Total Posts:104|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Liberalism and Democrats Exposed

GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/19/2013 12:59:37 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Liberalism has become the new norm but nobody (but the Libertarians and Conservatives) understands the dangers of it and why it's wrong. I was once a Democrat, in fact I'm still registered Democrat, and even more recently I identified as socially Liberal. Then I discovered Liberal Democrats are wrong about nearly everything including social issues. Here's why Liberalism fails:

Racism: Democrats opposed Abraham Lincoln, Democrats wanted slavery, the KKK were Democrats. The rebuttal is that Democrats were like that in the past, now the parties swapped ideologies. Wrong. Democrats are still the racist party. They lump people into groups and imply that all white people are racist, and that blacks are victims that need welfare and affirmative action.

Why do Democrats always have to resurrect racial division? Republicans and Libertarians don't talk about minority rights and race because they view people as individuals not helpless groups. Democrats want to make minorities dependent on government. Democrats also support Planned Parenthood, an organization founded by eugenecist, ethnic cleanser Margaret Sanger.

Eco-fascism: Liberals want to force mercury light bulbs into everyone's house. Liberals want to shut off your energy with mandatory smart meters.

Liberals want high gas prices, no energy independence, and want to stop the Keystone Pipeline even though a. It reduces carbon emissions by transporting through pipes rather gas-guzzling trucks and planes b. It reduces need to intervene in Middle East c. China would just buy it and burn it anyways.

Social Oppression: Liberals believe they're fighting for freedom when they're fighting for "gay rights." Wrong. The gay marriage movement is screaming for government to get involved in their relationship, personal affairs, and want government benefits. That's not freedom.

People will counter that gays don't get the hospital visitation they want. Guess what, neither do single people and besides, that's the hospital policy that needs to change. The individual should decide who is important enough to visit them in the hospital, not the government.

Name one ability or right that gays are denied. Zip.

Warlord Imperialism & Drone Massacre: Liberals say war is good so long as their guy is doing it. Obama is intervening in Syria, Libya, Egypt, Algeria, Mali, Iraq, Turkey, Afghanistan, and is bombing Yemen, Pakistan, and Somalia. But when Bush intervenes in Iraq, it's not enough. They want more war.

Liberals say it's wrong to waterboard the enemy, but it's good to drone strike American citizens. In fact, Liberals say we need more drone strikes, Obama did 5x the drone strikes as Bush with a much higher rate of civilian deaths.

Gun Control Fascism: Liberals say it's good to give assault weapons to violent Mexican drug cartels, good to give F-16s and tanks to a Muslim Brotherhood Dictator in Egypt who employs rapists to rape protesters, denies the Holocaust, and wants to blow up our ally, it's good to let only criminals have guns, it's good to let the police they don't like have guns, it's good to protect banks with guns, but it's wrong for citizens to have guns and armed protection for our children.

Liberals say guns can't defend against tyranny because they have drones. Liberals say the best form of defense for you and your family is the fetal position, not a firearm.

Collectivism & Democracy: Democrats say the individual doesn't matter, only the collective. If it's for the greater good and they get a majority vote, they say it's moral and ethical to trample an individual and steal his property, it's for the Earth.

They're belief that the highest principle is 51% voting to put the 49% through a meat grinder, it's democracy.

Democrats always divide people into groups, women's rights, minority rights, gay rights. How about individual rights where every individual has the same recognized rights.

Equal in Slavery: "Americans are so enamored with equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom." -- Alexis de Tocqueville

You all might be thinking "Liberals don't say all that!" Yes, they did say that by voting for Obama by landslide.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
malcolmxy
Posts: 2,855
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/19/2013 1:07:13 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Liberals want suffocate your baby and eat it for Thanksgiving.

Liberals want to engage you in a tickle fight.

Liberals want to burn down your house so they can make S'mores.

Don't worry...there's more.
War is over, if you want it.

Meet Dr. Stupid and his assistants - http://www.debate.org...
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/19/2013 1:08:49 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Larry Elder on Infowars:

Black Conservatives tell brethren: Get off the Liberal plantation.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=pnPzRgHx9dc

Black Tea Party Member, Ted Hayes Gives Tea Party Speech
www.youtube.com/watch?v=kq2scIx2gh8

Dr. Benjamin Carson refutes Obama to His Face
www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFb6NU1giRA
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/19/2013 1:17:52 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/19/2013 1:07:13 PM, malcolmxy wrote:
*Strawman rubbish*

Don't worry...there's more.

Can point out specifically which of my claims are wrong? You admitted that under Progressivism, if Communo-Fascism is chosen by the will of the people it's good.

It's also true that Liberals support Planned Parenthood, a group founded by a eugenecist. http://en.wikipedia.org...

Why are you saying that's not true?

Do Democrats support Planned Parenthood, yes or no.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
malcolmxy
Posts: 2,855
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/19/2013 1:19:26 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/19/2013 1:08:49 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:


Black Tea Party Member, Ted Hayes Gives Tea Party Speech
War is over, if you want it.

Meet Dr. Stupid and his assistants - http://www.debate.org...
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/19/2013 1:28:47 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/19/2013 1:19:26 PM, malcolmxy wrote:
At 2/19/2013 1:08:49 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
Black Tea Party Member, Ted Hayes Gives Tea Party Speech

Sorry, I had to speak in divisive Liberal terms to get a point across. If you watched the video you would hear the man refute the notion that he's an African-American.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
proglib
Posts: 391
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/19/2013 1:49:29 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/19/2013 12:59:37 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
Liberalism has become the new norm but nobody (but the Libertarians and Conservatives) understands the dangers of it and why it's wrong. I was once a Democrat, in fact I'm still registered Democrat, and even more recently I identified as socially Liberal. Then I discovered Liberal Democrats are wrong about nearly everything including social issues. Here's why Liberalism fails:

Racism: Democrats opposed Abraham Lincoln, Democrats wanted slavery, the KKK were Democrats. The rebuttal is that Democrats were like that in the past, now the parties swapped ideologies. Wrong. Democrats are still the racist party. They lump people into groups and imply that all white people are racist, and that blacks are victims that need welfare and affirmative action.

Why do Democrats always have to resurrect racial division? Republicans and Libertarians don't talk about minority rights and race because they view people as individuals not helpless groups. Democrats want to make minorities dependent on government. Democrats also support Planned Parenthood, an organization founded by eugenecist, ethnic cleanser Margaret Sanger.

Eco-fascism: Liberals want to force mercury light bulbs into everyone's house. Liberals want to shut off your energy with mandatory smart meters.

Liberals want high gas prices, no energy independence, and want to stop the Keystone Pipeline even though a. It reduces carbon emissions by transporting through pipes rather gas-guzzling trucks and planes b. It reduces need to intervene in Middle East c. China would just buy it and burn it anyways.

Social Oppression: Liberals believe they're fighting for freedom when they're fighting for "gay rights." Wrong. The gay marriage movement is screaming for government to get involved in their relationship, personal affairs, and want government benefits. That's not freedom.

People will counter that gays don't get the hospital visitation they want. Guess what, neither do single people and besides, that's the hospital policy that needs to change. The individual should decide who is important enough to visit them in the hospital, not the government.

Name one ability or right that gays are denied. Zip.

Warlord Imperialism & Drone Massacre: Liberals say war is good so long as their guy is doing it. Obama is intervening in Syria, Libya, Egypt, Algeria, Mali, Iraq, Turkey, Afghanistan, and is bombing Yemen, Pakistan, and Somalia. But when Bush intervenes in Iraq, it's not enough. They want more war.

Liberals say it's wrong to waterboard the enemy, but it's good to drone strike American citizens. In fact, Liberals say we need more drone strikes, Obama did 5x the drone strikes as Bush with a much higher rate of civilian deaths.

Gun Control Fascism: Liberals say it's good to give assault weapons to violent Mexican drug cartels, good to give F-16s and tanks to a Muslim Brotherhood Dictator in Egypt who employs rapists to rape protesters, denies the Holocaust, and wants to blow up our ally, it's good to let only criminals have guns, it's good to let the police they don't like have guns, it's good to protect banks with guns, but it's wrong for citizens to have guns and armed protection for our children.

Liberals say guns can't defend against tyranny because they have drones. Liberals say the best form of defense for you and your family is the fetal position, not a firearm.

Collectivism & Democracy: Democrats say the individual doesn't matter, only the collective. If it's for the greater good and they get a majority vote, they say it's moral and ethical to trample an individual and steal his property, it's for the Earth.

They're belief that the highest principle is 51% voting to put the 49% through a meat grinder, it's democracy.

Democrats always divide people into groups, women's rights, minority rights, gay rights. How about individual rights where every individual has the same recognized rights.

Equal in Slavery: "Americans are so enamored with equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom." -- Alexis de Tocqueville


You all might be thinking "Liberals don't say all that!" Yes, they did say that by voting for Obama by landslide.

At the risk of agreeing with Mr. Malcolm, this is pretty much a strawman argument. Even if there are *some* liberals that agree with *some* of these positions, it is unhelpful, IMHO, to ascribe them to liberals, in general.
"I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice.* And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue." Barry Goldwater
*Except in a democracy it might lose you an election.

http://unitedwegovern.org...
malcolmxy
Posts: 2,855
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/19/2013 2:11:47 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/19/2013 1:49:29 PM, proglib wrote:

At the risk of agreeing with Mr. Malcolm, this is pretty much a strawman argument. Even if there are *some* liberals that agree with *some* of these positions, it is unhelpful, IMHO, to ascribe them to liberals, in general.

Also, the "Constitutional Union" Party opposed Lincoln more than Democrats did, election-wise.

Don't confuse the Southern Democratic Party with the Democratic Party.

Southern Democrats are now Republicans.
War is over, if you want it.

Meet Dr. Stupid and his assistants - http://www.debate.org...
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/19/2013 2:30:25 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/19/2013 1:49:29 PM, proglib wrote:
At the risk of agreeing with Mr. Malcolm, this is pretty much a strawman argument. Even if there are *some* liberals that agree with *some* of these positions, it is unhelpful, IMHO, to ascribe them to liberals, in general.

Wait, are you saying it's wrong to say Liberals are pro-gay marriage, environmentalist, welfare, affirmative action, gun control, pro-choice, and pro-Obama?

Liberals are pretty much unified. The Republicans are split between Neo-Con and Conservative/Libertarian.

The high profile Liberals that go against the grain are Noam Chomsky, Cornel West, and Sam Harris, and that's it. But even Noam Chomsky despises modern day Liberalism. I'm fans of all 3 them.

My post is not strawman, it is directly addressing the 35% of the nation that voted for or supports Obama.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
malcolmyx
Posts: 31
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/19/2013 2:40:45 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/19/2013 2:30:25 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 2/19/2013 1:49:29 PM, proglib wrote:
At the risk of agreeing with Mr. Malcolm, this is pretty much a strawman argument. Even if there are *some* liberals that agree with *some* of these positions, it is unhelpful, IMHO, to ascribe them to liberals, in general.

Wait, are you saying it's wrong to say Liberals are pro-gay marriage, environmentalist, welfare, affirmative action, gun control, pro-choice, and pro-Obama?

Liberals are pretty much unified. The Republicans are split between Neo-Con and Conservative/Libertarian.

The high profile Liberals that go against the grain are Noam Chomsky, Cornel West, and Sam Harris, and that's it. But even Noam Chomsky despises modern day Liberalism. I'm fans of all 3 them.

My post is not strawman, it is directly addressing the 35% of the nation that voted for or supports Obama.

the Pro-Obama part is wrong for a lot of people who identify as liberal.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/19/2013 2:46:34 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/19/2013 2:40:45 PM, malcolmyx wrote:
the Pro-Obama part is wrong for a lot of people who identify as liberal.

Uh false. The majority Liberal complaint of Obama is that he isn't strong arming Liberal policy fast enough. In fact, Obama agrees with those Liberal critics of his.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
malcolmyx
Posts: 31
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/19/2013 3:12:59 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/19/2013 2:46:34 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 2/19/2013 2:40:45 PM, malcolmyx wrote:
the Pro-Obama part is wrong for a lot of people who identify as liberal.

Uh false. The majority Liberal complaint of Obama is that he isn't strong arming Liberal policy fast enough. In fact, Obama agrees with those Liberal critics of his.

I'm liberal, and that ain't true for me.

you're generalizing because your being fed propaganda...and eating it up.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/19/2013 3:21:53 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/19/2013 3:12:59 PM, malcolmyx wrote:
At 2/19/2013 2:46:34 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 2/19/2013 2:40:45 PM, malcolmyx wrote:
the Pro-Obama part is wrong for a lot of people who identify as liberal.
Uh false. The majority Liberal complaint of Obama is that he isn't strong arming Liberal policy fast enough. In fact, Obama agrees with those Liberal critics of his.

I'm liberal, and that ain't true for me.

you're generalizing because your being fed propaganda...and eating it up.

False. I listen to MSNBC, I listen to "Left Radio" on XM. I watch Liberal pundits online.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/19/2013 4:22:16 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/19/2013 12:59:37 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
Racism:

Democrats are still the racist party. They lump people into groups and imply that all white people are racist, and that blacks are victims that need welfare and affirmative action.

I think it's hilarious that you're complaining about Democrats lumping people into groups by lumping Democrats into groups. Just because someone identifies as a a particular ideology (based on the majority of their beliefs) doesn't mean that everyone within that group agrees. I know Libertarians and Anarchists who oppose abortion though many support it. I never supported Affirmative Action even when I considered myself a Democrat.

Why do Democrats always have to resurrect racial division? Republicans and Libertarians don't talk about minority rights and race because they view people as individuals not helpless groups.

I think it's wholly naive to suggest that Conservatives and Libertarians don't care and talk about race. A quick Google search could SERIOUSLY dismantle that completely fabricated interpretation of reality. The Tea Party has been referred to as racist because many of their supporters are racist, and obviously Conservatives have a history of racism which is pretty blatant in their social ideology today as well. I do agree that Democrats talk about race a lot, but many of the times it is completely warranted when talking about racism and ignorant perspectives on race even in 2013. Only when they try to pass legislation based on race does it become problematic, but you"re being hypocritical by not mentioning that Conservatives do the exact same thing when it comes to religion (by trying to incorporate religious beliefs into politics).

Democrats want to make minorities dependent on government. Democrats also support Planned Parenthood, an organization founded by eugenecist, ethnic cleanser Margaret Sanger.

I do think that Democrats make people dependent on government, but I don"t think the origins of Planned Parenthood is a relevant point.

Eco-fascism: Liberals want to force mercury light bulbs into everyone's house. Liberals want to shut off your energy with mandatory smart meters.

Liberals want high gas prices, no energy independence, and want to stop the Keystone Pipeline even though a. It reduces carbon emissions by transporting through pipes rather gas-guzzling trucks and planes b. It reduces need to intervene in Middle East c. China would just buy it and burn it anyways.

That's a fallacious way of presenting their ideas. Why are you ignoring all of the HORRENDOUS ideas Conservatives have regarding the environment and their complete disregard of eco-responsibility? They both support terrible policies, especially when it comes to oil.

Social Oppression: Liberals believe they're fighting for freedom when they're fighting for "gay rights." Wrong. The gay marriage movement is screaming for government to get involved in their relationship, personal affairs, and want government benefits. That's not freedom.

People will counter that gays don't get the hospital visitation they want. Guess what, neither do single people and besides, that's the hospital policy that needs to change. The individual should decide who is important enough to visit them in the hospital, not the government.

The government should have no say in marriage, but since it does, it is most definitely a civil rights issue and therefore gays should be allowed to marry so long as straight people have the right to marry. Until government marriage is abolished entirely, it is completely and utterly misguided to say that gay people shouldn't have the right to marry their partner on the basis that government shouldn't be involved in marriage in the first place. That"s like saying gay people shouldn't have to pay taxes (while straight people do) because taxes are unethical. Sure, taxes might be unethical, but to give gay people the opportunity to stop paying taxes while straight people still have to pay taxes is wrong. I"d like to see you argue otherwise.

The federal government gives 1,138 benefits and responsibilities based on marital status that they do not on civil union status. A few of those benefits are unpaid leave to care for an ill spouse, social security survivor benefits and spousal benefits, and the right not to testify against one"s spouse among others. Further, despite the shortage of blood at banks across the country, gay donors are not allowed to donate blood BY LAW. Men who have had sexual contact with a man even once are automatically disqualified. You're also ignoring parenting rights that are not given to gay couples. Not only is it infinitely harder for gays to adopt, but in families with gay parents, usually only the birth parent is afforded certain rights. This is incredibly important when it comes to gay divorce.

Name one ability or right that gays are denied. Zip.

Wrong - I just named several. Rights is a tricky term though.

Warlord Imperialism & Drone Massacre: Liberals say war is good so long as their guy is doing it. Obama is intervening in Syria, Libya, Egypt, Algeria, Mali, Iraq, Turkey, Afghanistan, and is bombing Yemen, Pakistan, and Somalia. But when Bush intervenes in Iraq, it's not enough. They want more war.

Um, really? You've never heard of neo-cons? Again, my entire beef with your liberal rants is that you focus on liberals which I find ABSURD. I complain about Obama and liberals constantly (especially on Facebook - you know that), but I also equally oppose conservative stupidity which you tend to ignore. I think that's insane. I can't take you seriously when complaining about war when you mention conservatism as a superior ideology in the OP. Libertarianism, fine.

Liberals say it's wrong to waterboard the enemy, but it's good to drone strike American citizens. In fact, Liberals say we need more drone strikes, Obama did 5x the drone strikes as Bush with a much higher rate of civilian deaths.

Lol @ "the enemy." I know many liberals who disagree with Obama on this issue, btw. It's true that liberals tend to be branwashed in the name of safety, but SO ARE CONSERVATIVES. Dude, Republicans banned a lawmaker for saying the word "vagina" when talking about an abortion bill. Get fvking real, dude. Seriously.

Gun Control Fascism:

...Liberals say guns can't defend against tyranny because they have drones. Liberals say the best form of defense for you and your family is the fetal position, not a firearm.

I oppose many forms of gun control, but one thing I always find funny is that conservatives think their handguns or even machine guns will protect them from tyranny, LOL. Right, the government has access to drones and NUCLEAR WEAPONS but it will be your good ol' Smith & Wesson that saves you, haha.

Collectivism & Democracy: Democrats say the individual doesn't matter, only the collective. If it's for the greater good and they get a majority vote, they say it's moral and ethical to trample an individual and steal his property, it's for the Earth.

They're belief that the highest principle is 51% voting to put the 49% through a meat grinder, it's democracy.

This is a terrible argument because conservatives support this exact type of government. Republicans are also going to great lengths to completely manipulate the political process

Democrats always divide people into groups, women's rights, minority rights, gay rights. How about individual rights where every individual has the same recognized rights.

You think Republicans care about individual rights...? Really?

"Corporations are people, my friend ... of course they are." Republicans all believe that considering the vast majority of them voted for Romney.
President of DDO
proglib
Posts: 391
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/19/2013 4:24:40 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/19/2013 2:40:45 PM, malcolmyx wrote:
At 2/19/2013 2:30:25 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 2/19/2013 1:49:29 PM, proglib wrote:
At the risk of agreeing with Mr. Malcolm, this is pretty much a strawman argument. Even if there are *some* liberals that agree with *some* of these positions, it is unhelpful, IMHO, to ascribe them to liberals, in general.

Wait, are you saying it's wrong to say Liberals are pro-gay marriage, environmentalist, welfare, affirmative action, gun control, pro-choice, and pro-Obama?

Liberals are pretty much unified. The Republicans are split between Neo-Con and Conservative/Libertarian.

The high profile Liberals that go against the grain are Noam Chomsky, Cornel West, and Sam Harris, and that's it. But even Noam Chomsky despises modern day Liberalism. I'm fans of all 3 them.

My post is not strawman, it is directly addressing the 35% of the nation that voted for or supports Obama.

the Pro-Obama part is wrong for a lot of people who identify as liberal.

Just to slow things down a little bit:

Is it possible that "pro-choice" is not the same as "pro-eugenics?"

Is it possible that gun regulation does not mean "anti-gun fascism?"

This type of all or nothing labeling is what I would call "crying wolf," and is just what hurts the credibility of the right, IMHO.

To debate whether Obama is a "communist" only hurts the credibility of the Pro side of the debate. Let's be more subtle and debate whether his advisors' Keynsian approach is preferable to a more free market (though still mixed) economy.
"I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice.* And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue." Barry Goldwater
*Except in a democracy it might lose you an election.

http://unitedwegovern.org...
proglib
Posts: 391
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/19/2013 4:28:32 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/19/2013 4:22:16 PM, Danielle wrote:
At 2/19/2013 12:59:37 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
Racism:

Democrats are still the racist party. They lump people into groups and imply that all white people are racist, and that blacks are victims that need welfare and affirmative action.

I think it's hilarious that you're complaining about Democrats lumping people into groups by lumping Democrats into groups. Just because someone identifies as a a particular ideology (based on the majority of their beliefs) doesn't mean that everyone within that group agrees. I know Libertarians and Anarchists who oppose abortion though many support it. I never supported Affirmative Action even when I considered myself a Democrat.

Why do Democrats always have to resurrect racial division? Republicans and Libertarians don't talk about minority rights and race because they view people as individuals not helpless groups.

I think it's wholly naive to suggest that Conservatives and Libertarians don't care and talk about race. A quick Google search could SERIOUSLY dismantle that completely fabricated interpretation of reality. The Tea Party has been referred to as racist because many of their supporters are racist, and obviously Conservatives have a history of racism which is pretty blatant in their social ideology today as well. I do agree that Democrats talk about race a lot, but many of the times it is completely warranted when talking about racism and ignorant perspect

Democrats want to make minorities dependent on government. Democrats also support Planned Parenthood, an organization founded by eugenecist, ethnic cleanser Margaret Sanger.

I do think that Democrats make people dependent on government, but I don"t think the origins of Planned Parenthood is a relevant point.

Eco-fascism: Liberals want to force mercury light bulbs into everyone's house. Liberals want to shut off your energy with mandatory smart meters.

Liberals want high gas prices, no energy independence, and want to stop the Keystone Pipeline even though a. It reduces carbon emissions by transporting through pipes rather gas-guzzling trucks and planes b. It reduces need to intervene in Middle East c. China would just buy it and burn it anyways.

That's a fallacious way of presenting their ideas. Why are you ignoring all of the HORRENDOUS ideas Conservatives have regarding the environment and their complete disregard of eco-responsibility? They both support terrible policies, especially when it comes to oil.

Social Oppression: Liberals believe they're fighting for freedom when they're fighting for "gay rights." Wrong. The gay marriage movement is screaming for government to get involved in their relationship, personal affairs, and want government benefits. That's not freedom.

People will counter that gays don't get the hospital visitation they want. Guess what, neither do single people and besides, that's the hospital policy that needs to change. The individual should decide who is important enough to visit them in the hospital, not the government.

The government should have no say in marriage, but since it does, it is most definitely a civil rights issue and therefore gays should be allowed to marry so long as straight people have the right to marry. Until government marriage is abolished entirely, it is completely and utterly misguided to say that gay people shouldn't have the right to marry their partner on the basis that government shouldn't be involved in marriage in the first place. That"s like saying gay people shouldn't have to pay taxes (while straight people do) because taxes are unethical. Sure, taxes might be unethical, but to give gay people the opportunity to stop paying taxes while straight people still have to pay taxes is wrong. I"d like to see you argue otherwise.

The federal government gives 1,138 benefits and responsibilities based on marital status that they do not on civil union status. A few of those benefits are unpaid leave to care for an ill spouse, social security survivor benefits and spousal benefits, and the right not to testify against one"s spouse among others. Further, despite the shortage of blood at banks across the country, gay donors are not allowed to donate blood BY LAW. Men who have had sexual contact with a man even once are automatically disqualified. You're also ignoring parenting rights that are not given to gay couples. Not only is it infinitely harder for gays to adopt, but in families with gay parents, usually only the birth parent is afforded certain rights. This is incredibly important when it comes to gay divorce.

Name one ability or right that gays are denied. Zip.

Wrong - I just named several. Rights is a tricky term though.

Warlord Imperialism & Drone Massacre: Liberals say war is good so long as their guy is doing it. Obama is intervening in Syria, Libya, Egypt, Algeria, Mali, Iraq, Turkey, Afghanistan, and is bombing Yemen, Pakistan, and Somalia. But when Bush intervenes in Iraq, it's not enough. They want more war.

Um, really? You've never heard of neo-cons? Again, my entire beef with your liberal rants is that you focus on liberals which I find ABSURD. I complain about Obama and liberals constantly (especially on Facebook - you know that), but I also equally oppose conservative stupidity which you tend to ignore. I think that's insane. I can't take you seriously when complaining about war when you mention conservatism as a superior ideology in the OP. Libertarianism, fine.

Liberals say it's wrong to waterboard the enemy, but it's good to drone strike American citizens. In fact, Liberals say we need more drone strikes, Obama did 5x the drone strikes as Bush with a much higher rate of civilian deaths.

Lol @ "the enemy." I know many liberals who disagree with Obama on this issue, btw. It's true that liberals tend to be branwashed in the name of safety, but SO ARE CONSERVATIVES. Dude, Republicans banned a lawmaker for saying the word "vagina" when talking about an abortion bill. Get fvking real, dude. Seriously.

Gun Control Fascism:

...Liberals say guns can't defend against tyranny because they have drones. Liberals say the best form of defense for you and your family is the fetal position, not a firearm.

I oppose many forms of gun control, but one thing I always find funny is that conservatives think their handguns or even machine guns will protect them from tyranny, LOL. Right, the government has access to drones and NUCLEAR WEAPONS but it will be your good ol' Smith & Wesson that saves you, haha.

Collectivism & Democracy: Democrats say the individual doesn't matter, only the collective. If it's for the greater good and they get a majority vote, they say it's moral and ethical to trample an individual and steal his property, it's for the Earth.

They're belief that the highest principle is 51% voting to put the 49% through a meat grinder, it's democracy.

This is a terrible argument because conservatives support this exact type of government. Republicans are also going to great lengths to completely manipulate the political process

Democrats always divide people into groups, women's rights, minority rights, gay rights. How about individual rights where every individual has the same recognized rights.

You think Republicans care about individual rights...? Really?

"Corporations are people, my friend ... of course they are." Republicans all believe

Can't quote this whole comment and reply, so first:

DITTO much of what Danielle said.
"I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice.* And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue." Barry Goldwater
*Except in a democracy it might lose you an election.

http://unitedwegovern.org...
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/19/2013 4:31:52 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/19/2013 2:46:34 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 2/19/2013 2:40:45 PM, malcolmyx wrote:
the Pro-Obama part is wrong for a lot of people who identify as liberal.

Uh false. The majority Liberal complaint of Obama is that he isn't strong arming Liberal policy fast enough. In fact, Obama agrees with those Liberal critics of his.

"Musclular Liberalism", the term explaining the politics of Thatcher and Reagan. +1 on consistency.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
proglib
Posts: 391
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/19/2013 4:52:50 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/19/2013 4:22:16 PM, Danielle wrote:
At 2/19/2013 12:59:37 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:

Gun Control Fascism:

...Liberals say guns can't defend against tyranny because they have drones. Liberals say the best form of defense for you and your family is the fetal position, not a firearm.

I oppose many forms of gun control, but one thing I always find funny is that conservatives think their handguns or even machine guns will protect them from tyranny, LOL. Right, the government has access to drones and NUCLEAR WEAPONS but it will be your good ol' Smith & Wesson that saves you, haha.



The gun control debate is only one example where the discussion is a lot more complicated than you make out. Danielle indicates some of the complexity.

Americans have the right to bear arms. We also have the ability to legislatively define which arms. Bazookas and canons are a form of arms, but I can't own them because of the 2nd Amendment can I?

Let's have that complicated discussion about which arms, rather than strawman each other with terms like "anti-gun fascist" or say "pro-gun nut job," what do you say?
"I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice.* And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue." Barry Goldwater
*Except in a democracy it might lose you an election.

http://unitedwegovern.org...
proglib
Posts: 391
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/19/2013 5:05:29 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/19/2013 4:52:50 PM, proglib wrote:
At 2/19/2013 4:22:16 PM, Danielle wrote:
At 2/19/2013 12:59:37 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:

Gun Control Fascism:

...Liberals say guns can't defend against tyranny because they have drones. Liberals say the best form of defense for you and your family is the fetal position, not a firearm.

I oppose many forms of gun control, but one thing I always find funny is that conservatives think their handguns or even machine guns will protect them from tyranny, LOL. Right, the government has access to drones and NUCLEAR WEAPONS but it will be your good ol' Smith & Wesson that saves you, haha.




The gun control debate is only one example where the discussion is a lot more complicated than you make out. Danielle indicates some of the complexity.

Americans have the right to bear arms. We also have the ability to legislatively define which arms. Bazookas and canons are a form of arms, but I can't own them because of the 2nd Amendment can I?

Let's have that complicated discussion about which arms, rather than strawman each other with terms like "anti-gun fascist" or say "pro-gun nut job," what do you say?

And I would ask the same for most of these issues. There are *millions* of people who would self identify as "liberal." I haven't been one of them in ages because I consider myself more radical than that--to the left ("progressive") on some issues, and the right ("libertarian") on others, thus "proglib" was the lame user name I came up with.

Of the millions of liberals you will find some anti-gun zealots, of course. You will find others like me who couldn't protect themselves with one and have never owned one, but believe the constitution means something, and that banning guns ain't going to happen and would rather have an intelligent conversation about limiting their usage for bad ends. [similar to what I feel about certain drugs, and actually similar to how I feel about abortion.]

Geo, do you really want to shut out conversation with such a large percentage of the population by stereotyping them inaccurately? Plenty on the left want to do that with "conservatives."

Seems unhelpful in a democracy. As the quote from Barry Goldwater in my signature is meant to indicate, in a democracy it doesn't do any good to be right if you aren't communicating with enough people to get your program passed.
"I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice.* And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue." Barry Goldwater
*Except in a democracy it might lose you an election.

http://unitedwegovern.org...
Citrakayah
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/19/2013 5:13:45 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/19/2013 12:59:37 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote::
Racism: Democrats opposed Abraham Lincoln, Democrats wanted slavery, the KKK were Democrats. The rebuttal is that Democrats were like that in the past, now the parties swapped ideologies. Wrong. Democrats are still the racist party. They lump people into groups and imply that all white people are racist, and that blacks are victims that need welfare and affirmative action.

I'm sure that's why so many white Democrats voted for Obama.

Why do Democrats always have to resurrect racial division? Republicans and Libertarians don't talk about minority rights and race because they view people as individuals not helpless groups.

Because only a fool says that historically oppressed minorities are going to magically snap their fingers and levitate themselves to equal status. It's not a matter of being 'helpless,' it's a matter of the fact that a group of people who have high numbers of people living in poverty might require assistance to break that cycle of poverty.

Eco-fascism: Liberals want to force mercury light bulbs into everyone's house. Liberals want to shut off your energy with mandatory smart meters.

Specific measures aside, you do realize that the reason we want that is so that dengue fever doesn't spread into the lower United States and we don't get more extreme weather, desertification, etc?

Liberals want high gas prices, no energy independence, and want to stop the Keystone Pipeline even though a. It reduces carbon emissions by transporting through pipes rather gas-guzzling trucks and planes b. It reduces need to intervene in Middle East c. China would just buy it and burn it anyways.

1. Do you realize how much energy we're sitting on in the form of solar, wind, hydroelectric, geothermal, and others?
2. Look up the refining process for oil tar sands. It isn't pretty.

Social Oppression: Liberals believe they're fighting for freedom when they're fighting for "gay rights." Wrong. The gay marriage movement is screaming for government to get involved in their relationship, personal affairs, and want government benefits. That's not freedom.

You define 'freedom' as 'lacking any government influence'. We don't. Quite simple, really.

Collectivism & Democracy: Democrats say the individual doesn't matter, only the collective. If it's for the greater good and they get a majority vote, they say it's moral and ethical to trample an individual and steal his property, it's for the Earth.

Damn right I do. And I'll formally debate you on the resolution: It is ethically mandated to harm one person to prevent a greater evil.

They're belief that the highest principle is 51% voting to put the 49% through a meat grinder, it's democracy.

Wrong; we support certain things that a majority can't take away. Freedom of religion, for example.

Democrats always divide people into groups, women's rights, minority rights, gay rights. How about individual rights where every individual has the same recognized rights.

Two reasons:
1. Those rights aren't always applicable. For instance, the right to be checked for cervical cancer doesn't apply to men. The right to not be discriminated against by the majority doesn't apply to the majority.
2. Again, you can't ignore the fact that in the United States certain groups are at certain disadvantages socially.
YYW
Posts: 36,282
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/19/2013 5:41:31 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/19/2013 12:59:37 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
Liberalism has become the new norm but nobody (but the Libertarians and Conservatives) understands the dangers of it and why it's wrong. I was once a Democrat, in fact I'm still registered Democrat, and even more recently I identified as socially Liberal. Then I discovered Liberal Democrats are wrong about nearly everything including social issues. Here's why Liberalism fails:

New? Really? Interesting claim, Geo.

Racism: Democrats opposed Abraham Lincoln, Democrats wanted slavery, the KKK were Democrats. The rebuttal is that Democrats were like that in the past, now the parties swapped ideologies. Wrong. Democrats are still the racist party. They lump people into groups and imply that all white people are racist, and that blacks are victims that need welfare and affirmative action.

The Democratic party of 1860 was not the Democratic party of post-1964. LBJ and Strom Thurmond changed everything.

Why do Democrats always have to resurrect racial division? Republicans and Libertarians don't talk about minority rights and race because they view people as individuals not helpless groups. Democrats want to make minorities dependent on government. Democrats also support Planned Parenthood, an organization founded by eugenecist, ethnic cleanser Margaret Sanger.

They don't.

Eco-fascism: Liberals want to force mercury light bulbs into everyone's house. Liberals want to shut off your energy with mandatory smart meters.

Liberals want high gas prices, no energy independence, and want to stop the Keystone Pipeline even though a. It reduces carbon emissions by transporting through pipes rather gas-guzzling trucks and planes b. It reduces need to intervene in Middle East c. China would just buy it and burn it anyways.

I'm a liberal, and I can only say DRILL BABY DRILL! I like cheap gas...

Social Oppression: Liberals believe they're fighting for freedom when they're fighting for "gay rights." Wrong. The gay marriage movement is screaming for government to get involved in their relationship, personal affairs, and want government benefits. That's not freedom.

The gay rights movement (I say this as a gay guy) is about equality under the law.

People will counter that gays don't get the hospital visitation they want. Guess what, neither do single people and besides, that's the hospital policy that needs to change. The individual should decide who is important enough to visit them in the hospital, not the government.

Equality. Under. The. Law.

Name one ability or right that gays are denied. Zip.

Right to marry in many states.
Right to marital benefits and legal protections of marriage.
Right to equal tax incentives with heterosexual couples.
Right to not be discriminated against in the workplace.
Etc.

That's four, but they're the big ones.

Warlord Imperialism & Drone Massacre: Liberals say war is good so long as their guy is doing it. Obama is intervening in Syria, Libya, Egypt, Algeria, Mali, Iraq, Turkey, Afghanistan, and is bombing Yemen, Pakistan, and Somalia. But when Bush intervenes in Iraq, it's not enough. They want more war.

No one says that war is good. Necessary? Perhaps. "Good"? Not a chance.

Liberals say it's wrong to waterboard the enemy, but it's good to drone strike American citizens. In fact, Liberals say we need more drone strikes, Obama did 5x the drone strikes as Bush with a much higher rate of civilian deaths.

I'm both liberal and pro-torture (The Dershowitz school of thought, if anyone was wondering). Note, I'm specifically implying that "enhanced interrogation" does not go far enough. And I agree that whereas Bush went to war in a way that was both constitutional and in concordance with international law, Obama has exercised extra-constitutional power which has gone far beyond that of any other president before him -though I don't see this as a bad thing. It's the result of a recalcitrant legislature... food for thought.

Gun Control Fascism: Liberals say it's good to give assault weapons to violent Mexican drug cartels, good to give F-16s and tanks to a Muslim Brotherhood Dictator in Egypt who employs rapists to rape protesters, denies the Holocaust, and wants to blow up our ally, it's good to let only criminals have guns, it's good to let the police they don't like have guns, it's good to protect banks with guns, but it's wrong for citizens to have guns and armed protection for our children.

Liberals aren't perfect, and no one would repeat Fast and Furious again.

Liberals say guns can't defend against tyranny because they have drones. Liberals say the best form of defense for you and your family is the fetal position, not a firearm.

This is just false.

Collectivism & Democracy: Democrats say the individual doesn't matter, only the collective. If it's for the greater good and they get a majority vote, they say it's moral and ethical to trample an individual and steal his property, it's for the Earth.

Liberals say both matter.

They're belief that the highest principle is 51% voting to put the 49% through a meat grinder, it's democracy.

False.

Democrats always divide people into groups, women's rights, minority rights, gay rights. How about individual rights where every individual has the same recognized rights.

It's rather that Republicans have a very limited electorate which they cater to.

Equal in Slavery: "Americans are so enamored with equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom." -- Alexis de Tocqueville

lol

You all might be thinking "Liberals don't say all that!" Yes, they did say that by voting for Obama by landslide.

Nonsense.
Tsar of DDO
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/19/2013 6:09:24 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/19/2013 4:22:16 PM, Danielle wrote:
I think it's hilarious that you're complaining about Democrats lumping people into groups by lumping Democrats into groups. Just because someone identifies as a a particular ideology (based on the majority of their beliefs) doesn't mean that everyone within that group agrees. I know Libertarians and Anarchists who oppose abortion though many support it. I never supported Affirmative Action even when I considered myself a Democrat.

Am I a collectivist by calling out collectivists?

Here's where you're wrong. Democrats JOINED a group, a group with a shared core philosophy.

Blacks didn't join the group "black" and they don't all share a core philosophy.

I am not denying individuals by criticizing a philosophy shared by a number of individuals.

I think it's wholly naive to suggest that Conservatives and Libertarians don't care and talk about race. A quick Google search could SERIOUSLY dismantle that completely fabricated interpretation of reality. The Tea Party has been referred to as racist because many of their supporters are racist,

False. The Tea Party fully supports Ted Cruz, Tim Scott, Allen West, Marco Rubio, Ben Carson, and Herman Cain, all are minorities. How is that racist?

and obviously Conservatives have a history of racism which is pretty blatant in their social ideology today as well.

Conservative Senators Tim Scott and Ted Cruz are racist against blacks and Hispanics? And Condoleezza Rice and Colin Powell? C'mon.

The real racists are the ones saying that people should be given a job based on genetics, it's called affirmative action.

I do agree that Democrats talk about race a lot, but many of the times it is completely warranted when talking about racism and ignorant perspectives on race even in 2013. Only when they try to pass legislation based on race does it become problematic, but you"re being hypocritical by not mentioning that Conservatives do the exact same thing when it comes to religion (by trying to incorporate religious beliefs into politics).

Religions are not generic traits, they are a set of beliefs, beliefs can be criticized. Genetics should not be criticized.

I do think that Democrats make people dependent on government, but I don"t think the origins of Planned Parenthood is a relevant point.

It's relevant because Democrats support a eugenics operation to get rid of "unfit" people.

That's a fallacious way of presenting their ideas. Why are you ignoring all of the HORRENDOUS ideas Conservatives have regarding the environment and their complete disregard of eco-responsibility? They both support terrible policies, especially when it comes to oil.

They don't believe in pollution, they simply don't hold the Liberal view that giving Al Gore money and paying carbon taxes doesn't save the environment. They also recognize the low role that humans play in obstructing the climate.

The government should have no say in marriage, but since it does, it is most definitely a civil rights issue and therefore gays should be allowed to marry so long as straight people have the right to marry. Until government marriage is abolished entirely, it is completely and utterly misguided to say that gay people shouldn't have the right to marry their partner on the basis that government shouldn't be involved in marriage in the first place. That"s like saying gay people shouldn't have to pay taxes (while straight people do) because taxes are unethical. Sure, taxes might be unethical, but to give gay people the opportunity to stop paying taxes while straight people still have to pay taxes is wrong. I"d like to see you argue otherwise.

The federal government gives 1,138 benefits and responsibilities based on marital status that they do not on civil union status. A few of those benefits are unpaid leave to care for an ill spouse, social security survivor benefits and spousal benefits, and the right not to testify against one"s spouse among others. Further, despite the shortage of blood at banks across the country, gay donors are not allowed to donate blood BY LAW. Men who have had sexual contact with a man even once are automatically disqualified. You're also ignoring parenting rights that are not given to gay couples. Not only is it infinitely harder for gays to adopt, but in families with gay parents, usually only the birth parent is afforded certain rights. This is incredibly important when it comes to gay divorce.

Donating blood is a right? Adopting a child is a right? No.

There's a medical concern with blood from men who engage in risky sexual activities. They have every right to be gay and engage in that activity, but they can't expect hospitals to spread that risk to others.

Regarding adoption, children need a mother and a father. Two dads can't breast feed, plain and simple. I'm fine with two dads and one mother or two mothers and one dad. But give the child the biological need of a mom and dad.

French homosexuals demonstrate against same-sex "marriage"
"The rights of children trump the right to children," said Jean Marc, a French mayor -- who is also homosexual.
http://www.lifesitenews.com...

Wrong - I just named several. Rights is a tricky term though.

Negative rights are rights. "Positive rights" for most part are a farce.

Um, really? You've never heard of neo-cons? Again, my entire beef with your liberal rants is that you focus on liberals which I find ABSURD. I complain about Obama and liberals constantly (especially on Facebook - you know that), but I also equally oppose conservative stupidity which you tend to ignore. I think that's insane. I can't take you seriously when complaining about war when you mention conservatism as a superior ideology in the OP.

