Why I Oppose Liberalism

[Pernicious]

http://www.debatepolicy.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=6661&stc=1DESPICABLE LIBERAL
Liberalism is an ideology of parasites, hypocrites, grievance mongers, victims, and control freaks. Like a tick, liberalism latches onto a victim and sucks him dry. Of course, a single tick can’t gorge itself on so much blood that it does to a dog what liberalism did to Detroit. It doesn’t turn the different parts of the dog against each other. The tick doesn’t tell everyone he’s a victim and that the dog is greedy if he tries to scratch it off. You can’t be both a good Christian and a good liberal because they’re incompatible and liberalism makes no exceptions for religious beliefs. It demands to be placed first in a person’s life, even above God; a liberal who stands up for his Christian beliefs or who merely asks that Christians not be demeaned will be ostracized for it by other liberals. Churches that adopt liberal beliefs inevitably become such pale imitations of the truth that missionaries should be sent in to convert them to Christianity.
Liberalism is an ideology of tribalism and hatred. It works incessantly to undermine anything that truly brings America together -- like Christianity, the culture and love of country -- so it can try to rebind people together as liberal drones. Relatively minor differences of opinion between liberals and those who disagree with them are habitually elevated to encourage hated.
For example, there’s no logical, rational reason that…
…If you oppose illegal immigration, you must hate Hispanics.
….If you oppose Affirmative Action, you must hate blacks.
….If you oppose free birth control, you must hate women.
….If you’re concerned about radical Islam, you must hate all Muslims.
….If you oppose gay marriage, you must hate gays.
Yet, liberalism promotes those lies incessantly to keep people at each other’s throats. Liberals have to convince their supporters that they’re hated for who they are to keep them from asking uncomfortable questions about why liberalism fails and conservatism works. As long as you’re brainwashed into believing that you’re universally hated by everyone except liberals for something you can’t control, you have nowhere else to turn.
http://townhall.com/columnists/johnhawkins/2014/10/11/why-i-oppose-liberalism-n1903749/page/full

[Gunny]

Obviously, you don't know what liberal means. The same as many don't know what conservative means.

Definition of "liberal" on this board: Anyone who doesn't fall in lockstep with the gaggle of non-thinking, fearmongers and haters that call themselves "conservatives".

Definition of "conservative" on this board:

It's Obama's fault. He should be impeached. I hate him. He's evil.

It's Islam's fault. We should nuke the entire Middle East. I hate Islam. It's evil.

True, that might be the definition for closed-minded, non-thinking haters, but it sounds like nothing more than a leftwingnut, and NOT a conservative. In fact the aforementioned are REAL quick to call people more conservative in reality than they have ever been a "librull".

[DLT]

Obviously, you don't know what liberal means. The same as many don't know what conservative means.

Definition of "liberal" on this board: Anyone who doesn't fall in lockstep with the gaggle of non-thinking, fearmongers and haters that call themselves "conservatives".

Definition of "conservative" on this board:

It's Obama's fault. He should be impeached. I hate him. He's evil.

It's Islam's fault. We should nuke the entire Middle East. I hate Islam. It's evil.

True, that might be the definition for closed-minded, non-thinking haters, but it sounds like nothing more than a leftwingnut, and NOT a conservative. In fact the aforementioned are REAL quick to call people more conservative in reality than they have ever been a "librull".

A liberal is someone who continues to stupidly vote against their own best interests, like most blacks in America do and like most morons that vote Democrat. A liberal is too stupid to know that when they vote Democrat in today's America, they are voting to give control of government to radical leftists.

A conservative is someone who wants to limit federal government control over our lives, and ergo, to NOT vote in fascist, leftist Democrats.

Which one are you?

[gabosaurus]

A conservative is someone who continues to stupidly vote against their own best interests, like most morons that vote Republican. A conservative is too stupid to know that when they vote Republican in today's America, they are voting to give control of government to radical right wing extremists.

A liberal is someone who wants to limit federal government control over our lives, and ergo, to NOT vote in fascist, right wing Republicans.
Which one are you?

[Gunny]

A liberal is someone who continues to stupidly vote against their own best interests, like most blacks in America do and like most morons that vote Democrat. A liberal is too stupid to know that when they vote Democrat in today's America, they are voting to give control of government to radical leftists.

A conservative is someone who wants to limit federal government control over our lives, and ergo, to NOT vote in fascist, leftist Democrats.

Which one are you?

Oh. You mean a Republicant.

Conservatism and liberalism are ideals, not political parties. I'm not a Republicant if that's what you are asking. The Dems in the70s 80s were more conservative than the GOP is now.

Sheep follow a party. PEOPLE think for themselves.

[DLT]

A conservative is someone who continues to stupidly vote against their own best interests, like most morons that vote Republican. A conservative is too stupid to know that when they vote Republican in today's America, they are voting to give control of government to radical right wing extremists.

A liberal is someone who wants to limit federal government control over our lives, and ergo, to NOT vote in fascist, right wing Republicans.
Which one are you?

Oh gee.

No original thought capability (has to copy and repeat what others have written) - Check.
Has nothing substantive to offer the discussion, only lameass insults and sarcasm - Check.
Gets no thrill from facts, but prefers to rely on the latest lamestream leftist media propaganda - Check.

Definition of a typical leftie. Congrats!

[DLT]

Oh. You mean a Republicant.

Conservatism and liberalism are ideals, not political parties. I'm not a Republicant if that's what you are asking. The Dems in the70s 80s were more conservative than the GOP is now.

Sheep follow a party. PEOPLE think for themselves.

And then....some "people" aren't capable of thinking at all.....but merely dodging uncomfortable questions and offering up sarcasm, insults and deflections on the issues.

I call them stuckonstupid lefties.

[PixieStix]

I have to wonder if some people that call themselves a liberal today. Are living in the past, or in the glory days of being a Reagan Democrat.

The way I see it is, if one is defending liberalism as it stands today they are only being stubborn and immovable to the point of being complicit in the destruction of a whole nation. It is not conservatives that are close minded, and hateful.

[PixieStix]

When I was a girl, I thought I was born a democrat, my parents were die hard democrats. . I thought that was how it was. As I grew into a teen and then a young woman. With my rebellious spirit, I registered as a republican and vote my conscience. Always will. I do not vote what is for best for me. But what is best for my nation

[Gunny]

I have to wonder if some people that call themselves a liberal today. Are living in the past, or in the glory days of being a Reagan Democrat.

