Page 6 of 10 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 95
  1. #51  
    Senior Member Janice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Southern USA
    Posts
    2,809
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonnabend View Post
    Then edit it out before he sees it. :p
    Are you referring to Lukes reply?
    http://i1220.photobucket.com/albums/dd445/JansGraphix/ConsUndergrd-Sig2.jpg
    Liberalism is just communism sold by the drink.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #52  
    PORCUS MAXIMUS Rockntractor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    oklahoma
    Posts
    41,905
    He probably won't notice, most individuals from the hive have an IQ slightly higher than an artichoke, if he does notice it it may confuse him enough so that he shows it to his handlers and they will find him an appropriate talking point.
    How is obama working out for you?
    http://i686.photobucket.com/albums/vv230/upyourstruly/5d569df9-186a-477b-a665-3ea8a8b9b655_zpse9003e54.jpg
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #53  
    Sonnabend
    Guest
    Janice, read my post and see what I left out. And what I hope DJones remembers to remove
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #54  
    Senior Member LukeEDay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Happy Valley
    Posts
    2,046
    I have another question for the liberal: Why do liberals hate our military, but love Islamic jihadist?

    And another one: Why do liberals hate legal citizens, but love illegal aliens?

    Another one: Why do liberals hate the US flag, but love the Mexican flag?

    Another one: Why do liberals hate people who work for what they have, but love lazy people who refuse to get off their ass and get a job?

    Another one: Why do liberals think that the top 1% (who pay over 80% of all taxes) aren't paying enough taxes, but people who only work two weeks out the year to get that big income tax return by claiming the 20 kids they have are paying too much?

    Another one: Why do liberals hate Christians, but love Muslims?

    Another one: Why do liberals want to keep a school from teaching creationism, but force a school to to teach evolution?

    Another one: Why do liberals just plain hate God?

    Another one: Why do liberals think that a gay couple should have more rights, and get special treatment over a straight couple?

    Another one: Why do liberals want to force a church to marry a gay couple, when it is against everything the bible teaches?

    Another one: Why do liberals have an average IQ of 10? Why are liberals so stupid?

    Another one: Why do liberals based everything on emotion instead of facts and research?

    Another one: Why do liberals ignore facts, and bend history to relate to their own agenda?

    And the last one is a quote from Michael Savage: 'Liberalism is a mental disorder that is untreatable' ....
    Last edited by LukeEDay; 04-02-2013 at 10:16 AM.

    I love my God, my country, my flag, and my troops ....
    _ WELFARE IS NOT AN ENTITLEMENT! _
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #55  
    Junior Member Epimetheus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    IL
    Posts
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by Odysseus View Post
    Actually, the Democrats wouldn't be as unrecognizable as you think. The last serving KKK member in the senate was Robert Byrd (D-WV), and until he died, the current crop of Democrats treated him as if he was a national treasure and not a bigoted loon who cheerfully used the N-word in public and filibustered against the Civil Rights and Voting Rights acts.
    Byrd was pretty clearly racist. He claimed to have regretted his filibuster, but I'm not sure I buy it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Odysseus View Post
    For an example of the current racism of the party, just look at the treatment given to conservative blacks, such as Condoleeza Rice, Mia Love, Colin Powell (before he went back to the liberal plantation), Herman Cain, Michael Steele, Alan West or Herman Cain.
    You'll have to do more to convince me that this is racially motivated. Mitt Romney, Rush Limbaugh, and Sarah Palin didn't exactly get wonderful treatment from their political opponents either.

    Quote Originally Posted by Odysseus View Post
    While you're at it, they also overlook antisemitism and viciously bigoted comments directed towards Asians, as long as the comments originate among Democrats. They party also maintains its power through the manipulation of voting blocks through urban machines, something Lincoln would have recognized from his era. The only real difference is that the Tammany Hall bosses now style themselves as community organizers.
    You'll have to forgive me taking this shot, but in response to some other posters: I'm surprised a party of low-IQ touchy-feely types could be this devious.

