<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Liberalism: Because We Know What&#8217;s Best For You</title>
	<atom:link href="http://pjmedia.com/blog/liberalism-because-we-know-whats-best-for-you/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://pjmedia.com/blog/liberalism-because-we-know-whats-best-for-you/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2012 00:21:01 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: SteveB/Colorado</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/blog/liberalism-because-we-know-whats-best-for-you/#comment-379192</link>
		<dc:creator>SteveB/Colorado</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 22 Aug 2009 20:26:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=64362#comment-379192</guid>
		<description>#121  Mike:  Congratulations on having a &quot;political cat.&quot; Not every person can have such a critter. 

Suggest you read again the comment from Paul-Indiana in #95 regarding that he knows what is best for a baby. I never said that men are not capable of love &amp; support. I also agree that a male can have valid input into the life or death of an unborn fetus; but that should be restricted to his own family. Family planning decisions are family decisions that should not be intervened in by big government or big religion. 

As for who is or is not &quot;conservative,&quot; consider this quote from the late Senator Barry Goldwater, generally acknowledged as the founder of the modern conservative movement in the US. 

&quot;A lot of so-called conservatives today don&#039;t know what the word means. They think I&#039;ve turned liberal because I believe a woman has a right to an abortion. That&#039;s a decision that&#039;s up to the pregnant woman, not up to the pope or some do-gooders on the religious right. It&#039;s not a conservative issue at all.&quot; 

Herein lies a massive inconsistency among many of those who consider themselves conservative. As I read posts from various individuals here on PJM, they are quick to condemn what they consider as big government/Obama interference in health care decisions. But then they also advocate for government intervention in personal life decisions. That&#039;s not conservative.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>#121  Mike:  Congratulations on having a &#8220;political cat.&#8221; Not every person can have such a critter. </p>
<p>Suggest you read again the comment from Paul-Indiana in #95 regarding that he knows what is best for a baby. I never said that men are not capable of love &amp; support. I also agree that a male can have valid input into the life or death of an unborn fetus; but that should be restricted to his own family. Family planning decisions are family decisions that should not be intervened in by big government or big religion. </p>
<p>As for who is or is not &#8220;conservative,&#8221; consider this quote from the late Senator Barry Goldwater, generally acknowledged as the founder of the modern conservative movement in the US. </p>
<p>&#8220;A lot of so-called conservatives today don&#8217;t know what the word means. They think I&#8217;ve turned liberal because I believe a woman has a right to an abortion. That&#8217;s a decision that&#8217;s up to the pregnant woman, not up to the pope or some do-gooders on the religious right. It&#8217;s not a conservative issue at all.&#8221; </p>
<p>Herein lies a massive inconsistency among many of those who consider themselves conservative. As I read posts from various individuals here on PJM, they are quick to condemn what they consider as big government/Obama interference in health care decisions. But then they also advocate for government intervention in personal life decisions. That&#8217;s not conservative.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/blog/liberalism-because-we-know-whats-best-for-you/#comment-378244</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Aug 2009 12:54:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=64362#comment-378244</guid>
		<description>Steve B. - you sound about as conservative as my cat. 
I get so tired of this bogus &quot;only a woman can decide what&#039;s best for the baby&quot; attitude, as though men lose all reason when it comes to matters of such import. Men can&#039;t possibly know what it&#039;s like to be pregnant, and to give birth. I will acknowlege there is a special bond, due to that process, that only Mothers can have. But that is where the distinction ends, or at least where it should end. Men are equally capable of love and support, and we are equally capable of having valid input into the life or death of the unborn. It&#039;s not just a woman&#039;s choice.
More at http://mikefromnc.wordpress.com</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Steve B. &#8211; you sound about as conservative as my cat.<br />
I get so tired of this bogus &#8220;only a woman can decide what&#8217;s best for the baby&#8221; attitude, as though men lose all reason when it comes to matters of such import. Men can&#8217;t possibly know what it&#8217;s like to be pregnant, and to give birth. I will acknowlege there is a special bond, due to that process, that only Mothers can have. But that is where the distinction ends, or at least where it should end. Men are equally capable of love and support, and we are equally capable of having valid input into the life or death of the unborn. It&#8217;s not just a woman&#8217;s choice.<br />
More at <a href="http://mikefromnc.wordpress.com" rel="nofollow">http://mikefromnc.wordpress.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bear</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/blog/liberalism-because-we-know-whats-best-for-you/#comment-378106</link>
		<dc:creator>bear</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Aug 2009 02:54:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=64362#comment-378106</guid>
		<description>tanstaafl:

I think we&#039;re on the same page.  I absolutely understand what you are saying.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>tanstaafl:</p>
<p>I think we&#8217;re on the same page.  I absolutely understand what you are saying.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: tanstaafl</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/blog/liberalism-because-we-know-whats-best-for-you/#comment-378063</link>
		<dc:creator>tanstaafl</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Aug 2009 23:56:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=64362#comment-378063</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;...but once we were in we were committed…he like most Americans, make a big to-do about being misled, but most were in favor of it, and I argued with many of them&lt;/i&gt;

Bear, I was referencing Massa&#039;s explanation for saying he&#039;d vote against the wishes of his constituents (it would appear, on the basis of his remarks, that he is a big proponent of &quot;single payer&quot; and his western NY constituents are not)

My comments weren&#039;t meant to be about getting engaged in the Iraq war, merely that Eric Massa attempted to justify the notion of not representing the folks in his district by bringing up that a Republican (a guy he &quot;admires&quot;)  had voted  against authorization of use of force in Iraq in 2002, i.e., &quot;gone against&quot; Bush.

It seemed lame.

I hope that&#039;s clear, clearer than mud, anyway.

For the record, once the Iraq war was a fact, a given, a &lt;i&gt;fait accompli&lt;/i&gt;, I found the dissembly on the part of some individuals who had, in fact, voted &quot;yea&quot; for authorization of use of force in October 2002 (e.g., John Kerry, John Edwards, Hillary Clinton) to be disingenuous, downright near anti-American, once big difficulties cropped up in Iraq, post invasion, and &quot;the war&quot; became hugely unpopular.

I found their repudiation of their own votes (and their own statements about Saddam &amp; the threat posed by Iraq) to be really tacky, somewhat like the statements of Eric Massa and his follow up attempts to justify them.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>&#8230;but once we were in we were committed…he like most Americans, make a big to-do about being misled, but most were in favor of it, and I argued with many of them</i></p>
<p>Bear, I was referencing Massa&#8217;s explanation for saying he&#8217;d vote against the wishes of his constituents (it would appear, on the basis of his remarks, that he is a big proponent of &#8220;single payer&#8221; and his western NY constituents are not)</p>
<p>My comments weren&#8217;t meant to be about getting engaged in the Iraq war, merely that Eric Massa attempted to justify the notion of not representing the folks in his district by bringing up that a Republican (a guy he &#8220;admires&#8221;)  had voted  against authorization of use of force in Iraq in 2002, i.e., &#8220;gone against&#8221; Bush.</p>
<p>It seemed lame.</p>
<p>I hope that&#8217;s clear, clearer than mud, anyway.</p>
<p>For the record, once the Iraq war was a fact, a given, a <i>fait accompli</i>, I found the dissembly on the part of some individuals who had, in fact, voted &#8220;yea&#8221; for authorization of use of force in October 2002 (e.g., John Kerry, John Edwards, Hillary Clinton) to be disingenuous, downright near anti-American, once big difficulties cropped up in Iraq, post invasion, and &#8220;the war&#8221; became hugely unpopular.</p>
<p>I found their repudiation of their own votes (and their own statements about Saddam &amp; the threat posed by Iraq) to be really tacky, somewhat like the statements of Eric Massa and his follow up attempts to justify them.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bear</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/blog/liberalism-because-we-know-whats-best-for-you/#comment-377922</link>
		<dc:creator>Bear</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Aug 2009 18:20:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=64362#comment-377922</guid>
		<description>96: tanstaafl:

&#039;Gee, Bear, you force me to learn more about this guy.&#039;

I said I was satisfied with his response, that the town hall meetings he&#039;s conducted and that his reading of the bill convinced him not to vote for HR3200.  Doesn&#039;t mean I&#039;ll be satisfied with what he ultimately does.

I personally don&#039;t like Massa&#039;s attitude about the war.  Like most it&#039;s a holier than thou attitude.

I personally was against it before I was for it.  I didn&#039;t believe it was good strategy,  but once we were in we were committed...he like most Americans, make a big to-do about being misled, but most were in favor of it,  and I argued with many of them.  The few that are overly vocal about how they were against it are just pompous idiots.  it is what it is (still).

Personally I have a bigger problem with our Afghan strategy.  It&#039;s the 1980&#039;s all over again</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>96: tanstaafl:</p>
<p>&#8216;Gee, Bear, you force me to learn more about this guy.&#8217;</p>
<p>I said I was satisfied with his response, that the town hall meetings he&#8217;s conducted and that his reading of the bill convinced him not to vote for HR3200.  Doesn&#8217;t mean I&#8217;ll be satisfied with what he ultimately does.</p>
<p>I personally don&#8217;t like Massa&#8217;s attitude about the war.  Like most it&#8217;s a holier than thou attitude.</p>
<p>I personally was against it before I was for it.  I didn&#8217;t believe it was good strategy,  but once we were in we were committed&#8230;he like most Americans, make a big to-do about being misled, but most were in favor of it,  and I argued with many of them.  The few that are overly vocal about how they were against it are just pompous idiots.  it is what it is (still).</p>
<p>Personally I have a bigger problem with our Afghan strategy.  It&#8217;s the 1980&#8242;s all over again</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SteveB/Colorado</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/blog/liberalism-because-we-know-whats-best-for-you/#comment-377742</link>
		<dc:creator>SteveB/Colorado</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Aug 2009 12:08:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=64362#comment-377742</guid>
		<description>#64  mythbuster:  &quot;We can ban abortion another way....declare the fetus to be a person entitled to equal protection under the law.....&quot;  Oh my, that sounds like a version of the Full Employment for Lawyers Act. And just what sort of police state would be needed to make sure a pregnant woman doesn&#039;t smoke, drink, engage in sports, or do other stuff that might harm a fetus?  The &quot;socialist right&quot; epitomized by groups like Right to Life and Focus on the Family tried to run a &quot;fetus is a person&quot; ballot initiative here in Colorado last year. As all the problems &amp; potential problems came out, it went down to defeat by a 27-73% margin.

#95  Paul-Indiana:  &quot;we are proposing what&#039;s best for the baby...&quot;  Sounds like a version of the nanny state to me. And of course as a man, you absolutely know what&#039;s best for every baby..... And if the mother is poor and carries to term, you fully support all the medical care and schooling that child will need, don&#039;t you?  (hint: it&#039;s called welfare). 

#109  Donna V.:  &quot;an awful lot of people seem to be calling themselves conservative.....&quot;  Yes that&#039;s true. Most seem to be CINOS however (CINO= conservative in name only). They weren&#039;t conservative until after inauguration day on January 20. Some of us, on the other hand, were conservative during 2001-09 trying to deal with all that deficit spending and corporate cronyism, despite self-proclaimed &quot;conservatives&quot; like Rush Limbaugh telling us &quot;life is good.&quot; 

