Why do people hate Liberals?

[RKMBrown]

What a crock. Repubs don't want to pay for liberals' baby-killing, welfare, birth control, housing, medical bills, education, incarceration and godless behavior. Most Repubs are fed up with footing the bill for loser liberals. Most liberals have no concept of self-sufficiency, self-reliance or self-respect.

Republicans just want all of these things to disappear, but have no clue how to accomplish that other than banning them. And that's the problem: the party of individual rights and self-sufficiency, is busy telling people how to live their lives. No abortions, no birth control, no medical bills, or, my personal favourite "godless behaviour".

I notice especially that women's health care is high on the list of things they don't want to fund. Women having sex always drives right-wingers to distraction.

No demanding we pay for your slutish behavior drives us nuts.... Get a ******* job and pay for the pill yourself or cross your ******* legs.

And the war on women continues.

 

[RKMBrown]

. 4) Liberals are actually bothered by people who do love America. On the rare occasion when you do see a liberal waving a flag, look for a camera.

When you actually post crap like this you lose all credibility.

Our side loves Amaerica, their side hates America

Can you actually come up with a more childlike view of political philosophy? Is your side really that simple that they buy into rhetoric like that?

And that would actually mean something if it did not come from the biggest turd of this thread.

 

[Foxfyre]

25 Reasons To Dislike Liberals

John Hawkins | May 11, 2013

Is every liberal an immoral, nasty tempered, habitual liar who accuses people of racism for fun and trashes his own country because he thinks it makes him look sophisticated? Of course, not! On the other hand, is that a fairly accurate description of most liberals in politics? Yes, it is. Most of them aren't evil per se, but as Margaret Thatcher said,


"Left-wing zealots have often been prepared to ride roughshod over due process and basic considerations of fairness when they think they can get away with it. For them the ends always seems to justify the means. That is precisely how their predecessors came to create the gulag."

Liberals view themselves as good people because they're liberals. People who are outside of that ugly little bit of circular reasoning don't have such a benign view of their horrible behavior. So, what reason could you have to dislike liberals?

...

25 Reasons To Dislike Liberals - John Hawkins - Page full

Actually that is a great list and the author put a lot of thought into it. It pretty well summarizes why liberalism gets a bad rap from people who do embrace concepts the Founders wrote into the Constitution, who are not ashamed to be people of faith or openly patriotic, and who believe there are traditional American values worth preserving and promoting.

The one on the list that really struck a chord with me as we are entering the next budget/debt ceiling raise fight was this one:

12) A policy that makes liberals feel superior and caring that doesn't work and wastes billions is considered a smashing success because they genuinely DON'T CARE WHETHER THEIR POLICIES ACTUALLY HELP PEOPLE OR NOT.

I would have written it however:

Liberals feel superior, caring, and righteous when they support programs with noble sounding titles that waste billions, don't deliver what their titles suggest, and don't help people but sometimes hurt them. And they condemn and accuse conservatives who want to end or defund those same programs.

 

[Pogo]

Nothing, but liberalism is just foolish enough to try to connect the two when no connection was made.

That's not a question of "liberalism" or of politics at all. It's a question of logic.

This inability to define terms is even worse than I imagined.

Yeah well, in this case I'll put my reading comprehension skills up against yours any day of the week.

Example: We just acquired some North Carolinans, passionate liberals with good hearts who brightens our day, and are sometimes jerks.

I don't see having a good heart as related to sometimes being a jerk. I don't see all North Carolinans as as having good hearts or brightening my day. I don't see the three traits attributed to in that sentence as being necessarily related in any way.

But if you read my sentence in the same way you interpreted Surfer's, you do. And THAT is what makes your leap to judgment illogical and, I might add, mean spirited.

I was not aware you can own North Carolinians. I'll have to find that aisle in the grocery store.

Btw brightens is singluar; doesn't agree with your plural noun. I'm the child of two proofreaders, Foxy. However I don't disagree with your spelling of Carolinans; it's more logical that Carolinians (I keep asking people where "Ecuadoria" is) so you get a thumbs-up for that.

Anyway, that out of the way and fixing the number to We just acquired some North Carolinans, passionate liberals with good hearts who brighten our day, and are sometimes jerks, your analogy doesn't work, because your phrase passionate liberals with good hearts who brighten our day, and are sometimes jerks is a compound supplementary adjectival phrase; it's doesn't follow as a definition of North Carolinans; you simply expanded on the simple description of where they were from. You have not excluded the possibility that other North Carolinans could be non-liberals, could nave non-good hearts, might not brighten our day, are not sometimes jerks, or any combination; you've described the specific North Carolinans you first referenced.

But you definitely get points for Carolinans. I'm going to adopt it. Good eye.

To the original point though: analyzing what a sentence means still has nothing whatsoever to do with political ideologies. So I'd say trying to make that stretch just to get a dig in on whatever "liberals" means, that's where the mean-spiritedness lies.

 

[Surfer]

Republicans just want all of these things to disappear, but have no clue how to accomplish that other than banning them.And that's the problem: the party of individual rights and self-sufficiency, is busy telling people how to live their lives. No abortions, no birth control, no medical bills, or, my personal favourite "godless behaviour".I notice especially that women's health care is high on the list of things they don't want to fund. Women having sex always drives right-wingers to distraction.

Bull. Republicans are for self-sufficiency. Liberals are for handouts. Most Republicans are winners. Most liberals are losers. Repubs don't want to fund ANYONE'S health care and rightly so: it is NOT their job/responsibility. Godless liberals...

No demanding we pay for your slutish behavior drives us nuts.... Get a ******* job and pay for the pill yourself or cross your ******* legs.

AMEN!

 

[Wake]

My contention is that liberals should strive to be more self-reliant and less radical, and that conservatives should be more willing to care about their fellow human beings.

 

[Pogo]

Republicans just want all of these things to disappear, but have no clue how to accomplish that other than banning them.And that's the problem: the party of individual rights and self-sufficiency, is busy telling people how to live their lives. No abortions, no birth control, no medical bills, or, my personal favourite "godless behaviour".I notice especially that women's health care is high on the list of things they don't want to fund. Women having sex always drives right-wingers to distraction.

Bull. Republicans are for self-sufficiency. Liberals are for handouts. Most Republicans are winners. Most liberals are losers. Repubs don't want to fund ANYONE'S health care and rightly so: it is NOT their job/responsibility. Godless liberals...

No demanding we pay for your slutish behavior drives us nuts.... Get a ******* job and pay for the pill yourself or cross your ******* legs.

AMEN!

These two knuckledraggers ^^ demonstrate why this conversation cannot happen. One contingent is so busy demonizing people, yea verily even unto wild slurs on the moral codes of posters they don't even know, that they can't hear what the demonized side is even saying.

It would be crawling into the same sewer they call home to suggest that this contingent is representative of the entire "side" -- yet we hear no one from that "side" condemning it, so we're left to assume assent.

Until that bit of hatred is resolved, nothing gets done here.

 

[RKMBrown]

My contention is that liberals should strive to be more self-reliant and less radical, and that conservatives should be more willing to care about their fellow human beings.

Modern liberals believe caring for people means taking money from Peter to pay Paul for sitting on his ass. Intelligent humans understand that is a recipe for disaster. You want to care for people? Stop crippling them with your coddling.

 

[Uncensored2008]

And the war on women continues.

You didn't pay for my coffee this morning - so you're waging a war on men.

 

[Pogo]

And the war on women continues.

You didn't pay for my coffee this morning - so you're waging a war on men.

Failure to stipend your coffee is equivalent to telling a poster you don't know to "get a ******* job or cross your ******* legs".

Life in Bizzaroworld.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Failure to stipend your coffee is equivalent to telling a poster you don't know to "get a ******* job or cross your ******* legs".

Life in Bizzaroworld.

Yes it is, even if you're too stupid to grasp it.

 

[RKMBrown]

And the war on women continues.

You didn't pay for my coffee this morning - so you're waging a war on men.

