Famous Liberals in our history

[Fatality]

He was also a LIBERAL

and NOT a socialist, like you

Love our right wing name calling

20 years ago they were calling you a communist
5 years ago they were calling you a liberal
Now they call you a socialist

They don't know what any of these words mean but they just like to call names

you are what you are stop trying to hide

 

[DiveCon]

He was also a LIBERAL

didnt he own slaves?
i know a few on your list did

Martha Washington owned slaves when they got married. They were freed upon Washingtons death

so did Jefferson

 

[DiveCon]

and NOT a socialist, like you

Love our right wing name calling

20 years ago they were calling you a communist
5 years ago they were calling you a liberal
Now they call you a socialist

They don't know what any of these words mean but they just like to call names

you are what you are stop trying to hide

hes also got his times off
the house unamerican affairs commitee thing was in the 1950's
a little more than 20 years ago

 

[rightwinger]

Love our right wing name calling

20 years ago they were calling you a communist
5 years ago they were calling you a liberal
Now they call you a socialist

They don't know what any of these words mean but they just like to call names

you are what you are stop trying to hide

hes also got his times off
the house unamerican affairs commitee thing was in the 1950's
a little more than 20 years ago

I timed it to the fall of the Berlin Wall

 

[Oddball]

Love our right wing name calling

20 years ago they were calling you a communist
5 years ago they were calling you a liberal
Now they call you a socialist

They don't know what any of these words mean but they just like to call names

Wrong again, borcht breath.

As was pointed out earlier -and is historically correct- the Eugene Debs socialist wing of the Democrat Party stole the term "liberal" (which up to that point meant libertarian), as a semantic smokescreen to obscure their authoritarian agenda.

Then again, as you continue to prove, accurate knowledge of history isn't your strong suit.

 

[Fatality]

you are what you are stop trying to hide

hes also got his times off
the house unamerican affairs commitee thing was in the 1950's
a little more than 20 years ago

I timed it to the fall of the Berlin Wall

I bet you wept with the stasi that day.

 

[Harry Dresden]

whats wrong dumplin, you upset that i wont be taking that trip south with ya? tuff shit.

I'd rather crisp up like sizzly bacon in eternal hell than spend one day in heaven with folks like you.

THAT would be Hell, squared.

well be sure youll get what you ask for; just remember to look for me as you fall past, ill be the one sitting at the table smiling and waving.

and eating bacon....

 

[rightwinger]

Love our right wing name calling

20 years ago they were calling you a communist
5 years ago they were calling you a liberal
Now they call you a socialist

They don't know what any of these words mean but they just like to call names

Wrong again, borcht breath.

As was pointed out earlier -and is historically correct- the Eugene Debs socialist wing of the Democrat Party stole the term "liberal" (which up to that point meant libertarian), as a semantic smokescreen to obscure their authoritarian agenda.

Then again, as you continue to prove, accurate knowledge of history isn't your strong suit.

What are you just brain dead or intentionally moronic?

Eugene Debs? for crying out loud, when have republicans invoked the name of Eugene Debs?

I'll type slow so you understand. Up until the Bush debacle of a presidency, the republicans used "liberal" as a dirty word, just like they used communist before that. Once the public realized what a load of crap the right wing was selling, calling someone a "liberal" lost its sting. Now the dirty word off every right wingers tongue is the dreaded "socialist"

 

[midcan5]

The early liberals were John Locke, Montesquieu, John Stewart Mill, and James Madison.

Contemporary: John Rawls, Isaiah Berlin, Bernard Williams, Ronald Dworkin, Jeremy Waldron are my favorites today.

"Liberals demand that the social order should in principle be capable of explaining itself at the tribunal of each person's understanding." Jeremy Waldron


http://www.jesusisaliberal.org/

[ame]http://www.amazon.com/Jesus-Was-Liberal-Conservative-Rejection/dp/0965761061/ref=pd_sim_b_1[/ame]

[ame]http://www.amazon.com/Jesus-Was-Liberal-Reclaiming-Christianity/dp/0230614299/ref=pd_bxgy_b_img_b[/ame]

[ame]http://www.amazon.com/Perfect-Freedom-Liberal-Christianity-Looking/dp/1905047185/ref=pd_sim_b_5[/ame]

 

[Oddball]

Love our right wing name calling

20 years ago they were calling you a communist
5 years ago they were calling you a liberal
Now they call you a socialist

They don't know what any of these words mean but they just like to call names

Wrong again, borcht breath.

As was pointed out earlier -and is historically correct- the Eugene Debs socialist wing of the Democrat Party stole the term "liberal" (which up to that point meant libertarian), as a semantic smokescreen to obscure their authoritarian agenda.

Then again, as you continue to prove, accurate knowledge of history isn't your strong suit.

What are you just brain dead or intentionally moronic?

Eugene Debs? for crying out loud, when have republicans invoked the name of Eugene Debs?

I'll type slow so you understand. Up until the Bush debacle of a presidency, the republicans used "liberal" as a dirty word, just like they used communist before that. Once the public realized what a load of crap the right wing was selling, calling someone a "liberal" lost its sting. Now the dirty word off every right wingers tongue is the dreaded "socialist"

First of all, I'm not a republican, ignoramus.

Secondly, the word "liberal" wouldn't have become synonymous with "socialist" if the socialist wing of the Democrat Party hadn't stolen the term back in the 1920s....That is a matter of true historical fact. That the socialists (who at forst embraced the term liberal) have destroyed the meaning of the word is no fault of the true classical libeerals.

Moreover, this isn't a matter of what socialiststs have been identified as from without, it's a matter of them being semantic chemeleons (liberal...to progressive...to centrist....) because they cannot be intellectualy honest about what they stand for.

That you don't know jack shit about the etymology of your own idealogy is your problem, not mine.

 

[Oddball]

The early liberals were John Locke, Montesquieu, John Stewart Mill, and James Madison.

Contemporary: John Rawls, Isaiah Berlin, Bernard Williams, Ronald Dworkin, Jeremy Waldron are my favorites today.

"Liberals demand that the social order should in principle be capable of explaining itself at the tribunal of each person's understanding." Jeremy Waldron


Jesus Is A Liberal - Home Page

Amazon.com: Jesus Was a Liberal: How the Conservative Agenda Is a Rejection of Christ's Teachings (9780965761062): Jerry Wilde: Books

Amazon.com: Jesus Was a Liberal: Reclaiming Christianity for All (9780230614291): Scotty McLennan: Books

Amazon.com: Perfect Freedom: Why Liberal Christianity Might Be the Faith You're Looking For (9781905047185): Brian Mountford: Books

Yes...And those classical liberals in the first list have little to nothing to do with the modern quasi-socialist "liberals" of today.

 

[elvis]

The early liberals were John Locke, Montesquieu, John Stewart Mill, and James Madison.

Contemporary: John Rawls, Isaiah Berlin, Bernard Williams, Ronald Dworkin, Jeremy Waldron are my favorites today.

"Liberals demand that the social order should in principle be capable of explaining itself at the tribunal of each person's understanding." Jeremy Waldron


Jesus Is A Liberal - Home Page

Amazon.com: Jesus Was a Liberal: How the Conservative Agenda Is a Rejection of Christ's Teachings (9780965761062): Jerry Wilde: Books

Amazon.com: Jesus Was a Liberal: Reclaiming Christianity for All (9780230614291): Scotty McLennan: Books

Amazon.com: Perfect Freedom: Why Liberal Christianity Might Be the Faith You're Looking For (9781905047185): Brian Mountford: Books

enough with the blasphemy, ok Obamabot?

 

[Intense]

The early liberals were John Locke, Montesquieu, John Stewart Mill, and James Madison.

Contemporary: John Rawls, Isaiah Berlin, Bernard Williams, Ronald Dworkin, Jeremy Waldron are my favorites today.

"Liberals demand that the social order should in principle be capable of explaining itself at the tribunal of each person's understanding." Jeremy Waldron


Jesus Is A Liberal - Home Page

Amazon.com: Jesus Was a Liberal: How the Conservative Agenda Is a Rejection of Christ's Teachings (9780965761062): Jerry Wilde: Books

Amazon.com: Jesus Was a Liberal: Reclaiming Christianity for All (9780230614291): Scotty McLennan: Books

Amazon.com: Perfect Freedom: Why Liberal Christianity Might Be the Faith You're Looking For (9781905047185): Brian Mountford: Books

Hey Midcan, Long time.

I'll disagree with you on Locke and Madison speciffically. One thing neither would have ever done was sacrifice Individual Perspective to the Group. They were both Christian, and believed in Individual Salvation. They believed in Self Determination, in Individual Liberty, in Choice. The Statist requirement of the abandonment of the Self for the Group is actually an abomination when you study it. When the price of fitting in, being a member, requires the abandonment of Conscience (Who Knows whom might be offended by Truth), Which is the core of the Self, the price is too high. You cannot serve God and Man, though you can serve one through the other.

 

[Harry Dresden]

The early liberals were John Locke, Montesquieu, John Stewart Mill, and James Madison.

