Helen Thomas on Liberals

[101A]

http://washingtonexaminer.com/helen-...rticle/2533472

..."What is a liberal? A liberal cares for the poor, and the sick, and the hungry. A liberal cares about the government doing for the people what they cannot do for themselves, is what Lincoln said. A liberal seeks the truth and doesn't put the spin on anything and asks to look at the facts. I think liberal correspondents are honest. I don't mean the others are dishonest, but what I mean is--I don't think that liberals, liberals have an axe to grind except they really do want a better world..."

Had a little bit of an epiphany moment (not really an epiphany, have realized this for a while, but this quote from the dead icon does a good job of illustration).

If that is truly a window into the liberals mind, it makes their actions and beliefs understandable.

There is a glaring non sequitur in this woman's logic:

1. "A Liberal cares for the poor, and the sick and the hungry...they really do want a better world."
2. "A liberal cares about the government doing for the people what they cannot do for themselves."

There are two elephants in the room she has constructed here: First, liberals do not have a monopoly on caring. Second just because one WANTS something to be doesn't make it so. That something is the governments actual ability to improve the lives of the poor, the sick and the hungry - without creating more, or entrenching, the problems that exist.

If liberals were as honest as Helen Thomas proclaims them to be, they would be honest, first, with themselves, about the damage the government programs they hold so dear are bringing upon the classes of people they champion.

[ElNono]

There is a glaring non sequitur in this woman's logic:

1. "A Liberal cares for the poor, and the sick and the hungry...they really do want a better world."
2. "A liberal cares about the government doing for the people what they cannot do for themselves."

There are two elephants in the room she has constructed here: First, liberals do not have a monopoly on caring. Second just because one WANTS something to be doesn't make it so. That something is the governments actual ability to improve the lives of the poor, the sick and the hungry - without creating more, or entrenching, the problems that exist.

If liberals were as honest as Helen Thomas proclaims them to be, they would be honest, first, with themselves, about the damage the government programs they hold so dear are bringing upon the classes of people they champion.

Meh, the way I read it is spelling out ideals... the government being a partisan, corrupt bunch betrays liberal ideals as much as individuals being a greedy bunch betray conservative ideals pretty much equally.

In an ideal world, with a lean and efficient government, there's nothing wrong with what she says, IMO. Much like in an ideal world, without greed (and things like price fixing, etc), free markets and honest compe ion would require no government intervention. But we're all aware that we don't live in an ideal world. That doesn't mean the ideals are wrong, they simply need to be adjusted to that reality.

Just my 2c.

[boutons_deux]

"liberals do not have a monopoly on caring."

strawman, who said they did?

"just because one WANTS something to be doesn't make it so"

big ing duh.

the power and ease of saying of NO overpowers the power of YES, as the current extremeit gang of obstructing, sociopathic Repugs demonstrates daily.

NO = do nothing, easy

YES = do something, MUCH harder

[SA210]

It's been hard to find a real liberal since 2008, especially in this forum.

[rjv]

if most people on both sides were honest (or even read just a bit) they'd realize our government is not acting on behalf of the poor; our country is being privatized on a massive scale.

[101A]

if most people on both sides were honest (or even read just a bit) they'd realize our government is not acting on behalf of the poor; our country is being privatized on a massive scale.

I'd suggest it is being privatized with specific winners in mind; Government is used to pick the winners and losers - and since the government has virtually unlimited power, it has an unlimited ability to do so.

[rjv]

I'd suggest it is being privatized with specific winners in mind; Government is used to pick the winners and losers - and since the government has virtually unlimited power, it has an unlimited ability to do so.

it's not a coincidence that many poiliticians have connections to many of the companies associated with specific roles that once belonged to the government. we know the GOP is guilty of this but the dems are equally culpable. it's not a coincidence the obama administration shut down the occupy movement because the dems had the most to lose from the movement (from a PR stance).

[boutons_deux]

if most people on both sides were honest (or even read just a bit) they'd realize our government is not acting on behalf of the poor; our country is being privatized on a massive scale.

Privatization into the hands of the capitalists and UCA is of course a VRWC strategy, (not a Dem strategy), sucking down taxpayer dollars and weakening the govt (eg, busting govt, teacher unions and non-unionized charter indoctrination sham schools).

[ElNono]

Winners have a large say on how that government that picks winners and losers is put together...

[rjv]

Privatization into the hands of the capitalists and UCA is of course a VRWC strategy, (not a Dem strategy), sucking down taxpayer dollars and weakening the govt (eg, busting govt, teacher unions and non-unionized charter indoctrination sham schools).

it's the primary goal of neoliberalism, an ideology that has been championed by both parties since it took off under reagan.

[boutons_deux]

It's ALWAYS CONSERVE-my-wealthy-status-quo-Haves vs We-want-PROGRESS-Have-nots.

After a few decades of post-FDR social (ie, Have-Not) progress, the VRWC/1% reared its ugly head, starting with Lewis Powell's "take the country back" memo reacting to the 30s and 60s, to once again take over and rig the country like in the 19th century up to the '30s.

[101A]

Winners have a large say on how that government that picks winners and losers is put together...

Aristocratic chicken and egg, eh?

[ElNono]

Aristocratic chicken and egg, eh?

pretty much

[spurraider21]

"liberals do not have a monopoly on caring."

strawman, who said they did?

true. but in that case, liberals saying "we care" is the equivalent of saying "we have circulatory systems"

by bringing up that "they care" they are implying that others do not

[boutons_deux]

true. but in that case, liberals saying "we care" is the equivalent of saying "we have circulatory systems"

by bringing up that "they care" they are implying that others do not

Dems try to help students with their debt, Repug try to them harder

Dems try to poor people into health insurance so they get timely, early care, Repug want ACA and poor people dead

Dems try to protect consumers with CFPB, Repugs defund it, refuse to approve a director, absolutely make sure E Warren isn't running it.

etc, etc, etc. Show ANY EVIDENCE that Repugs GAF about the 99%, we know they "care" deeply about the 1%.

[spurraider21]

Dems try to help students with their debt, Repug try to them harder

Dems try to poor people into health insurance so they get timely, early care, Repug want ACA and poor people dead

Dems try to protect consumers with CFPB, Repugs defund it, refuse to approve a director, absolutely make sure E Warren isn't running it.

etc, etc, etc. Show ANY EVIDENCE that Repugs GAF about the 99%, we know they "care" deeply about the 1%.

so now you ARE claiming they have a monopoly on caring, when a few comments ago you called strawman

[spurraider21]

Dems try to help students with their debt, Repug try to them harder

Dems try to poor people into health insurance so they get timely, early care, Repug want ACA and poor people dead

Dems try to protect consumers with CFPB, Repugs defund it, refuse to approve a director, absolutely make sure E Warren isn't running it.

etc, etc, etc. Show ANY EVIDENCE that Repugs GAF about the 99%, we know they "care" deeply about the 1%.

so now you ARE claiming they have a monopoly on caring, when a few comments ago you called strawman.

also, why you bringing up democrats/republicans when this is about liberals

[TeyshaBlue]

Because logic has no chair at bouton's table.

[SnakeBoy]

I've always thought that liberals live in the world they wish existed and conservatives live in the world that is.

[boutons_deux]

so now you ARE claiming they have a monopoly on caring

straw man I didn't say that.

Dems ACTIONS vs Repugs are what I listed.

"why you bringing up democrats/republicans when this is about liberals"

list me some LIBRUL Repugs

Liberals, progressives, are nearly 100% Dem or independent.

[Wild Cobra]

If liberals actually cared, they would do it with their money. Not everyone elses.

[boutons_deux]

If liberals actually cared, they would do it with their money. Not everyone elses.

Starting with St Ronnie, Repugs/VWRC switched USA from tax-and-spend (cut taxes on capital gains from 35% to 15%, the biggest driver of inequality) to borrow-and-spend (borrow from OTHER PEOPLE), with St Ronnie and dubya's regime vastly increasing the national debt, 2x and 3x.

[Wild Cobra]

Starting with St Ronnie, Repugs/VWRC switched USA from tax-and-spend (cut taxes on capital gains from 35% to 15%, the biggest driver of inequality) to borrow-and-spend (borrow from OTHER PEOPLE), with St Ronnie and dubya's regime vastly increasing the national debt, 2x and 3x.

Didn't the both have democrat congresses?

[CosmicCowboy]

..."What is a liberal? A liberal cares for the poor, and the sick, and the hungry. A liberal cares about the government doing for the people what they cannot do for themselves, is what Lincoln said. A liberal seeks the truth and doesn't put the spin on anything and asks to look at the facts. I think liberal correspondents are honest. I don't mean the others are dishonest, but what I mean is--I don't think that liberals, liberals have an axe to grind except they really do want a better world..."

With the exception of the Jews, right, Helen?

[SA210]

It's been hard to find a real liberal since 2008, especially in this forum.