#116  Marc Malone:  &quot;Bush clearly made the right call to stay in Iraq....&quot; Actually, we shouldn&#039;t have been there in the first place. Taking out Saddam could have been handled very cheaply and discreetly. However, Dick Cheney was still in denial about the loss of executive power following Watergate. In its own way, Cheney&#039;s abuse of executive power was as bad as what people are accusing Obama of now.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>#64  mythbuster:  &#8220;We can ban abortion another way&#8230;.declare the fetus to be a person entitled to equal protection under the law&#8230;..&#8221;  Oh my, that sounds like a version of the Full Employment for Lawyers Act. And just what sort of police state would be needed to make sure a pregnant woman doesn&#8217;t smoke, drink, engage in sports, or do other stuff that might harm a fetus?  The &#8220;socialist right&#8221; epitomized by groups like Right to Life and Focus on the Family tried to run a &#8220;fetus is a person&#8221; ballot initiative here in Colorado last year. As all the problems &amp; potential problems came out, it went down to defeat by a 27-73% margin.</p>
<p>#95  Paul-Indiana:  &#8220;we are proposing what&#8217;s best for the baby&#8230;&#8221;  Sounds like a version of the nanny state to me. And of course as a man, you absolutely know what&#8217;s best for every baby&#8230;.. And if the mother is poor and carries to term, you fully support all the medical care and schooling that child will need, don&#8217;t you?  (hint: it&#8217;s called welfare). </p>
<p>#109  Donna V.:  &#8220;an awful lot of people seem to be calling themselves conservative&#8230;..&#8221;  Yes that&#8217;s true. Most seem to be CINOS however (CINO= conservative in name only). They weren&#8217;t conservative until after inauguration day on January 20. Some of us, on the other hand, were conservative during 2001-09 trying to deal with all that deficit spending and corporate cronyism, despite self-proclaimed &#8220;conservatives&#8221; like Rush Limbaugh telling us &#8220;life is good.&#8221; </p>
<p>#116  Marc Malone:  &#8220;Bush clearly made the right call to stay in Iraq&#8230;.&#8221; Actually, we shouldn&#8217;t have been there in the first place. Taking out Saddam could have been handled very cheaply and discreetly. However, Dick Cheney was still in denial about the loss of executive power following Watergate. In its own way, Cheney&#8217;s abuse of executive power was as bad as what people are accusing Obama of now.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Marc Malone</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/blog/liberalism-because-we-know-whats-best-for-you/#comment-377678</link>
		<dc:creator>Marc Malone</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Aug 2009 07:47:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=64362#comment-377678</guid>
		<description>It IS the President&#039;s job to occasionally go against the will of the people, to do his duty as he deems fit, especially in foreign affairs, as he has info they do not have.  He is elected every four years, so that he has time to enact his policies before having to answer to the electorate.

  Thus, Bush clearly made the right call to stay in Iraq.  We won... not that the newsies gave him much credit... or even acknowledged the victory, in many cases.

  Your Congresscritter, however, has no such responsibility.  He is beholden to his district.  He is supposed to speak with their voice, not his own, when they have made their will clear.  He is to represent them, not himself.  That&#039;s why there is an election every two years for him.  Another election is always just around the corner.

  Do not confuse a Congressman with a President.  They are worlds apart.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It IS the President&#8217;s job to occasionally go against the will of the people, to do his duty as he deems fit, especially in foreign affairs, as he has info they do not have.  He is elected every four years, so that he has time to enact his policies before having to answer to the electorate.</p>
<p>  Thus, Bush clearly made the right call to stay in Iraq.  We won&#8230; not that the newsies gave him much credit&#8230; or even acknowledged the victory, in many cases.</p>
<p>  Your Congresscritter, however, has no such responsibility.  He is beholden to his district.  He is supposed to speak with their voice, not his own, when they have made their will clear.  He is to represent them, not himself.  That&#8217;s why there is an election every two years for him.  Another election is always just around the corner.</p>
<p>  Do not confuse a Congressman with a President.  They are worlds apart.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rashputin</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/blog/liberalism-because-we-know-whats-best-for-you/#comment-377674</link>
		<dc:creator>Rashputin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Aug 2009 06:54:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=64362#comment-377674</guid>
		<description>AtheistConservative  (111)

   &quot;It amazes me how lefties will deny reality.&quot;


   Whether working to warp the minds of their students with revisionist history or working to destroy the economy with revisionist economics, they cannot deal with reality and therefore either deny or ignore it.  Their successes are always based on lying about who they are and what they believe.  They are elitists who don’t believe in our system of government and feel that they themselves are the elite that should rule.  Not govern, mind you, but rule.  Who else could worship and praise a man who has never accomplished a thing other than to walk from one quota based entitlement to the next?  Were there no quotas and preferences in place, no one other than corrupt Chicago politicians in need of a corrupt gofer would have ever heard of the man now in the Whitehouse.   Lefties are, in fact, nothing but parasites.  They never create anything; they attach themselves to something already in existence and drain the life out of it.

   Conservatives and Independents, on the other hand, have long ignored reality themselves.  They refuse to admit that the left honestly and deeply wants to destroy this country.  Which is worse, not admitting your real intentions or not admitting that anyone could possibly intend to do you harm?  The parasite by nature tries to remain hidden, but the prey that refuses to admit that there are parasites about is actively denying reality and inviting its own destruction.  The American people have no one to blame for this mess, both the economic mess and the fools in charge, but themselves.  I hope average citizens finally face the reality that the left is intent on taking away their freedom and entire way of life.  Then it wouldn’t matter whether the left admitted what they were or not, anyone proposing or refusing to remove preferences and entitlements would be seen for what they really are, Czarist elitists intent on destroying this country. 