Here's why. Democrats and Liberals share a core philosophy of progressivism, equality, big government nanny, activist government, socialism, and collectivism.

Republicans are split and in the process of transformation. As Ron Paul put it, Republicans have lost their way. He argued against fellow Neo-Cons telling them he's the true Conservative and that they were elected to end the wars, small government, and low taxes. So Republicans experienced a bump in the road with Nixon, Bush Sr., Bush Jr. but now the party is going back to it's roots and slowly becoming Barry Goldwater Conservatives again. I denounce Neo-Cons and fundamentalists.

Fox News unanimously praises Rand Paul, including O'Reilly and even the establishment Karl Rove! Fox News is talking about Libertarianism and shooting drones out of the sky with 2nd Amendment. Republican Senate Leader Mitch McConnell is legalizing hemp! The whole party is inviting of Rand Paul's anti-war sentiment. Fox has Lou Dobbs, John Stossel, Judge Napolitano, Neil Cavuto, Charles Krauthammer, Greg Gutfeld, etc. Very Libertarian.

Where's the Liberal media? They have nothing but fascists. S.E. Cupp is the only outstanding journalist on MSNBC. They bash Rand Paul.

The main thing is, Conservatives aren't collectivists, Liberals are. That's why I favor one over the other.

Fox is defending the 2nd Amendment, Liberals are talking about repealing it. And you wonder why I bash one more than the other?

I oppose many forms of gun control, but one thing I always find funny is that conservatives think their handguns or even machine guns will protect them from tyranny, LOL. Right, the government has access to drones and NUCLEAR WEAPONS but it will be your good ol' Smith & Wesson that saves you, haha.

Yes. We couldn't hold off Baghdad. We've been in the Middle East for decades, why hasn't our advanced technology and drones beat the cave dwelling Jihadists yet? The tyrants admit the citizens must be disarmed. Are you seriously questioning the ability of 300,000,000 armed citizens?

You are insane if you think the gove
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
sadolite
Posts: 8,837
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/19/2013 6:37:29 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Nothing ever comes from politics except blame and excuses.

"A man who is good for blame and excuses is good for nothing"
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
DeFool
Posts: 626
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/19/2013 7:00:36 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
"Democrats opposed Abraham Lincoln, Democrats wanted slavery, the KKK were Democrats."

I suppose that this could be interpreted as a call for the right-wing to oppose racism. If so, then I want to encourage it.

However, I have reason to think that it is simply a way to call names.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/19/2013 7:08:45 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/19/2013 4:52:50 PM, proglib wrote:
The gun control debate is only one example where the discussion is a lot more complicated than you make out. Danielle indicates some of the complexity.

Americans have the right to bear arms. We also have the ability to legislatively define which arms. Bazookas and canons are a form of arms, but I can't own them because of the 2nd Amendment can I?

Firearm: a small arms weapon, as a rifle or pistol, from which a projectile is fired by gunpowder

http://dictionary.reference.com...

Let's have that complicated discussion about which arms

Been there done that. Liberals don't understand the complexity of the debate.

They don't know the difference between a semi-automatic and a machine gun.
They don't know that cosmetic features like black guns, pistol grips, etc. don't make it more lethal.
They don't know that many handguns are semi-automatic.
They don't know that semi-automatic means one bullet per trigger pull.
They don't know that HANDGUNS are the number one most used gun in gun murders, yet they want to ban scary looking rifles that are used in only a tiny fraction of the crimes.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/19/2013 7:24:33 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/19/2013 12:59:37 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
Liberalism has become the new norm but nobody (but the Libertarians and Conservatives) understands the dangers of it and why it's wrong. Blah, blah, and more hackneyed blah.

Mm-hmm, a perfectly stereotypical load of "libertarian", rightist banality.
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/19/2013 7:25:02 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/19/2013 7:00:36 PM, DeFool wrote:
"Democrats opposed Abraham Lincoln, Democrats wanted slavery, the KKK were Democrats."

I suppose that this could be interpreted as a call for the right-wing to oppose racism. If so, then I want to encourage it.

The Right Wing has already and historically been opposed to racism. Was Bush a racist for appointing Condoleezza Rice? I don't get your point.

However, I have reason to think that it is simply a way to call names.

My purpose is to dismantle a philosophy I view as destructive. Why must it be criticized? Because, unlike Fascism, Liberalism is viewed as "good and loving" and I'm here to say it's a wolf in sheep's clothing. How can you say my post that critiqued the core values of an ideology be name-calling?
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/19/2013 7:45:57 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/19/2013 7:25:02 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 2/19/2013 7:00:36 PM, DeFool wrote:
"Democrats opposed Abraham Lincoln, Democrats wanted slavery, the KKK were Democrats."

I suppose that this could be interpreted as a call for the right-wing to oppose racism. If so, then I want to encourage it.

The Right Wing has already and historically been opposed to racism.

Oy vey! The right opposed to racism! What next, a bit of Holocaust denying just to demonstrate how supremely chutzpaic you can be? FYI, the politics of the typical hard-core racist are invariably rightist.

Was Bush a racist for appointing Condoleezza Rice? ...

Allow me to assist you in expanding your vocabulary, the term is tokenism.

However, I have reason to think that it is simply a way to call names.

My purpose is to dismantle a philosophy I view as destructive. Why must it be criticized?

Because the nature of your critique is bigoted.

Because, unlike Fascism, Liberalism is viewed as "good and loving" and I'm here to say it's a wolf in sheep's clothing.

Fascism has more of a family resemblance to rightism.

How can you say my post that critiqued the core values of an ideology be name-calling?

Hmm, would you prefer if one were to characterize it as intellectually dishonest, blatantly biased, thoroughly riddled through with cheap shots, and lamely defamatory?
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/19/2013 7:51:54 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
A friendly suggestion, if you're a rightist and not personally a racist, then simply disavow racism on a personal basis, but don't attempt to assert that the right isn't guilty of and is opposed to racism. That's simply not at all plausible and is in fact a quite dumb tack.
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.