Contemporary: John Rawls, Isaiah Berlin, Bernard Williams, Ronald Dworkin, Jeremy Waldron are my favorites today.

"Liberals demand that the social order should in principle be capable of explaining itself at the tribunal of each person's understanding." Jeremy Waldron

your favorites.....you mean there is actually someone who is more left then you are?.....

 

[elvis]

The early liberals were John Locke, Montesquieu, John Stewart Mill, and James Madison.

Contemporary: John Rawls, Isaiah Berlin, Bernard Williams, Ronald Dworkin, Jeremy Waldron are my favorites today.

"Liberals demand that the social order should in principle be capable of explaining itself at the tribunal of each person's understanding." Jeremy Waldron

your favorites.....you mean there is actually someone who is more left then you are?.....

maybe karl marx.

 

[Intense]

Ellsworth Toohey.

 

[code1211]

1. Jesus Christ
2. George Washington
3. Abe Lincoln
4. Gandhi
5. Martin Luther King
6. Ben Franklin
7. FDR
8. Thomas Jefferson
9. JFK
10. James Madison

And what exactly have the conservatives done for us?

I'll give you FDR. He was a man who believed that the average man was not capable of dealing with the world around him. As a result, he spent his life trying to construct a government that would both cradle the individual and insert itself into the lives of the individuals.

All of the others on the list seemed to believe quite srongly in the power of the individual against the force of the government or the power present at the time.

Any of them would certainly have been "Borqed" by modern Liberals if they dared to assert their core beliefs as they did at the time they lived.

At the core of Conservatism is the belief that the individual is a strong and competent force in the world. At the core of Liberalism is the belief that the individual is not capable and is weak in the face of adversity and must be protected by a collective.

That is why Conservatives want to protect reward for effort while Liberals want to assure the protection from failure. Everyone on your list believed in the nobility of the individual and all except FDR believed in the ability of the individual. This is odd to me in that he was crippled and yet the President.

Truly a "content of the charachter" triumph story.

 

[paperview]

I'll give you FDR. He was a man who believed that the average man was not capable of dealing with the world around him. As a result, he spent his life trying to construct a government that would both cradle the individual and insert itself into the lives of the individuals.

All of the others on the list seemed to believe quite srongly in the power of the individual against the force of the government or the power present at the time.

Any of them would certainly have been "Borqed" by modern Liberals if they dared to assert their core beliefs as they did at the time they lived.

At the core of Conservatism is the belief that the individual is a strong and competent force in the world. At the core of Liberalism is the belief that the individual is not capable and is weak in the face of adversity and must be protected by a collective.

That is why Conservatives want to protect reward for effort while Liberals want to assure the protection from failure. Everyone on your list believed in the nobility of the individual and all except FDR believed in the ability of the individual. This is odd to me in that he was crippled and yet the President.

Truly a "content of the charachter" triumph story.

You said it.

FDR should have left all those breadline stalkers to die slow deaths in the misery of their own failures.

 

[Fatality]

I'll give you FDR. He was a man who believed that the average man was not capable of dealing with the world around him. As a result, he spent his life trying to construct a government that would both cradle the individual and insert itself into the lives of the individuals.

All of the others on the list seemed to believe quite srongly in the power of the individual against the force of the government or the power present at the time.

Any of them would certainly have been "Borqed" by modern Liberals if they dared to assert their core beliefs as they did at the time they lived.

At the core of Conservatism is the belief that the individual is a strong and competent force in the world. At the core of Liberalism is the belief that the individual is not capable and is weak in the face of adversity and must be protected by a collective.

That is why Conservatives want to protect reward for effort while Liberals want to assure the protection from failure. Everyone on your list believed in the nobility of the individual and all except FDR believed in the ability of the individual. This is odd to me in that he was crippled and yet the President.

Truly a "content of the charachter" triumph story.

You said it.

FDR should have left all those breadline stalkers to die slow deaths in the misery of their own failures.

yeah should have let em die becasue they were to stupid to have done anything for themselves unlike the bums who took to the rails, right?

 

[rightwinger]

I'll give you FDR. He was a man who believed that the average man was not capable of dealing with the world around him. As a result, he spent his life trying to construct a government that would both cradle the individual and insert itself into the lives of the individuals.

FDR was willing to look at what happens if the average man is dealt a series of conditions that were beyond his ability to deal with. The great depression was caused by greed and speculation. The ones who paid the price were the workers who found themselves without jobs.
Retirement plans of that era consisted of either dying young or having enough kids so that someone would be there to care for you in your old age. Social Security, which conservatives fought as socialism, provided a safety net for those who worked their whole lives