The way I see it is, if one is defending liberalism as it stands today they are only being stubborn and immovable to the point of being complicit in the destruction of a whole nation. It is not conservatives that are close minded, and hateful.

It's easy. You use a dictionary definition instead of a label.

[gabosaurus]

When I was a girl, I thought I was born a democrat, my parents were die hard democrats. . I thought that was how it was. As I grew into a teen and then a young woman. With my rebellious spirit, I registered as a republican and vote my conscience. Always will. I do not vote what is for best for me. But what is best for my nation

I vote my conscience as well. I vote what I feel is best for my family and this country.
My husband sees otherwise, but this is what makes this country a great place. We can have opposing opinions.

[PixieStix]

I vote my conscience as well. I vote what I feel is best for my family and this country.
My husband sees otherwise, but this is what makes this country a great place. We can have opposing opinions.


You vote your feelings. I vote my conscience
There is the difference. I vote what is best for my nation FIRST

[fj1200]

DESPICABLE LIBERAL
Liberalism is an ideology of parasites, hypocrites, grievance mongers, victims, and control freaks.

I think liberals would disagree but I see that you've got your mind made up with no room for a competing thought. :rolleyes:


A conservative is someone who wants to limit federal government control over our lives...

What's your stance on the traditional marriage amendment, torture, Bush-era NSA, Social Security and Medicare reform that will likely result in lower benefits?

[Shadow]

And then....some "people" aren't capable of thinking at all.....but merely dodging uncomfortable questions and offering up sarcasm, insults and deflections on the issues.

I call them stuckonstupid lefties.
You wouldn't know an actual "leftie" if it bit you in the ass. Hint... A leftie is not everyone that doesn't agree with you.

[gabosaurus]

You vote your feelings. I vote my conscience
There is the difference. I vote what is best for my nation FIRST

I do the same same. I just happen to have a different point of view.
The difference between us is that I don't insist that my viewpoint is the only valid one. I am free to vote one way, my husband is free to vote the other way, and our daughter will be free to develop her own opinions. Just as I was when I was growing up.

[Gunny]

You vote your feelings. I vote my conscience
There is the difference. I vote what is best for my nation FIRST

You have a conscience? When did THAT happen?

[Gunny]

I do the same same. I just happen to have a different point of view.
The difference between us is that I don't insist that my viewpoint is the only valid one. I am free to vote one way, my husband is free to vote the other way, and our daughter will be free to develop her own opinions. Just as I was when I was growing up.

Pffft .... where does that thinking crap come in? Just do what Hannity says. All you need to know.

[fj1200]

Pffft .... where does that thinking crap come in? Just do what Hannity says. All you need to know.

:laugh: Hannity is a hack.

[Shadow]

You vote your feelings. I vote my conscience
There is the difference. I vote what is best for my nation FIRST
Oh please. You are going to assign why someone else votes the way they do to them ...and then claim the honorable and self sacrificing stance for yourself? Not self righteous at.all. LMAO

[PixieStix]

Oh good grief :lame2:

[Shadow]

Yeah. That's what I said when I read your BS LOL

[Shadow]

:laugh: Hannity is a hack.
That is putting it mildly. I'm pretty conservative and even I have a hard time listening to his crap.

[DLT]

You wouldn't know an actual "leftie" if it bit you in the ass. Hint... A leftie is not everyone that doesn't agree with you.


Au contraire. I've been dealing with lefties for going on two decades now on the internet. So you have no clue what you're bleating about here.

No, for one thing....a leftie is someone that still supports Obama and the Democrats, despite the damage they have done TO America...because they are A-OK with that damage as long as it results in more freebies for them from higher taxes on the working middle class taxpayers. A leftie is also someone that mocks and ridicules conservatives for trying to get Republicans to reign in the Democrat leftists and their spending.

As for someone on an internet that apparently lives to post insulting, demeaning and snarky crap just for the helluvit...

I call them ASSHOLES, no political affilation or label needed.

[Gunny]

That is putting it mildly. I'm pretty conservative and even I have a hard time listening to his crap.

Hannity is a GOP mouthpiece. The GOP isn't conservative. Not even close.

[DLT]

When I was a girl, I thought I was born a democrat, my parents were die hard democrats. . I thought that was how it was. As I grew into a teen and then a young woman. With my rebellious spirit, I registered as a republican and vote my conscience. Always will. I do not vote what is for best for me. But what is best for my nation

My grandfather (dad's dad) was a Democrat. He was also a Christian and the deacon in his church. The Democratic Party is NOT the same party that it was back then though. He is no doubt rolling over in his grave to see the crap they Dem Party now "stands for".

[Shadow]

Au contraire. I've been dealing with lefties for going on two decades now on the internet. So you have no clue what you're bleating about here.

No, for one thing....a leftie is someone that still supports Obama and the Democrats, despite the damage they have done TO America...because they are A-OK with that damage as long as it results in more freebies for them from higher taxes on the working middle class taxpayers. A leftie is also someone that mocks and ridicules conservatives for trying to get Republicans to reign in the Democrat leftists and their spending.

As for someone on an internet that apparently lives to post insulting, demeaning and snarky crap just for the helluvit...

I call them ASSHOLES, no political affilation or label needed.
Mmm hmm. Name all the lefties on this board.

[PixieStix]

Oh please. You are going to assign why someone else votes the way they do to them ...and then claim the honorable and self sacrificing stance for yourself? Not self righteous at.all. LMAO

I did not assign why someone else votes the way they do. Only myself. I did not say I had to sacrifice a damned thing, certainly not my conscience for the sake of what? A union, healthcare for all?

[DLT]

Oh good grief :lame2:

Just the usual and standard moronic bleatings and lameass attempts to insult from a few of the usual suspects. Ignore them (advice I've been given)...and maybe they'll go away. In fact, they might all commit hari kari by Nov. 5. Or at the very least be too hungover to post much.

Hope springs!

[Shadow]

Just the usual and standard moronic bleatings and lameass attempts to insult from a few of the usual suspects. Ignore them (advice I've been given)...and maybe they'll go away. In fact, they might all commit hari kari by Nov. 5. Or at the very least be too hungover to post much.

Hope springs!
Got the names of all the liberals yet?

[Gunny]

Au contraire. I've been dealing with lefties for going on two decades now on the internet. So you have no clue what you're bleating about here.

No, for one thing....a leftie is someone that still supports Obama and the Democrats, despite the damage they have done TO America...because they are A-OK with that damage as long as it results in more freebies for them from higher taxes on the working middle class taxpayers. A leftie is also someone that mocks and ridicules conservatives for trying to get Republicans to reign in the Democrat leftists and their spending.

As for someone on an internet that apparently lives to post insulting, demeaning and snarky crap just for the helluvit...

I call them ASSHOLES, no political affilation or label needed.

She's been on here as long as you have, and she's smarter than your drone ass. At least she thinks for herself instead of regurgitating rhetoric.

Try again.

[Shadow]

She's been on here as long as you have, and she's smarter than your drone ass. At least she thinks for herself instead of regurgitating rhetoric.

Try again.
Actually I have been a member in good standing since 2004. But who is counting :)

[Gunny]

Actually I have been a member in good standing since 2004. But who is counting :)

"member in good standing"? Gee, which boards have I heard that on and who always pulls it?

Ummm ....

[Shadow]

I did not assign why someone else votes the way they do. Only myself. I did not say I had to sacrifice a damned thing, certainly not my conscience for the sake of what? A union, healthcare for all?
Who is sacrificing their conscience? And how do you know another voter only votes based on their "feelings". Assume much?

[Shadow]

"member in good standing"? Gee, which boards have I heard that on and who always pulls it?

Ummm ....
I know. I was being facetious. You can spank me later for being bad. :)

[DLT]

Got the names of all the liberals yet?

No.....but I've got the names of a few obnoxious aholes.

[Shadow]

No.....but I've got the names of a few obnoxious aholes.
Me too. And you top the list.

[DLT]

Me too. And you top the list.

Ironic....since you're the one doing the personal insulting.

Check a mirror once in a while, eh?

[Shadow]

Ironic....since you're the one doing the personal insulting.

Check a mirror once in a while, eh?
You do realize trying to veil your nastiness in political rants still makes you an asshole... Yes?
Who are you trying to kid? Them conservatives... So self righteous.

[Pernicious]

Speaking of smart...............
Over the last 15 months, we’ve traveled to every corner of the United States. I’ve now been in 57 states? I think one left to go. — Barack Obama

[PixieStix]

Speaking of smart...............
Over the last 15 months, we’ve traveled to every corner of the United States. I’ve now been in 57 states? I think one left to go. — Barack Obama


Now that's smart ;)

[fj1200]

Mmm hmm. Name all the lefties on this board.

:crickets:

[Shadow]

:crickets:
Did you ever doubt it? :)

[Animal Mother]

You do realize trying to veil your nastiness in political rants still makes you an asshole... Yes?
Who are you trying to kid? Them conservatives... So self righteous.

You have to question anybody whose avatar has the US flag and Israel together like we're one nation. Interesting loyalties.

[Shadow]

You have to question anybody whose avatar has the US flag and Israel together like we're one nation. Interesting loyalties.
Hey!! Good to see you here :)

[Gunny]

You have to question anybody whose avatar has the US flag and Israel together like we're one nation. Interesting loyalties.

The most interesting loyalty there is the Jews are the most intolerant conservative people I've ever met. Yet they vote Democrat in lockstep.

I'm thinking there's something not quite right about that.

[Gunny]

You have to question anybody whose avatar has the US flag and Israel together like we're one nation. Interesting loyalties.

And welcome aboard. They're going to LOVE you. Heh. :dev3:

[gabosaurus]

"member in good standing"? Gee, which boards have I heard that on and who always pulls it?

Ummm ....

I am a member. Whether I am in good standing is a matter of debate. ;)

[Gunny]

I am a member. Whether I am in good standing is a matter of debate. ;)

"I am a member in good standing" = biddy-speak for I get to say what I want and you don't.

[DLT]

You do realize trying to veil your nastiness in political rants still makes you an asshole... Yes?
Who are you trying to kid? Them conservatives... So self righteous.

And here's the difference, which you're obviously not bright enough to discern. My ""political nastiness"" (your words, not mine) insults nobody here, personally. While you, on the other hand, go about insulting anyone and everyone, myself included, that you disagree with here. That makes you the asshole, dear. Get a f'in clue....for a refreshing change. You aren't even half as smart as you seem to 'think' you are....lol.

[DLT]

Who is sacrificing their conscience? And how do you know another voter only votes based on their "feelings". Assume much?

Actually, you're the one doing all of the assuming here. But....

it kinda figures....considering.



Oh please. You are going to assign why someone else votes the way they do to them ...and then claim the honorable and self sacrificing stance for yourself? Not self righteous at.all. LMAO

[Gunny]

Oh gee.

No original thought capability (has to copy and repeat what others have written) - Check.
Has nothing substantive to offer the discussion, only lameass insults and sarcasm - Check.
Gets no thrill from facts, but prefers to rely on the latest lamestream leftist media propaganda - Check.

Definition of a typical leftie. Congrats!

DO you realise how much you resemble those you accuse?

[Gunny]

And here's the difference, which you're obviously not bright enough to discern. My ""political nastiness"" (your words, not mine) insults nobody here, personally. While you, on the other hand, go about insulting anyone and everyone, myself included, that you disagree with here. That makes you the asshole, dear. Get a f'in clue....for a refreshing change. You aren't even half as smart as you seem to 'think' you are....lol.

Who are you trying to kid? You cry and whine about anyone that disagrees with you.

Even if she's not half as smart as she thinks she is, she's STILL twice as smart as you are. You have no argument. Never have. All you have are insults and backbiting biddy buddies. You try to hide your lack of intelligence and education behind what you think are cool insults. You suck at that too.

Take the OP for example. You don't know what a liberal is. All you know is what hannity and Rush tell YOU to bleat.

[aboutime]

Actually, you're the one doing all of the assuming here. But....

it kinda figures....considering.



DLT. Nuff said. Below. You have been accused of resembling the accuser. What does that tell you?:laugh::laugh:

[Gunny]

DLT. Nuff said. Below. You have been accused of resembling the accuser. What does that tell you?:laugh::laugh:

Says hypocrite to me.

[gabosaurus]

Says hypocrite to me.

It does zero good to argue with someone who cranial lobes have turned into cottage cheese.

[SassyLady]

I oppose liberalism because it is consumed with the notion of "social justice".


Ben O'Neill says:


the notion of "rights" is a mere term of entitlement, indicative of a claim for any possible desirable good, no matter how important or trivial, abstract or tangible, recent or ancient. It is merely an assertion of desire, and a declaration of intention to use the language of rights to acquire said desire.
In fact, since the program of social justice inevitably involves claims for government provision of goods, paid for through the efforts of others, the term actually refers to an intention to use forceto acquire one's desires. Not to earn desirable goods by rational thought and action, production and voluntary exchange, but to go in there and forcibly take goods from those who can supply them!


http://mises.org/daily/5099

[Shadow]

And here's the difference, which you're obviously not bright enough to discern. My ""political nastiness"" (your words, not mine) insults nobody here, personally. While you, on the other hand, go about insulting anyone and everyone, myself included, that you disagree with here. That makes you the asshole, dear. Get a f'in clue....for a refreshing change. You aren't even half as smart as you seem to 'think' you are....lol.
Like I said... Who are you trying to kid? You came here with an agenda. You ain't that bright if you think no one has noticed. So you can save your victim status and bullshit for someone else.

[Drummond]

And then....some "people" aren't capable of thinking at all.....but merely dodging uncomfortable questions and offering up sarcasm, insults and deflections on the issues.

I call them stuckonstupid lefties.

Very well said. So do I !!

[Drummond]

You have to question anybody whose avatar has the US flag and Israel together like we're one nation. Interesting loyalties.

Welcome to the forum .. looks like you are on course to supply a distinctive form of contribution here. Should be interesting.

To your statement ... I'd simply ask ... WHY you want to pose any such question ? What's your thinking ?

[Gunny]

Very well said. So do I !!

I agree. She's got that right. Live what you learn. ;)

[Drummond]

:laugh: Hannity is a hack.

He's a Conservative. Sorry to learn that you don't approve of him ...

[Gunny]

He's a Conservative. Sorry to learn that you don't approve of him ...

Hannity ios a GOP hack. He's NOT conservative.

Conservatives used to stand for something. It annoys me greatly that the GOP has usurped the word.

I wish some of you people could see beyond your nose.

[fj1200]

He's a Conservative. Sorry to learn that you don't approve of him ...

He's a hack radio host. Sorry to learn you are unable to separate such things.

[BoogyMan]

Obviously, you don't know what liberal means. The same as many don't know what conservative means.

Definition of "liberal" on this board: Anyone who doesn't fall in lockstep with the gaggle of non-thinking, fearmongers and haters that call themselves "conservatives".

Definition of "conservative" on this board:

It's Obama's fault. He should be impeached. I hate him. He's evil.

It's Islam's fault. We should nuke the entire Middle East. I hate Islam. It's evil.

True, that might be the definition for closed-minded, non-thinking haters, but it sounds like nothing more than a leftwingnut, and NOT a conservative. In fact the aforementioned are REAL quick to call people more conservative in reality than they have ever been a "librull".

Gunny, I think you are shooting a pretty wide net there.

You speak of a definition of liberal for this board? I think not. Liberals today are not what they used to be. They are closed minded while purporting an openness they claim the conservative is incapable of. They know little to nothing of history and long to re-create the socialist/Marxist cesspools of 19th and 20th century Europe right in our own back yard.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

A liberal is someone who continues to stupidly vote against their own best interests, like most blacks in America do and like most morons that vote Democrat. A liberal is too stupid to know that when they vote Democrat in today's America, they are voting to give control of government to radical leftists.

A conservative is someone who wants to limit federal government control over our lives, and ergo, to NOT vote in fascist, leftist Democrats.

Which one are you?


You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to DLT again.

Dem voters primarily sell their vote. They by a majority vote for freebies. Those freebies are why our taxes have shot thru the roof in the last 5 decades.
The main voting block, the blacks, vote 90+% for the freebies.
Thus we have primarily dems voters are leeches.. Living off those that work for a living..
And those that support the dems are likely in that boat too.- :laugh: -Tyr

[Drummond]

Hannity ios a GOP hack. He's NOT conservative.

Conservatives used to stand for something. It annoys me greatly that the GOP has usurped the word.

I wish some of you people could see beyond your nose.

As I've made clear in a recent post, I take the point that the GOP needs some internal reform in order to qualify, fully, as 'Conservative'.

That said -- disenchant enough would-be GOP voters, and what will that bring ? Another Dem victory, by default !

And it's the LEFT, but of course, who'll cheer the loudest in seeing all of this evolve into being. [Assuming that they don't, themselves, actively work to bring that about - any way they can contrive to.]

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

As I've made clear in a recent post, I take the point that the GOP needs some internal reform in order to qualify, fully, as 'Conservative'.

That said -- disenchant enough would-be GOP voters, and what will that bring ? Another Dem victory, by default !

And it's the LEFT, but of course, who'll cheer the loudest in seeing all of this evolve into being. [Assuming that they don't, themselves, actively work to bring that about - any way they can contrive to.]

We that truly see the big picture have no choice but to vote Republican because the alternative is to give the lousy socialist Dems full and free reign. Too many fail to see this because they are too stupid to get in out of a pouring rain IMHO.--:laugh:
As you say Republican party platform and its leaders need drastic change but not voting to hold or gain power will not bring that change. For in those weaker years the Dems gain massive ground and by way of massive corruption destroy so much that can not be replaced.

That is exactly what has got this nation in the degraded state it is in now..
Unenlightened fools thinking they are brilliant.. -Tyr

[Drummond]

Gunny, I think you are shooting a pretty wide net there.

You speak of a definition of liberal for this board? I think not. Liberals today are not what they used to be. They are closed minded while purporting an openness they claim the conservative is incapable of. They know little to nothing of history and long to re-create the socialist/Marxist cesspools of 19th and 20th century Europe right in our own back yard.

Totally agree.

I see Obama as the first real example of 'proper' Socialist leadership in America. He's given you a taste of Socialism, but FAR worse is to come for America if the Dems continue to enjoy electoral successes. There may be those who are dissatisfied with the GOP, and with reason, but they will still save you from the program your Dems will happily foist / dripfeed upon you if re-elected.

You think Obama assumes dictatorial powers ? Try voting people in who tell you how you must feel mandated to think about it.Try seeing your Constitution whittled away, slowly, to nothing. I'm convinced that the Dems are hell bent on copying the model existing here in Britain, established over GENERATIONS, and they won't stop until it's achieved.

The GOP is unsatisfactory ? Will THEY do to you what the Democratic Party wants to do ? Are THEY all about the disempowerment of the individual ?

I certainly doubt it.

[Drummond]

We that truly see the big picture have no choice but to vote Republican because the alternative is to give the lousy socialist Dems full and free reign. Too many fail to see this because they are too stupid to get in out of a pouring rain IMHO.--:laugh:
As you say Republican party platform and its leaders need drastic change but not voting to hold or gain power will not bring that change. For in those weaker years the Dems gain massive ground and by way of massive corruption destroy so much that can not be replaced.

That is exactly what has got this nation in the degraded state it is in now..
Unenlightened fools thinking they are brilliant.. -Tyr

-- My own thinking exactly !!

[Drummond]

He's a hack radio host. Sorry to learn you are unable to separate such things.

I thought he was also a TV host ? And author ?

Isn't 'Hannity & Colmes' aired any more ? Pity ... I used to watch it myself once upon a time (via the Sky satellite system).

I haven't seen one programme of his, nor listened to any of his radio shows (via Internet radio ... I used to use WSB transmitting from Atlanta for the purpose) without agreeing with a great deal of what he had to say.

My favourite broadcasts .... his condemnatory interview with Islamist Anjem Choudary, also his interview with the proposer of the Islamic centre on 'Ground Zero', in New York. Absolutely brilliant - I felt like cheering each time ...

[fj1200]

Gunny, I think you are shooting a pretty wide net there.

Actually the net was cast very narrowly IMO, thus "conservative" and "liberal" with emphasis on the quotes. :)


I see Obama as the first real example of 'proper' Socialist leadership in America.

FDR was far more socialist in what he accomplished and proposed than BO. Thankfully much was struck down (NIRA), much was never passed (UPT), much went away (PWA, CCC) more has been deregulated (banking reg.s), but much still exists (Social Security).

[fj1200]

I thought he was also a TV host ? And author ?

Of course, and I'm sure he does those equal to his radio show... which is to say offering up red meat to the masses.

[Drummond]

Of course, and I'm sure he does those equal to his radio show... which is to say offering up red meat to the masses.

You suggest disapproval of FDR (apparently), yet you also disapprove of Hannity ?

Don't you need to coordinate your positions a little more consistently ?

Perhaps there are aspects of Socialist agenda-mongering you do not approve of (I'm not at all sure I buy any of it, but at least, you ARE claiming this, it seems). But surely, the antidote to Socialism is to give wholehearted support to those strong Conservative voices that are fighting the corner you'd like us to believe might, ahem, be 'yours' .. ?

You'd be a lot more credible, here, if you stopped singling out Conservatives, here on DP, for attack.

Care to try it ? And .. to sustain that effort ?

-- Just a thought. I won't hold my breath, waiting for you to start. But the suggestion's made, all the same.

[PixieStix]

We that truly see the big picture have no choice but to vote Republican because the alternative is to give the lousy socialist Dems full and free reign. Too many fail to see this because they are too stupid to get in out of a pouring rain IMHO.--:laugh:
As you say Republican party platform and its leaders need drastic change but not voting to hold or gain power will not bring that change. For in those weaker years the Dems gain massive ground and by way of massive corruption destroy so much that can not be replaced.

That is exactly what has got this nation in the degraded state it is in now..
Unenlightened fools thinking they are brilliant.. -Tyr

The democratic party has taken Colorado"s "educate the idiots" campaign, nationwide. Since it worked so well in Colorado.

[Gunny]

You suggest disapproval of FDR (apparently), yet you also disapprove of Hannity ?

Don't you need to coordinate your positions a little more consistently ?

Perhaps there are aspects of Socialist agenda-mongering you do not approve of (I'm not at all sure I buy any of it, but at least, you ARE claiming this, it seems). But surely, the antidote to Socialism is to give wholehearted support to those strong Conservative voices that are fighting the corner you'd like us to believe might, ahem, be 'yours' .. ?

You'd be a lot more credible, here, if you stopped singling out Conservatives, here on DP, for attack.

Care to try it ? And .. to sustain that effort ?

-- Just a thought. I won't hold my breath, waiting for you to start. But the suggestion's made, all the same.

You have to find a conservative to single them out. My POV is, the RINO's are the ones singling out actual conservatives here.

Conservatism is a belief and a lifestyle. NOT party policy. GOPer's are no different than Dems. Blindly following the party.

Unimpressive, to say the least.

[Gunny]

The democratic party has taken Colorado"s "educate the idiots" campaign, nationwide. Since it worked so well in Colorado.

And the GOP has taken "we aren't them" and lost with it for 8 years at President. 12 in Congress.

[fj1200]

You suggest disapproval of FDR (apparently), yet you also disapprove of Hannity ?

Don't you need to coordinate your positions a little more consistently ?

Perhaps there are aspects of Socialist agenda-mongering you do not approve of (I'm not at all sure I buy any of it, but at least, you ARE claiming this, it seems). But surely, the antidote to Socialism is to give wholehearted support to those strong Conservative voices that are fighting the corner you'd like us to believe might, ahem, be 'yours' .. ?

You'd be a lot more credible, here, if you stopped singling out Conservatives, here on DP, for attack.

Care to try it ? And .. to sustain that effort ?

-- Just a thought. I won't hold my breath, waiting for you to start. But the suggestion's made, all the same.

The above is a microcosm of why you are incomprehensibly dumb. I didn't say I disapproved of Hannity, I called him a hack. He, like you, does not have the ability of independent thought. You two are merely parrots.

And to clarify; I don't single out conservatives "for attack," I single out idiots "for attack." You unfortunately fit that bill to a T. So, please stop being an idiot... please. Nevertheless, you're welcome for educating you on United States history. :)

[Shadow]

He's a hack radio host. Sorry to learn you are unable to separate such things.
Yes he is. And when he goes off the rails and gets stuck in the weeds on some stupid unimportant political rant. I tune him out.