    In all seriousness, it would not surprise me much if the DNC thought this way. Far too much of politics these days is thinking about how to get/stay elected, not actual thoughtful policy. I'd be very surprised if the average Democratic politician was this cynical, however.

    And yes, Democrats aren't going to dwell on missteps or nutjobs in their ranks. You'll have a hard time convincing me that Republicans don't do the same thing.
    Quote Originally Posted by Odysseus View Post
    Your comment on Islam seems based on wishful thinking, since violent jihad is a basic function of Islam. It's not a bug, it's a feature.
    Yikes. I dislike Islam more than other religions, but this is going too far in my opinion. Every Muslim I've met here in the states seems very unlikely to participate in violent jihad. I would attribute violence by Muslims much more to society in the Middle East than to the religion itself (indoctrinating children to hate the West, poverty, and so on). Now, since religion plays an important role in society, Islam clearly isn't blameless.

    Quote Originally Posted by Odysseus View Post
    As Santayana said, those who do not learn from the past are condemned to repeat it. The understanding of the roots of the ideology that you claim to believe in will show you the intent of those who established it, and possibly give you something to think about the next time you advocate for them. Finally, if you don't attach much significance to the term "liberal," why call yourself one? Words have meaning, and if you pretend that they don't, then there is no thoughtful discussion possible, since words are the tools by which we have such discussions, and your presence here becomes simply self-indulgence on your part.
    When I started this thread, I assumed 'liberal' would be interpreted in the street-sense of the word used here in the US. That is, tending to agree with the policies of the Democratic Party (post Solid-South). I used 'relative' in the thread title because while I don't actually agree with Democrats on everything, I probably still share more of their viewpoints than most everyone here.

    I'll agree that this isn't a great definition, particularly if we want to get into history, philosophy, etc. But if you pressed the average American to define liberal or conservative, I'd guess that'd is the response they'd give - particularly in this era of 'us vs. them' in politics.

    Quote Originally Posted by Odysseus View Post
    No, but many of them want to turn us into 1930s America, or 1970s Russia. The commonalities between Nazism, fascism, Progressivism, socialism and communism and the New Deal would be troubling to you if you bothered to look at them, but by not looking, you can blithely pretend that "labels don't matter" or some such variation of the theme, and evade responsibility for what you claim to believe. The fact is that labels do matter, which is why I asked you how you defined your liberalism vs. the other ideologies mentioned. If you haven't examined these, how would you know whether you are a liberal, a socialist, or even a Nazi, since you couldn't tell me the difference between them? Now do you understand why it matters, and why you need to be able to explain yourself?
    I would still tend to disagree. I am not claiming to believe in all aspects of classical liberalism or any other ideology (I should have clarified this earlier - apologies for the confusion), so therefore don't see how I am 'evading responsibility' for the Soviets, let alone North Korea or Hitler.

    However, there can be no harm in researching these further. I can also see an argument that knowing the logical extreme (or purest form) of an ideology can help when making decisions about whether to support various policy choices (i.e. instead of agreeing with a stream of policies that ever so gradually trade freedom for security, recognizing the destination each step is leading toward). Unless you want me copy-pasting Wikipedia, I'm probably not going to be in a position to rigorously debate these ideologies or their history with you during the course of this thread.

    I'll note that while I have yet to distinguish socialism, liberalism, communism, etc, I've also yet to see any justification for claims that they are all the same. In an effort to make this discussion more concrete, I'll lay out some statements. Feel free to accept or refute them as you will.
    • I do not believe "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" (Marx/communism) is an appropriate maxim to run a country by. It has a nice ring to it ('hooray no one suffers anymore'), but even if it were possible to objectively define what people's 'ability' and 'needs' were, no government would be adequately capable of executing on this principle. Additionally, the freedom to ascend or descend in social status is too important an incentive for people to be productive members of society to lose.
    • Likewise, "From each according to his ability, to each according to his work" (Stalin/Soviet communism/socialism) is bad for the same reasons
    • "Equality of Outcomes" is even worse than the above two ideas.
    • "Equality of Opportunity" has a nice ring to it but in practice often turns into "Equality of Wealth" or "Bash people with lucky genetics back down to the level of others". Aside from these cases it seems to be a reasonable pursuit (e.g. Equal Opportunity Employment is fine with me)
    • Absolute "Equality of Wealth" is no better than "Equality of Outcomes". But it is concerning to me that our Gini coefficient is relatively high compared to the rest of the world (and high compared to what most Americans believe is a reasonable distribution of wealth), and that it has been rising consistently for a good 30 years.
    • I believe we have enough wealth and technology that we can afford to have a reasonably high minimum standard-of-living. The tricky bit is to set this up in a way that does not encourage people to become dependent on welfare / stop seeking to make contributions to society. I support universal health care, progressive taxation, and tend to oppose unions in their fights (you can call that progressive or not..)
    • I'm not a fan of nationalism, let alone the concept of a master race
    • I don't believe that governments plan economies better than the free market. But there are certainly uses for government to provide things the free market would not on its own.
    Quote Originally Posted by Odysseus View Post
    Well, I assumed that it was your response, but that it was sarcastic. If your friends feel the same way that you do, then are you here to defend their ideas, or are you here to test them? Are you a liberal because they say that you are, and you don't want to rock the boat (in which case, you're not so much a liberal as a member of a clique, and your understanding of the ideas of that clique are as shallow as the high school cheerleader who sees school spirit as a unifying ideal, even as she ignores the uncool kids from her school). If you can't tell the difference between what you believe and what a doctrinaire Marxist believes, then why should you expect us to know what sets you apart?
    That question was directed more at others than you. I've seen many 'All libs _____' comments here that would be pretty remarkable if true. I would hope that I would serve as a counterexample to some of them.

    That aside, I think this comparison is unfair. I didn't take the time to answer your question precisely because my views on issues aren't based on WWOD ('What would Obama do?', in case the reference isn't clear). There are a number of issues I disagree with either my friends or Democrats on (you'll see this to an extent when I get to the gun control questions)

    Quote Originally Posted by Odysseus View Post
    Yes, but you don't want me defining you, do you? After all, this is your thread, and you're the one who challenged us to ask you anything. My question, which you still haven't answered, is why do you call yourself a liberal, as opposed to any of the other leftist tags available?
    Thank you for not putting words in my mouth, and I do genuinely appreciate your questions - hopefully some progress has been made towards satisfying them. If you still feel I am evading you, let me know and I can attempt to elaborate.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #56  
    Politically tired. Lanie's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,351
    You said to ask you anything. What did the Easter bunny bring you?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #57  
    PORCUS MAXIMUS Rockntractor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    oklahoma
    Posts
    41,905
    Quote Originally Posted by Lanie View Post
    You said to ask you anything. What did the Easter bunny bring you?
    The Easter bunny is union, all he can deliver is eggs.
    How is obama working out for you?
    http://i686.photobucket.com/albums/vv230/upyourstruly/5d569df9-186a-477b-a665-3ea8a8b9b655_zpse9003e54.jpg
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #58  
    Junior Member Epimetheus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    IL
    Posts
    16
    Easter Bunny brought me a Digiorno Pizza! My coworkers are bringing more than enough sweets into the office, though - I'm glad I don't have any here.

    Didn't get the chance to go home to the family this year, but was still able to spend time with them thanks to the wonder of the internet
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #59  
    Power CUer NJCardFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    15,912
    You'll have to do more to convince me that this is racially motivated.
    So, you don't consider this racially motivated?


    Or calling Colin Powell a house slave? But taking all of this away, if a conservative media outlet gave a black democrat half the grief black conservatives get from the liberal media machine, the cries of racism would be deafening. Hell, any criticism of Obama is met with cries of racism.

    I would attribute violence by Muslims much more to society in the Middle East than to the religion itself
    I guess the you're unfamiliar with a guy named Nidal Hassan.
    The Obama Administration: Deny. Deflect. Blame.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #60  
    Sonnabend
    Guest
    and I do genuinely appreciate your questions
    Good. Glad to hear it. Going to answer mine?
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •