Brink Lindsey, the director of research at the libertarian Cato Institute, argued in an essay in the New Republic that the “alliance between traditionalists and libertarians appears, at long last, to be falling apart.” And he argued that libertarians should leave the GOP and join with Democrats.
Washington Post columnist Sebastian Mallaby noted that libertarians and Democrats are certainly more alike on moral questions such as abortion, gay marriage and stem cell research. But probably not on economic issues.
“Just as Republicans want government to restore traditional values, so Democrats want government to bring back the economic order that existed before globalization,” Mallaby wrote. “As Lindsey puts it in his New Republic essay, Republicans want to go home to the United States of the 1950s while Democrats want to work there.”
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Chas on Open thread 11/22
- george on Health care reform would save state money
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- Politico on So they said
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- JWink on Health care reform would save state money
- Politico on Health care reform would save state money
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
163 Comments
I used to be a “libertarian” (note the small “L”) Republican. I switched to the Democratic Party nearly two years ago, and I now work to get Democrats elected to office. Too bad, Republicans. By going after social issues for no other reason than “God says so,” you’ve managed to alienate a key constituency in your party. So it goes.
PS: Thanks so much, Eagle, for linking to an article we can’t read without forking over a credit card number.
I think this article will actually irritate the true blue Libertarians. They are wanting a 3 or more party system in America, and don’t want to have to give up part of their beliefs to try to conform to the democratic party either. I do think they belong more under Democrats than Republicans though.
And to be honest, as a democrat, I want democratic ideals to STAY democratic ideals. I don’t want to have to conform my ideals to squeeze in the libertarians.
I agree with their hands-off approach to people’s rights, but I don’t like their 3rd world country leanings. And that is exactly where we’d end up.
Don’t want to use your credit card, don’t read the article. Free markets, man…
“In a time of faith, skepticism is the most intolerable of all insults.”Randolph Bourne
The author of that article has a point. I doubt that Libertarians will join the Democrats. They will, however, vote for Democrats if they are better than the Republican Candidates.
Libertarians agree with Democrats on the moral issue, but widely differ on economic issues. But economic issues outweigh any moral issues by far.
For instance, Libertarians like Bill Clinton, because he was free market, free trade globalization believer. Globalization has help bring millions of people in 3rd world countries out of poverty and has help our economic stance tramendously.
So there are Democrats we support. But if it comes to some Religious Right Wing Nut and a Leftist Socialist Radical for office, we either don’t vote or default to the religious nut. Because the Leftist will do far more damage than the Religious nut.
Wait until after the next presidential election. We need as many Republican votes as possible to keep the Madame she-devil and VP Barak Hussein O’bama out of the WH.
Like I’ve said before ” Democrats want to help the common man live a better life; Republicans want to dictate how the common man lives his life.”
Yo Morris! While I agree with you that Hillary shouldn’t be elected President. Barak Hussein O’bama isn’t a bad candidate at all. Not much leadership experience, but isn’t bad at all. I would vote for him on a logical standpoint, not on an emotional one, like the Democrats would.
It would be too lengthy for me to post all the good things about Barak Hussein O’bama. Yeah! He isn’t perfect, but he is much more moderate and pro-capitalistic than you think. His record in Illinois Legislature and his own personal actions have me convience that he will be ok.
But! At this point of time, Rudy is a better option. But we will see who jumps in. Dennis Kucinich jumped in the race yesterday. He stands a good chance to be nominated by the Democrats.
“Dennis Kucinich jumped in the race yesterday. He stands a good chance to be nominated by the Democrats.”
In your dreams, maybe…
What? He’s everything you like about a Democrat? Why not? Just because he isn’t rich enough or popular enough for you guys?
I guess I must tell you libs how it should be.We want you to nominate Hillary or Obama or Kusinich (Did you see his extra hot wife at the announcement yesterday? She doesn’t look like a first wife.) They will lose. The one we would worry about is John Edwards. He would be trouble.
Since the democratic nominee will be none of the four you name I’m not going to worry a lot about it.
According to talk radio Hillary ran in 2004. At least, that is what they were all saying back then.
The reason for a libertarian to vote Democratic is just to register a protest against the Republican Party. The GOP became the party of big, pork-barrel spending (though no one believes Democrats will spend less.)
The social conservatives have shifted from agreeing with Libertarians that the government shouldn’t be teaching your kids about sex or promoting single-motherhood through welfare programs to using government to control people’s lives on gambling, pornography, alcohol, etc. Conservatives even want government teaching their kids abstinence in school! Whatever happened to doing that stuff at home?
The problem is George Bush is a big government conservative. Democrats are big government liberals. Libertarians have no place to go.
Wow! The Dems may be gaining the Libertarians . . . both of them . . .
BTW, Real Lib, “no one believes that the Dems will spend less”?
Just look at the record under Clinton (balanced budget) and under W. (gov’t spending increased 9 percent per annum, faster than any President since WW2).
Fleet,We can rest assured they’ll nominate a sure loser. The last good candidate they stood up was…let’s see…
Kerry? HA!
Gore? Ozone Man (probably would have won had he not had such an elitist attitude).
Clinton? Won twice with less than 50% of the vote – thank you Ross Perot.
Du-cock-kiss? (laugh).
Mondale? More liberal than Lenin, barely got 40% of the vote.
Carter? Barely won even though there was huge anti-GOP backlash thanks to Nixon.
McGovern? 37% of the vote – largest margin of defeat in US history.
HHH? Left-er than Mondale, close race, thanks to Wallace).
Johnson? Ok, I’ll give them Johnson. Nice tough Texan. 1964. 40+ years ago.
Du-cock-kiss? (laugh).Hey! That’s my joke!
Correction, GoofNut, Gore DID win.
He won the popular vote, and had the recount gone forward in Florida, he would have won there too.
WAAAAAA WAAAAAAA WAAAAAA
And in the 2000 election, your guy–who is now in serious contention for worst president ever–actually got less than 50 percent of the vote in a TWO WAY race.
Incredibly, Bush claimed a mandate.
I’d like to see Gore run again.
At least he doesn’t have Alzheimers . . . And also unlike Reagan, he may win an Oscar.
WAAAAAAHHHHHH.
Libs are STILL whining about 2000. Florida. Ha! Even after countless lawsuits and recounts. Bush still won.
Wait – lemme check the history books – yep, Bush won.
