When is it good to be a liberal?

[skookerasbil]

you purposely miss the point. Liberals are not measuring success in election cycles, but in decades and centuries. The list of accomplishments I laid out were ALL opposed by conservatives and they were ALL enacted and will never be repealed. You may win an election, but history has shown that, even when conservatives are in control of all three branches of government, they are incapable of dismantling what has been put in place by progressive liberalism. Like I said, all you can do is stall and delay in the short term... the sweep of history in this nation shows the continuing triumph of progressive liberalism against conservatism... that's just fact.

That comes out of Rosseiu and the Hegallians philosophers of germany.

I am not suggesting any dialectic process is in play here. I merely state the obvious fact that society has moved in a liberal progressive direction despite the efforts of conservatives to change its direction. YOu cannot honestly deny that, can you?

Yeah.........but that sentiment is analogous to the New York Islander hockey fan going to a celebration of the Stanley Cups won in the early 1980's, and meanwhile, virtually the whole team is now in wheelchairs and nobody really cares anymore because the team hasnt done sh!t in 30 years, but still the fan can go and pump his chest out


Why are you falling all over yourself posting up 6X in the last 3 pages about "the unabated march of the liberal progressives". Wouldnt be because it is obvuious that the worm is turning, would it s0n?? Your 12,000 posts would suggest so (HOLY MOTHER OF GOD..........is that not confidence in your position or what??.).............

Indeed, like the progressive, the conservative can hang his hat on its contributions in the ebb and flow of politics in any civilized society. The "founders" and the "anti-founders" continue to shape American society...........some more, some less, depending on the decade. But what of the future? IDK.......its cool to sit around and get all sentimental about the past 100 years, but really, is it not an exercise in navel contemplation when it gets right down to it?

Margaret Thatcher once said it best..........."socialism is a wonderful thing until you run out of other peoples money".

Thats the dynamic that is changing as we speak. There were no consequences for big ass spending on mega-bureaucracies over the past 100 years...........at least that has been the perception of the voting public.

People cha-cha the emergence of Tea Parties, but lets call a spade a spade. For the past 50 years, who are the only ones to organize in great numbers on the Mall? Lefty k00ks..........thats it!! It is significant..........and the fact that the state run media is falling all over themseves to try and marginalize the movement is only proof of the threat it has become to modern progressivism.

Indeed it is impossible to disband large government bureaucracies due to the concept of bureaucratic inertia, but the plain fact is becomming that people are starting to realize that taxes are becomming prohibitive due to the need to maintain programs that the majority doesnt use, thus, progressivism is meeting that old deminishing returns law!!!

 

[ihopehefails]

What you are talking about is a tribe and they do band together for that reason but modern societies can't function like that because they are not composed of three hundred people who have to work together to take down a wooly mammoth to feed them collectively. They bind together for their mutual independent needs that can be provided by other unrelated members of that society. A ditch digger needs money so his need for that is supplied by someone who needs a ditch dug. These two work together without having the tribal impulse to bond with each other for their economic needs.

The days of the tribe are gone but if you wish to live like that then strip down to your underwear with your fellow 'liberals' and camp somewhere.

Oh, you are sadly misinformed there. We have only escaped from tribal dependence since the discovery of hydrocarbon energy. As that wanes, you won't be able to hide behind your gated community any longer. As municipalities continue to break down, we will all be forced into regional cohesiveness. ... You will have to come out and actually interact with different people in order to survive. Sorry. ...

There goes your "freedom to not care" without ever having to be enforced.

Duh...which is why I pay people to do things to provide things like food, water, and shelter. Nothing tribalistic about that unless someone comes along and pretends to be some great chiefton and takes our bounty and puts it into a collective pot to redistribute to the tribe. That works really well in small groups that have to pitch themselves against mother nature but since when did we as human beings have to worry about a saber tooth tiger eating us?

 

[maineman]

That comes out of Rosseiu and the Hegallians philosophers of germany.

I am not suggesting any dialectic process is in play here. I merely state the obvious fact that society has moved in a liberal progressive direction despite the efforts of conservatives to change its direction. YOu cannot honestly deny that, can you?

