Why do people hate Liberals?

[RKMBrown]

It's a glaring fallacy to suggest that "Democrats" and "Republicans" are the same difference as "liberal" versus "conservative" or "right" versus "left". Know what I call 'em? "Demoplicans" or "Republicrats". Two sides of the same coin. To pretend that these two puppets are opposites just because one's dressed in red and the other in blue is to ignore a lot.

To paraphrase Gore Vidal, we can't have a third party in this country, because in order to have a third party you must first have two other parties.

Yeah.. but you have to admit there is a significant difference between Rand Paul and Charles Rangel.

 

[Uncensored2008]

That what government is suppose to provide you ******* idiot! Thats what you are calling authoritarian.

I live in the Peoples Republic of California. Out here, you pay very high taxes for everything. But if you call the police or fire department, you are billed for the service. When my father in law had a heart attack, the fire department sent us a $600 bill for responding.

What is it that the taxes are supposed to pay for? Apparently paying taxes gets the taxpayer nothing and services must be purchased separately.

Government is a form of organized crime, it "provides" nothing. Government exists to enrich those in the government.

 

[Surfer]

CA has gone to hell since the criminal aliens took over. There are very few nice areas anymore. Most are disgusting now...

 

[Uncensored2008]

CA has gone to hell since the criminal aliens took over. There are very few nice areas anymore. Most are disgusting now...

The idea the Jerry Brown is a criminal fleeing from justice on Jupiter makes perfect sense, and explains a lot....

 

[Surfer]

The idea the Jerry Brown is a criminal fleeing from justice on Jupiter makes perfect sense, and explains a lot....

Yeah. He's just one of the problems. Their open borders have ruined them. You can't go anywhere without having to listen to Spanish-speaking idiots, endure their poor driving, try to get them to help you at a store etc. It's just bad. And what they've done to the schools, neighborhoods, hospitals etc is a sin.

 

[Pogo]

The idea the Jerry Brown is a criminal fleeing from justice on Jupiter makes perfect sense, and explains a lot....

Yeah. He's just one of the problems. Their open borders have ruined them. You can't go anywhere without having to listen to Spanish-speaking idiots, endure their poor driving, try to get them to help you at a store etc. It's just bad. And what they've done to the schools, neighborhoods, hospitals etc is a sin.

So lemme get this straight....
Speaking Spanish makes you a bad driver??

Ya learn so much around this joint about logic.

Be glad they're not speaking Italian.

 

[Uncensored2008]

So lemme get this straight....
Speaking Spanish makes you a bad driver??

Ya learn so much around this joint about logic.

Be glad they're not speaking Italian.

What makes illegals bad drivers is that so many of them buy their drivers license on the black market and don't actually know how to drive.

 

[Foxfyre]

But dragging the train back on the tracks, the modern American 'liberal' thinks the Spanish speaking person must be accommodated with full functionality at other people's expense and requirement to speak English only should be illegal.

The modern American 'conservative' aka classical liberal think people have every right to speak whatever language they wish to speak. . .BUT. . employers should not have to hire someone who can't converse with their customers, nobody who can't read English should be licensed to do something that could make it dangerous not to be able to read signs or hear warnings in English, and a working understanding of English should be required for a green card or citizenship.

 

[Pogo]

But dragging the train back on the tracks, the modern American 'liberal' thinks the Spanish speaking person must be accommodated with full functionality at other people's expense and requirement to speak English only should be illegal.

The modern American 'conservative' aka classical liberal think people have every right to speak whatever language they wish to speak. . .BUT. . employers should not have to hire someone who can't converse with their customers, nobody who can't read English should be licensed to do something that could make it dangerous not to be able to read signs or hear warnings in English, and a working understanding of English should be required for a green card or citizenship.

I don't know about any of that ^^ - was just noting the logic of Surfer's post. "Spanish = bad driver". He's obviously never been to New Jersey. Or Montréal. Etc etc etc.

 

[rightwinger]

But dragging the train back on the tracks, the modern American 'liberal' thinks the Spanish speaking person must be accommodated with full functionality at other people's expense and requirement to speak English only should be illegal.

The modern American 'conservative' aka classical liberal think people have every right to speak whatever language they wish to speak. . .BUT. . employers should not have to hire someone who can't converse with their customers, nobody who can't read English should be licensed to do something that could make it dangerous not to be able to read signs or hear warnings in English, and a working understanding of English should be required for a green card or citizenship.

Maybe its just me

But where are employers forced to hire someone who cannot speak English? Isn't it up to the employer to set the requirements for the job?

Do you think people who cannot speak English should be allowed to drive on our roads?

I believe speaking English is a requirement for citizenship.....has that changed?

 

[Foxfyre]

But dragging the train back on the tracks, the modern American 'liberal' thinks the Spanish speaking person must be accommodated with full functionality at other people's expense and requirement to speak English only should be illegal.

The modern American 'conservative' aka classical liberal think people have every right to speak whatever language they wish to speak. . .BUT. . employers should not have to hire someone who can't converse with their customers, nobody who can't read English should be licensed to do something that could make it dangerous not to be able to read signs or hear warnings in English, and a working understanding of English should be required for a green card or citizenship.

I don't know about any of that ^^ - was just noting the logic of Surfer's post. "Spanish = bad driver". He's obviously never been to New Jersey. Or Montréal. Etc etc etc.

The illogic is your interpretaton of Surfer's post. In the referenced sentence, he listed three things that we experience with an influx of non-English speaking illegals, of which bad driving was one of them. He wasn't equating Spanish with bad driving--you made that illogical leap, not him.

 

[Foxfyre]

But dragging the train back on the tracks, the modern American 'liberal' thinks the Spanish speaking person must be accommodated with full functionality at other people's expense and requirement to speak English only should be illegal.

The modern American 'conservative' aka classical liberal think people have every right to speak whatever language they wish to speak. . .BUT. . employers should not have to hire someone who can't converse with their customers, nobody who can't read English should be licensed to do something that could make it dangerous not to be able to read signs or hear warnings in English, and a working understanding of English should be required for a green card or citizenship.

Maybe its just me

But where are employers forced to hire someone who cannot speak English? Isn't it up to the employer to set the requirements for the job?

Do you think people who cannot speak English should be allowed to drive on our roads?

I believe speaking English is a requirement for citizenship.....has that changed?

In 2007, Nancy Pelosi moved to kill an amendment that would protect employers from federal lawsuits for requiring their workers to speak English. Among the employers targeted by such lawsuits: the Salvation Army. . . .

and. . . .

In March (2007) the EEOC sued the Salvation Army because its thrift store in Framingham, Mass., required its employees to speak English on the job. The requirement was clearly posted and employees were given a year to learn the language. The EEOC claimed the store had fired two Hispanic employees for continuing to speak Spanish on the job. It said that the firings violated the law because the English-only policy was not "relevant" to job performance or safety.

Read more: Nancy Pelosi wants to FORCE US companies to hire people who cannot speak English!!!! (ethic, illegal) - Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, Conservatives, Liberals, Third Parties, Left-Wing, Right-Wing, Congress, President - City-Data Forum

Both incidents were reported by John Fund in the WSJ.

In 1990, an exception was written into the immigration laws waiving the English requirement for citizenship for long time resident older people and those with certain mental or physical disabilities. And there are 'liberal' activists who are lobbying for the English requirement to be waived for everybody.

 

[rightwinger]

But dragging the train back on the tracks, the modern American 'liberal' thinks the Spanish speaking person must be accommodated with full functionality at other people's expense and requirement to speak English only should be illegal.

The modern American 'conservative' aka classical liberal think people have every right to speak whatever language they wish to speak. . .BUT. . employers should not have to hire someone who can't converse with their customers, nobody who can't read English should be licensed to do something that could make it dangerous not to be able to read signs or hear warnings in English, and a working understanding of English should be required for a green card or citizenship.

Maybe its just me

But where are employers forced to hire someone who cannot speak English? Isn't it up to the employer to set the requirements for the job?

Do you think people who cannot speak English should be allowed to drive on our roads?

I believe speaking English is a requirement for citizenship.....has that changed?

In 2007, Nancy Pelosi moved to kill an amendment that would protect employers from federal lawsuits for requiring their workers to speak English. Among the employers targeted by such lawsuits: the Salvation Army. . . .

and. . . .