  Regards</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>AtheistConservative  (111)</p>
<p>   &#8220;It amazes me how lefties will deny reality.&#8221;</p>
<p>   Whether working to warp the minds of their students with revisionist history or working to destroy the economy with revisionist economics, they cannot deal with reality and therefore either deny or ignore it.  Their successes are always based on lying about who they are and what they believe.  They are elitists who don’t believe in our system of government and feel that they themselves are the elite that should rule.  Not govern, mind you, but rule.  Who else could worship and praise a man who has never accomplished a thing other than to walk from one quota based entitlement to the next?  Were there no quotas and preferences in place, no one other than corrupt Chicago politicians in need of a corrupt gofer would have ever heard of the man now in the Whitehouse.   Lefties are, in fact, nothing but parasites.  They never create anything; they attach themselves to something already in existence and drain the life out of it.</p>
<p>   Conservatives and Independents, on the other hand, have long ignored reality themselves.  They refuse to admit that the left honestly and deeply wants to destroy this country.  Which is worse, not admitting your real intentions or not admitting that anyone could possibly intend to do you harm?  The parasite by nature tries to remain hidden, but the prey that refuses to admit that there are parasites about is actively denying reality and inviting its own destruction.  The American people have no one to blame for this mess, both the economic mess and the fools in charge, but themselves.  I hope average citizens finally face the reality that the left is intent on taking away their freedom and entire way of life.  Then it wouldn’t matter whether the left admitted what they were or not, anyone proposing or refusing to remove preferences and entitlements would be seen for what they really are, Czarist elitists intent on destroying this country. </p>
<p>  Regards</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Donna V.</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/blog/liberalism-because-we-know-whats-best-for-you/#comment-377605</link>
		<dc:creator>Donna V.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Aug 2009 03:43:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=64362#comment-377605</guid>
		<description>P.S. The prospect of hospitals reintroducing wards is probably one reason Congress has exempted itself from healthcare meant for the proles.  If Pelosi or Dodd ever found themselves in a hospital ward, the other patients would summon the strength to beat them to death with bedpans.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>P.S. The prospect of hospitals reintroducing wards is probably one reason Congress has exempted itself from healthcare meant for the proles.  If Pelosi or Dodd ever found themselves in a hospital ward, the other patients would summon the strength to beat them to death with bedpans.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Donna V.</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/blog/liberalism-because-we-know-whats-best-for-you/#comment-377604</link>
		<dc:creator>Donna V.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Aug 2009 03:40:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=64362#comment-377604</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve been following the uproar in the UK regarding Daniel Hannan&#039;s comments on Fox about the NHS.  This is what struck me:  UK hospitals have &lt;i&gt;wards&lt;/i&gt;. Some of them are mixed sex.

Think about that one, folks.  An inpatient hospital visit is no fun, even when you have a private room.  Now imagine lying there recovering from your knee operation - in a ward with 29 other patients.  In the UK, it seems you have the additional pleasure of watching the elderly woman (or man) in the next bed trying to pull out their catheter or take off their hospital gown.  And the 101 close friends and relatives of the lady in the bed to you and the guy across from you are all visiting them at the same time.   

Boy, doesn&#039;t that sound fun!  And &quot;progressive!&quot;  It is, I&#039;m sure - if you&#039;re a time traveler and have just arrived from 1835.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve been following the uproar in the UK regarding Daniel Hannan&#8217;s comments on Fox about the NHS.  This is what struck me:  UK hospitals have <i>wards</i>. Some of them are mixed sex.</p>
<p>Think about that one, folks.  An inpatient hospital visit is no fun, even when you have a private room.  Now imagine lying there recovering from your knee operation &#8211; in a ward with 29 other patients.  In the UK, it seems you have the additional pleasure of watching the elderly woman (or man) in the next bed trying to pull out their catheter or take off their hospital gown.  And the 101 close friends and relatives of the lady in the bed to you and the guy across from you are all visiting them at the same time.   </p>
<p>Boy, doesn&#8217;t that sound fun!  And &#8220;progressive!&#8221;  It is, I&#8217;m sure &#8211; if you&#8217;re a time traveler and have just arrived from 1835.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

