either.  It is the
>>question of the private good versus the common good.  That both Conservatives
>>and Liberals make this value judgement is inarguable, the question is
>>on which side do they most often stand.
>>
>>  [much intelligent discourse deleted]
>>
>>Mike Best
>
>That was a very good post.  Just when I thought you might be some
>closed-minded jerk, you go and spoil it for me.  I've always defined
>liberal as someone concerned with individual rights, so in many cases I
>find myself defending the label "liberal". 
>
>In reality, these labels do
>not effectively describe *my* political views.  I do not believe in the
>Webster's definition of conservative (resisting change) in most cases,
>and believe in the Webster's definition of liberal (nothing about tax
>and spend in there).  Yet, I find myself jumping across the fence on
>most issues, and I assume that most people also feel restricted by these
>labels.
>
>I believe in:	     General Consensus
>Term limits		(cons)
>RTKABA			(cons)
>Waiting period		(lib)
>Welfare reform		(cons)
>Aid to cities		(lib)
>Federal Health care	(lib)
>Family values		(cons)
>Moral obligations	(cons)
>Lowering the deficit	(lib) -- GHWB ignores except during elections
>Gay rights 		(lib) -- the right to be left alone
>First half abortions	(lib) -- legal, but restricted somewhat
>States rights		(both) - abortion (con)  other (lib)
>Peaceful coexist.	(lib) -- see GHWB policy
>Environmentism		(lib)
>Development		(cons)
>Kemp			(cons)
>Gore			(lib)
>Capital punishment	(cons)
>
>The list goes on.  What party am I supposed to belong to?
>-- 
>John Viveiros     (jviv@chevron.com)
>Chevron USA        Standard disclaimer applies
>Midland TX 


Dunno.  I'm similar on many of the mentioned positions, with a couple of 
major exceptions:

Family Values - Sorry, but I don't buy the spiel that Bush/Buchannan/Robertson
are spouting off these days.  Bush has been quoted as saying that atheists 
shouldn't be allowed to vote (I've seen several posts and articles to support
this) and that the Repubs are "God's party". Family values should stay in the
family, and not through religious/governmental edicts.

Federal Health Care- The plan as suggested has two major flaws: (1) Cost to 
middle-class income earner and small businesses is much too high. (2) No real
plan to cut costs of price-gouging that is going on with the lawyers, doctors,
hospitals, insurance companies, and pharmaceuticals. Making a profit is one 
thing, but these guys are getting away with highway robbery.

In looking at the election this year, I kinda wish that we could roll back the
clock 12 months and try again. If you're telling me that Bush/Quayle and 
Clinton/Gore are the best we could come up with, we have really fallen off in
the quality of politicians.  Maybe a Tsongas/W. Rudman bill? or  Kemp/Gramm?

Tom H.


-- 

Just a message looking for a .signature file......
 
thyat@sdf.lonestar.org
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton