Conservative Texas Democrat Talks Semantics

By Justin Gardner | Related entries in General Politics

…there are a lot more people in the Democratic party who do what the Good Book says: Take care of the poor and the afflicted and the downtrodden. I took flak from some of my Republican colleagues for working with the mentally ill, for working with some of the underprivileged from the Children’s Health Insurance Program. That’s not liberal; that’s trying to use the assets of the state to produce the best economics you can.

Austin Centrist has more.


This entry was posted on Tuesday, March 21st, 2006 and is filed under General Politics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

6 Responses to “Conservative Texas Democrat Talks Semantics”

  1. qatwoman Says:

    Just typical repugNUT hypocracy at work against the less fortunate…..and they LIKE to call themselves “Christians”. Laughable in my opinion!

  2. Justin Gardner Says:

    Hey qatwoman, this is a blog where that type of commenting is frowned upon. Make your point and make it well, but leave the name calling at home.

  3. Kevin Says:

    This guy is good. He articulates his position and that of his party in a way that makes his oponents seem shortsighted and heartless. Democrats on the national stage should take note, this is how you frame an issue. Whether or not what he’s saying is true, it’s at least compelling. I wish the rest of the Democrats were this good at articulating their views. Of course I live in NY and never heard of Pete Laney before so I don’t know if this is the exception of the rule for him.

  4. Jimmy the Dhimmi Says:

    Set up the straw man, knock him down! Only Democrats care about the poor and downtrodden, because the only solution to poverty is government mediated income redistribution.

  5. Meredith Says:

    This just reminds me that at the place I work (which is for a state court of appeals), we are not allowed to belong to or promote any organizations that would be considered partisan. For example: I cannot donate money to the “One” campaign because it is considered liberal. If you haven’t heard of the “One” campaign, it is an organization to end world hunger, particularly in Africa. If I were a conservative, I would be angry about the obvious implications of that rule. As a liberal, I am frustrated that I can’t be involved in volunteer-type organizations because they are considered to be too liberal. However, what does this say about the state of our two-party system?

  6. Kevin Says:

    Meredith, you point out the danger in the tactics I was admiring above. If beating up straw-men is an acceptable substitute for discussion of the issues, then there is room for dialogue. The result is absurd situations like the one you describe, feeding hungry people must be a “Democrat thing”. That said, I still wish dems were better at framing their positions and attaching the other side.

Leave a Reply


NOTE TO COMMENTERS:


You must ALWAYS fill in the two word CAPTCHA below to submit a comment. And if this is your first time commenting on Donklephant, it will be held in a moderation queue for approval. Please don't resubmit the same comment a couple times. We'll get around to moderating it soon enough.


Also, sometimes even if you've commented before, it may still get placed in a moderation queue and/or sent to the spam folder. If it's just in moderation queue, it'll be published, but it may be deleted if it lands in the spam folder. My apologies if this happens but there are some keywords that push it into the spam folder.


One last note, we will not tolerate comments that disparage people based on age, sex, handicap, race, color, sexual orientation, national origin or ancestry. We reserve the right to delete these comments and ban the people who make them from ever commenting here again.


Thanks for understanding and have a pleasurable commenting experience.


Related Posts: