| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"Craig Chilton" |
| Date: |
04 Dec 2005 08:36:47 PM |
| Object: |
What is a Liberal? |
Acceptance of the New York Liberal Party Nomination
by John F. Kennedy -- September 14, 1960
What do our opponents mean when they apply to us the label
"Liberal?" If by "Liberal" they mean, as they want people to believe,
someone who is soft in his policies abroad, who is against local
government, and who is unconcerned with the taxpayer's dollar,
then the record of this party and its members demonstrate that we
are not that kind of "Liberal." But if by a "Liberal" they mean
someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who wel-
comes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares
about the welfare of the people - their health, their housing, their
schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties --
someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and
suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they
mean by a "Liberal," then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal."
But first, I would like to say what I understand the word "Liberal"
to mean and explain in the process why I consider myself to be
a "Liberal," and what it means in the presidential election of 1960.
In short, having set forth my view -- I hope for all time -- two nights
ago in Houston, on the proper relationship between church and
state, I want to take the opportunity to set forth my views on the
proper relationship between the state and the citizen. This is my
political credo:
I believe in human dignity as the source of national purpose, in
human liberty as the source of national action, in the human heart
as the source of national compassion, and in the human mind as
the source of our invention and our ideas. It is, I believe, the faith
in our fellow citizens as individuals and as people that lies at the
heart of the liberal faith. For liberalism is not so much a party
creed or set of fixed platform promises as it is an attitude of mind
and heart, a faith in man's ability through the experiences of his
reason and judgment to increase for himself and his fellow men t
he amount of justice and freedom and brotherhood which all
human life deserves.
I believe also in the United States of America, in the promise that it
contains and has contained throughout our history of producing a
society so abundant and creative and so free and responsible that
it cannot only fulfill the aspirations of its citizens, but serve equally
well as a beacon for all mankind. I do not believe in a superstate.
I see no magic in tax dollars which are sent to Washington and
then returned. I abhor the waste and incompetence of large-scale
federal bureaucracies in this administration as well as in others. I
do not favor state compulsion when voluntary individual effort can
do the job and do it well. But I believe in a government which acts,
which exercises its full powers and full responsibilities. Government
is an art and a precious obligation; and when it has a job to do, I
believe it should do it. And this requires not only great ends but
that we propose concrete means of achieving them.
Our responsibility is not discharged by announcement of virtuous
ends. Our responsibility is to achieve these objectives with social
invention, with political skill, and executive vigor. I believe for these
reasons that liberalism is our best and only hope in the world today.
For the liberal society is a free society, and it is at the same time
and for that reason a strong society. Its strength is drawn from the
will of free people committed to great ends and peacefully striving
to meet them. Only liberalism, in short, can repair our national power,
restore our national purpose, and liberate our national energies. And t
he only basic issue in the 1960 campaign is whether our government
will fall in a conservative rut and die there, or whether we will move
ahead in the liberal spirit of daring, of breaking new ground, of doing
in our generation what Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt
and Harry Truman and Adlai Stevenson did in their time of influence
and responsibility.
Our liberalism has its roots in our diverse origins. Most of us are
descended from that segment of the American population which
was once called an immigrant minority. Today, along with our
children and grandchildren, we do not feel minor. We feel proud
of our origins and we are not second to any group in our sense
of national purpose. For many years New York represented the
new frontier to all those who came from the ends of the earth to
find new opportunity and new freedom, generations of men and
women who fled from the despotism of the czars, the horrors of
the Nazis, the tyranny of hunger, who came here to the new
frontier in the State of New York. These men and women, a
living cross section of American history, indeed, a cross section
of the entire world's history of pain and hope, made of this city
not only a new world of opportunity, but a new world of the
spirit as well.
Tonight we salute Governor and Senator Herbert Lehman as a
symbol of that spirit, and as a reminder that the fight for full consti-
tutional rights for all Americans is a fight that must be carried on in
1961.
Many of these same immigrant families produced the pioneers and
builders of the American labor movement. They are the men who
sweated in our shops, who struggled to create a union, and who
were driven by longing for education for their children and for the
children's development. They went to night schools; they built their
own future, their union's future, and their country's future, brick by
brick, block by block, neighborhood by neighborhood, and now
in their children's time, suburb by suburb.
Tonight we salute George Meany as a symbol of that struggle and
as a reminder that the fight to eliminate poverty and human exploita-
tion is a fight that goes on in our day. But in 1960 the cause of
liberalism cannot content itself with carrying on the fight for human
justice and economic liberalism here at home. For here and around
the world the fear of war hangs over us every morning and every
night. It lies, expressed or silent, in the minds of every American.
We cannot banish it by repeating that we are economically first or
that we are militarily first, for saying so doesn't make it so. More will
be needed than goodwill missions or talking back to Soviet politic-
ians or increasing the tempo of the arms race. More will be needed
than good intentions, for we know where that paving leads.
In Winston Churchill's words, "We cannot escape our dangers by
recoiling from them. We dare not pretend such dangers do not exist."
And tonight we salute Adlai Stevenson as an eloquent spokesman
for the effort to achieve an intelligent foreign policy. Our opponents
would like the people to believe that in a time of danger it would be
hazardous to change the administration that has brought us to this
time of danger. I think it would be hazardous not to change. I think
it would be hazardous to continue four more years of stagnation
and indifference here at home and abroad, of starving the under-
pinnings of our national power, including not only our defense but
our image abroad as a friend.
This is an important election -- in many ways as important as any
this century -- and I think that the Democratic Party and the Liberal
Party here in New York, and those who believe in progress all over
the United States, should be associated with us in this great effort.
The reason that Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt and Harry
Truman and Adlai Stevenson had influence abroad, and the United
States in their time had it, was because they moved this country
here at home, because they stood for something here in the United
States, for expanding the benefits of our society to our own people,
and the people around the world looked to us as a symbol of hope.
I think it is our task to re-create the same atmosphere in our own
time. Our national elections have often proved to be the turning
point in the course of our country. I am proposing that 1960 be
another turning point in the history of the great Republic. Some
pundits are saying it's 1928 all over again. I say it's 1932 all over
again. I say this is the great opportunity that we will have in our
time to move our people and this country and the people of the
free world beyond the new frontiers of the 1960s.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Any neocon reading the speech above REALLY needs to
re-think his/her philosophy.
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
.
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: What is a Liberal? |
05 Dec 2005 12:29:54 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 05 Dec 2005 02:36:47 GMT, Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
wrote:
"Liberal?"
(...)
...someone who is soft in his policies abroad, who is against local
government, and who is unconcerned with the taxpayer's dollar,
You got it right this time, boy!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Matty" |
|
| Title: Re: What is a Liberal? |
04 Jan 2006 12:00:36 AM |
|
|
On 2005-12-05 19:29:54 +1300, said:
On Mon, 05 Dec 2005 02:36:47 GMT, Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
wrote:
"Liberal?"
(...)
...someone who is soft in his policies abroad, who is against local
government, and who is unconcerned with the taxpayer's dollar,
You got it right this time, boy!
What happens if you're a Libertarian like me, who believes in liberal
values (noting the lowercase l)?
Matt
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Craig Chilton" |
|
| Title: Re: What is a Liberal? |
05 Dec 2005 10:31:12 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 05 Dec 2005 06:29:54 GMT,
<default@easynews.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
"Liberal?"
(...)
...someone who is soft in his policies abroad, who is against local
government, and who is unconcerned with the taxpayer's dollar,
You got it right this time, boy!
JFK got it right, for SURE -- when we see that paragraph
of his speech in its full CONTEXT:
What do our opponents mean when they apply to us the label
"Liberal?" If by "Liberal" they mean, as they want people to believe,
someone who is soft in his policies abroad, who is against local
government, and who is unconcerned with the taxpayer's dollar,
then the record of this party and its members demonstrate that we
are not that kind of "Liberal." But if by a "Liberal" they mean
someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who wel-
comes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares
about the welfare of the people - their health, their housing, their
schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties --
someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and
suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they
mean by a "Liberal," then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal."
JFK **did** have it right.
And -- AS USUAL -- neocon/RRR Cult "conservatives" -- abject
ignoramuses that they are -- have it *wrong.* As you just demonstrated.
THANKS for this further demonstration to society of the desperate
DISHONESTY of losers like you. It's postings like yours that help to
raise conscious awareness of the ludicrousness, hatefulness, and moral
vacuousness of the RRR Cult and its agendas. Which contributes to
the HASTENING of the wondrous day when critical mass is reached in
that regard, and society REJECTS the RRR Cult, and renders its
agendas permanently *extinct*. Works just fine for me! And for all
the tens of millions of other fair-minded, sensible, and intelligent
egalitarians who stand up for individual liberties.
<Previous post fully restored, below> ---
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Acceptance of the New York Liberal Party Nomination
by John F. Kennedy -- September 14, 1960
What do our opponents mean when they apply to us the label
"Liberal?" If by "Liberal" they mean, as they want people to believe,
someone who is soft in his policies abroad, who is against local
government, and who is unconcerned with the taxpayer's dollar,
then the record of this party and its members demonstrate that we
are not that kind of "Liberal." But if by a "Liberal" they mean
someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who wel-
comes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares
about the welfare of the people - their health, their housing, their
schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties --
someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and
suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they
mean by a "Liberal," then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal."
But first, I would like to say what I understand the word "Liberal"
to mean and explain in the process why I consider myself to be
a "Liberal," and what it means in the presidential election of 1960.
In short, having set forth my view -- I hope for all time -- two nights
ago in Houston, on the proper relationship between church and
state, I want to take the opportunity to set forth my views on the
proper relationship between the state and the citizen. This is my
political credo:
I believe in human dignity as the source of national purpose, in
human liberty as the source of national action, in the human heart
as the source of national compassion, and in the human mind as
the source of our invention and our ideas. It is, I believe, the faith
in our fellow citizens as individuals and as people that lies at the
heart of the liberal faith. For liberalism is not so much a party
creed or set of fixed platform promises as it is an attitude of mind
and heart, a faith in man's ability through the experiences of his
reason and judgment to increase for himself and his fellow men t
he amount of justice and freedom and brotherhood which all
human life deserves.
I believe also in the United States of America, in the promise that it
contains and has contained throughout our history of producing a
society so abundant and creative and so free and responsible that
it cannot only fulfill the aspirations of its citizens, but serve equally
well as a beacon for all mankind. I do not believe in a superstate.
I see no magic in tax dollars which are sent to Washington and
then returned. I abhor the waste and incompetence of large-scale
federal bureaucracies in this administration as well as in others. I
do not favor state compulsion when voluntary individual effort can
do the job and do it well. But I believe in a government which acts,
which exercises its full powers and full responsibilities. Government
is an art and a precious obligation; and when it has a job to do, I
believe it should do it. And this requires not only great ends but
that we propose concrete means of achieving them.
Our responsibility is not discharged by announcement of virtuous
ends. Our responsibility is to achieve these objectives with social
invention, with political skill, and executive vigor. I believe for these
reasons that liberalism is our best and only hope in the world today.
For the liberal society is a free society, and it is at the same time
and for that reason a strong society. Its strength is drawn from the
will of free people committed to great ends and peacefully striving
to meet them. Only liberalism, in short, can repair our national power,
restore our national purpose, and liberate our national energies. And t
he only basic issue in the 1960 campaign is whether our government
will fall in a conservative rut and die there, or whether we will move
ahead in the liberal spirit of daring, of breaking new ground, of doing
in our generation what Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt
and Harry Truman and Adlai Stevenson did in their time of influence
and responsibility.
Our liberalism has its roots in our diverse origins. Most of us are
descended from that segment of the American population which
was once called an immigrant minority. Today, along with our
children and grandchildren, we do not feel minor. We feel proud
of our origins and we are not second to any group in our sense
of national purpose. For many years New York represented the
new frontier to all those who came from the ends of the earth to
find new opportunity and new freedom, generations of men and
women who fled from the despotism of the czars, the horrors of
the Nazis, the tyranny of hunger, who came here to the new
frontier in the State of New York. These men and women, a
living cross section of American history, indeed, a cross section
of the entire world's history of pain and hope, made of this city
not only a new world of opportunity, but a new world of the
spirit as well.
Tonight we salute Governor and Senator Herbert Lehman as a
symbol of that spirit, and as a reminder that the fight for full consti-
tutional rights for all Americans is a fight that must be carried on in
1961.
Many of these same immigrant families produced the pioneers and
builders of the American labor movement. They are the men who
sweated in our shops, who struggled to create a union, and who
were driven by longing for education for their children and for the
children's development. They went to night schools; they built their
own future, their union's future, and their country's future, brick by
brick, block by block, neighborhood by neighborhood, and now
in their children's time, suburb by suburb.
Tonight we salute George Meany as a symbol of that struggle and
as a reminder that the fight to eliminate poverty and human exploita-
tion is a fight that goes on in our day. But in 1960 the cause of
liberalism cannot content itself with carrying on the fight for human
justice and economic liberalism here at home. For here and around
the world the fear of war hangs over us every morning and every
night. It lies, expressed or silent, in the minds of every American.
We cannot banish it by repeating that we are economically first or
that we are militarily first, for saying so doesn't make it so. More will
be needed than goodwill missions or talking back to Soviet politic-
ians or increasing the tempo of the arms race. More will be needed
than good intentions, for we know where that paving leads.
In Winston Churchill's words, "We cannot escape our dangers by
recoiling from them. We dare not pretend such dangers do not exist."
And tonight we salute Adlai Stevenson as an eloquent spokesman
for the effort to achieve an intelligent foreign policy. Our opponents
would like the people to believe that in a time of danger it would be
hazardous to change the administration that has brought us to this
time of danger. I think it would be hazardous not to change. I think
it would be hazardous to continue four more years of stagnation
and indifference here at home and abroad, of starving the under-
pinnings of our national power, including not only our defense but
our image abroad as a friend.
This is an important election -- in many ways as important as any
this century -- and I think that the Democratic Party and the Liberal
Party here in New York, and those who believe in progress all over
the United States, should be associated with us in this great effort.
The reason that Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt and Harry
Truman and Adlai Stevenson had influence abroad, and the United
States in their time had it, was because they moved this country
here at home, because they stood for something here in the United
States, for expanding the benefits of our society to our own people,
and the people around the world looked to us as a symbol of hope.
I think it is our task to re-create the same atmosphere in our own
time. Our national elections have often proved to be the turning
point in the course of our country. I am proposing that 1960 be
another turning point in the history of the great Republic. Some
pundits are saying it's 1928 all over again. I say it's 1932 all over
again. I say this is the great opportunity that we will have in our
time to move our people and this country and the people of the
free world beyond the new frontiers of the 1960s.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Any neocon reading the speech above REALLY needs to
re-think his/her philosophy.
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: What is a Liberal? |
06 Dec 2005 12:15:00 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 06 Dec 2005 04:31:12 GMT, Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
wrote:
On Mon, 05 Dec 2005 06:29:54 GMT,
<default@easynews.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
"Liberal?"
(...)
...someone who is soft in his policies abroad, who is against local
government, and who is unconcerned with the taxpayer's dollar,
You got it right this time, boy!
JFK got it right, for SURE -- when we see that paragraph
of his speech in its full CONTEXT:
Yeah, the major thrust of JFK's administrations of lies and deceit was
warmongering -- it was" Trust me, my fellow Americans, we really do
need to bomb the ***** out of Cuba (maybe) and the North Vietnamese for
sure."
Get you Leftist Liberal Loonie (LLL) head out of your Rump Rider's
Rodeo Cult, dumber than dirt lemming ,homosexual *****, boy!
.
|
|
|
| User: "osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: What is a Liberal? |
06 Dec 2005 01:00:51 PM |
|
|
<default@easynews.com> wrote in message
news:q6lbp15je7ool2uuvogk4ma0g1s12vjn79@4ax.com...
On Tue, 06 Dec 2005 04:31:12 GMT, Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
wrote:
On Mon, 05 Dec 2005 06:29:54 GMT,
<default@easynews.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
"Liberal?"
(...)
...someone who is soft in his policies abroad, who is against local
government, and who is unconcerned with the taxpayer's dollar,
You got it right this time, boy!
JFK got it right, for SURE -- when we see that paragraph
of his speech in its full CONTEXT:
Yeah, the major thrust of JFK's administrations of lies and deceit was
warmongering -- it was" Trust me, my fellow Americans, we really do
need to bomb the ***** out of Cuba (maybe) and the North Vietnamese for
sure."
What else do you suppose we should have done with the Cuban Missle Crisis?
I think we did the right thing, at least from what history tells us. Let's
put it this way, we are still here.
Get you Leftist Liberal Loonie (LLL) head out of your Rump Rider's
Rodeo Cult, dumber than dirt lemming ,homosexual *****, boy!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mimi Cohen" |
|
| Title: Re: What is a Liberal? |
06 Dec 2005 05:32:38 PM |
|
|
osprey lied:
What
"One last note: I am very surprised at your reaction especially after
just a few short months ago I provided a copy of my DD214 Right in
box 18...1st line it says... SERVED 2 AUG 90 TO 1 OCT 94 IN SUPPORT
OF OPERATION DESERT SHIELD/STORM and in box 13 NATIONAL DEFENSE SERVICE
MEDAL Funny how you have selective memory, why? Yes, I served in combat
during Desert Storm."
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.abortion/msg/38f5de5691243868?dmode=source&hl=en
"Fine, if you want to play on words...no I was not in actual "combat" "
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/msg/db12fe6b6ec66a35?dmode=source&hl=en
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: What is a Liberal? |
08 Dec 2005 08:39:55 PM |
|
|
Mimi Cohen wrote:
osprey lied:
What
"One last note: I am very surprised at your reaction especially after
just a few short months ago I provided a copy of my DD214 Right in box
18...1st line it says... SERVED 2 AUG 90 TO 1 OCT 94 IN SUPPORT OF
OPERATION DESERT SHIELD/STORM and in box 13 NATIONAL DEFENSE SERVICE
MEDAL Funny how you have selective memory, why? Yes, I served in
combat during Desert Storm."
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.abortion/msg/38f5de5691243868?dmode=source&hl=en
"Fine, if you want to play on words...no I was not in actual "combat" "
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/msg/db12fe6b6ec66a35?dmode=source&hl=en
I would just like to interject, I am not getting enough lowdown homo
sex. Can anyone help me out?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Craig Chilton" |
|
| Title: Re: What is a Liberal? |
06 Dec 2005 08:29:50 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 06 Dec 2005 18:15:00 GMT,
<default@easynews.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
<default@easynews.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
"Liberal?"
(...)
...someone who is soft in his policies abroad, who is against local
government, and who is unconcerned with the taxpayer's dollar,
You got it right this time, boy!
JFK got it right, for SURE -- when we see that paragraph
of his speech in its full CONTEXT:
What do our opponents mean when they apply to us the label
"Liberal?" If by "Liberal" they mean, as they want people to believe,
someone who is soft in his policies abroad, who is against local
government, and who is unconcerned with the taxpayer's dollar,
then the record of this party and its members demonstrate that we
are not that kind of "Liberal." But if by a "Liberal" they mean
someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who wel-
comes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares
about the welfare of the people - their health, their housing, their
schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties --
someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and
suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they
mean by a "Liberal," then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal."
JFK **did** have it right.
And -- AS USUAL -- neocon/RRR Cult "conservatives" -- abject
ignoramuses that they are -- have it *wrong.* As you just demonstrated.
THANKS for this further demonstration to society of the desperate
DISHONESTY of losers like you. It's postings like yours that help to
raise conscious awareness of the ludicrousness, hatefulness, and moral
vacuousness of the RRR Cult and its agendas. Which contributes to
the HASTENING of the wondrous day when critical mass is reached in
that regard, and society REJECTS the RRR Cult, and renders its
agendas permanently *extinct*. Works just fine for me! And for all
the tens of millions of other fair-minded, sensible, and intelligent
egalitarians who stand up for individual liberties.
Yeah, the major thrust of JFK's administrations of lies and deceit was
warmongering -- it was" Trust me, my fellow Americans, we really do
need to bomb the ***** out of Cuba (maybe) and the North Vietnamese
for sure."
Those missiles in Cuba would have given the USSR first strike
capability against the USA -- and given the mindsets in that day, there's
a good likelihood that they'd have either blackmailed us into submission
or possibly even have nuked us, if Kennedy hadn't stood his ground and
gotten those missiles out of there.
So I'm VERY glad that we had JFK in the White House back then,
and not a doltish and ignorant clown like you.
<Moronic whine having to do with my being gay -- which I'm not -- and
which spews mindless hatefulness against innocent gays, flushed)
(What a DODO!!!)
<Remainder of previous post -- which makes
DOG MEAT of him... restored, below> ---
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
[ ... ]
Acceptance of the New York Liberal Party Nomination
by John F. Kennedy -- September 14, 1960
What do our opponents mean when they apply to us the label
"Liberal?" If by "Liberal" they mean, as they want people to believe,
someone who is soft in his policies abroad, who is against local
government, and who is unconcerned with the taxpayer's dollar,
then the record of this party and its members demonstrate that we
are not that kind of "Liberal." But if by a "Liberal" they mean
someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who wel-
comes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares
about the welfare of the people - their health, their housing, their
schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties --
someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and
suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they
mean by a "Liberal," then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal."
But first, I would like to say what I understand the word "Liberal"
to mean and explain in the process why I consider myself to be
a "Liberal," and what it means in the presidential election of 1960.
In short, having set forth my view -- I hope for all time -- two nights
ago in Houston, on the proper relationship between church and
state, I want to take the opportunity to set forth my views on the
proper relationship between the state and the citizen. This is my
political credo:
I believe in human dignity as the source of national purpose, in
human liberty as the source of national action, in the human heart
as the source of national compassion, and in the human mind as
the source of our invention and our ideas. It is, I believe, the faith
in our fellow citizens as individuals and as people that lies at the
heart of the liberal faith. For liberalism is not so much a party
creed or set of fixed platform promises as it is an attitude of mind
and heart, a faith in man's ability through the experiences of his
reason and judgment to increase for himself and his fellow men t
he amount of justice and freedom and brotherhood which all
human life deserves.
I believe also in the United States of America, in the promise that it
contains and has contained throughout our history of producing a
society so abundant and creative and so free and responsible that
it cannot only fulfill the aspirations of its citizens, but serve equally
well as a beacon for all mankind. I do not believe in a superstate.
I see no magic in tax dollars which are sent to Washington and
then returned. I abhor the waste and incompetence of large-scale
federal bureaucracies in this administration as well as in others. I
do not favor state compulsion when voluntary individual effort can
do the job and do it well. But I believe in a government which acts,
which exercises its full powers and full responsibilities. Government
is an art and a precious obligation; and when it has a job to do, I
believe it should do it. And this requires not only great ends but
that we propose concrete means of achieving them.
Our responsibility is not discharged by announcement of virtuous
ends. Our responsibility is to achieve these objectives with social
invention, with political skill, and executive vigor. I believe for these
reasons that liberalism is our best and only hope in the world today.
For the liberal society is a free society, and it is at the same time
and for that reason a strong society. Its strength is drawn from the
will of free people committed to great ends and peacefully striving
to meet them. Only liberalism, in short, can repair our national power,
restore our national purpose, and liberate our national energies. And t
he only basic issue in the 1960 campaign is whether our government
will fall in a conservative rut and die there, or whether we will move
ahead in the liberal spirit of daring, of breaking new ground, of doing
in our generation what Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt
and Harry Truman and Adlai Stevenson did in their time of influence
and responsibility.
Our liberalism has its roots in our diverse origins. Most of us are
descended from that segment of the American population which
was once called an immigrant minority. Today, along with our
children and grandchildren, we do not feel minor. We feel proud
of our origins and we are not second to any group in our sense
of national purpose. For many years New York represented the
new frontier to all those who came from the ends of the earth to
find new opportunity and new freedom, generations of men and
women who fled from the despotism of the czars, the horrors of
the Nazis, the tyranny of hunger, who came here to the new
frontier in the State of New York. These men and women, a
living cross section of American history, indeed, a cross section
of the entire world's history of pain and hope, made of this city
not only a new world of opportunity, but a new world of the
spirit as well.
Tonight we salute Governor and Senator Herbert Lehman as a
symbol of that spirit, and as a reminder that the fight for full consti-
tutional rights for all Americans is a fight that must be carried on in
1961.
Many of these same immigrant families produced the pioneers and
builders of the American labor movement. They are the men who
sweated in our shops, who struggled to create a union, and who
were driven by longing for education for their children and for the
children's development. They went to night schools; they built their
own future, their union's future, and their country's future, brick by
brick, block by block, neighborhood by neighborhood, and now
in their children's time, suburb by suburb.
Tonight we salute George Meany as a symbol of that struggle and
as a reminder that the fight to eliminate poverty and human exploita-
tion is a fight that goes on in our day. But in 1960 the cause of
liberalism cannot content itself with carrying on the fight for human
justice and economic liberalism here at home. For here and around
the world the fear of war hangs over us every morning and every
night. It lies, expressed or silent, in the minds of every American.
We cannot banish it by repeating that we are economically first or
that we are militarily first, for saying so doesn't make it so. More will
be needed than goodwill missions or talking back to Soviet politic-
ians or increasing the tempo of the arms race. More will be needed
than good intentions, for we know where that paving leads.
In Winston Churchill's words, "We cannot escape our dangers by
recoiling from them. We dare not pretend such dangers do not exist."
And tonight we salute Adlai Stevenson as an eloquent spokesman
for the effort to achieve an intelligent foreign policy. Our opponents
would like the people to believe that in a time of danger it would be
hazardous to change the administration that has brought us to this
time of danger. I think it would be hazardous not to change. I think
it would be hazardous to continue four more years of stagnation
and indifference here at home and abroad, of starving the under-
pinnings of our national power, including not only our defense but
our image abroad as a friend.
This is an important election -- in many ways as important as any
this century -- and I think that the Democratic Party and the Liberal
Party here in New York, and those who believe in progress all over
the United States, should be associated with us in this great effort.
The reason that Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt and Harry
Truman and Adlai Stevenson had influence abroad, and the United
States in their time had it, was because they moved this country
here at home, because they stood for something here in the United
States, for expanding the benefits of our society to our own people,
and the people around the world looked to us as a symbol of hope.
I think it is our task to re-create the same atmosphere in our own
time. Our national elections have often proved to be the turning
point in the course of our country. I am proposing that 1960 be
another turning point in the history of the great Republic. Some
pundits are saying it's 1928 all over again. I say it's 1932 all over
again. I say this is the great opportunity that we will have in our
time to move our people and this country and the people of the
free world beyond the new frontiers of the 1960s.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Any neocon reading the speech above REALLY needs to
re-think his/her philosophy.
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
--
RRR cult lemmings... dumber than dirt.
America's mentally-challenged version of the Taliban.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "James Riske" |
|
| Title: Re: What is a Liberal? |
06 Dec 2005 09:33:17 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 06 Dec 2005 18:15:00 GMT, wrote:
On Tue, 06 Dec 2005 04:31:12 GMT, Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
wrote:
On Mon, 05 Dec 2005 06:29:54 GMT,
< > wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
"Liberal?"
(...)
...someone who is soft in his policies abroad, who is against local
government, and who is unconcerned with the taxpayer's dollar,
You got it right this time, boy!
JFK got it right, for SURE -- when we see that paragraph
of his speech in its full CONTEXT:
Yeah, the major thrust of JFK's administrations of lies and deceit was
warmongering -- it was" Trust me, my fellow Americans, we really do
need to bomb the ***** out of Cuba (maybe) and the North Vietnamese for
sure."
Get you Leftist Liberal Loonie (LLL) head out of your Rump Rider's
Rodeo Cult, dumber than dirt lemming ,homosexual *****, boy!
Liberals have both feet planted firmly in the air.
"The ***** is so etched onto the minds of homosexuals that even mental illness does not prevent them from focusing on it." -- Erik Holland
.
|
|
|
| User: "Matty" |
|
| Title: Re: What is a Liberal? |
04 Jan 2006 12:04:58 AM |
|
|
On 2005-12-07 16:33:17 +1300, James Riske <james.riske@h0tmail.com> said:
On Tue, 06 Dec 2005 18:15:00 GMT, wrote:
On Tue, 06 Dec 2005 04:31:12 GMT, Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
wrote:
On Mon, 05 Dec 2005 06:29:54 GMT, < > wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
"Liberal?"
(...)
...someone who is soft in his policies abroad, who is against local
government, and who is unconcerned with the taxpayer's dollar,
You got it right this time, boy!
JFK got it right, for SURE -- when we see that paragraph of his speech
in its full CONTEXT:
Yeah, the major thrust of JFK's administrations of lies and deceit was
warmongering -- it was" Trust me, my fellow Americans, we really do
need to bomb the ***** out of Cuba (maybe) and the North Vietnamese for
sure."
Get you Leftist Liberal Loonie (LLL) head out of your Rump Rider's
Rodeo Cult, dumber than dirt lemming ,homosexual *****, boy!
Liberals have both feet planted firmly in the air.
Of course, floating ontop of a positive energy due to our enlightened
state of mind.
Matt
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Craig Chilton" |
|
| Title: Re: What is a Liberal? |
06 Dec 2005 09:59:05 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 06 Dec 2005 22:33:17 -0500,
James Riske <james.riske@h0tmail.com> wrote:
Liberals have both feet planted firmly in the air.
If so, it beats hell of their having them drowned in SEWAGE,
as is the case with today's loathsome and hateful neocons/
RRR Cultists... the Culture of Corruption and mindless bigotry.
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
--
RRR cult lemmings... dumber than dirt.
America's mentally-challenged version of the Taliban.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: What is a Liberal? |
07 Dec 2005 06:27:12 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 07 Dec 2005 03:59:05 GMT, Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
wrote:
On Tue, 06 Dec 2005 22:33:17 -0500,
James Riske <james.riske@h0tmail.com> wrote:
Liberals have both feet planted firmly in the air.
If so, it beats hell of their having them drowned in SEWAGE,
as is the case with today's loathsome and hateful RRR Cultists
... the Culture of Corruption and mindless bigotry.
--Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
Rump Rider's Rodeo (RR) cult lemming... dumber than dirt.
Right on, Oba-San!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Craig Chilton" |
|
| Title: Re: What is a Liberal? |
07 Dec 2005 08:46:16 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 08 Dec 2005 00:27:12 GMT,
"fAULTY" <default@easynews.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
James Riske <james.riske@h0tmail.com> wrote:
Liberals have both feet planted firmly in the air.
If so, it beats hell of their having them drowned in SEWAGE,
as is the case with today's loathsome and hateful neocons/
RRR Cultists... the Culture of Corruption and mindless bigotry.
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
--
RRR cult lemmings... dumber than dirt.
America's mentally-challenged version of the Taliban.
Right on, Oba-San!
Thanks!! When it comes to these issues, I always am. Since
RRR Cultists are literally **clueless**, because they are FACTLESS.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: What is a Liberal? |
07 Dec 2005 10:56:06 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 08 Dec 2005 02:46:16 GMT, Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
wrote:
On Thu, 08 Dec 2005 00:27:12 GMT,
Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
James Riske <james.riske@h0tmail.com> wrote:
Liberals have both feet planted firmly in the air.
If so, it beats hell of their having them drowned in SEWAGE,
as is the case with today's loathsome and hateful neocons/
RRR Cultists... the Culture of Corruption and mindless bigotry.
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
Rump Rider's Rodeao (RRR) cult lemming... dumber than dirt.
America's mentally-challenged version of the Taliban.
Right on, Oba-San!
Thanks!! When it comes to these issues, I always am. Since
RRR Cultists are literally **clueless**, because they are FACTLESS.
How candid of you to point out your status..
.
|
|
|
| User: "Craig Chilton" |
|
| Title: Re: What is a Liberal? |
08 Dec 2005 12:33:27 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 08 Dec 2005 00:27:12 GMT,
"Faulty" <default@easynews.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
James Riske <james.riske@h0tmail.com> wrote:
Liberals have both feet planted firmly in the air.
If so, it beats hell of their having them drowned in SEWAGE,
as is the case with today's loathsome and hateful neocons/
RRR Cultists... the Culture of Corruption and mindless bigotry.
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
--
RRR cult lemmings... dumber than dirt.
America's mentally-challenged version of the Taliban.
Right on, Oba-San!
Thanks!! When it comes to these issues, I always am. Since
RRR Cultists are literally **clueless**, because they are FACTLESS.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: What is a Liberal? |
08 Dec 2005 08:24:12 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 08 Dec 2005 06:33:27 GMT, Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
wrote:
On Thu, 08 Dec 2005 00:27:12 GMT,
"Faulty" <default@easynews.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
James Riske <james.riske@h0tmail.com> wrote:
Liberals have both feet planted firmly in the air.
If so, it beats hell of their having them drowned in SEWAGE,
as is the case with today's loathsome and hateful neocons/
RRR Cultists... the Culture of Corruption and mindless bigotry.
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
--
RRR cult lemmings... dumber than dirt.
America's mentally-challenged version of the Taliban.
Right on, Oba-San!
Thanks!! When it comes to these issues, I always am. Since
RRR Cultists are literally **clueless**, because they are FACTLESS.
<SNIGGER>
.
|
|
|
| User: "Craig Chilton" |
|
| Title: Re: What is a Liberal? |
08 Dec 2005 09:13:11 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 08 Dec 2005 00:27:12 GMT,
"Faulty" <default@easynews.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
James Riske <james.riske@h0tmail.com> wrote:
Liberals have both feet planted firmly in the air.
If so, it beats hell of their having them drowned in SEWAGE,
as is the case with today's loathsome and hateful neocons/
RRR Cultists... the Culture of Corruption and mindless bigotry.
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
--
RRR cult lemmings... dumber than dirt.
America's mentally-challenged version of the Taliban.
Right on, Oba-San!
Thanks!! When it comes to these issues, I always am. Since
RRR Cultists are literally **clueless**, because they are FACTLESS.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: What is a Liberal? |
05 Dec 2005 03:16:17 AM |
|
|
That was an awesome speech by Kennedy. Terribly sad that he was taken
from this world so soon. I hope the same ideals and principles apply to
Australia. There is indeed a lot of political change in Australia at
this time and there was talk of civil rights being threatened and
possibly changed forever, but I can only hope that the changes will
help us rather than harm us.
I see the USA as a beacon of hope in this great big world of tyranny.
It IS the country that has changed the world, by setting an example
that human rights and civil liberties greatly strengthen the human
spirit and enable society to mature at a level that is not impossible
for other countries to emulate. I am sure that there are random acts of
insanity and deprivation of human rights in the US, but I am even more
sure that the same things have happened in all countries and quite
possibly even at a worse level. Most important of all, it is the
principle on which the US was founded that makes it so special.
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