Yeah.........but that sentiment is analogous to the New York Islander hockey fan going to a celebration of the Stanley Cups won in the early 1980's, and meanwhile, virtually the whole team is now in wheelchairs and nobody really cares anymore because the team hasnt done sh!t in 30 years, but still the fan can go and pump his chest out


Why are you falling all over yourself posting up 6X in the last 3 pages about "the unabated march of the liberal progressives". Wouldnt be because it is obvuious that the worm is turning, would it s0n?? Your 12,000 posts would suggest so (HOLY MOTHER OF GOD..........is that not confidence in your position or what??

Indeed, like the progressive, the conservative can hang his hat on its contributions in the ebb and flow of politics in any civilized society. The "founders" and the "anti-founders" continue to shape American society...........some more, some less, depending on the decade. But what of the future? IDK.......its cool to sit around and get all sentimental about the past 100 years, but really, is it not an exercise in navel contemplation when it gets right down to it?

Margaret Thatcher once said it best..........."socialism is a wonderful thing until you run out of other peoples money".

Thats the dynamic that is changing as we speak. There were no consequences for big ass spending on mega-bureaucracies over the past 100 years...........at least that has been the perception of the voting public.

People cha-cha the emergence of Tea Parties, but lets call a spade a spade. For the past 50 years, who are the only ones to organize in great numbers on the Mall? Lefty k00ks..........thats it!! It is significant..........and the fact that the state run media is falling all over themseves to try and marginalize the movement is only proof of the threat it has become to modern progressivism.

Indeed it is impossible to disband large government bureaucracies due to the concept of bureaucratic inertia, but the plain fact is becomming that people are starting to realize that taxes are becomming prohibitive due to the need to maintain programs that the majority doesnt use, thus, progressivism is meeting that old deminishing returns law!!!

and once again... your post is devoid of FACTS. All of your PREDICTIONS about the demise of progressive liberalism are just that... you can use tea leaves, or a crystal ball or you can just pull them rudely out of your own ass, which is what you seem to have done, but they are all unproven guesses nonetheless. Wishing something would stop and actually SEEING it stop and reverse course are two different things entirely. From my perspective, watching conservatives try to stop the inexorable march or liberalism is like watching them try to stop the wind. When conservatives in America finally succeed in repealing ONE major piece of social legislation that has been passed by liberals in the past century, I'll start paying attention to your blathering. Not until.

 

[midcan5]

This is an example of the wrong question. The question should be about policy and issues and not labels. Labels allow the narrow minded easy thought, but nothing else.

Jonathan Haidt on the moral roots of liberals and conservatives | Video on TED.com



"We first kill people with our minds, before we kill them with weapons. Whatever the conflict, the enemy is always the destroyer. We're on God's side; they're barbaric. We're good, they're evil. War gives us a feeling of moral clarity that we lack at other times." Sam Keen

 

[maineman]

That comes out of Rosseiu and the Hegallians philosophers of germany.

I am not suggesting any dialectic process is in play here. I merely state the obvious fact that society has moved in a liberal progressive direction despite the efforts of conservatives to change its direction. YOu cannot honestly deny that, can you?

Of course society changes but the mechanism that makes that happen is what I disspute. Progressives like to implement change at the political level which is why their mantra for the last hundred years has been 'change' while liberals prefer change on the individual level. This kind of change happens because of the person's own choice over their own life which is independent of others and the change in politics.

regardless, society DOES change and HAS change and anyone who honestly looks at the long arc of change in America would have to conclude that the change has always been in a liberal direction and, if one would honestly look at the major events along that arc, they would also have to conclude that conservatives have always tried - always unsuccessfully - to change the direction of that arc. All your trumpeting about how things are ABOUT to change because of deficits or Obama or healthcare or this or that or any other such thing are just wishful thinking from the team that has LOST every major skirmish for the past century. As I said earlier... the arc has moved so far that conservatives are now fighting to protect programs that, fifty years ago, they were fighting to prevent. If it were a football game, we've played the last century on YOUR side of the field and the only variable is whether we will score a touchdown or a field goal or maybe even a safety when you fumble the ball in your own endzone. Liberals have been scoring points pretty much at will and conservatives still have a big goose egg on the scoreboard. When your side can even score ONE point, that would be remarkable.