[fj1200]

Yes he is. And when he goes off the rails and gets stuck in the weeds on some stupid unimportant political rant. I tune him out.

"You're a great American."
"No, you're a great American."
"Yeah, we're all great Americans."
"Except those liberals."
"Right, liberals are not great Americans."

Did I get the summary of his radio show correct? :)

[Shadow]

"You're a great American."
"No, you're a great American."
"Yeah, we're all great Americans."
"Except those liberals."
"Right, liberals are not great Americans."

Did I get the summary of his radio show correct? :)
Pretty much. LMAO

[DLT]

DO you realise how much you resemble those you accuse?

Do you realize how really skewed and screwed your perception of this, and pretty much everything else, is?

[DLT]

Mmm hmm. Name all the lefties on this board.

Now why the hell would I want to do that?

[DLT]

She's been on here as long as you have, and she's smarter than your drone ass. At least she thinks for herself instead of regurgitating rhetoric.

Try again.

Yeah....if you two were even half as smart as you "think" you are, you'd still be mental midgets...lol.

Hint: Trolling and flinging your poo and insults around does NOT mean that you are "smart". Quite the opposite, in fact. Get a clue.

[Gunny]

Yeah....if you two were even half as smart as you "think" you are, you'd still be mental midgets...lol.

Hint: Trolling and flinging your poo and insults around does NOT mean that you are "smart". Quite the opposite, in fact. Get a clue.

@jimnyc this is okay, right?

I can't say shit, but I can be attacked by a dumbass bitch?

[jimnyc]

@jimnyc this is okay, right?

I can't say shit, but I can be attacked by a dumbass bitch?

For fucks sake. First off, we don't use the @ system here, not being a dick, just saving you the trouble of wasting your time with that feature. Secondly, you have been allowed to trash talk, just as DLT has done in return. Big difference between trash talk, and bringing stuff here from other boards or real life. There are limitations, and as of late you have been going over them. I'd really rather not have personal feuds going on, but I certainly don't want them brought here from real world situations.

[Drummond]

The above is a microcosm of why you are incomprehensibly dumb. I didn't say I disapproved of Hannity, I called him a hack. He, like you, does not have the ability of independent thought. You two are merely parrots.

To be crystal clear, then ... this, um, is your way of APPROVING of Hannity ??

You've accused me, in the past, of 'parroting' Lady Thatcher. For clarity (and to perhaps bolster your 'Thatcherite' self-claimed bona fides ..) this was your way of APPROVING of my 'parroting' her .. ?


And to clarify; I don't single out conservatives "for attack," I single out idiots "for attack." You unfortunately fit that bill to a T. So, please stop being an idiot... please.

And I suppose I demonstrate my 'idiocy' when I ask you to name even ONE Leftie you have singled out for attack, as you regularly do with Conservatives here ?? After all ... if you don't single out Conservatives for attack, just 'idiots', you should find an 'idiot Leftie' you can show me you've attacked in anything like equal measure ??

I take it that you see the difficulty. If you, as a 'Conservative', can't demonstrate comparable disparagement meted out to Lefties here, (a) what does this do for your claim to be a Conservative, and (b) would your failure to prove attacks on Lefties serve as evidence that you thought they WEREN'T as deserving of them as Conservatives ??

Seems to me that you're digging yourself into a hole, my son .... it'd be far simpler, in the long run, just to admit to us the truth about yourself.

[Drummond]

You have to find a conservative to single them out. My POV is, the RINO's are the ones singling out actual conservatives here.

Conservatism is a belief and a lifestyle. NOT party policy. GOPer's are no different than Dems. Blindly following the party.

Unimpressive, to say the least.

So, to be clear on this: you think voting GOP holds no advantages over voting Dem ? Meaning that the US would be no worse off if the Democratic Party won the next Presidential election, rather than the Republicans ?

Is that your position ?

[DLT]

To be crystal clear, then ... this, um, is your way of APPROVING of Hannity ??

You've accused me, in the past, of 'parroting' Lady Thatcher. For clarity (and to perhaps bolster your 'Thatcherite' self-claimed bona fides ..) this was your way of APPROVING of my 'parroting' her .. ?



And I suppose I demonstrate my 'idiocy' when I ask you to name even ONE Leftie you have singled out for attack, as you regularly do with Conservatives here ?? After all ... if you don't single out Conservatives for attack, just 'idiots', you should find an 'idiot Leftie' you can show me you've attacked in anything like equal measure ??

I take it that you see the difficulty. If you, as a 'Conservative', can't demonstrate comparable disparagement meted out to Lefties here, (a) what does this do for your claim to be a Conservative, and (b) would your failure to prove attacks on Lefties serve as evidence that you thought they WEREN'T as deserving of them as Conservatives ??

Seems to me that you're digging yourself into a hole, my son .... it'd be far simpler, in the long run, just to admit to us the truth about yourself.

L M A O !!!

http://www.debatepolicy.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=6723&stc=1

[SassyLady]

The democratic party has taken Colorado"s "educate the idiots" campaign, nationwide. Since it worked so well in Colorado.

Have you seen the documentary? Rocky Mountain Heist with Michelle Malkin?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cROIofrDXn0

[Gunny]

So, to be clear on this: you think voting GOP holds no advantages over voting Dem ? Meaning that the US would be no worse off if the Democratic Party won the next Presidential election, rather than the Republicans ?

Is that your position ?

Not what I said, is it?

I've voted GOP since 1980. To keep the Dem's out. I understand the math. There used to be a difference between the two parties.

Explain "worse off" please.

[Gunny]

L M A O !!!

http://www.debatepolicy.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=6723&stc=1

Here's a perfect example for you @drummond.

[Shadow]

Not what I said, is it?

I've voted GOP since 1980. To keep the Dem's out. I understand the math. There used to be a difference between the two parties.

Explain "worse off" please.
Same here since 2000. Not doing it anymore. The GOP is on it's own.

[Drummond]

Not what I said, is it?

I've voted GOP since 1980. To keep the Dem's out. I understand the math. There used to be a difference between the two parties.

Explain "worse off" please.

Now I'm confused.

You voted GOP since 1980, to keep the Dem's out .... all well and good. Understood.

