consevative correctness

[blackhawk]

Several of the post on the first page highlight the idiocy of both parties someone on the right calls Hillary Clinton hildibeast and the left gives us the war on women talking point yet these same war on women crusaders are also the ones who call Sarah Palin every vile name they can think of. When the Republican staffer made her tasteless and low class comments about how the Obama daughters were dressed the left was outraged children are off limits and they should be and fyi most of the right was fine with the staffers comments lets go back a few years Bristol Palin is pregnant slut, tramp, whore just a few of the names she is called by the left of course then the right is outraged and the left was finding ways to justify those comments. The ugly truth is most are fine with verbal attacks on women and politicians children as long as it's someone you disagree with.

 

[daws101]

-Classical Liberalism vs. Modern Liberalism
What's the best way to secure everyone's mastery over his or her own destiny?
Sheldon Richman | August 12, 2012
In The Future of Liberalism (2009), Alan Wolfe writes that the true heirs to the liberalism of John Locke, Adam Smith, and Thomas Jefferson are not today’s classical liberals (libertarians), but rather the other kind of liberals, those who would use government power to assure autonomy and equality for all. Such “modern liberalism,” for Wolfe, is simply an updating of the original: In the eighteenth century, political power crushed autonomy and equality, requiring a free market as the antidote; now private corporate power under capitalism does the same, but this time the remedy is active government.
Early in his book Wolfe writes:
The core substantive principle of liberalism is this: As many people as possible should have as much say as is feasible over the direction their lives will take. Expressed in this form, liberalism, as in the days of John Locke, is committed both to liberty and to equality. . . . [Emphasis in original.]
With respect to liberty, liberals want for the person what Thomas Jefferson wanted for the country: independence. Dependency, for liberals, cripples. . . . When we have no choice but to accept someone else’s power over us, we fail to think for ourselves, are confined to conditions of existence resembling an endless struggle for survival, are unable to plan for the future, and cannot posses elementary human dignity. The autonomous life is therefore the best life. We have the potential, and are therefore responsible for realizing it, to be masters of our own destiny.
This sounds pretty good, no? Being subject to another’s arbitrary will clashes with the liberal spirit, which projects the ideal of mastery of one’s destiny even as one cooperates with others for mutual benefit.

Classical Liberalism vs. Modern Liberalism - Reason.com

remember the above when fascists like the hawk make intentional misrepresentations like this:" Yes, classical liberalism or libertarian. They were not draconian statist/progressive idiots. Don't try to equate yourselves to them."- the hawk post #31

So the far left goes to a far left blog site that they believe without question or hesitation and thus proving my original comments.

btw you have no original comments or thoughts..
that would be in diametric opposition to conservative norms and values..

 

[daws101]

Several of the post on the first page highlight the idiocy of both parties someone on the right calls Hillary Clinton hildibeast and the left gives us the war on women talking point yet these same war on women crusaders are also the ones who call Sarah Palin every vile name they can think of. When the Republican staffer made her tasteless and low class comments about how the Obama daughters were dressed the left was outraged children are off limits and they should be and fyi most of the right was fine with the staffers comments lets go back a few years Bristol Palin is pregnant slut, tramp, whore just a few of the names she is called by the left of course then the right is outraged and the left was finding ways to justify those comments. The ugly truth is most are fine with verbal attacks on women and politicians children as long as it's someone you disagree with.

the award for best rationalization in a thread goes to ....

 

[konradv]

Once again the irony impaired far left drones proves my comments!

Blah, blah,blah far left done, blah, blah,blah, irony impaired, blah,blah, blah. ***YAWN***

 

[blackhawk]

Several of the post on the first page highlight the idiocy of both parties someone on the right calls Hillary Clinton hildibeast and the left gives us the war on women talking point yet these same war on women crusaders are also the ones who call Sarah Palin every vile name they can think of. When the Republican staffer made her tasteless and low class comments about how the Obama daughters were dressed the left was outraged children are off limits and they should be and fyi most of the right was fine with the staffers comments lets go back a few years Bristol Palin is pregnant slut, tramp, whore just a few of the names she is called by the left of course then the right is outraged and the left was finding ways to justify those comments. The ugly truth is most are fine with verbal attacks on women and politicians children as long as it's someone you disagree with.

the award for best rationalization in a thread goes to ....

The award for not disputing any of it goes to. And thank you for proving my point.

 

[JoeNormal]

Conservative correctness
From RationalWiki

with all the conservative whining about political correctness being a democrat's invention ,the below needed to be posted.


Conservative correctness ("CC"), also known as patriotic correctness ("PC"),[1] is a term referring to a brand of political correctness practiced by conservatives. Yes, seriously.
Whereas political correctness attempts to minimize offense through the rebranding of certain words and terms to be neutral or inclusive, its conservative counterpart rebrands terms to include extreme political bias. Concepts which are liked are Americanized or linked with positive thoughts such as freedom or liberty, while the disliked terms are rebranded in the most negative light possible (describing homosexuality as an "unnatural vice," for example). "CC" is especially hilarious considering that the most heated decrying of "PC" usually comes from conservatives.
The first recorded uses were made by Michael Fauntroy[2] and Bill Scher.[3]

These are the groups that have overused and cheapened words like liberty and freedom to the point that you'd expect to find them at a used car lot.

 

[daveman]

The only PC people I find these days are these little reactionaries. Say Sarah Palin is a moron and you'd swear they thought you just called the Virgin Mary a whore.

virgin Mary was not a virgin but not a whore.
Sara Palin on the other hand is a whore's whore.

Such progressive misogyny.

 

[theHawk]

Self reliant, liberal, welfare
Personal freedom, liberal, only if I agree
Respect for others, liberal, yeah what do you call a successful black man
Protect your family, liberal, yeah the way Brown was raised. Opposite
Help your neighbor, liberal, burn and loot!

wake up Dorothy! you're having that KKK dream again.

That would also be the democrat party. Sorry in liberalism there is no freedom.

Liberalism is what founded this nation dumbass.

Yes, classical liberalism or libertarian. They were not draconian statist/progressive idiots. Don't try to equate yourselves to them.

Liberalism then is liberalism now dumbass, we are just 230 years smarter and the times have changed. And they were nothing like Libertarians, who are little more than selfish children.

LOL, do you have anything to back that up? Of course not. Just a self proclaimed "we're 230 years smarter". Yea, all you anti-cop, race baiting, Christian-bashing, Statist loving progressives are "smarter" than the founding fathers. The founding fathers, that we're mostly very religious Christians, yet didn't want to force their beliefs on everyone else through law. That is the polar opposite of modern day "liberals", who are mostly atheist, and want to force everyone to think like them, enforced by a strong State.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

wake up Dorothy! you're having that KKK dream again.

That would also be the democrat party. Sorry in liberalism there is no freedom.

Liberalism is what founded this nation dumbass.

Yes, classical liberalism or libertarian. They were not draconian statist/progressive idiots. Don't try to equate yourselves to them.

Liberalism then is liberalism now dumbass, we are just 230 years smarter and the times have changed. And they were nothing like Libertarians, who are little more than selfish children.

LOL, do you have anything to back that up? Of course not. Just a self proclaimed "we're 230 years smarter". Yea, all you anti-cop, race baiting, Christian-bashing, Statist loving progressives are "smarter" than the founding fathers. The founding fathers, that we're mostly very religious Christians, yet didn't want to force their beliefs on everyone else through law. That is the polar opposite of modern day "liberals", who are mostly atheist, and want to force everyone to think like them, enforced by a strong State.

Yep, you're as dumb as dog shit. Carry on...

 

[daws101]

Several of the post on the first page highlight the idiocy of both parties someone on the right calls Hillary Clinton hildibeast and the left gives us the war on women talking point yet these same war on women crusaders are also the ones who call Sarah Palin every vile name they can think of. When the Republican staffer made her tasteless and low class comments about how the Obama daughters were dressed the left was outraged children are off limits and they should be and fyi most of the right was fine with the staffers comments lets go back a few years Bristol Palin is pregnant slut, tramp, whore just a few of the names she is called by the left of course then the right is outraged and the left was finding ways to justify those comments. The ugly truth is most are fine with verbal attacks on women and politicians children as long as it's someone you disagree with.

the award for best rationalization in a thread goes to ....

The award for not disputing any of it goes to. And thank you for proving my point.

nothing to dispute ...It would useless to dispute that bullshit

 

[daws101]

The only PC people I find these days are these little reactionaries. Say Sarah Palin is a moron and you'd swear they thought you just called the Virgin Mary a whore.

virgin Mary was not a virgin but not a whore.
Sara Palin on the other hand is a whore's whore.

Such progressive misogyny.

a fact is still a fact.

 

[daws101]

wake up Dorothy! you're having that KKK dream again.

That would also be the democrat party. Sorry in liberalism there is no freedom.

Liberalism is what founded this nation dumbass.

Yes, classical liberalism or libertarian. They were not draconian statist/progressive idiots. Don't try to equate yourselves to them.

Liberalism then is liberalism now dumbass, we are just 230 years smarter and the times have changed. And they were nothing like Libertarians, who are little more than selfish children.

LOL, do you have anything to back that up? Of course not. Just a self proclaimed "we're 230 years smarter". Yea, all you anti-cop, race baiting, Christian-bashing, Statist loving progressives are "smarter" than the founding fathers. The founding fathers, that we're mostly very religious Christians, yet didn't want to force their beliefs on everyone else through law. That is the polar opposite of modern day "liberals", who are mostly atheist, and want to force everyone to think like them, enforced by a strong State.

more right wing fascist propaganda!


None of the Founding Fathers were atheists. Most of the Founders were Deists, which is to say they thought the universe had a creator, but that he does not concern himself with the daily lives of humans, and does not directly communicate with humans, either by revelation or by sacred books. They spoke often of God, (Nature's God or the God of Nature), but this was not the God of the bible. They did not deny that there was a person called Jesus, and praised him for his benevolent teachings, but they flatly denied his divinity. Some people speculate that if Charles Darwin had lived a century earlier, the Founding Fathers would have had a basis for accepting naturalistic origins of life, and they would have been atheists. We'll never know; but by reading their own writings, it's clear that most of them were opposed to the bible, and the teachings of Christianity in particular.
Yes, there were Christian men among the Founders. Just as Congress removed Thomas Jefferson's words that condemned the practice of slavery in the colonies, they also altered his wording regarding equal rights. His original wording is here in blue italics: "All men are created equal and independent. From that equal creation they derive rights inherent and inalienable." Congress changed that phrase, increasing its religious overtones: "All men are created equal. They are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights." But we are not governed by the Declaration of Independence-- it is a historical document, not a constitutional one.

Our Founding Fathers Were NOT Christians

 

[daveman]

The only PC people I find these days are these little reactionaries. Say Sarah Palin is a moron and you'd swear they thought you just called the Virgin Mary a whore.

virgin Mary was not a virgin but not a whore.
Sara Palin on the other hand is a whore's whore.

Such progressive misogyny.

a fact is still a fact.

Your "facts" are opinions based on irrational hatred.

 

[daws101]

The only PC people I find these days are these little reactionaries. Say Sarah Palin is a moron and you'd swear they thought you just called the Virgin Mary a whore.

virgin Mary was not a virgin but not a whore.
Sara Palin on the other hand is a whore's whore.

Such progressive misogyny.

a fact is still a fact.

Your "facts" are opinions based on irrational hatred.

ah... no, that's you guys.....

 

[Two Thumbs]

Conservative correctness
From RationalWiki

with all the conservative whining about political correctness being a democrat's invention ,the below needed to be posted.


Conservative correctness ("CC"), also known as patriotic correctness ("PC"),[1] is a term referring to a brand of political correctness practiced by conservatives. Yes, seriously.
Whereas political correctness attempts to minimize offense through the rebranding of certain words and terms to be neutral or inclusive, its conservative counterpart rebrands terms to include extreme political bias. Concepts which are liked are Americanized or linked with positive thoughts such as freedom or liberty, while the disliked terms are rebranded in the most negative light possible (describing homosexuality as an "unnatural vice," for example). "CC" is especially hilarious considering that the most heated decrying of "PC" usually comes from conservatives.
The first recorded uses were made by Michael Fauntroy[2] and Bill Scher.[3]

you used Two examples, I have heard of neither

shame when a leftist thinks he hit one outta the park but was never even at the game

 

[daws101]

Conservative correctness
From RationalWiki

with all the conservative whining about political correctness being a democrat's invention ,the below needed to be posted.


Conservative correctness ("CC"), also known as patriotic correctness ("PC"),[1] is a term referring to a brand of political correctness practiced by conservatives. Yes, seriously.
Whereas political correctness attempts to minimize offense through the rebranding of certain words and terms to be neutral or inclusive, its conservative counterpart rebrands terms to include extreme political bias. Concepts which are liked are Americanized or linked with positive thoughts such as freedom or liberty, while the disliked terms are rebranded in the most negative light possible (describing homosexuality as an "unnatural vice," for example). "CC" is especially hilarious considering that the most heated decrying of "PC" usually comes from conservatives.
The first recorded uses were made by Michael Fauntroy[2] and Bill Scher.[3]

you used Two examples, I have heard of neither

shame when a leftist thinks he hit one outta the park but was never even at the game

and just because you have never heard of something does not make it any less factually.
it does however reflect your intentional ignorance.
nor did I think I was hitting one outta the park.
I posted some facts and watched as you folks as usual, went batshit all by yourselves.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The only PC people I find these days are these little reactionaries. Say Sarah Palin is a moron and you'd swear they thought you just called the Virgin Mary a whore.

No, not Jake's sock account

No, Sir

 

[daws101]

The only PC people I find these days are these little reactionaries. Say Sarah Palin is a moron and you'd swear they thought you just called the Virgin Mary a whore.

No, not Jake's sock account

No, Sir

Jake wears no socks!

 

[bripat9643]

Is that why liberals are ashamed of our founding fathers?

What asshole told you that, and why are you so stupid that you believed them?

Many liberals like to derogate and dismiss our Founders who owned slaves. The same way right wingers like to dismiss Martin Luther King's achievements because he was a serial adulterer.

Name them? Oh right, you can't. Carry on.

I see. You are the only person on this forum who has never heard a left winger use the ownership of slaves to derogate our Founders.

Well they did own slaves, and they fucked them which is rape since livestock can't grant consent, and they also wrote All Men Are Created Equal while treating other men as property. If the truth hurts, so be it, it's still true. The were men, not gods or saints, but they were Liberal men who founded the nation using the ideals of Liberalism and there's no reason to be ashamed about that, and I'm not but you are.

So liberals condone slavery and rape?

 

[daws101]

What asshole told you that, and why are you so stupid that you believed them?

Many liberals like to derogate and dismiss our Founders who owned slaves. The same way right wingers like to dismiss Martin Luther King's achievements because he was a serial adulterer.

Name them? Oh right, you can't. Carry on.

I see. You are the only person on this forum who has never heard a left winger use the ownership of slaves to derogate our Founders.

Well they did own slaves, and they fucked them which is rape since livestock can't grant consent, and they also wrote All Men Are Created Equal while treating other men as property. If the truth hurts, so be it, it's still true. The were men, not gods or saints, but they were Liberal men who founded the nation using the ideals of Liberalism and there's no reason to be ashamed about that, and I'm not but you are.

So liberals condone slavery and rape?

so did conservatives .