waltermitty (r) vs. carlhayden(d)

[WalterMitty]

was the real senator carl hayden a liberal?

[Max Power]

was the real senator carl hayden a liberal?

He was dead against the New Deal, I think, so no.

[A18]

WalterMitty has become a complete socialist loon, so Carl Hayden.

[Gabu]

was the real senator carl hayden a liberal?

I don't know anything about the actual Carl Hayden.

[Alcon]

The thing is, I don't actually know much about CARLHAYDEN's philosophy beyond his belief that gay marriage is entirely intended to ruin civilization and that liberals exist solely to destroy the planet.

I think those speak for themselves, though.

[nini2287]

If these were the only two candidates:

Walter Mitty 54% 345 EV
Carl Hayden 46% 193 EV

[??????????]

Carl would win Florida easily.

[nini2287]

Carl would win Florida easily.

Carl's hard-line immigration stances wouldn't help him there.

[??????????]

Carl would win Florida easily.

Carl's hard-line immigration stances wouldn't help him there.

You haven't been to Florida lately. Carl would sweep everything from Lake Okeechobee North.

[Alcon]

Carl would win Florida easily.

Carl's hard-line immigration stances wouldn't help him there.

You haven't been to Florida lately. Carl would sweep everything from Lake Okeechobee North.

The SurveyUSA poll of Florida on immigration showed a 57-38 positive split.  Can you cite from where you are getting this information?

[??????????]

Carl would win Florida easily.

Carl's hard-line immigration stances wouldn't help him there.

You haven't been to Florida lately. Carl would sweep everything from Lake Okeechobee North.

The SurveyUSA poll of Florida on immigration showed a 57-38 positive split.  Can you cite from where you are getting this information?

On the ground experience.

[Cubby]

Walter Mitty

The fact that he doesn't like the evil Mormon Mitt Romney earns him 1,000 bonus points.

I had a discussion with Carl once about how I liked Barry Goldwater's Senate career after 1964 (he didn't like Nixon or Reagan, for starters) and he said that from the 80's onward Barry was senile and that his wife was telling him lies that he grew to believe. I found that disrespectful and wrong, but he insists its true.

[??????????]

Walter Mitty

The fact that he doesn't like the evil Mormon Mitt Romney earns him 1,000 bonus points.

I had a discussion with Carl once about how I liked Barry Goldwater's Senate career after 1964 (he didn't like Nixon or Reagan, for starters) and he said that from the 80's onward Barry was senile and that his wife was telling him lies that he grew to believe. I found that disrespectful and wrong, but he insists its true.

Its very true...Barry Goldwater had alzheimers in his later years.

[jokerman]

Carl would win Florida easily.

Carl's hard-line immigration stances wouldn't help him there.

You haven't been to Florida lately. Carl would sweep everything from Lake Okeechobee North.

The SurveyUSA poll of Florida on immigration showed a 57-38 positive split.  Can you cite from where you are getting this information?

57-38 split on what question particularly?

[bgwah]

I would actually vote Republican in this election. Of course, CarlHayden isn't a Democrat and Mitty is basically a Democrat anyway so it doesn't mean much.

[jokerman]

Mitty's been making some dumbass comments lately so, nevermind, Carl Hayden.

[Alcon]

Carl would win Florida easily.

Carl's hard-line immigration stances wouldn't help him there.

You haven't been to Florida lately. Carl would sweep everything from Lake Okeechobee North.

The SurveyUSA poll of Florida on immigration showed a 57-38 positive split.  Can you cite from where you are getting this information?

57-38 split on what question particularly?

Immigrants do jobs that Americans don't versus immigrants take jobs.  Sorry for not being clearer.

[minionofmidas]

Walter Mitty

The fact that he doesn't like the evil Mormon Mitt Romney earns him 1,000 bonus points.

I had a discussion with Carl once about how I liked Barry Goldwater's Senate career after 1964 (he didn't like Nixon or Reagan, for starters) and he said that from the 80's onward Barry was senile and that his wife was telling him lies that he grew to believe. I found that disrespectful and wrong, but he insists its true.

Of course, 80s is a misprint for 40s.

[dazzleman]

Walter Mitty

The fact that he doesn't like the evil Mormon Mitt Romney earns him 1,000 bonus points.

I had a discussion with Carl once about how I liked Barry Goldwater's Senate career after 1964 (he didn't like Nixon or Reagan, for starters) and he said that from the 80's onward Barry was senile and that his wife was telling him lies that he grew to believe. I found that disrespectful and wrong, but he insists its true.