But you also say that 'there used to be a difference between the two parties'. Meaning, that now, there no longer is ?

One can infer from this the message that current would-be GOP voters have, now, no good reason for continuing to do so.

I posted previously:


So, to be clear on this: you think voting GOP holds no advantages over voting Dem ? Meaning that the US would be no worse off if the Democratic Party won the next Presidential election, rather than the Republicans ?

Is that your position ?

.. and your reply fails to answer my question.

I'm asking, again, for your answer.

As for 'worse off' ... it means what it says. I said, though .. 'No worse off', i.e no difference, for better or worse.

Perhaps you can clarify matters by actually answering the question I asked ?

[Drummond]

Here's a perfect example for you @drummond.

I'm far from sure what the '@' mark is supposed to mean, as you intended it. Some sort of intended shorthand protocol for discussion sites, I understand ... but as Jim has said, it isn't used here, and I'm not familiar with it. I've never seen it on a British site ... nor the handful of others I've been to from America.

Anyway, maybe it's just incidental ?

What was the point of the post, anyway ? Are you commenting on my ability to mete out such a thing ?

[Drummond]

Same here since 2000. Not doing it anymore. The GOP is on it's own.

I'm sure Obama and his people will be delighted to see this duplicated in large voting numbers ...

[Shadow]

I'm sure Obama and his people will be delighted to see this duplicated in large voting numbers ...
Not my problem. I don't owe the GOP any loyalty. So... Meh.

[jimnyc]

I'm far from sure what the '@' mark is supposed to mean, as you intended it. Some sort of intended shorthand protocol for discussion sites, I understand ... but as Jim has said, it isn't used here, and I'm not familiar with it. I've never seen it on a British site ... nor the handful of others I've been to from America.

There is an addon that can be installed, where if you posted for example @Drummond, you would get a notification that someone mentioned you in a post/thread. This is a way of getting someone to a thread. I never liked it the places I've seen it and I think it spits out unnecessary notifications. Maybe on a much larger board it can be useful, but not here.

[Drummond]

Not my problem. I don't owe the GOP any loyalty. So... Meh.

Just as you wish, Shadow .. to each their own. I'm just making the rather obvious point that this, on a large scale, can act against Conservative interests. I'm not trying to 'recruit' you to my point of view, in case you thought otherwise.

Have a nice day.

[Drummond]

There is an addon that can be installed, where if you posted for example @Drummond, you would get a notification that someone mentioned you in a post/thread. This is a way of getting someone to a thread. I never liked it the places I've seen it and I think it spits out unnecessary notifications. Maybe on a much larger board it can be useful, but not here.

Ah, I see. Thanks for the info. An attention-grabbing device, then.

And I see your argument.

[fj1200]

To be crystal clear, then ... this, um, is your way of APPROVING of Hannity ??

You've accused me, in the past, of 'parroting' Lady Thatcher. For clarity (and to perhaps bolster your 'Thatcherite' self-claimed bona fides ..) this was your way of APPROVING of my 'parroting' her .. ?

A dictionary would be helpful for you to understand what words mean. A parrot can say things but that doesn't mean it understands what it says; that sums you up quite well. I can appreciate when Hannity says conservative things but that doesn't necessarily mean he isn't a hack at his job. He is far from a conservative thinker.


And I suppose I demonstrate my 'idiocy' when I ask you to name even ONE Leftie you have singled out for attack, as you regularly do with Conservatives here ?? After all ... if you don't single out Conservatives for attack, just 'idiots', you should find an 'idiot Leftie' you can show me you've attacked in anything like equal measure ??

I take it that you see the difficulty. If you, as a 'Conservative', can't demonstrate comparable disparagement meted out to Lefties here, (a) what does this do for your claim to be a Conservative, and (b) would your failure to prove attacks on Lefties serve as evidence that you thought they WEREN'T as deserving of them as Conservatives ??

Seems to me that you're digging yourself into a hole, my son .... it'd be far simpler, in the long run, just to admit to us the truth about yourself.

Your premise is based on ignorance as per usual. When any idiot makes an argument they don't understand or is poorly thought out, they should be called on it. But you're probably of the mindset that there are actual lefties here on a daily basis. But overall I give you a 'C' for effort in attempting to deflect the argument away from your failure of pointing out my "leftie-ism." ;)

[fj1200]

I'm asking, again, for your answer.

As for 'worse off' ... it means what it says. I said, though .. 'No worse off', i.e no difference, for better or worse.

Mindlessly granting your vote to a party that doesn't reflect your views means that said party doesn't have to work for your vote and can easily slide left knowing that it has the right "locked up." Or that's the argument and shown in 2006 when the Republicans lost after not governing as conservatives after Bush won. Hence "worse off" when all that's left is two big government options.

[Gunny]

I'm sure Obama and his people will be delighted to see this duplicated in large voting numbers ...

They've been very happy with it.

[Drummond]

A dictionary would be helpful for you to understand what words mean. A parrot can say things but that doesn't mean it understands what it says; that sums you up quite well. I can appreciate when Hannity says conservative things but that doesn't necessarily mean he isn't a hack at his job. He is far from a conservative thinker.

Your premise is based on ignorance as per usual. When any idiot makes an argument they don't understand or is poorly thought out, they should be called on it. But you're probably of the mindset that there are actual lefties here on a daily basis. But overall I give you a 'C' for effort in attempting to deflect the argument away from your failure of pointing out my "leftie-ism." ;)

Actually, I've no need to answer any of this. As I type, just a few minutes previously I'd finished another reply to you, one where you show your lack of understanding of Conservative pragmatism (a VERY odd mistake to make, if you seriously suggest you're a Conservative yourself !!!!) .. and a lack of understanding, or appreciation, of Margaret Thatcher's own pragmatism.

If anyone's premise is rooted in ignorance, FJ, it is YOUR ignorance that's the real issue.

My other reply, I believe, makes that point with crystal clarity. And if you care to doubt that conclusion, take it up with Britain's CURRENT PRIME MINISTER, whose OWN words prove yours to be an almighty load of rot !!

I believe your real problem is that you're a Leftie who's doing his level best to try and understand the Conservative mindset ... and failing miserably, since you don't share it yourself. Since that's so, it isn't really my task to prove you to be a Leftie.