 

[skookerasbil]

I am not suggesting any dialectic process is in play here. I merely state the obvious fact that society has moved in a liberal progressive direction despite the efforts of conservatives to change its direction. YOu cannot honestly deny that, can you?

Of course society changes but the mechanism that makes that happen is what I disspute. Progressives like to implement change at the political level which is why their mantra for the last hundred years has been 'change' while liberals prefer change on the individual level. This kind of change happens because of the person's own choice over their own life which is independent of others and the change in politics.

regardless, society DOES change and HAS change and anyone who honestly looks at the long arc of change in America would have to conclude that the change has always been in a liberal direction and, if one would honestly look at the major events along that arc, they would also have to conclude that conservatives have always tried - always unsuccessfully - to change the direction of that arc. All your trumpeting about how things are ABOUT to change because of deficits or Obama or healthcare or this or that or any other such thing are just wishful thinking from the team that has LOST every major skirmish for the past century. As I said earlier... the arc has moved so far that conservatives are now fighting to protect programs that, fifty years ago, they were fighting to prevent. If it were a football game, we've played the last century on YOUR side of the field and the only variable is whether we will score a touchdown or a field goal or maybe even a safety when you fumble the ball in your own endzone. Liberals have been scoring points pretty much at will and conservatives still have a big goose egg on the scoreboard. When your side can even score ONE point, that would be remarkable.

No wonder you have a US Message Board record in posts s0n...........

I just went back over this thread............you said the same God damn thing in 7 posts on this thread alone!!! I love the members who debate sh!t by talking in circles.........and this guy is no different than the rest of the k00ks who are still OCD about George Bush. Lefties like to keep the debate in the context of a carefully selected history and conveniently ignore other historical lessons AND the current political dynamic.

fAiL

This bozo makes it seem that personal liberty ( which means nothing to the progressive) and conservative ideology has had no impact in history........."the march of liberlism moves forward unabated"!!! Historically however, it appears that in societies where the state established toxic levels of power and influence on personal liberty, some sobering realities emerged, effectively halting "the unabated march". By the end of the twentieth century, the planned economy of the Soviet Union finally followed into oblivion the new forms of economic organization in Germany and Italy. A general respect for a foundation of private property and a market economy emerged among both intellectuals and the populace, edging out hopes for socialism with any kind of face. This was due in part to the lessons of Communist experience and in recent years, free-market economists have made their influence felt in everything from history (debunking the myth that unregulated "market forces" caused the Great Depression) to theory (refuting the general theories of John Maynard Keynes, the Marx of the mixed economy) to policy -- the rise of free trade between nations (even though the actual treaties often muddle free trade with pages of protectionism). As a practical challenge to the welfare state, New Zealand in the mid-80s succeeded in cutting government down to a significantly smaller size. The Thatcher government accomplished smaller governemnt on almost the same scale.

It is significant to recognize the fatal flaw in the application of the liberals' principle of "equal rights for all" and its relatiionship to the fact that the public sector employee now makes a higher average wage than the private sector employee.........a reality that never existed until now. Citizens are just now beginning to revolt over the self-centered/greediness of unions. Indeed, the ideals of laissez faire continue to thrive, most notably within the libertarian movement, which poses a challenge on all levels to the dog-eat-dog grapplings of the special interest groups. The libertarian/tea partiers are shocklingly taking the page of the classic liberal ideology ( equal rights for all) and turning it on its head. Indeed.........we are in a period of transition s0ns!!! The "march" is halting.........because the masses are recognizing that life is ultimately about acceptance of necessary tradeoffs. Weighing "necessary tradeoffs" is not part of the dialogue if one talks to any modern k00k liberal...........but it is to the majority. As New Zealanders found out by 1980, eventually, the rubber does meet the road. People dont realize the many disasterous implications of liberal public policy until it is too late..........but when personal liberty begins to get crushed.............................................


But you're right s0n..........I guess Im the asshole here.

 

[ihopehefails]

I am not suggesting any dialectic process is in play here. I merely state the obvious fact that society has moved in a liberal progressive direction despite the efforts of conservatives to change its direction. YOu cannot honestly deny that, can you?

Of course society changes but the mechanism that makes that happen is what I disspute. Progressives like to implement change at the political level which is why their mantra for the last hundred years has been 'change' while liberals prefer change on the individual level. This kind of change happens because of the person's own choice over their own life which is independent of others and the change in politics.

regardless, society DOES change and HAS change and anyone who honestly looks at the long arc of change in America would have to conclude that the change has always been in a liberal direction and, if one would honestly look at the major events along that arc, they would also have to conclude that conservatives have always tried - always unsuccessfully - to change the direction of that arc. All your trumpeting about how things are ABOUT to change because of deficits or Obama or healthcare or this or that or any other such thing are just wishful thinking from the team that has LOST every major skirmish for the past century. As I said earlier... the arc has moved so far that conservatives are now fighting to protect programs that, fifty years ago, they were fighting to prevent. If it were a football game, we've played the last century on YOUR side of the field and the only variable is whether we will score a touchdown or a field goal or maybe even a safety when you fumble the ball in your own endzone. Liberals have been scoring points pretty much at will and conservatives still have a big goose egg on the scoreboard. When your side can even score ONE point, that would be remarkable.

I'm glad you pointed this out that societies do change but in what way should societies change that does not infringe on my personal liberty to decide how my life should change? In the latter scenario a third of society can go progressive, another third can go in the opposite, and the last third can pick its own direction. You can even break it down to each person within society. We can have 300 million oppisite and opposing directions that society changes in and you can be the only progressive in it but no matter what direction each of us go in it is all liberal because liberal should mean individual freedom not a preset of ideas we are suppose to adhere to.

 

[maineman]

Of course society changes but the mechanism that makes that happen is what I disspute. Progressives like to implement change at the political level which is why their mantra for the last hundred years has been 'change' while liberals prefer change on the individual level. This kind of change happens because of the person's own choice over their own life which is independent of others and the change in politics.

regardless, society DOES change and HAS change and anyone who honestly looks at the long arc of change in America would have to conclude that the change has always been in a liberal direction and, if one would honestly look at the major events along that arc, they would also have to conclude that conservatives have always tried - always unsuccessfully - to change the direction of that arc. All your trumpeting about how things are ABOUT to change because of deficits or Obama or healthcare or this or that or any other such thing are just wishful thinking from the team that has LOST every major skirmish for the past century. As I said earlier... the arc has moved so far that conservatives are now fighting to protect programs that, fifty years ago, they were fighting to prevent. If it were a football game, we've played the last century on YOUR side of the field and the only variable is whether we will score a touchdown or a field goal or maybe even a safety when you fumble the ball in your own endzone. Liberals have been scoring points pretty much at will and conservatives still have a big goose egg on the scoreboard. When your side can even score ONE point, that would be remarkable.

No wonder you have a US Message Board record in posts s0n...........

I just went back over this thread............you said the same God damn thing in 7 posts on this thread alone!!! I love the members who debate sh!t by talking in circles.........and this guy is no different than the rest of the k00ks who are still OCD about George Bush. Lefties like to keep the debate in the context of a carefully selected history and conveniently ignore other historical lessons AND the current political dynamic.

fAiL

This bozo makes it seem that personal liberty ( which means nothing to the progressive) and conservative ideology has had no impact in history........."the march of liberlism moves forward unabated"!!! Historically however, it appears that in societies where the state established toxic levels of power and influence on personal liberty, some sobering realities emerged, effectively halting "the unabated march". By the end of the twentieth century, the planned economy of the Soviet Union finally followed into oblivion the new forms of economic organization in Germany and Italy. A general respect for a foundation of private property and a market economy emerged among both intellectuals and the populace, edging out hopes for socialism with any kind of face. This was due in part to the lessons of Communist experience and in recent years, free-market economists have made their influence felt in everything from history (debunking the myth that unregulated "market forces" caused the Great Depression) to theory (refuting the general theories of John Maynard Keynes, the Marx of the mixed economy) to policy -- the rise of free trade between nations (even though the actual treaties often muddle free trade with pages of protectionism). As a practical challenge to the welfare state, New Zealand in the mid-80s succeeded in cutting government down to a significantly smaller size. The Thatcher government accomplished smaller governemnt on almost the same scale.

It is significant to recognize the fatal flaw in the application of the liberals' principle of "equal rights for all" and its relatiionship to the fact that the public sector employee now makes a higher average wage than the private sector employee.........a reality that never existed until now. Citizens are just now beginning to revolt over the self-centered/greediness of unions. Indeed, the ideals of laissez faire continue to thrive, most notably within the libertarian movement, which poses a challenge on all levels to the dog-eat-dog grapplings of the special interest groups. The libertarian/tea partiers are shocklingly taking the page of the classic liberal ideology ( equal rights for all) and turning it on its head. Indeed.........we are in a period of transition s0ns!!! The "march" is halting.........because the masses are recognizing that life is ultimately about acceptance of necessary tradeoffs. Weighing "necessary tradeoffs" is not part of the dialogue if one talks to any modern k00k liberal...........but it is to the majority. As New Zealanders found out by 1980, eventually, the rubber does meet the road. People dont realize the many disasterous implications of liberal public policy until it is too late..........but when personal liberty begins to get crushed.............................................


But you're right s0n..........I guess Im the asshole here.

like I said, junior... when conservatives succeed in repealing ONE of the major accomplishments of progressive liberalism, I will start to worry... until then, our progress is not really a matter of "if", but only of "when".

Now you can either discuss that point or you can avoid it.... your choice.

 

[maineman]

Of course society changes but the mechanism that makes that happen is what I disspute. Progressives like to implement change at the political level which is why their mantra for the last hundred years has been 'change' while liberals prefer change on the individual level. This kind of change happens because of the person's own choice over their own life which is independent of others and the change in politics.

regardless, society DOES change and HAS change and anyone who honestly looks at the long arc of change in America would have to conclude that the change has always been in a liberal direction and, if one would honestly look at the major events along that arc, they would also have to conclude that conservatives have always tried - always unsuccessfully - to change the direction of that arc. All your trumpeting about how things are ABOUT to change because of deficits or Obama or healthcare or this or that or any other such thing are just wishful thinking from the team that has LOST every major skirmish for the past century. As I said earlier... the arc has moved so far that conservatives are now fighting to protect programs that, fifty years ago, they were fighting to prevent. If it were a football game, we've played the last century on YOUR side of the field and the only variable is whether we will score a touchdown or a field goal or maybe even a safety when you fumble the ball in your own endzone. Liberals have been scoring points pretty much at will and conservatives still have a big goose egg on the scoreboard. When your side can even score ONE point, that would be remarkable.

I'm glad you pointed this out that societies do change but in what way should societies change that does not infringe on my personal liberty to decide how my life should change? In the latter scenario a third of society can go progressive, another third can go in the opposite, and the last third can pick its own direction. You can even break it down to each person within society. We can have 300 million oppisite and opposing directions that society changes in and you can be the only progressive in it but no matter what direction each of us go in it is all liberal because liberal should mean individual freedom not a preset of ideas we are suppose to adhere to.

what you THINK that "liberal" ought to mean is a symantic argument for the classroom. MY point is that the issues that have been considered important by those individuals in American politics who consider themselves to be liberal or progressive have advanced throughout the last century pretty much unabated despite the efforts to deraill them by those individuals who considered themselves conservative.

And my further point is that those issues that were once considered ultra liberal and espoused only by the far left wing of American politics have now become totally mainstream..... Conservatives now fight to maintain those very government programs that they previously considered socialistic and destructive to American democracy and they seem almost unaware of the glaring contradiction such positions create.

Sign held by a teabagger at a town hall meeting this past fall:

"Keep your socialist hands off my medicare"

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Not everything Liberal is bad. Liberals have done some great things for our nation. I think the problem is that many people are confusing Socialism/Progressivism with Liberalism. They are not the same thing. For instance,no true Liberal would ever support a brutal Socialist Dictator like Hugo Chavez. The man is currently shutting down all Free Speech in Venezuela. No true Liberal could support that. Unfortunately most of the current Democratic Party is made up of Chavez Butt-Sniffing Socialists/Progressives. These people shouldn't be confused for Liberals. So being a Liberal in it's truest sense isn't so bad. There is a lot of good in true Liberalism. Hey that's my take anyway.

 

[Old Rocks]

Not everything Liberal is bad. Liberals have done some great things for our nation. I think the problem is that many people are confusing Socialism/Progressivism with Liberalism. They are not the same thing. For instance,no true Liberal would ever support a brutal Socialist Dictator like Hugo Chavez. The man is currently shutting down all Free Speech in Venezuela. No true Liberal could support that. Unfortunately most of the current Democratic Party is made up of Chavez Butt-Sniffing Socialists/Progressives. These people shouldn't be confused for Liberals. So being a Liberal in it's truest sense isn't so bad. There is a lot of good in true Liberalism. Hey that's my take anyway.

And who wanted unlimited ability to eavesdrop on all Americans without any oversight at all? Who tried to declare the FISA court null and void? Who espoused torture as a true American value? And fruitcakes like you yap on like little mutts, not a brain in your little heads.

Yep, Liberals have done and will do great things for this nation. And each time the Conservatives will say, oh, but you may have been right last time, but this time you are just a bunch of Commies.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Like i said,not everything Liberal is bad. Socialism/Progressivism in the Sean Penn mold is something else completely though. Too many people are still confusing Socialism/Progressivism with Liberalism. Real Liberals have contributed quite a bit to our nation.

 

[skookerasbil]

regardless, society DOES change and HAS change and anyone who honestly looks at the long arc of change in America would have to conclude that the change has always been in a liberal direction and, if one would honestly look at the major events along that arc, they would also have to conclude that conservatives have always tried - always unsuccessfully - to change the direction of that arc. All your trumpeting about how things are ABOUT to change because of deficits or Obama or healthcare or this or that or any other such thing are just wishful thinking from the team that has LOST every major skirmish for the past century. As I said earlier... the arc has moved so far that conservatives are now fighting to protect programs that, fifty years ago, they were fighting to prevent. If it were a football game, we've played the last century on YOUR side of the field and the only variable is whether we will score a touchdown or a field goal or maybe even a safety when you fumble the ball in your own endzone. Liberals have been scoring points pretty much at will and conservatives still have a big goose egg on the scoreboard. When your side can even score ONE point, that would be remarkable.

No wonder you have a US Message Board record in posts s0n...........

I just went back over this thread............you said the same God damn thing in 7 posts on this thread alone!!! I love the members who debate sh!t by talking in circles.........and this guy is no different than the rest of the k00ks who are still OCD about George Bush. Lefties like to keep the debate in the context of a carefully selected history and conveniently ignore other historical lessons AND the current political dynamic.

fAiL

This bozo makes it seem that personal liberty ( which means nothing to the progressive) and conservative ideology has had no impact in history........."the march of liberlism moves forward unabated"!!! Historically however, it appears that in societies where the state established toxic levels of power and influence on personal liberty, some sobering realities emerged, effectively halting "the unabated march". By the end of the twentieth century, the planned economy of the Soviet Union finally followed into oblivion the new forms of economic organization in Germany and Italy. A general respect for a foundation of private property and a market economy emerged among both intellectuals and the populace, edging out hopes for socialism with any kind of face. This was due in part to the lessons of Communist experience and in recent years, free-market economists have made their influence felt in everything from history (debunking the myth that unregulated "market forces" caused the Great Depression) to theory (refuting the general theories of John Maynard Keynes, the Marx of the mixed economy) to policy -- the rise of free trade between nations (even though the actual treaties often muddle free trade with pages of protectionism). As a practical challenge to the welfare state, New Zealand in the mid-80s succeeded in cutting government down to a significantly smaller size. The Thatcher government accomplished smaller governemnt on almost the same scale.

It is significant to recognize the fatal flaw in the application of the liberals' principle of "equal rights for all" and its relatiionship to the fact that the public sector employee now makes a higher average wage than the private sector employee.........a reality that never existed until now. Citizens are just now beginning to revolt over the self-centered/greediness of unions. Indeed, the ideals of laissez faire continue to thrive, most notably within the libertarian movement, which poses a challenge on all levels to the dog-eat-dog grapplings of the special interest groups. The libertarian/tea partiers are shocklingly taking the page of the classic liberal ideology ( equal rights for all) and turning it on its head. Indeed.........we are in a period of transition s0ns!!! The "march" is halting.........because the masses are recognizing that life is ultimately about acceptance of necessary tradeoffs. Weighing "necessary tradeoffs" is not part of the dialogue if one talks to any modern k00k liberal...........but it is to the majority. As New Zealanders found out by 1980, eventually, the rubber does meet the road. People dont realize the many disasterous implications of liberal public policy until it is too late..........but when personal liberty begins to get crushed.............................................


But you're right s0n..........I guess Im the asshole here.

like I said, junior... when conservatives succeed in repealing ONE of the major accomplishments of progressive liberalism, I will start to worry... until then, our progress is not really a matter of "if", but only of "when".

Now you can either discuss that point or you can avoid it.... your choice.

8X in one thread............wanna go for 9 s0n???Not sure if you made your point yet




......we'd all be real proud of ya.........


so, in the meantime, whats the endgame of "the march" Einstein???

 

[skookerasbil]

Not everything Liberal is bad. Liberals have done some great things for our nation. I think the problem is that many people are confusing Socialism/Progressivism with Liberalism. They are not the same thing. For instance,no true Liberal would ever support a brutal Socialist Dictator like Hugo Chavez. The man is currently shutting down all Free Speech in Venezuela. No true Liberal could support that. Unfortunately most of the current Democratic Party is made up of Chavez Butt-Sniffing Socialists/Progressives. These people shouldn't be confused for Liberals. So being a Liberal in it's truest sense isn't so bad. There is a lot of good in true Liberalism. Hey that's my take anyway.

Chavez is a hero to k00ks like Maineman and Old Rocks!!!

 

[maineman]

my only point has been that the predictions of the imminent demise of liberalism in America that have been made in this thread are silly. Liberalism has changed America and it ain't gonna change back.

women's suffrage
rights of workers to organize
workplace safety
child labor laws
40 hour work week
minimum wage
social security
environmental protection
disabled rights
medicare
medicaid
etc.etc.

EVERY ONE of those initiatives- and lots more like them - changed the face of America and EVERY ONE of them were vehemently opposed by American conservatives. They flat out LOST the 20th century to liberalism and they don't have the grace to admit it...

instead, they flap their gums on here and predict that liberalism and all that we have built with it will come crashing down any day now... any MINUTE NOW!!!!!

the day they repeal ONE of those initiatives listed above will be the day I start worrying about the future of liberalism in America, not until.

 

[maineman]

No wonder you have a US Message Board record in posts s0n...........

I just went back over this thread............you said the same God damn thing in 7 posts on this thread alone!!! I love the members who debate sh!t by talking in circles.........and this guy is no different than the rest of the k00ks who are still OCD about George Bush. Lefties like to keep the debate in the context of a carefully selected history and conveniently ignore other historical lessons AND the current political dynamic.

fAiL

This bozo makes it seem that personal liberty ( which means nothing to the progressive) and conservative ideology has had no impact in history........."the march of liberlism moves forward unabated"!!! Historically however, it appears that in societies where the state established toxic levels of power and influence on personal liberty, some sobering realities emerged, effectively halting "the unabated march". By the end of the twentieth century, the planned economy of the Soviet Union finally followed into oblivion the new forms of economic organization in Germany and Italy. A general respect for a foundation of private property and a market economy emerged among both intellectuals and the populace, edging out hopes for socialism with any kind of face. This was due in part to the lessons of Communist experience and in recent years, free-market economists have made their influence felt in everything from history (debunking the myth that unregulated "market forces" caused the Great Depression) to theory (refuting the general theories of John Maynard Keynes, the Marx of the mixed economy) to policy -- the rise of free trade between nations (even though the actual treaties often muddle free trade with pages of protectionism). As a practical challenge to the welfare state, New Zealand in the mid-80s succeeded in cutting government down to a significantly smaller size. The Thatcher government accomplished smaller governemnt on almost the same scale.

It is significant to recognize the fatal flaw in the application of the liberals' principle of "equal rights for all" and its relatiionship to the fact that the public sector employee now makes a higher average wage than the private sector employee.........a reality that never existed until now. Citizens are just now beginning to revolt over the self-centered/greediness of unions. Indeed, the ideals of laissez faire continue to thrive, most notably within the libertarian movement, which poses a challenge on all levels to the dog-eat-dog grapplings of the special interest groups. The libertarian/tea partiers are shocklingly taking the page of the classic liberal ideology ( equal rights for all) and turning it on its head. Indeed.........we are in a period of transition s0ns!!! The "march" is halting.........because the masses are recognizing that life is ultimately about acceptance of necessary tradeoffs. Weighing "necessary tradeoffs" is not part of the dialogue if one talks to any modern k00k liberal...........but it is to the majority. As New Zealanders found out by 1980, eventually, the rubber does meet the road. People dont realize the many disasterous implications of liberal public policy until it is too late..........but when personal liberty begins to get crushed.............................................


But you're right s0n..........I guess Im the asshole here.

like I said, junior... when conservatives succeed in repealing ONE of the major accomplishments of progressive liberalism, I will start to worry... until then, our progress is not really a matter of "if", but only of "when".

Now you can either discuss that point or you can avoid it.... your choice.

8X in one thread............wanna go for 9 s0n???Not sure if you made your point yet




......we'd all be real proud of ya.........


so, in the meantime, whats the endgame of "the march" Einstein???

endgame? why would you think there would be an endgame? We'll keep shoving initiatives up your ass and you'll keep bitching about them, and not being able to stop them, and we'll laugh and shove some more.

And I will stop making my point when you finally get the balls to recognize it and admit that I am right and you are doing nothing but blowing smoke and blindly prognosticating.

how's that, junior?

 

[maineman]

Not everything Liberal is bad. Liberals have done some great things for our nation. I think the problem is that many people are confusing Socialism/Progressivism with Liberalism. They are not the same thing. For instance,no true Liberal would ever support a brutal Socialist Dictator like Hugo Chavez. The man is currently shutting down all Free Speech in Venezuela. No true Liberal could support that. Unfortunately most of the current Democratic Party is made up of Chavez Butt-Sniffing Socialists/Progressives. These people shouldn't be confused for Liberals. So being a Liberal in it's truest sense isn't so bad. There is a lot of good in true Liberalism. Hey that's my take anyway.

Chavez is a hero to k00ks like Maineman and Old Rocks!!!

fuck you, asshole...chavez is an even bigger prick than you are, if that's possible.

 

[skookerasbil]

10 reposts in one thread FTW!!! Gotta be some kind of USMessageBoard record s0n

In the end, I believe in the American people who love their liberty and love their country............unlike the k00ks, who loath their own country and live a life of misery. 12,000 posts for the gay............

Look s0n........it doesnt take any genius to recognize that somebody who spends 16 hours a day making posts on a blog also has "meaningless" as a middle name, such is the level of fcukking misery!! Do I hit the nail on the head or what Larry??



Heres to your communist vision s0n...............

 

[AvgGuyIA]

It's always good to be a liberal.

You wouldn't know a liberal if one jumped off the 4th floor balcony and landed on you. You're a leftwing fanatical sheep and idiot parrot. You and a half dozen other members here could be interposed. You all say the same stupid shit.

This is why I call people like Gunny a troll, as this would fit many of the people like him that spout the same talking points over and over again. thanks for the laugh

We knew you were going to react that way.

 

[Dr Grump]

10 reposts in one thread FTW!!! Gotta be some kind of USMessageBoard record s0n

In the end, I believe in the American people who love their liberty and love their country............unlike the k00ks, who loath their own country and live a life of misery. 12,000 posts for the gay............

Look s0n........it doesnt take any genius to recognize that somebody who spends 16 hours a day making posts on a blog also has "meaningless" as a middle name, such is the level of fcukking misery!! Do I hit the nail on the head or what Larry??



Heres to your communist vision s0n...............

You're the kook....s0n....