In March (2007) the EEOC sued the Salvation Army because its thrift store in Framingham, Mass., required its employees to speak English on the job. The requirement was clearly posted and employees were given a year to learn the language. The EEOC claimed the store had fired two Hispanic employees for continuing to speak Spanish on the job. It said that the firings violated the law because the English-only policy was not "relevant" to job performance or safety.

Read more: Nancy Pelosi wants to FORCE US companies to hire people who cannot speak English!!!! (ethic, illegal) - Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, Conservatives, Liberals, Third Parties, Left-Wing, Right-Wing, Congress, President - City-Data Forum

Both incidents were reported by John Fund in the WSJ.

In 1990, an exception was written into the immigration laws waiving the English requirement for citizenship for long time resident older people and those with certain mental or physical disabilities. And there are 'liberal' activists who are lobbying for the English requirement to be waived for everybody.

You use a message board hate post from "Nirvana-Guy" as a reference? I still don't see any laws forcing employers to hire people who can't speak English. I even see employers who make speaking Spanish a requirement for employment.

For the most part speaking English is a requirement for citizenship

 

[Foxfyre]

Maybe its just me

But where are employers forced to hire someone who cannot speak English? Isn't it up to the employer to set the requirements for the job?

Do you think people who cannot speak English should be allowed to drive on our roads?

I believe speaking English is a requirement for citizenship.....has that changed?

In 2007, Nancy Pelosi moved to kill an amendment that would protect employers from federal lawsuits for requiring their workers to speak English. Among the employers targeted by such lawsuits: the Salvation Army. . . .

and. . . .

In March (2007) the EEOC sued the Salvation Army because its thrift store in Framingham, Mass., required its employees to speak English on the job. The requirement was clearly posted and employees were given a year to learn the language. The EEOC claimed the store had fired two Hispanic employees for continuing to speak Spanish on the job. It said that the firings violated the law because the English-only policy was not "relevant" to job performance or safety.

Read more: Nancy Pelosi wants to FORCE US companies to hire people who cannot speak English!!!! (ethic, illegal) - Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, Conservatives, Liberals, Third Parties, Left-Wing, Right-Wing, Congress, President - City-Data Forum

Both incidents were reported by John Fund in the WSJ.

In 1990, an exception was written into the immigration laws waiving the English requirement for citizenship for long time resident older people and those with certain mental or physical disabilities. And there are 'liberal' activists who are lobbying for the English requirement to be waived for everybody.

You use a message board hate post from "Nirvana-Guy" as a reference? I still don't see any laws forcing employers to hire people who can't speak English. I even see employers who make speaking Spanish a requirement for employment.

For the most part speaking English is a requirement for citizenship

You asked a question. I answered it and provided a source. That source (and dozens of others) took the information from a WSJ article. I went straight to the immigration rules and regs themselves to verify that the English only requirements can be waived in some cicumstances. And if you don't know that activists are lobbying for English only requirements to be waived for everybody, you really need to get out more.

 

[rightwinger]

In 2007, Nancy Pelosi moved to kill an amendment that would protect employers from federal lawsuits for requiring their workers to speak English. Among the employers targeted by such lawsuits: the Salvation Army. . . .

and. . . .

In March (2007) the EEOC sued the Salvation Army because its thrift store in Framingham, Mass., required its employees to speak English on the job. The requirement was clearly posted and employees were given a year to learn the language. The EEOC claimed the store had fired two Hispanic employees for continuing to speak Spanish on the job. It said that the firings violated the law because the English-only policy was not "relevant" to job performance or safety.

Read more: Nancy Pelosi wants to FORCE US companies to hire people who cannot speak English!!!! (ethic, illegal) - Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, Conservatives, Liberals, Third Parties, Left-Wing, Right-Wing, Congress, President - City-Data Forum

Both incidents were reported by John Fund in the WSJ.

In 1990, an exception was written into the immigration laws waiving the English requirement for citizenship for long time resident older people and those with certain mental or physical disabilities. And there are 'liberal' activists who are lobbying for the English requirement to be waived for everybody.

You use a message board hate post from "Nirvana-Guy" as a reference? I still don't see any laws forcing employers to hire people who can't speak English. I even see employers who make speaking Spanish a requirement for employment.

