Defining "Liberalism"

[rightwinger]

JFK was more liberal than Barack Obama, and at least as hated by the Right as is our current president.

Since when did he try to implement socialized healthcare? I freaking love JFK... he had more of a head on his shoulders than Obama does, no pun intended.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXUJErr_vfo]JFK'S "HEALTH CARE" SPEECH FROM MADISON SQUARE GARDEN (MAY 20, 1962) - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Foxfyre]

Okay my children, she says with arrogance dripping with condescension, let me show you how it is done.

The OP ends with this sentence:

Liberalism: seeking evil in America the way pigs seek truffles.

While I agree that modern day American liberals do embrace Marxist principles (i.e. communism) to an alarming degree, I do not believe that liberals seek evil.

From what I have observed over my increasingly long life, modern day American liberals have a view of what a perfect world would be, however fuzzy that view is in the dark glass they see through. Liberals see themselves as smarter, more just, more compassionate, more righteous, nicer, and better people than any other, and that is their justification.

And they look to an ever larger, more encompassing, more authoritarian government to produce that more perfect world and are unwilling or incapable of seeing that more evil than good comes from that.

And that is not the same thing as seeking evil.

 

[PoliticalChic]

So you're going to post a thread proving that all the conservatives on USMB who call Obama a Marxist are full of shit?

That would be fascinating.

1. I haven't been elected to speak for any conservatives other than myself.
And I do.

.

You also weren't elected to assign beliefs and positions to me. I'm a liberal; you accuse me of being a Communist.

Prove it with real life evidence. (Hint: snotty middle-aged haus-frau retorts are not evidence)

Simple enough to pin the tail on you, donkey.

Take the post #9 challenge.

Double-dog dare ya.'

 

[PoliticalChic]

My link is from the NY Post. Where did you link to the NY Post article?

Did I provide the link that was the source of everything between the quotation marks, or are you a fool?


Both 'yeses'?
OK, then, no argument.

I am referring to your OP as a whole, which is largely, at best, a paraphrase, at worst, plagiarism, of George Will's article last week in the NY Post.

I love the opportunity to mash a verbal cream pie in your puss.
Here it comes.

1. pla·gia·rism
ˈplājəˌrizəm/Submit
noun
the practice of taking someone else's work or ideas and passing them off as one's own.

Since I correctly used quotation marks and a clickable link for the source....

...that makes you a lying moron.
True?



2. "...of George Will's article last week in the NY Post"
Clearly the Will article was published by numerous outlets.

It takes a ratified level of moron to demand that I list every one of his syndications.

And...another new word for you:

Syndication: An agency that sells articles, features, or photographs for publication in a number of newspapers or periodicals simultaneously.




I'd call you a moron again, but the official moron association feels that including you brings their level down.....

 

[PoliticalChic]

Rabid Rightie defines Liberals as commies.

SOP.

But true.

 

[ba1614]

I have long argued the point that the modern American liberal aka leftist aka progressive aka statist aka political class

May 13, 2010
RUSH: Conservatives remember that "we, the people" are the government. ... We do not divide people by groups. We do not see groups.

It's the left that keeps running from what they wish to be known as. If they'd make up their mind and stick with it we'd know what to refer to their ideology as.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Rabid Rightie defines Liberals as commies.

SOP.

And of course the most timely example of liberalism being Communism is the insistence by liberal politicians in Washington that American consumers not be deprived of their opportunity to shop for health insurance in an open competitive market of private sector health insurance businesses.

1. Glad you brought that up.
Your ignorance plays right into my hands.


2. Obama wasn't the first Bolshevik to support socialized medicine.
For context, there was Henry Sigerist:
"He devoted himself to the study of history of medicine. Socialized Medicine in the Soviet Union (1937), and History of Medicine were among his most important works. He emerged as a major spokesman for "compulsory health insurance". ...He attacked the American Medical Association because of his conflicting views on socialized medicine." Henry E. Sigerist - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


a. And, Sigerist was one of the apologists for Stalin, including his state-engineered famine in the Ukraine. 7 million perished (The History Place - Genocide in the 20th Century: Stalin's Forced Famine 1932-33).


b. Sigerist "shared with the architects of Soviet health policy under Stalin an outlook best described as medical totalitarianism. He really believed that humanity would be better off if every individual were under the medical supervision of the state from cradle to grave....[and] Sigerist's belief in the necessity for state control over all aspects of medicine ultimately made him an apologist for state control over most aspects of human life."
Fee and Brown, eds. "Making Medical History: The Life and Times of Henry E. Sigerist," p. 252

Does he sound just like a certain President??
I mean....really.



3. That's quite a jump, from Stalin to Obama, you say. How did it happen? Well, let's admit that the ascension of Barack Obama proves the ideological victory of Marxian beliefs. Perhaps the greatest factor was, as historian Robert Conquest explains it, that the West, unlike the USSR, "did not have a universal and exclusively defined mind-set." They attacked, and won, in the universities, the media, pop culture, the arts, and even Wall Street.
Robert Conquest, "Reflections on a Ravaged Century," p. 155.


a. The details of the attack involve the writings of Antonio Gramsci, the invasion by the 'Frankfurt School, the early attacks by Progressives, and the shredding of the Constitution by FDR....and lets not forget Saul Alinsky. All of flowed from the wellspring of Marxism, and flooded, saturated, and finally, warped, Western Civilization.


Any truth to the rumor that this tune is on your iPod?


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t8EMx7Y16Vo]The Internationale ( In Russian ) - YouTube[/ame]

 

[NoNukes]

JFK Acceptance of the New York Liberal Party Nomination
September 14, 1960

What do our opponents mean when they apply to us the label "Liberal?" If by "Liberal" they mean, as they want people to believe, someone who is soft in his policies abroad, who is against local government, and who is unconcerned with the taxpayer's dollar, then the record of this party and its members demonstrate that we are not that kind of "Liberal." But if by a "Liberal" they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people -- their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties -- someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a "Liberal," then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal."

So am I, and proud of it.

Whittaker Chambers wrote in his book WITNESS that liberals are/were incapable of ever effectively fighting Communism because they did not see anything in Communism that was antithetical to their own beliefs. In short, Liberals are Communists and Communists are Liberals.

I doubt if you are stupid enough to believe this, although the possibility exists, so why are you posting it.

 

[Freemason9]

I thought PC had been banished forever.

 

[LoneLaugher]

I think author of this thread owes the real author of this thread at least a passing acknowledgment:

http://nypost.com/2013/10/09/expunging-oswald/

Now if I missed it in the OP, I apologize in advance.

Oh shit! You mean this whack-job is a plagiarizing poser! Who would have guessed?

Classic nutter lying piece of shit.

 

[PoliticalChic]

So am I, and proud of it.

Whittaker Chambers wrote in his book WITNESS that liberals are/were incapable of ever effectively fighting Communism because they did not see anything in Communism that was antithetical to their own beliefs. In short, Liberals are Communists and Communists are Liberals.

I doubt if you are stupid enough to believe this, although the possibility exists, so why are you posting it.

Again, a vapid post....no substance, no rebuttal, no data nor documentation.

Why post if you have nothing to bring to the table?

Be honest....it's that lack of ability thing, isn't it.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I thought PC had been banished forever.

I can see why you'd wish that.

The hallmark of a Liberal: marginalize, silence, 'banish,' alternative viewpoints.


Imagine how different your post would be if you had the ability to deal with opposition voices.



Coward.

 

[TemplarKormac]

So am I, and proud of it.

Whittaker Chambers wrote in his book WITNESS that liberals are/were incapable of ever effectively fighting Communism because they did not see anything in Communism that was antithetical to their own beliefs. In short, Liberals are Communists and Communists are Liberals.

I doubt if you are stupid enough to believe this, although the possibility exists, so why are you posting it.

I figured you'd be smart enough to post a rebuttal. Alas, here you are with your childish name calling. Typical liberal debate tactics.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Whittaker Chambers wrote in his book WITNESS that liberals are/were incapable of ever effectively fighting Communism because they did not see anything in Communism that was antithetical to their own beliefs. In short, Liberals are Communists and Communists are Liberals.

I doubt if you are stupid enough to believe this, although the possibility exists, so why are you posting it.

I figured you'd be smart enough to post a rebuttal. Alas, here you are with your childish name calling. Typical liberal debate tactics.

Are you going to respond to the JFK video clip?

 

[PoliticalChic]

I think author of this thread owes the real author of this thread at least a passing acknowledgment:

http://nypost.com/2013/10/09/expunging-oswald/

Now if I missed it in the OP, I apologize in advance.

Oh shit! You mean this whack-job is a plagiarizing poser! Who would have guessed?

Classic nutter lying piece of shit.

I know of a landfill not too far away...you might feel right at home there.

 

[Foxfyre]

So am I, and proud of it.

Whittaker Chambers wrote in his book WITNESS that liberals are/were incapable of ever effectively fighting Communism because they did not see anything in Communism that was antithetical to their own beliefs. In short, Liberals are Communists and Communists are Liberals.

I doubt if you are stupid enough to believe this, although the possibility exists, so why are you posting it.

Because it is an interesting concept? It is to me.

Considering that modern day American liberals are generally agreed that:
1. The rich should pay more so that the poor will have more
2. It is right and good that government take from some and give to others.
3. It is necessary for government to order society and regulate the work place, wages, products, education, and living conditions
4. Justice demands control over speech, attitudes towards disadvantaged people, and punishment for those who don't toe the political correctness bible
5. Property should be more communal than private

. . . can anybody honestly say that these are not components of Marx's method for wresting power from the haves and transferring to the have nots until his vision of utopian communism is achieved?

 

[TemplarKormac]

JFK was more liberal than Barack Obama, and at least as hated by the Right as is our current president.

Since when did he try to implement socialized healthcare? I freaking love JFK... he had more of a head on his shoulders than Obama does, no pun intended.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXUJErr_vfo]JFK'S "HEALTH CARE" SPEECH FROM MADISON SQUARE GARDEN (MAY 20, 1962) - YouTube[/ame]

Get a clue dimwit, his "Medicare" bill was defeated by the Senate in 1962. So while he tried, he failed. Thus no implementation. His form of Medicare was not socialist either. The cost at the time was simply too steep, which was around $600 million at the time.

 

[BlindBoo]

Rabid Rightie defines Liberals as commies.

SOP.

But true.

I'm quite sure plenty of Liberal Looney's will gladly define the conservatives in the same manner.

 

[rightwinger]

Since when did he try to implement socialized healthcare? I freaking love JFK... he had more of a head on his shoulders than Obama does, no pun intended.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXUJErr_vfo]JFK'S "HEALTH CARE" SPEECH FROM MADISON SQUARE GARDEN (MAY 20, 1962) - YouTube[/ame]

Get a clue dimwit, his "Medicare" bill was defeated by the Senate in 1962. So while he tried, he failed. Thus no implementation. His form of Medicare was not socialist either. The cost at the time was simply too steep, which was around $600 million at the time.

Really? Do tell

Inform us what part of JFKs Medicare bill was not socialist while Obamacare is

 

[PoliticalChic]

Rabid Rightie defines Liberals as commies.

SOP.

But true.

I'm quite sure plenty of Liberal Looney's will gladly define the conservatives in the same manner.

Did ya' see post #9?

Ever hear this: "If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, we have at least to consider the possibility that we have a small aquatic bird of the family anatidae on our hands."

Say 'quack.'