What makes me a liberal?

[pegwinn]

Originally posted by acludem
I get asked that question a lot, what makes you a liberal? The answer I've come up with is this: .......................... I am a liberal...and I'm damn proud of it.
acludem

Conservative: Basically you are a person who is happy with how it is. You are the traditional values guys. You oppose change, the more radical, the more opposition you will muster. Obviously political conservatives are different than dictionary conservatives. http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=conservative&r=67

Liberal: Basically you want to make changes and loosen things up. Traditional values are, well, lets just say that you are tolerant of new ideas. Obviously political liberals are different than dictionary liberals. http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=liberal&r=67

Radical: When it comes to change, you are a liberal on steroids. To you, destroying the building to save the architects dream isn't such a bad idea. Read about it here. http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=radical&r=67

Realist: What most claim to be and few are. True realists stay away from extreme labels if possible. They attempt to deal with the situation as it exists at the moment. They may have long term liberal or conservative ideals, but they live in the present and deal with it in a pragmatic and realistic way. Sometimes this means that they must do something on the spur of the moment that they wish later they'd had more time to think about. Read here: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=realist&r=67

Now that we've identified the terms: Are you really what you think you are? Here's a pop quiz;

You encounter an apparently homeless person on the street. Because of something or other you become engaged in a conversation with him. You really want to help, what did you say to him:

Go to the shelters, get fed, look for work, things will get better. -or-
I didn't talk to him. He's at best a bum, or at worst a criminal preying on my good nature. -or-
I told him to join the Army for 2-4 years to learn a trade, have a place to sleep, and a steady paycheck so he can break whatever got a grip on him and made him homeless in the first place.

A person is under the influence of a mind-altering substance. He operated a piece of machinery that caused the death of another person. You believe:

It was an accident. He didn't intend for it to happen. It is a tragic accident. He should learn from it and move on. -or-
He killed someone. The dead cannot come back. Apply the death penalty. -or-
He knowingly impaired himself. That means he is as responsible for his actions as if he had been unimpaired. So this accident is really manslaughter, and he should get his therapy in a prison somewhere.

A middle class White male cannot get financial aid for college. You believe.
Financial aid should be reserved based on need only. Obviously he doesn't need it. -or-
Financial aid should be disbursed based on race or affiliation. White males are in the payback stage. Its not personal, its historical. -or-
The question is racist. Move on.

A poor Hispanic male cannot get financial aid for college. You believe.
Financial aid should be reserved based on need only. Obviously he doesn't need it. -or-
Financial aid should be disbursed based on race or affiliation. As long as he's a citizen, he should've gotten aid. We need diversity. -or-
The question is racist. Move on.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

This whole post is liberal crap. The tricks employed are 1.defining all terms and 2. controlling all options.

Your definition of conservatives as people who just fear change, and muster more resistance relative to the degree of change is totally wrong. The whole thing is ill-conceived and partisan, designed to normalize liberalism.

Good day to you.

Go play with the other commies.

 

[insein]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
This whole post is liberal crap. The tricks employed are 1.defining all terms and 2. controlling all options.

Your definition of conservatives as people who just fear change, and muster more resistance relative to the degree of change is totally wrong. The whole thing is ill-conceived and partisan, designed to normalize liberalism.

Good day to you.

Go play with the other commies.

Actually RWA, a conservative by definition favors traditional values and tends to oppose change.

con·ser·va·tive ( P ) Pronunciation Key (kn-sûrv-tv)
adj.
Favoring traditional views and values; tending to oppose change.
Traditional or restrained in style: a conservative dark suit.
Moderate; cautious: a conservative estimate.

Of or relating to the political philosophy of conservatism.
Belonging to a conservative party, group, or movement

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=conservative

Not everything is a leftwing conspiracy.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by insein
Actually RWA, a conservative by definition favors traditional values and tends to oppose change.



http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=conservative

Not everything is a leftwing conspiracy.

But in the context of modern political parties that definition is not exactly accurate.

Just as the dictionary definition of "liberal" is stuff like open minded and open to new ideas, but we KNOW it's really just thinly veiled socialism and anti americanism. The dictionary definitions are not relevant because these words have come to mean slightly different things, in actual usage. She's using dictionary definitions when that is not the reality of what people actually are. Liberals are not open minded; they've been working off the same playbook of lies and villainization for the last 50 years. Hows that progressive? It's not. It's assinine.

 

[insein]

lib·er·al ( P ) Pronunciation Key (lbr-l, lbrl)
adj.

Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry.
Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded.
Of, relating to, or characteristic of liberalism.
Liberal Of, designating, or characteristic of a political party founded on or associated with principles of social and political liberalism, especially in Great Britain, Canada, and the United States.

That describes a good majority. I'd question the free from bigotry in todays context. Also in the leadership of the Liberals (namely lead Dems) they certainly don't follow this definition to the letter. Especially on the tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others.

But generally its true.

 

[pegwinn]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
This whole post is liberal crap. (snip)

The score is one to one.

One stupid, knee jerk reaction to one measured response. That was the one following the above quote.

Updates as they occur..........

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
But in the context of modern political parties that definition is not exactly accurate.

Just as the dictionary definition of "liberal" is stuff like open minded and open to new ideas, but we KNOW it's really just thinly veiled socialism and anti americanism. The dictionary definitions are not relevant because these words have come to mean slightly different things, in actual usage. She's using dictionary definitions when that is not the reality of what people actually are. Liberals are not open minded; they've been working off the same playbook of lies and villainization for the last 50 years. Hows that progressive? It's not. It's assinine.

RWA, just for the record, my user name is my first two initials and my last name. I'm Phil. No tits here. Next, I didn't mention political parties did I? I was looking at labels and how individuals act. Individuals congregate and become parties and then the stupidity begins. Not only didn't you answer the questions, you didn't offer any other alternatives either.

Tag, you're it

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by pegwinn
The score is one to one.

One stupid, knee jerk reaction to one measured response. That was the one following the above quote.

Updates as they occur..........





RWA, just for the record, my user name is my first two initials and my last name. I'm Phil. No tits here. Next, I didn't mention political parties did I? I was looking at labels and how individuals act. Individuals congregate and become parties and then the stupidity begins. Not only didn't you answer the questions, you didn't offer any other alternatives either.

Tag, you're it

Yes. You were using inaccurate labels though. That's all. And that error invalidated all else.

It seems you have a cynical attitude towards combined human effort. Go live in the woods, unabomber! Are you a neoluddite?

 

[pegwinn]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
Yes. You were using inaccurate labels though. That's all. And that error invalidated all else.

It seems you have a cynical attitude towards combined human effort. Go live in the woods, unabomber! Are you a neoluddite?

Neoluddite? According to this? http://www.usemod.com/cgi-bin/mb.pl?NeoLuddite Nah, not me.

I admit to a cynical attitude. That keeps me from blindly accepting everything a certain point of view puts out. The alleged inaccuracy of the labels is due to your failure to click the dictionary links and apply common sense.

Tag, you're it.

 

[DKSuddeth]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
Your definition of conservatives as people who just fear change, and muster more resistance relative to the degree of change is totally wrong. The whole thing is ill-conceived and partisan, designed to normalize liberalism.

and this is any different than you trying to re-write the dictionary definition of 'vegetarian'?

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
and this is any different than you trying to re-write the dictionary definition of 'vegetarian'?

That was a joke. This guys serious about substituting dictionary definitions to for what these groups actually believe.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by pegwinn
The alleged inaccuracy of the labels is due to your failure to click the dictionary links and apply common sense.

Tag, you're it. [/B]

No. The labels are inaccurate as descriptors of what the groups believe. Liberals are not open minded, and in fact they're very resistant to change from the status quo of failed liberal policies. Look at their unwillingness to change anything about public schools, for instance. Conservatives, on the other hand, want lots of changes, from a voucher system for schools, to privatization of anything that can reasonably be privatized. So your labels are just wrong, yet you continue to fancy them useful.

 

[pegwinn]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
That was a joke. This guys serious about substituting dictionary definitions to for what these groups actually believe.

Still haven't figured out the post yet?

Here's a hint.......It's about people and labels and individual thought Lets try to move on now.

At least you got the guy part right

Tag, you're it

 

[Cousin Vinnie]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
Liberalism is about curtailing freedoms on the grounds that free societies are unfair because in free societies people excel at different rates, and people excelling at different rates is evil. Liberalism is primarily based on envy, and power acquisition through fear mongering, misrepresentation, and historical revisionism.

I believe the first statement is what makes us liberals look bad in many cases. I can't say it's true exactly the way said here, but programs that Democrats support sure make this statement sound true and I kind of agree.

The second statement isn't really true though, especially liberalism being based on envy. It's not envy to want to, for example, tighten the gap between the lower-class and the upper-class, which I think is the goal of liberals. Now, there's always going to be unproductive members of society, but "there are" too many people that work hard (perhaps even do the "hardest" type of work) and still end up with the short end of the stick. That's just the bottom line with that.

 

[Cousin Vinnie]

Originally posted by gop_jeff




While many conservatives are opposed to homosexuality on a moral/religious basis, I don't know any conservatives who want to kill or beat homos based on their orientation. If you want to be gay, great - go be gay. But don't tell me that you're gay and that you then deserve special treatment.

Homosexuals don't want special treatment. They just want "equal" treatment that they don't have. And I think it's right for them to go after the equality they deserve.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by pegwinn
Still haven't figured out the post yet?

Here's a hint.......It's about people and labels and individual thought Lets try to move on now.

At least you got the guy part right

Tag, you're it

You've said nothing convincing. I've bested you. Your labels were wrong, so you use their wrongness to try to destroy the concept of labels in general. There are accurate labels, however, that DO identify trends in thought, see my many threads bashing libs.

Goodday, captain wrong!

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by Cousin Vinnie
I believe the first statement is what makes us liberals look bad in many cases. I can't say it's true exactly the way said here, but programs that Democrats support sure make this statement sound true and I kind of agree.

The second statement isn't really true though, especially liberalism being based on envy. It's not envy to want to, for example, tighten the gap between the lower-class and the upper-class, which I think is the goal of liberals. Now, there's always going to be unproductive members of society, but "there are" too many people that work hard (perhaps even do the "hardest" type of work) and still end up with the short end of the stick. That's just the bottom line with that.

50% ain't bad. Especially if libs have anything to do with it. The dumbing down of america and all.

 

[pegwinn]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
You've said nothing convincing. I've bested you. Your labels were wrong, so you use their wrongness to try to destroy the concept of labels in general.

No, I provided the accepted definition of the most common labels and threw in my personal favorite (realist). You're the one who can't handle a dictionary and tried to re-define things (vegetarian right?)

There are accurate labels, however, that DO identify trends in thought, see my many threads bashing libs.

Throw in some links and I might observe. With the number of posts credited to you, you might've actually said something more than one sided stupid.

Goodday, captain wrong!

Since RWA doesn't get it, we are going to break it down kindergarten style.

Labels box you in. Labels require you to buy into a loaded black/white philosophy.
Personally, I'd think you would not want to be so limited, so one dimensional.

Once you identify yourself as a Right Winger or Left Winger or Debra Winger, you are committed.
You can't change your mind or acknowledge that there might be other ways.

Poor guy. My sympathies.

Tag, you're still it.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by pegwinn
No, I provided the accepted definition of the most common labels and threw in my personal favorite (realist). You're the one who can't handle a dictionary and tried to re-define things (vegetarian right?) Throw in some links and I might observe. With the number of posts credited to you, you might've actually said something more than one sided stupid.



Since RWA doesn't get it, we are going to break it down kindergarten style.

Labels box you in. Labels require you to buy into a loaded black/white philosophy.
Personally, I'd think you would not want to be so limited, so one dimensional.

Once you identify yourself as a Right Winger or Left Winger or Debra Winger, you are committed.
You can't change your mind or acknowledge that there might be other ways.

Poor guy. My sympathies.

Tag, you're still it.

The dictionary definitions of those terms are not accurate. SO that's wrong. Then you say "labels only box you in". That's wrong too. Some labels are useful and can be accurate; your wrong ones, of course, are always useless.

You can say you're right and stomp around like a big man and be condescending, but we see you for what you are , a fraud and a poser.

 

[pegwinn]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
The dictionary definitions of those terms are not accurate. SO that's wrong. Then you say "labels only box you in". That's wrong too. Some labels are useful and can be accurate; your wrong ones, of course, are always useless.

You can say you're right and stomp around like a big man and be condescending, but we see you for what you are , a fraud and a poser.

Please post the link where I may peruse the RWA dictionary. I wanna see your labels (the usefull and accurate ones)

Tag (but U know that by now)

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by pegwinn
Please post the link where I may peruse the RWA dictionary. I wanna see your labels (the usefull and accurate ones)

Tag (but U know that by now)

The truth must be revealed slowly, grasshopper. An instantaneous illumination could result in blindness. The truth will reveal itself to you slowly, if you are patient, and read my posts and learn, and do not struggle.

Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.