“Correction, GoofNut, Gore DID win.
He won the popular vote, and had the recount gone forward in Florida, he would have won there too.”Posted by: CapnAmerica | December 13, 2006 at 08:51 AM
Correction Capn Misinformation
Even your favorite liberal newspapers confirm Bush won the recount:
“Bush Really Won. “Florida Recounts Would Have Favored Bush” (Washington Post); “Bush Still Had Votes to Win in a Recount, Study Finds”(L.A. Times); “Florida Recount Study: Bush Still Wins” (CNN.com); “Ballot Recount Supports Bush Win,” (St. Petersburg Times); “Under the Two Most Likely Scenarios, Bush Won Recount” (Palm Beach Post). Other papers opted for a take-your-pick approach: “Florida Review Shows Narrowest Imaginable Margins with Bush Ahead in Some Categories, Gore Others” (AP); “Bush Wins, Gore Wins–Depends on How Ballots Are Added Up” (L.A. Times).”
Quite a few of those brillliant nimnoy voters in Florida marked both Bush and Gore. Of course, the Democraps claims ALL of these votes were for Gore. Yeah, like they are mindreaders.
Fletttwood’s crying must be in reference to his party’s scourging in the midterm election.
BOTH houses of Congress flipped . . . hasn’t happened since Wilson.
The Senate Intelligence Committee that has oversight over the “intelligence failures” is now headed by Vietnam Vet Reyes.
The Senate Judicial Committee is now headed by Leahy, the guy who was targetted by the anthrax attack that could have only come from a US gov’t lab and was strangely never solved, the guy who told by Mr. Vice-President to “go f*** himself” on the Senate floor.
Leahy says that Bush should be “terrified” at his appointment.
Sucks to be you, doesn’t it.
JM–
Thanks for giving me the opportunity to correct this widely misunderstood “fact” of the right.
The newspaper article said that Bush “won” if Gore had gotten the recount he wanted–that is, a targetted recount.
If the entire state had been recounted as the Florida Supreme Court had ordered, Gore would have won.
Why?
Because of the tens of thousands of overvotes–people who voted Gore and then also wrote in Gore’s name in the line that said “write in candidate.”
A lot of people thought “write in” was a verb, not an adjective.
Had those legal votes been counted, the hanging chads and the absentee ballots controversies that the Repukes used to steal the election would mean nothing.
Bush did win in the electoral college to become the first minority popular vote president in a century-and-a-half.
capn – what we have to face is that Gore blew it by not neutralizing Nader. Unlike Perot who took votes from both sides (and probably more from the challenger than the incumbent) Nader took his pretty much exclusively from one candidate – Gore.
With the Nader votes Gore would have easily carried both FL and NH. Either would have been enough.
Six years later, they’re still bawling.
*heh*
True, he was clearly a spoiler, Ben.
But in reference to “whining about the 2000 election,” this is a very telling difference between liberals and conservatives.
We liberals believe in a fair process. I would be just as outraged if Gore had stolen the election in a state in which his brother was the governor, even though I supported him.
Because you either believe in democracy or you don’t. You either believe in the rule by the majority, or you don’t.
I do.
The CONservatives don’t. They only care about getting their guy in.
Same deal overseas–they believe that Hugo Chavez deserves to be assissinated even though he was elected President three times overwhelmingly.
CONservatives don’t like him, so democracy be damned.
Hey, why don’t you people move to Russia if you don’t like democracy?
“Correction, GoofNut, Gore DID win.”
hehehehehehe
If he could have only won Tennnessee!
As a real American, unlike the right-wing whose only country is their bank account, I will never “get over” the day Bush and the Supreme Court killed democracy in my country.
But you wing-nuts got your guy . . . boy, did you get him.
Check those approval ratings.
The Republican party is a drowning man with the anvil of George W. Bush around his neck.
Laugh at that.
WAAAAAHHHH.
Any bets as to how long the libs will continue to bawl about this?
Wow . . . good come back, GoofNut.
If I were a thinking conservative, I’d be embarrassed by you.
As it is, I’m only embarrassed for you.
As for how long will we “continue to bawl,” the answer is as long as I draw breath.
Democracy is just about my most important value. The man who isn’t outraged about the election of 2000 is no American. The man who trades democracy for a “win” is no man.
Gore also erred in 2000 by acting like he did not know who Clinton was. Even though he had been through impeachment, Clinton was still popular and could have helped Gore.
Edwards will never get the nomination. He couldn’t even carry his own state in 2004.
Frankly, I am not yet seeing a democratic candidate to get excited about.
Maybe that’s it exactly, Steven.
Maybe we don’t need an “exciting” candidate.
We just need a competent one.
As opposed to Worst. President. Ever.
I’ll not continue to foster this conversation after this post. Here’s the bottom line:
Bush won. He won initially. He won after all the recounts. He won after the Supreme Court ended the fiasco. He won in all the post-election model recounts. He won.
The man who continues to cry over a lost cause is no productive man.
I thought the Seahawks were screwed in the Super Bowl last year, but…Yep, the Steelers won.
the more I hear the Republicans spout off about Barack Obama, the more I know they must be scared as hell. Why? Because this is a man who seems to be sincere and not corrupted? Is it because he is a minority and relates to the common people? Is it because he doesn’t NEED the GOP for his validation? Just why is it that the Republicans fear him so much?
Yup, he won.
Boy, did he win.
He won so much.
And thanks to folks like you, he’s still “winning.”
With Bush in charge, I feel like a winner, don’t you?
Bush did not win the popular vote in 2000 and that was the point Golfnut. If what happened in Florida in 2000 had happened in any third world country that the US was watching for fair elections, there would have been an investigation – and you Republicans know it.
Besides, if George W. Bush prides himself on being the uniter – then why did he not reach out to all Americans and unite? I’ll tell you why, because he and Cheney had it planned to go get the oil for themselves.
Yes, Bush, like Clinton, like all other Presidents before, won a majority in the Electoral College, and thus won the Presidency. Oops-my history slip is showing; wasn’t there an early Presidential election decided by the House?
Capn,You bring up an interesting subject. This is a bit off-topic, but in reading Woodward’s _State of Denial_, Kerry thought that he had a case for challenging the 2004 results in Ohio. Predominantly poor and non-white polling places had voting waits of up to 6 hours, whereas in Republican district polling places the wait was a matter of minutes. Kerry thought that the nation had been through enough with the 2000 mess and believed it was the correct thing to accept defeat for the best interests of the country. When reading that I thought ‘I’m sure Bush would have done the same thing had the shoe been on the other foot – NOT!’
And you’re right Capn. I was definitely not excited about Kerry, but I sent him more money than I’ve ever sent any other candidate.
I think the rumors of the death of the far-right nutjobs in the Republican party are greatly exaggerated. Thus, I am as sure as I can be that McCain does not have a chance at the Repub nomination.
Sunny,I’ve said it countless times – if the Dims nominate Osama Obama
…err, Obama Osama
…err, Barack Hussein Osama
…err, that dude from Illinois
…the GOP will win.
Where do you get ‘fear’ out of that?
Vaughn–
Considering that only white landowning men could vote for the first 100 years or so of American history, the early elections don’t reflect too well our ideal of democracy today.
Because sunny knows that some around here express their fears in the most pathetically narcissistic way.
bush lost and is still losing.
Libertarians would be wise to abandon the GOP. The GOP cares about nothing but money and no one but those who have it.
No, they’re not dead, they’re just resting! (Sorry, too easy–Monty Python reference).
McCain may occasionally commit minor heresies against the party, but he’s quite conservative. He will also be 72, though. Just like Bob Dole.
I don’t know who else they have of national stature who will be acceptable to the Republican rank-and-file. Rudy “my mistress gets the master bedroom” Guiliani? I think not.
Folks, in my view, Bush stole 1 election, and probably stole a second, but. . who cares? Let’s focus on not having the NEXT one stolen.
Thank you.
Good point also hank. Tenneessee, Arkansas, Florida, New Hampshire. Any ONE of them would have tipped the college.
Poorly run campaign.
For not fearing Obama – you sure have called this man alot of names, Golfnut.
Usually a man who is NOT afraid will not resort to name calling, but you are a Republican. Unless, of course, Rush Limbaugh and his crooked cronies are seeing Obama as a threat to their power?
Sunny…
I wasn’t calling him names, and I apologize for not giving appropriate footnoting of the quote. Those were the words of Ted Kennedy.
Actions speak louder than empty apologies.
Actions? So, you want me to repost with an appropriate footnote?
I’m trying hard not to question your intellect here, but…
Where do I go to see the Gore presidential libary?Is it in Tennessee?If only he would have won his own state.Damn it, man!
KsG – I do not know whether Ted K did the “Osama” thing or not nor whether it was a slip of the tongue or what. But your constant parroting “Osama Obama” is clear as to intent.
Of course, from a supporter of the cokehead-in-chief I should not be surprised.
From the Capn (this week’s nic):
“We liberals believe in a fair process. I would be just as outraged if Gore had stolen the election in a state in which his brother was the governor, even though I supported him.”
Bullshit. Get off your self-rightous high horse.
Who woulda thought the great republican juggernaut would of unraveled so quickly. Would like to welcome the libertarians to our side. Now if we could only get Ron Paul to change parties.
hehehehehehehehehehe
GMC contribution this thread 0GMC relevance this thread 0
assesment GMC this thread “pissy”
GMC your future is cancelled
Before the 2000 election the Dems had plans to stealk the election in Florida. The plane tickets for the legion of attorneys that flooded the state were bought before the election.
The Dallas firm that called voters on the day of the election had their ‘push poll’ questions ready days before the election.
Every county had two democratic lawyers in place days before the election with no other purpose than to challenge military absentee ballots.
Bush stole the election? No, my dear friends, the dems failed to steal it!
Hank
The left-wing commie media even did their part. They called the election for Gore two hours before the polls closed in the panhandle. This was calculated to have cost Bush several thousand votes.
No my friends the dems tried to steal the election and failed. They can’t win on ideas and policy so they have to turn to the courts.
They can’t win on who they are so they spend all of their time and efforts tearing down the opposition with personnal attacks.
hehehehehehe
Hank
PS I think the Gore Presidential Library should be in the basement of the Clinton Presidential Library. All he ever was was Clinton’s buttboy anyway.
hehehehehehe
“Should libertarians jump from GOP?” What I really love about this line is that a quick search of the blog front page shows that the word Republican is capitalized, but libertarian is not. I have experienced first hand from the Eagle the lack of respect for being a Libertarian. Apparently it’s fairly deep in their minds.
Did you know that antiwar.com is Libertarian?http://antiwar.com/who.php
“They can’t win on who they are”
Say it with me Hank.
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi!
Nice little story ya got there Hank.
I have another one for you. Like you, I have no links.
It was assumed that the 2000 election would be close. In fact, the GOP believed that bush would win the popular vote and Gore would win the electoral vote. They were prepared for that outcome. They were going to challenge the electoral college.
No folks. Gore won. He got more votes. 500,000 more votes. And he did that against an opponent whose brother was the governor of the key state.
Too bad repukes can’t fix anything but elections.
I want to give the Eagle credit for thinking that the only options for Libertarians is to either join the Republicans or the Democrats.
It’s no wonder I don’t subscribe to the local newspaper.
Sorry to change subjects here, but this doesnt fit under any threads today and no open thread. Why write a great editorial and then not give us a place to respond? (WTF?)
Anyway… interesting that someone in the kansas msm is asking governor leadership to, um, actually lead. Her silence and fence sitting on the coal fired generating plant in Holcomb is telling.
Whatever will governor leadership do? I called it a couple of weeks ago that her ties with Hays and Steve Irsik would win out over doing the right thing. (Sunflower electric is based in Hays, Irsik is the head of the kansas water board and a giant irrigator and subsidy queen.)
But when the only blue city in Kansas is clamboring for her to intervene on their side, I wonder who will get sacrificed? Hays? Or Lawrence? Salina? Garden City? Stay tuned…
On a related note, could governor leadership’s dont rock the boat style finally be catching up with her? Will the people of Kansas demand that she not only lead but be clear about her positions on water resources and on this plant?
Will she be able to dodge the issue? Will less than chatty kathy have to finally get off the fence of water? Of ethanol and corn? Irrigation right in Steve Irsik’s back yard?
Or will she send in Joe Harkins to do the dirty work under cover of night and secret meetings? Kansas’ own Darth Cheney. Or the governor’s jim baker? Mr. Fixit?
It will be interesting now to see the statements she makes, how she avoids taking a stand, and how she sidesteps under the guise of letting KDHE do its work.
She isnt going to want to piss off anyone, and so this time, she may piss off everyone.
As you theivin’ bloggers have been saying all day…
hehehehehehehehehehehhe
Comment on style; it would be appropriate to capitalize the “L” in libertarian if the writer was commenting on members of the Libertarian party; if, however, the individual(s) were of libertarian belief, but a member of the Republican party, then the lower case “l” is to be used. Correspondingly, should the writer be discussing a person who believes in democratic principles, a lower case “d” should be used; if thesubject individual is a member of the Democratic party, then the “D” is to be capitalized if referencing the party affiliation; otherwise, not.
Libertarians should work on building their own party not begging for scapes from the Dems and Repugs,
On further reflection, I wonder if this has any implications for governor leadership?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061213/lf_nm/climate_politics_dc
If she wants to be on the national stage, she better have some “correct” decisions and actions on environmental issues. If she does, it could really boost her next career move. Imagine, governor of little ag state takes on tough political calls where the rubber meets the road on ag, rural development, jobs, water, and pollution.
If she doesnt, and dances adroitly around it?
Some bad decisions or no decisions that will cause some Democrats to question her judgement on environmental issues. Particularly water issues.
Better make sure you come down on the “correct” side of these issues, governor leadership. I dont think Democrats will support a nominee with a bad, or worse, no record on the environment.
stay tuned….
Anyone who thinks right wing radicals are better than Democrats need their head examined.
Not only have the republicans shown a distain for the freedoms of this country, but also showed they don’t care how they spend your money too.
I believe in some social programs, but it’s far cheaper than this massive pork barrel spending the dems are about to undo.
Never know, the next four years could demand you tith that 10% to the government, and they’ll decide which church to send it to.
“I apologize for not giving appropriate footnoting of the quote. Those were the words of Ted Kennedy.”
golfnut, as usual, is lying. Kennedy only said:”Osama bin … Osama … Obama”.
The “…” are pauses (realized he misspoke) and removing them is misquoting.
golfnut, as usual, is quoting Rush’s misquotes’Criticizing Sen. Obama, Limbaugh called him “Obama Osama”‘http://mediamatters.org/items/200507120008
GMC wrote–
From the Capn (this week’s nic):
“We liberals believe in a fair process. I would be just as outraged if Gore had stolen the election in a state in which his brother was the governor, even though I supported him.”
Bullshit. Get off your self-rightous high horse.
*****
I once believed that GMC was at least a thinking CONservative. I having to reassess that given his nasty cheap shot.
I’m sorry that a simple statement of fact so enrages you, GMC, but it’s still true.
I would oppose ANY candidate who “won” the way Bush “won” in Florida, no matter what their party.
It may be hard for you CONs to comprehend, but there are some real patriots in this country who actually believe in democracy.
“Self righteous”?
Nope.
American.
I will grant you though that it’s hard to reconcile a real belief in democracy when the CONs so deeply hold their real value: “the golden rule.”
“He who has the gold rules.”
I can’t believe y’all are talking about hanging chad. Have you not heard about Diebold selling elections?????
“DELAND, Fla., Nov. 11 – Something very strange happened on election night to Deborah Tannenbaum, a Democratic Party official in Volusia County. At 10 p.m., she called the county elections department and learned that Al Gore was leading George W. Bush 83,000 votes to 62,000. But when she checked the county’s Web site for an update half an hour later, she found a startling development: Gore’s count had dropped by 16,000 votes, while an obscure Socialist candidate had picked up 10,000–all because of a single precinct with only 600 voters.”- Washington Post Sunday , November 12, 2000 ; Page A22
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0310/S00211.htm
I think I’m going to change my name to this.
And, I’m conservative.
The exact quote:
“Why don’t we just ask Osama bin — Osama Obama — Obama what — since he won by such a big amount.”
As usual, a lib is rather liberal with the word “lying”.
I clearly wasn’t trying to quote him verbatim. Otherwise, I would’ve used quotation marks. If you’d listen to the recording of the speach, you’d hear that there were no pauses between “Osama Obama”.
*shaking my head at the simplicity of the libs*
There is no difference between a Democrat and a Republican, especially when it comes to supporting the 51st state of Israel. Democrats pride themselves on being anti-war, but look who calls for a DRAFT! Charles Rangel no less!
Democrats are fucking hypocrites who want to go back to conscription while making themselves appear anti-war!
Sheer hypocrisy at its finest!
Libertarians are people who want to pay no taxes and smoke dope. They apparently think the Interstate Highway System is a natural stone formation. They take for granted all the advantages of collective effort — a clean, reliable water system, sewers, ambulances, Social Security, fire departments, hotdogs (relatively) free of rodent parts, and on and on — not recognizing that their self-righteousness sometimes infringes on the rights of others; and not admitting that others interests have a place in democracy.
There’s nothing more Libertarian than the right of the Head of a Household to force sex on any female who lives under his roof, even if she’s his 12-year-old daughter. A Libertarian’s house is his castle, so he’s got the right to cook meth on the stove and shoot anyone who comes on his property.
It’s the height of irony that Libertarians promote themselves on the Internet, a medium created by government. They’re the classic selfish little kids who come to the birthday party for ice cream and cake but don’t want to bring a present.
Libertarians comprise part of the Republican Party’s coalition of fools. Evangelical Christians are another faction of the GOP “majority,” (a “majority” that lost the 2000 presidential election and eked out the re(s)election of George WMD Bush in 2004 only under a cloud of Ohio fraud.
There were plenty of close races in the 2006 election that fell the Democrats’ way. All were uncontested by the GOP because they knew the (Diebold) fix was in and they *still* couldn’t overcome the power of America’s rejection of 12 years of Republican Party fascism.
Republicans rose to power with their anti-tax message. Pure genius, that. People don’t want to pay taxes. Duh. But people don’t want to pay anything. If Dillon’s got rid of check-outs, they’d get rid of a lot more food. If Wal-Mart would tell the masses, “Come on in, take what you want, and we’ll send the bill to your grandchildren,” they’d move a lot of merchandise.
That’s how government under the Republicans has been run for the past dozen years or so.
A few of us sane people know better. A few of us patriots think America is a good idea and worth paying for. The Republican/Libertarian majority wants the ice cream and cake and doesn’t want to bring a present.
Karl Rove wrote many years ago that the key to political success was to understand that half the people in America are below-average in intelligence. If you add the corrupt and dishonest to the 50% ignorant, you can generate a majority on election day.
It almost worked.
Monkeyhawk
Ranking this thread 1
Please post initials for high score.
Ah the great Bush isn’t president because he stole the election, didn’t win the popular vote crap.
They are the two major ploys the democratic leadership harps on to keep the peasant’s panties in a bind.
Again, for the Constitutionally challanged amongst us. The electorial college elects the president, not the popular vote. Saying Gore won because he got the popular vote is like sayint the team that achieved the most passing yards or first downs, regargless of the final, won. BS
Hank
PS tell me, my dear J R when did you ever give us a link? hmmmmmmmm?
hehehehehehe
PSS Dear kfg I did credit you when I first used the famous hehehehehe.
You see this is the kind of self-aggrandisement from the Democrats that is particularly putrid! DummyHawk thinks that all Republicans andthose who vote for them are either:a) unintelligentb) corrupt & dishonest
and that Democrats are basically Superman who fights for Truth Justice and the American Way. That’s first class propaganda!
Monkeyhawk
E-mail me at the link.
We need you for our organization dedicated to overthrowing the ruling class and subverting life as we know it.
In other words, establishing a real democracy in America . . .
Thanks for admitting that you CONs don’t give a sh*t about the popular vote in this country, Hank.
BushCo was ready to go ballistic if Gore had won the electoral college but not the popular vote.
Because you don’t really care about the process of democracy, you just care about the result–Bush won, get over it.
CapnAmerica,
What exactly are you saying? Are you saying that the electoral college is not a necessary institution of a representative democracy?
Crus X–
Off your meds again, dude?
It’s pretty hard to hold the Dems responsible for much of anything since they haven’t had any real influence in gov’t for six full years.
Turn down the hysteria, why doncha?
“Because you don’t really care about the process of democracy,”
It is our democracy that the Electoral College decides the election results, not the popular vote. Did you miss that part?
What I think the Capn is saying is this:
“We don’t like that Bush won but didn’t win the popular vote. We know it doesn’t matter but we’re just so damn bitter so we must protest.”
Capn,If Bush won the electoral vote, and if the electoral vote is the way in which this country decides its Presidents, then why do you still bitch about the popular vote which apparently doesn’t matter in a presidential election in this country?
Why keep arguing about past elections, and who won what and how?
Isn’t it obvious that we all lost those elections, i.e. America lost completely!
That’s what is important and should be considered.
Dear CapnAmerica,
We are not a democracy. We are a Constituional Republic. Only a fool or an intellectually dishonist nitwit would infer that I don’t care about the popular vote because I explained the Constituion to you.
Want a democracy? Move to one.
Hank
No, I didn’t miss that part, Sol.
My point is that it wouldn’t have mattered to the CONs. They would argue any position if it justified them winning.
What do you think would have happened if Kerry had won Ohio and won the electoral college while losing the popular vote?
What would the CONs have said then, do you think?
Growing up, Captain America was one of my favourite superheroes. Truly a symbol of what America never was!
:)
I’m not going anywhere, Hank.
What I and other liberals are trying to do is change THIS COUNTRY’S government into a better reflection of what people want.
And judging from the mid-term elections, we’re succeeding magnificiently.
A well written, relatively brief discussion on the Electoral College, its origins, and how it works:
http://www.fec.gov/pdf/eleccoll.pdf
Well, I think if would have been the other way around then the Republican party would have accepted it and not been whining about it six years later. Six.
Capn,Then your issue is with the Electoral College then, isn’t it? Your issue is with the process in which this country chooses it’s presidential candidates. So you think that the popular vote should override the electoral vote? because that is exactly what would have taken place for Gore to have won.
Capn,So if your issue is with the electoral college then why do you insist that Bush “stole” the election, when he clearly won the electoral vote?
You have to lead from the middle – moderate. If the dems take office in 08 and have an extreme leftist, we will be in no better shape. Repub or Dem, they will need to be moderate to be successful.
Bush didn’t steal the election, he saved America. Imagine President Gore on 9/11. Scary isn’t it. We would all be bowing five times a day towards Mecca by now. The Dems reckoned early on that victory in the war on terror wasn’t going to be a good thing for them. If they ever hoped to get their power back than the war on terror must not succeed. So the Dems. when faced with a choice of whats good for the Country verses whats good for them, naturally chose to screw the Country. A united America would have caused the occupation of Iraq to go entirerly different from the mess we have today. But noooo, Bush had to be destroyed at all costs. So the Left as they always do conspired with their allies around the World to defeat America, even going so far as to coach the enemy on how to manipulate the American media and help turn Americans against the war. Total crap like Abu Graib and Gitmo have been used to turn even our traditional allies against us. Just like in Vietnam, the American servicemen and women have performed admirably, but have been undercut at every turn by biased reporting that makes it appear that the enemy is winning without ever showing the humanitarian good that has been done. Now our enemies around the world are emboldened and the world is a much more dangerous place. America is seen as a weak kneed paper tiger who is only waiting for the right moment to cut and run. So you Dems have won back the Congress and probably will elect a president in 08. And all you had to do to accomplish it was betray America. Hope you enjoy your return to power. You may find that the only thing you have left to do is negotiate the terms of our surrender.
CruX–
I believe that the evidence overwhelming shows that Gore won Florida.
Google “over votes” and “Gore” and see what you find.
You’re setting up a false dichotomy.
What I and other liberals are trying to do is change THIS COUNTRY’S government into a better reflection of what people want.
That is bullshit and you know it. What liberals want is to change this country’s government into a better reflection of liberal ideals. Not everyone ascribes to such ideals as you seek to portray them.
Chris wrote–
“A united America would have caused the occupation of Iraq to go entirerly different from the mess we have today. But noooo, Bush had to be destroyed at all costs.”
It would have. Really, Chris.
You mean all I have to do is listen and nod to everything Rush says and then terrorists would be crushed.
Holy crap! I’ve been so deluded. All I have to do is THINK THE RIGHT WAY and all our problems will be solved by our great leaders.
Just like Hitler. Everyone in Germany believed in him. They worshipped him. They saluted him. Or Mao in China during the Cultural revolution.
Pure unity.
And look at what that perfect solidarity of thought created for them–A LIVING HELL.
Get help, Chris. Your delusion border on mental illness.
Again, the hysteria, Crus. Unnecessary.
The American people are overwhelmingly liberal in their beliefs.
So yeah you’re right. The two go hand in hand.
KSgolfnut,
Audio, and video is very easy to edit.
People normally pause after misspeaking — either trying to remember correct word, or to emphasize correction.
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/politics/20050112-1451-kennedy-democrats.htmlKennedy also mangled the name of the Democrats’ new star, Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, calling him “Osama bin … Osama … Obama.”
Don’t confuse them with reality, Cosmos.
Rush already told them what to think.
Okay, back to earning an honest dollar.
I’ll leave you CONS some shred of butt I can kick later . . .
I feel so very “unshredded”
Holy smokes Chris is RIGHT!
Let’s all hold hands and think good thoughts! Probably we should click our heels together three times too! Then the terrorists will just go away!
Hey Chris you made a fool of yourself. Spare us any further self flagellation.
I did what you asked and got this:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/00-949.ZPC.html
Again, the hysteria, Crus. Unnecessary.
The American people are overwhelmingly liberal in their beliefs.
Uhhh, no. Look at the abortion issue, and you will find otherwise. Unless of course, you only view those with a pro-abortion stance t be the only “real” Americans then yeah you could say that Americans are “overwhelmingly liberal.” Just because the Democrats won the House and the Senate in the midterm elections, does not mean that Americans became liberal. America doesn’t exist in your head, buddy.
As far as the abortion issue, most are for allowing women to make their own decisions at least up till the third trimester.
at that point, the popular opinion changes to restrictions- but not outright bans.
I guess that explains why South Dakota voted to restrict abortions because they . . . oh, wait, they voted to keep abortion legal.
You’re proving my point for me, CruX.
JR,TERRORISTS!? I seem to recall you postulating that 9/11 was caused by the Federal Government. Change your position?
Uhh, no. The point is abortion is a single issue, to be considered “liberal” one would have to ascribe to ALL liberal values. That includes big beurocratic government, yearnings for a socialistic economy, pro-abortion, pro-gay-marriage, and a non-religious affiliation. (my personal favorite) To describe “an overwhelming majority” of Americans as such is both intellectually dishonest.
Chris from Mac is SERIOUSLY deluded. You may want to stop watching so much of Faux News and step into the real world.
Dems were STRONGLY in support of the REAL war on terrorism, you know, the REAL bad guys, the REAL people who attacked us.
Republicans screwed up almost entire support for Afghanistan from the US and abroad with this nonsense crap in Iraq. We warned you, and you did not listen.
This mess lays solely at your feet. Give it a rest. You’ve been figured out for your nutty agendas.
Our world is 1000x’s worse now than it was when Bush stepped into office.
You could of course, argue that most of the posters on this Blog are liberals though. I will concede that to you.
Well if I have to adhere to all of those to be considered liberal, I guess I’m not a liberal afterall lol.
Our world is 1000x’s worse now than it was when Bush stepped into office.
No, that’s just your perception, and “perception is reality.” I think that nothing really has changed much because the bullets that are used in killing Palestinian children are still manufactured in the Springfield Armory. The IDF’s M1A1 Abrams battletanks still come from America, and Israel is still the 51st state.
Perception is reality
Go put up a flag Crusader X. That will make the Iraq civil war go away!
Well if I have to adhere to all of those to be considered liberal, I guess I’m not a liberal afterall lol.
Uhhh,yeah. That’s because most Americans are neither liberals nor conservatives, but a hodge-podge combination of both systems of thought. For example, it is well known that American Catholics mostly vote Democrat. I believe Howard Dean himself said that one of the four pillars of the Democrat party was the Catholic Church. But their stance on abortion and gay marriage is similar to the conservatives. So it depends upon the individual, one can be socially conservative and economically liberal.
I was working on a brilliant refutation to all who responded to my previous post.
It was magnificent.
It would have converted all.
Then I hit a wrong combination of keys and lost it all.
Probably, it was destined to create a major transcendent shift in the universe.
And Fate stepped in.
Basically, the point of the lost post was that George WMD Bush — at best — *barely* won the White House in 2000 but acted as if it were a landslide mandate.
Go put up a flag Crusader X. That will make the Iraq civil war go away!
How is this relevant to anything that I said?
Basically, the point of the lost post was that George WMD Bush — at best — *barely* won the White House in 2000 but acted as if it were a landslide mandate.
MonkeyHawk,”Acting as if it were a landslide mandate” is not indicative of cheating. btw, wasn’t there another guy who used something-hawk as his moniker?Are you the same guy?
I find it interesting that Hank does not think we live in a democracy. Then why the hell are we fighting in Iraq to bring them democracy? isn’t that the mantra of Bush and Company for this insane war?
Yeah liberal Catholics. I voted for two, Kerry and Sebelius.
Dear sunny,
Kansas is a democracy. The United States (notice the name) is a republic of states.
As for why we are fighting in Iraq, who the hell knows? We should just nuc ‘em. We could do that from Utah.
Hank
Hank
Hank is right on his point that the Constitution created a republic, not a democracy. In the text of the instrument itself, the word “republic” appears. When one considers the document, prior to any amendments, clearly the United States of America was not created as a democracy.
Over time, more democratic principles have been incorporated into our form of government; e.g., 17th Amendment concerning the direct election of Senators by the voters of the several states.
The only form of “democracy” in the United States, to my memory, lays in the traditional town hall meetings of the New England States, which, by and large, have ceased to exist. There, the residents of the political entity would meet and directly vote on any manner of proposals which would affect them, after open and vigorous debate.
Perhaps the best description of our form of government, as it currently exists, is a “democratic republic”, as the people elect their representatives directly (the President and Vice President excepted).
But the US promotes democracy and your cowboy attitude of just nuking them is why Iraq is a mess today. And if you listen to your boy Bush, he wraps the cause of Iraq War in the American Flag, God and Democracy – or don’t you even listen to Bush anymore?
Not to become too picky here, Hank, but Kansas is not a democracy; if it was, there would be no state legislature or senate, all laws would be enacted on the popular vote of the people. Again, the phrase “democratic republic” comes to mind, in this case a republic of counties.
I dont think that last one was Hank’s.
Responding to X here:
I’m not the other “-hawk” guy.
As for the mandate, it seems that a good President might recognize that more people voted against him than for him.
Point in fact: Bill Clinton ran his presidency recognizing that he didn’t get into the Oval Office with a majority of the popular vote… and caught a lot of hell from Republicans when he compromised with them. Welfare Reform — for better or worse — was Clinton reaching across the aisle and Republicans whined that “he stole our issue!”
Only in the view of the Limbaugh-tomized Masses was Bill Clinton’s presidency “ultra-liberal.” In fact, it succeeded in pissing off a lot of liberal Democrats by working for compromises with the Republican Congress.
Shrub, on the other hand, strutted around like — as Ann Richards said of his father — he’d hit a triple.
I’m pretty much a dyed-in-the-wool liberal. But I understand, usually, where conservatives are coming from. I recognize their objections and sometimes their objections make sense. And I approach those differences with a sense of let’s find something we can both live with.
Dear Vaughn,
Go ahead and get picky, you’re allowed.
Hank
I used to be a liberal until crazed out whackos like you took over. You scream and holler and drown out any kind of logic. It seems to me that you all are the ones who are brainwashed, brainwashed people usually stick together and repeat the same things. I didn’t see hardly any conservative blogs but there were many so called liberal ones. How many of these blogs are repeating the leftist liberal views which say the same thing over and over again without any original thought of its own. I am so glad that I am getting a job so I won’t have time to read this crap anymore. However, I wonder how many of you are sitting in your cubicles reading and writing to blogs instead of doing your work. And the odd thing is you probably don’t even feel guilty about it.
Chris (who is now onceuponatime), There is no way I’m believing you were ever a liberal.
See, cause the funny thing is we don’t have to listen to Sean Hannity to know that what we say is the truth, because we don’t repeat each other- we all just believe the same. It’s so funny, I can sit and watch O’Reilly, and I’ll hear the same thoughts I was thinking in rebuttal by some no-name schmo they put on.
Unless…they’re all just getting their ideas from telepathicly honing into my brain.
Yeah, that’s it lol.
They call themselves “Ditto Heads” for a reason.
Once upon a time-Have you seen the crazy Lib websites they read and link to? I don’t know where they find them. Does one gooooogle “anti-capitalist hate bush raise taxes love terrorists abhor military we really won the election”?I don’t know.
Once upon a time, I was actually a conservative. I used to walk around as a little kid passing out “Nixon” fliers. I read Ayn Rand and thought she was a genius.
Then I turned 18 and got a draft card.
It didn’t take me long to figure out that the rich were profitting from the war but they sure as hell weren’t fighting it.
Also, I informed myself on the history of Vietnam and was shocked to discover that the United States–that was fighting in VN for “freedom”–had always supported France’s colonial occupation of the region.
Once you start digging into history and politics, all the bullshit lies fall away. You realize that the United States is NOT by any measure the “greatest country in the world,” except in terms of military spending. We spend more than all the other militaries in the world put together.
That our history isn’t a steady march toward “progress”–the poor are getting poorer and the rich are getting vastly richer here for instance. Racism was much WORSE at the turn of the century than it had been right after the Civil War. The successful peopling of the New World was less the hard work and courage of the settlers as it was that European disease wiped out the indigenous Indians but left their corn fields and gardens standing.
Once you inform yourself, you can’t help but become a liberal.
On a scale of 1 to 10 with 1 being Michael Moore and George Soros and a 10 being Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity, I’d say O’Reilly is about a 7. He says he’s a 6.5. If you think Bill is a whacko right winger, you might want to listen to his show occasionally.
I think I’m about a 7.5. I’d consider myself a Dittohead (clearly, those of you that use it as a disparaging monicker don’t know the meaning), because I agree with Rush far more often than I disagree with him. And, I listen every day.
I would like to acknowledge that above all else, I’m a Parrothead. =)
Golf, “It’s five o’clock somewhere….”
Boat drinks!The perfect Parrot Head song. It’s got boats and drinking.It was a bear, a rare bear and I was drunk.
I have watched BillO and he is a fundy right winger.
If you ever bother to check out the stories he talks about, most are embellished or twisted to leave out anything that doesn’t agree with his hostile agenda.
He just plays up that whole innocent ‘no spin’ crap, so once in awhile when the right’s crap stinks so bad that it’s incredibly obvious, he has to say so.
Bill O Reilly is an idiot.
One Particular Harbor is my fave, Fleet. Boat Drinks is a great tune for a very cold winter day.
O’Reilly is faaaaaaar from being far right. If you say he’s a fundamental conservative, you don’t listen.
As a dreamer of dreams and a travelin man
I have chalked up many a mile
Read dozens of books about heroes and crooks
And I learned much from both of their styles
I’m a parrothead too!
Another longtime Republican bites the dust from a Red state.
Oh, the humanity! The wailing and the gnashing of teeth!
The American people are speaking to the CONservatives and they’re saying, “screw you!”
Bonilla Loses House Seat After 7 Terms
Wednesday December 13, 2006 3:01 AM
By ELIZABETH WHITE
Associated Press Writer
SAN ANTONIO (AP) – Former Congressman Ciro Rodriguez defeated seven-term RepublicanHenry Bonilla in a runoff election Tuesday, adding another Democrat to Congress.
With more than half the precincts reporting in the state’s largest district, Rodriguezhad 57 percent to Bonilla’s 43 percent.
They were the top vote-getters in a special election held Nov. 7, but neither got 50percent, prompting the runoff.
Bonilla was seeking an eighth term in Washington, while Rodriguez was hoping to returnafter a two-year absence. He served from 1997-2005 in another district but was oustedin the March 2004 Democratic primary by Henry Cuellar, a Laredo Democrat. Rodriguezlost again to Cuellar in this year’s primary.
“Have you seen the crazy Rightie websites they read and link to? I don’t know where they find them. Does one gooooogle “anti-science love bush raise debt military we really won the Iraq war”?I don’t know.
Aww,Hank…Son of a Son…love it.
I’ve been to a dozen JB concerts, although not so many in recent years. We went to Dallas a couple of years ago, and took all three kids. My son was 5 and singing along to almost all the songs. That’s pure joy right there.
Sorry folks, Chris from Mac Town is still Chris from Mac Town. “She who must be obeyed” got her hands on the ol computer and decided to blog a little. And once upon a time she was a liberal.
When the bass fishing gets slow, we pop in Jimmy. The fish can hear it and jump on the lure. It is amazing.My band does Margaritaville, the crowd always goes nuts.
ben-You may hate to hear this, but the Iraq war is not done.You people’s desire to cut and run is not happening yet.We will add more troops and look out for Omgwan kick booty.
Bush is ready to send in more troops and I knew he wasn’t going to listen to anyone else come Hell or high water about the war. The Bush Administration is really treading on thin ice here. Even Daddy Bush threw Junior a line with the Baker/Hamilton report but Junior has his own delusions of grandeur.
Jimmy Buffett is going to be on CMT at 10 PM tonight.
Jimmy Buffett Uncut
Ok is it time to Impeach Bush and Cheney yet or not?
Fleet — Band?
Who is it? I’d love to come see you play.
Feel free to email me. (My email is live – hehe)
BTW, Hank – Thanks.
I’m watching it now. =)
BS, Chris, you’re wife was never a liberal.
Not even a good try.
If you’re going to lie, lie so that it’s believable.
“A bad lie is no better than telling the truth.” Mark Twain
Chris, I can relate…
Once upon a time, MrsGolfnut was a liberal.
She also thought we could love our enemies, embrace them with affection and care, sing kum-bah-yah…and we’d all live happily ever after.
Then she finished her PhD, tripled her income, saw what the libs wanted to do to her income taxes…
She also saw that no matter how much we show empathy and compassion to our enemies – they’ll still hate us and our ways of life. And they’ll still try to destroy us. They see our “reaching out” as weakness, and they rally around it.
A few years ago, we were hiking up Longs Peak in Colorado and saw a sign about feeding the animals. It explained how chipmunks and other mountain creatures become dependent on humans for food if we feed them. They lose the drive to find their own food, etc, etc, etc. While we were hiking (it’s a 16 hour round trip, and I highly recommend it to anyone), we talked about how this same principle applies to people and the government. The more that is handed out, the less likely the recipients are to become self-sufficient.
And those that TRULY need help, are best served via charitiable organizations – United Way, Red Cross, Catholic charities.
Oh yeah, CHURCH organizations. At the time, I was volunteering as business manager for our church. We had about a million dollars a year in operating budget – all funded by donations. About half of the budget paid the salaries of the church staff; 30% went to pay for the building, utilities, insurance; 10% went to educational materials and programs; and 10% went to charity. TEN PERCENT of the church’s operating budget went to charities like Hunter Health Clinic, GraceMed, Urban Ministries Food Bank…the list went on and on.
And, many church members donated funds specifically to charaties via the church that didn’t go into the church budget. This was easily another $50k.
Charitable donations from a church. $150k+ annually. From a church filled with conservatives.
So, MrsGolfnut came around. Like the old saying: if you’re under 30 and not a liberal, you have no heart. If you’re over 30 and not conservative, you have no brain. She was about 35. Stubborn. But now, she sees the light with great clarity.
Next challenge: my 14 yr old daughter. She’s brighter than both of us – I taught her calculus before she turned 10.
VT,
About 100 posts ago you pointed out my, shall I say ‘lack of grammar courtesy’. Fair enough. I suppose I react poorly when people keep telling me that I need to be either a democrat or a republican to matter, like the original post to this thread.
Understood totally, PM.
GolfNut,When I met my wife, she too was liberal. Very fiscally liberal. She was always talking about hand outs for this and hand outs for that for other peple. Why isn’t the government doing more about this or that? We had many debates over responsibility. She began to see what horrifies me daily; the lack of responsibility in America today. No matter how freakin ignorant you are (spilling coffee on yourself and sue because it was hot) you still expect someone else to be responsible for it.
She has seen the light. She is mostly moderate now, but far right leaning on some key topics.
I educate my kids on that very topic every day, Sol – taking responsibility for your own actions, and EARNING your way in life.
Sol,
” No matter how freakin ignorant you are (spilling coffee on yourself and sue because it was hot)”
Your hand covers an area roughly equal to one percent of your total skin area.
Measure 6 “hands” of your skin, on your crotch, thighs, and rear end. Imagine that skin completely GONE, exposing the fat, muscle, ligaments, etc underneath.
Spend 8 days in the hospital, $11,000 bill (1992 $’s).
Have another 10 “hands” of your skin surgically removed to make skin grafts.
Be immobile, and have someone lose $9,000 in wages because they stay home to take care of you.
Be disabled for 2 years, undergo horribly painful therapy to stretch the (contracting) skin grafts.
Wear adult diapers the rest of your life, because you’ve lost bladder control.
Yeah… EVERYONE “knows” that’s what happens if you accidently spill coffee on yourself. Or the employee at the drive-thru window accidently spills it on your lap. /sarcasm
Cosmos,If the employee did the spilling, that’s different.
But, the person to whom Sol is referring (unless I’m mistaken) is Stella Liebeck, the woman that sued McDonalds (and won) for serving hot coffee that she later spilled on herself. Fortunately, that monetary award was later greatly reduced on appeal.
golfnut,
As usual, you are misinformed. The judge, a conservative Republican, reduced the punitive award. He also called McD’s conduct reckless, callous and willful.
There were about 700 McD’s hot coffee lawsuits the decade prior to Stella Liebeck’s.
One woman had burns similar to Liebeck’s, after the “employee did the spilling”. Children were also burned.
You CANNOT assume “responsibility for your own actions”, if you are NOT AWARE of the risks you are taking.
Most people assume hot coffee only causes MINOR burns.
POLL TIME:
How many people on this blog are aware that McD’s coffee could do to them what it did to Liebeck, and many other people, including children?
When they hand you the coffee, do you WORRY that if it spills, it could do to you what it did to her?Fortunately, McD’s lowered their coffee temperature after Liebeck “won”.
http://www.atla.org/pressroom/FACTS/frivolous/McdonaldsCoffeecase.aspx
golfnut,
Have you educated your kids on how DANGEROUS hot coffee is? Have you told them about the hospitalization, loss of body “parts”, skin grafts, disability, painful therapy, and permanent scarring?
Fortunately, you don’t have to — Liebeck’s jury convinced McD’s to serve coffee at a safer temperature, that doesn’t cause 3rd degree burns in a few seconds.