For the most part speaking English is a requirement for citizenship

You asked a question. I answered it and provided a source. That source (and dozens of others) took the information from a WSJ article. I went straight to the immigration rules and regs themselves to verify that the English only requirements can be waived in some cicumstances. And if you don't know that activists are lobbying for English only requirements to be waived for everybody, you really need to get out more.

I believe I said that English is still a requirement for citizenship.......infrequent waivers does not change that

I still haven't seen any laws requiring employers to hire people who can't speak English. And Nirvana Guy doesn't count

 

[Foxfyre]

You use a message board hate post from "Nirvana-Guy" as a reference? I still don't see any laws forcing employers to hire people who can't speak English. I even see employers who make speaking Spanish a requirement for employment.

For the most part speaking English is a requirement for citizenship

You asked a question. I answered it and provided a source. That source (and dozens of others) took the information from a WSJ article. I went straight to the immigration rules and regs themselves to verify that the English only requirements can be waived in some cicumstances. And if you don't know that activists are lobbying for English only requirements to be waived for everybody, you really need to get out more.

I believe I said that English is still a requirement for citizenship.......infrequent waivers does not change that

I still haven't seen any laws requiring employers to hire people who can't speak English. And Nirvana Guy doesn't count

Well, there's no accounting for those who will not see. The thread topic is why do people hate liberals? Which I have amended to be why do people hate liberalism? One of the reasons I hate liberalism is that it prompts people who embrace it to debate like you--twisting the concepts into something that was never said so that you will have something to attack. And when you are adequately rebutted you just move the goal posts to something else. Not the way to make friends and influence people for sure.

 

[numan]

The program is funded by paying customers of the cell phone companies. The moochers get their cell phones for nothing, and we get to pay a higher cost for our phone service to account for their cell phones. Government mandated redistribution at it's best.

I wonder how ready you would be to pay the full cost of driving your car and maintaining the highway system, Hypocrite.

.

 

[rightwinger]

You asked a question. I answered it and provided a source. That source (and dozens of others) took the information from a WSJ article. I went straight to the immigration rules and regs themselves to verify that the English only requirements can be waived in some cicumstances. And if you don't know that activists are lobbying for English only requirements to be waived for everybody, you really need to get out more.

I believe I said that English is still a requirement for citizenship.......infrequent waivers does not change that

I still haven't seen any laws requiring employers to hire people who can't speak English. And Nirvana Guy doesn't count

Well, there's no accounting for those who will not see. The thread topic is why do people hate liberals? Which I have amended to be why do people hate liberalism? One of the reasons I hate liberalism is that it prompts people who embrace it to debate like you--twisting the concepts into something that was never said so that you will have something to attack. And when you are adequately rebutted you just move the goal posts to something else. Not the way to make friends and influence people for sure.

Your claim....

American 'liberal' thinks the Spanish speaking person must be accommodated with full functionality at other people's expense and requirement to speak English only should be illegal.

The modern American 'conservative' aka classical liberal think people have every right to speak whatever language they wish to speak. . .BUT. . employers should not have to hire someone who can't converse with their customers

I just asked you to back it up....so far, you have failed

 

[Foxfyre]

The program is funded by paying customers of the cell phone companies. The moochers get their cell phones for nothing, and we get to pay a higher cost for our phone service to account for their cell phones. Government mandated redistribution at it's best.

I wonder how ready you would be to pay the full cost of driving your car and maintaining the highway system, Hypocrite.

.

What does one have to do with the other? RKM and I certainly have our differences and he has accused me of some pretty outrageous things, but how is he wrong in his statement here? How does the accuracy of his statement make him a hypocrite?

That's another thing I hate about liberalism. It promotes those who embrace it to debate via insult, insinuation, and accusation, and while some conservatives also do that, at least you usually can get a conservative to focus on a specific concept. Liberals seem to have a real problem doing that.

 

[numan]

Government is a form of organized crime, it "provides" nothing. Government exists to enrich those in the government.

Well, at least you have learned something in the decades of your misguided existence!!

The genius of our ruling class is that it has kept a majority of the people from ever questioning the inequity of a system where most people drudge along paying taxes for which they get nothing in return.
---Gore Vidal

As soon as you get anywhere near the truth about anything with an American, he becomes a squid: black ink begins to fill the atmosphere as he tries to disguise what he's up to, which is usually stealing your watch.
---Gore Vidal

.