No, such a cause is better served by my sitting back and just pointing out when YOU prove that, YOURSELF. As, indeed, you did just a short time ago.

[Drummond]

They've been very happy with it.

... and, I strongly suspect, will continue to be. Unless the only Party with a proper chance of defeating the Dems is given the opportunity, the means, to do so.

[Drummond]

Mindlessly granting your vote to a party that doesn't reflect your views means that said party doesn't have to work for your vote and can easily slide left knowing that it has the right "locked up." Or that's the argument and shown in 2006 when the Republicans lost after not governing as conservatives after Bush won. Hence "worse off" when all that's left is two big government options.

You know, if it was ONLY the integrity of the GOP that had to be considered ... I have to concede that your argument has a certain soundness to it (unusual for you, but heyy, I'll give credit where it's due).

But that's only a part of the picture, as I'm sure we all know. The fact is - and I'm growing just a little weary of saying it - that a vote which the GOP doesn't get, is also a vote which their opposition doesn't have to overcome and 'better' in its own tally. If GOP voters stay away from polling booths in large numbers, but Dem voters basically turn up and vote themselves ... even if the number is actually reduced, by a more moderate amount ... then a Dem victory can ride on the back of GOP failure.

So the question becomes ... just how FAR to the Left do you insist that America goes - through failure to fend off that outcome ?

[Gunny]

... and, I strongly suspect, will continue to be. Unless the only Party with a proper chance of defeating the Dems is given the opportunity, the means, to do so.

You mean vote for someone I could care less about and doesn't represent me just to beat the Dems?

Been there, done that. Bitched at people all over the internet for it. The fact is though, the madness has to stop.

[fj1200]

You know, if it was ONLY the integrity of the GOP that had to be considered ... I have to concede that your argument has a certain soundness to it (unusual for you, but heyy, I'll give credit where it's due).

But that's only a part of the picture, as I'm sure we all know. The fact is - and I'm growing just a little weary of saying it - that a vote which the GOP doesn't get, is also a vote which their opposition doesn't have to overcome and 'better' in its own tally. If GOP voters stay away from polling booths in large numbers, but Dem voters basically turn up and vote themselves ... even if the number is actually reduced, by a more moderate amount ... then a Dem victory can ride on the back of GOP failure.

So the question becomes ... just how FAR to the Left do you insist that America goes - through failure to fend off that outcome ?

Then stop saying it because nobody disagrees with it. The issue is not how far left the US goes because under your plan we get there anyway. If the GOP no longer gets their gimme votes then they need to react and actually espouse some conservative values, and govern that way, so that we can stop the slide.

[fj1200]

Actually, I've no need to answer any of this. As I type, just a few minutes previously I'd finished another reply to you...
:blah:

I'll try and keep you getting pwned to each particular thread and not have to rehash why you're getting thrashed all over the place. You're welcome. :)

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

... and, I strongly suspect, will continue to be. Unless the only Party with a proper chance of defeating the Dems is given the opportunity, the means, to do so.

We have two evils in this nation's political arena, the two parties that both seek power.
Thus we have by default two evils and one is the lesser evil. Currently the lib/dem/socialist playbooks teaches its followers to to spread the insane philosophy of why continue to vote Republican when they are now so much like us! As if it makes sense to abandon the lesser evil so the greater prevails. This tactics has cost the Republicans many important elections but one never sees it played in reverse!
That is because the dems are more hardcore/realistic in their approach to winning..
Also far, far more cleverly corrupt and deceitful.
Dem operatives(PAID) are all over the internet now preaching that insane philosophy of just let the greater evil win!!!!!
Fools that haven't an ounce of integrity IMHO...-TYR

[tailfins]

A conservative is someone who continues to stupidly vote against their own best interests, like most morons that vote Republican. A conservative is too stupid to know that when they vote Republican in today's America, they are voting to give control of government to radical right wing extremists.

A liberal is someone who wants to limit federal government control over our lives, and ergo, to NOT vote in fascist, right wing Republicans.
Which one are you?

What you actually describe is the corporatists in both parties. The most obvious corporatist policies are flooding the labor market with obedient populations from repressive cultures and the movement to allow strict non-compete agreements.

[Drummond]

I've got one overall comment to make.

Those who think that the way ahead is to work to reform the GOP, in the current situation of their OPPOSITION being in power, will KEEP that opposition in their position of power for as long as any of that remains ongoing.

The UK has its own example to offer, from its own political past.

Margaret Thatcher enjoyed landslide victory after landslide victory, becoming the longest serving PM of the 20th century. YES, this was in large measure because her pragmatic Conservative measures worked, and people could measure the progress made. But there's more to it than that ...

Their opposition, the Labour Party, fractured from within. The 1979 election was a rejection of Left-wing wreckage .. which Labour symbolised in its own Left-wing character. Labour did not reform -- it chose Michael Foot as its leader, and remained Left-wing to an unacceptable degree.

There were some within Labour who were desperate to make the Party electable once more. So - New Labour, after very considerable infighting, was born. People, the media, picked up on this battle 'for Labour's soul', but they REMAINED unelectable for as long as the reforming wing kept the Party in flux. So it was that the Conservatives kept winning elections by massive majorities.

'New Labour', a more Right-wing reincarnation of Labour, had to triumph ... had to present clear and stable leadership, they HAD to be firmly in charge, before they became electable.

So it is with your GOP problem. Infighting will be the way of it before any reform emerges. It has to both begin, then end, there needs to be proof of stability - ALL BEFORE anyone will entrust them with real power.

So I ask: for how long do you want the GOP incapable of defeating the Dems ? Because if you do this the 'British' way, you keep the Dems in power for at least a further DECADE.

- How much thanks will the Left owe you for giving them that much latitude to do their worst ?????

[Drummond]

I'll try and keep you getting pwned to each particular thread and not have to rehash why you're getting thrashed all over the place. You're welcome. :)

A sure sign you're a Leftie, FJ ... delusion dominates your thinking. You just can't break free of it.

[fj1200]

A sure sign you're a Leftie, FJ ... delusion dominates your thinking. You just can't break free of it.

Constantly pwning you is not a sign of being a leftie. Perhaps if you demonstrated that you have the mental capacity to have a discussion without succumbing to your imagination and leftie paranoia we could get somewhere. :)