Is it wrong to say it if it's true?  It might be.  That happens a lot as people's mental capacity declines as they get older.

[CARLHAYDEN]

On what issues is CarlHayden a Democrat? Maybe he just can't bring himself to be in the same party as McCain....

I remember someone asking Carl if there was actually anything on which he agreed with the Democratic Party

Dave

Well, let me give you a few to start off

1.) I support the Democrat position on the Estate Tax (i.e. increase the exclusion but don't eliminate)

2.) I support the Democrat position of reducing subsidies for large corporations,

3.)  I have proposed that compensation for Executives of busineses in excess of the compensation paid to the President of the United States should NOT be deductible against federal corporate income taxes as a business expense.

4.) I supported Ed Rendell in his effort to stop the elimination of a national guard facility.

5.) I have recently commended Sen. Clinton for her support for building a fence on the border.

6.) I have joined with the labor unions in denouncing Sen. McVain's attack on the American work ethic.

How's that for a start?

On what issues is CarlHayden a Democrat? Maybe he just can't bring himself to be in the same party as McCain....

I remember someone asking Carl if there was actually anything on which he agreed with the Democratic Party

Dave

And what was his response?

I don't think he did. I think it was NickG, who asked him

Dave

If you check, you will see that I did respond.

The thing is, I don't actually know much about CARLHAYDEN's philosophy beyond his belief that gay marriage is entirely intended to ruin civilization and that liberals exist solely to destroy the planet.

I think those speak for themselves, though.

Alcon, you are using one of Richard M. Nixon's pet techniques by attributing statements to me which I did not make.

I stated that the motivation of most (not all) liberals who do support 'gay marriage' (believe it or not, all do not) for supporting 'gay marriage' was to show their contempt for real marriage.

Second, I never said anything even remotely the effect that liberals exist "to destroy the plant," merely that their motivations for a number of positions were a little strange.

Walter Mitty

The fact that he doesn't like the evil Mormon Mitt Romney earns him 1,000 bonus points.

I had a discussion with Carl once about how I liked Barry Goldwater's Senate career after 1964 (he didn't like Nixon or Reagan, for starters) and he said that from the 80's onward Barry was senile and that his wife was telling him lies that he grew to believe. I found that disrespectful and wrong, but he insists its true.

I'm sorry Cubby, but I knew Barry (his Senate career resumed by being elected in 1968 to the seat held by, er, Carl Hayden).

I worked in an important position in his reelection campaign in 1974.

Now, presenile Barry DID like Reagan (Reagan had campaigned for him in 1964, as a matter of fact, his speech on television that year launched his career in elective office).  Barry never liked or trusted Nixon, for good reasons.

I regret that Barry lost it in the last years of his life, but denying the fact would be a simple lie.

I think it was sad how the second wife manipulated Barry, and felt sorry for him.

was the real senator carl hayden a liberal?

I don't know anything about the actual Carl Hayden.

He was one of the most important members of the Senate in the twentieth century.

Before he retired, Carl was President Pro Temp of the Senate as well as Chairman of the Appropriations committee.

In his early career, before being elected to Congress, Carl served in a couple of offices of Maricopa county, including Sherrif.

Steve Shaddegg (the father of the Congressman) told me a number of Carl Hayden stories when I worked with Steve.

Please try to, when possible, limit the number of posts in a row made. Thanks.

[Alcon]

The thing is, I don't actually know much about CARLHAYDEN's philosophy beyond his belief that gay marriage is entirely intended to ruin civilization and that liberals exist solely to destroy the planet.

I think those speak for themselves, though.

Alcon, you are using one of Richard M. Nixon's pet techniques by attributing statements to me which I did not make.

I stated that the motivation of most (not all) liberals who do support 'gay marriage' (believe it or not, all do not) for supporting 'gay marriage' was to show their contempt for real marriage.

Second, I never said anything even remotely the effect that liberals exist "to destroy the plant," merely that their motivations for a number of positions were a little strange.

I was being more than a little hyperbolic, which I apologise for, but nonetheless I find your assertions more than a little paranoid:

1. Liberals intentionally want to damage marriage because they have contempt for it;
2. Liberals support gun control because it allows citizens to protect themselves from a totalitarian liberal regime;
3. And liberals think that the French should dictate foreign policy (if this is what you meant by the pont de neuf - it was unclear whether this was a reference to the courts or the bridge.)

Your presentation of them as accepted facts bothers me.   I especially thought it was amusing that you presented this list and then declared that it clearly indicated that Time is a liberal publication; not only was this a bit of a non-sequitur, but it is basely a logical fallacy.

[CARLHAYDEN]

Well, Alcon, you continue to misunderstand/misrepresent.

First, you omit the qualifiers, and add on extra assertions I never made.  Let me be specific,

a.) I made it clear that not all liberals favor 'gay marriage,'
b.) I gave an evaluation of the motivation of MOST liberals who favor 'gay marriage' (again NOT all).
c.) I did not say they"want to dammage marriage," but rather that their motivation was to show their contempt for real marriage.
d.) With respect to gun control, I note the previous qualifiers to the effect that not all liberals favor gun control, and that not all of the liberals who favor gun control do so for the reason I asserted (however, I do note that MOST liberals who favor disarming the American people do so because they realize that an armed people stands in the way of their desire to inflict a 'benevolent' totalitarian state).
e.) I apologize about the pont de neuf (I was tired at the time of posting) and will correct it to Quai d'orsai (that's the french version of 'foggy bottom.')

Second, with respect to the rest of your assertion, I suggest you reread the thread involved.   As I noted, ideological divisions (liberal adversus conservative) in the United States at this time are NOT based on views on economic issues, but rather primarily on social issues (a point NOT disputed by other posters)

Now, most (but not all) self-described liberals favor 'gay marriage' whereas
most self-described conservatives oppose it.  Most self-described liberals want to disarm the American people, whereas most self-described conservatives support the right to keep and bear arms.  Finally, most self-described liberals have consistently favored the french foreign policy over American foreign policy whereas most self-described conservatives prefer the American foreign policy.

Third, it is important to understand the prevailing motivations of the opposition.  Such motivations are not always well conceived, much less logical (especially for liberals).  Now, conceptionally their is a difference between 'tolerance' and 'endorsement,'  What most liberals who support 'gay marriage' is NOT tolerance, but rather endorsement.  Why?  Clearly it is NOT material benefits (which CAN be achieved via Civil Unions).     

Finally, I don't know what has happened to you in the last few months, but I note you have become very hostile

[A18]

You support a 45% estate tax? Definitely stay with the Democrats, then.

[Alcon]

CARL,

You said their contempt was - and I quote - "malicious."  Does that not mean "with intent to cause damage"?

I never said you said all liberals think these things.  I just said you said "liberals" do.  This is exactly how you phrased it in your original post.  You didn't say all, and neither did I.

I do not think I am being hostle; I apologised for pigeonholing your positions.  How am I communicating hostility?  I will do my best to stop doing whatever it is, but I do need to know.

You are, however, unjustly using strawmen.  You say that "most sellf-described liberals want to disarm the American people."  I agree with you on gun control 110 percent.  However, it frustrates me when liberals say "most self-described conservatives want to promote the use of dangerous guns."  I have no reason to believe their intent is to disarm people to install a totalitarian regime.  I do think it is inappropriate and would disarm the American people, but that is my opinion, which should not be confused with their motivation.

[CARLHAYDEN]

First, lets first start with definitions:

Malicious - given to, marked by or arising from malice

Malice - desire to cause pain, injury or distress to another

Now, I don't believe most liberals who support 'gay marriage' actually want dammage, but I do think that most liberals who support 'gay marriage' because they recognize that it will distress conservatives.

Second, I suggest you reread my original posts. Obviously, since I clearly limited my observation as to the rationale for those liberals who do support
'gay marriage' (as opposed to those liberals who do NOT support ''gay marriage), my statement did not on its face apply to all liberals.  I appologize that this was not made clearer.

Third, I repeat it is important to understand the motivation of those proposed a particular matter of public policy.   Sometimes it is merely the case of people not being adequately informed concerning a subject.  So, if the alledged rationale for supporting 'gay marriage' would be to obtain certain tax and other tangible benefits for homosexuals, if those benefits could be obtained by civil unions, would that be acceptable?  If the answer is in the affirmative, then the person was being honest in their rationale, and an accomodation can be reached.  However, if the answer is "no," then it is clear that the originally proffered explanation was bogus.

In the context of those who wish to disarm the American people, I trust you will concur that the overwhelming majority of conservatives (and yes, moderates) are opposed to such a proposition whereas a majority of self-identified liberals do support such a proposal.  Why?  Recently in my state the legislature voted (19-10 in the State Senate) to probibit the Governor from seizing privately owned firearms (as occured in Louisiana last year).  The conservatives and moderates of both parties voted for the proposal, the liberals voted against it.  Hmm.