Did I call you a coffee slut that needs to learn to say no to creamers?

;-)

 

[Wake]

My contention is that liberals should strive to be more self-reliant and less radical, and that conservatives should be more willing to care about their fellow human beings.

Modern liberals believe caring for people means taking money from Peter to pay Paul for sitting on his ass. Intelligent humans understand that is a recipe for disaster. You want to care for people? Stop crippling them with your coddling.

I think it is generally a wise thing to learn as much as you can about a person before talking with him or her. That, and not making general partisan assertions that are likely to come crashing down when there are civil requests for credible sources. Making an assertion is different from stating an opinion.

Modern liberals may or may not believe that caring for people means taking money from Peter to pay Paul for "sitting on his ass." Already that sounds like a very dishonest claim. Why? Because I don't think you get to speak for every single modern liberal out there. Imagine, Brown, if I told you that every single conservative out there does not care one iota about women. That, too, is another partisan assertion—another arrow—flying instead towards your camp. How does it make you feel when someone makes this quip and expects you to respond with something other than indignance? I'm no liberal, but I don't mind voicing my thoughts when either faction makes unreasonable statements.

There may actually be modern liberals out there who don't think they way you think they do. They may be the minority, but you can't really say they don't exist. It's always better to qualify your statements Brown because it makes arguments more honest. Also, "Paul" may not always be on his ass, but may be a young man or woman in dire need of help who is desperately trying to carve out a future. That person may even be a poor conservative. Or, "Paul" could be injured, sickly, desperate, indebted, you name it. I am certain there are conservatives out there who, if it weren't for government programs like FoodShare, would suffer and be homeless.

As for "intelligence," please be careful when using that word. Intelligence is solely the acquisition and application of knowledge and skills. Intelligence is not and never will be synonymous with any political ideology out there. Not ever. So no, don't tell me that "intelligent people" can only be intelligent if they believe one thing or another. That notion is partisan bull crap. There are highly intelligent people on both the Left and the Right, so pretending that only one side has a monopoly on collective intelligence is a sign of partisan zealotry.

It is my opinion that to care for people you need to help them become self-reliant. By teaching a man how to fish, he learns to gather enough fish for himself to live... from that point onward. However, America isn't one big lake with a nearly endless line of fishermen. Sometimes, people need assistance... or they've going to starve, suffer, and maybe even die. I am in favor of giving people limited assistance for a set period of time, depending on their respective situations, while also working with these people to find jobs. Lastly, it must be reconciled that right now it is very difficult to find a job... with many people looking for only a limited amount of jobs there's going to be massive competition and a lot of suffering. That needs to be understood. It must. For example, I'm a Caregiver/CNA. I had to apply with resume in hand at over 25 different organizations just to net a job that's currently part-time. It's really tough out there.

 

[Pogo]

My contention is that liberals should strive to be more self-reliant and less radical, and that conservatives should be more willing to care about their fellow human beings.

Modern liberals believe caring for people means taking money from Peter to pay Paul for sitting on his ass. Intelligent humans understand that is a recipe for disaster. You want to care for people? Stop crippling them with your coddling.

I think it is generally a wise thing to learn as much as you can about a person before talking with him or her. That, and making general partisan assertions that are like to come crashing down when there are civil requests for credible sources. Making an assertion is different from stating an opinion.

Modern liberals may or may not believe that caring for people means taking money from Peter to pay Paul for "sitting on his ass." Already that sounds like a very dishonest claim. Why? Because I don't think you get to speak for every single modern liberal out there. Imagine, Brown, if I told you that every single conservative out there does not care one iota about women. That, too, is another partisan assertion—another arrow—flying instead towards your camp. How does it make you feel when someone makes this quip and expects you to respond with something other than indignance? I'm no liberal, but I don't mind voicing my thoughts when either faction makes unreasonable statements.

There may actually be modern liberals out there who don't think they way you think they do. They may be the minority, but you can't really say they don't exist. It's always better to qualify your statements Brown because it makes arguments more honest. Also, "Paul" may not always be on his ass, but may be a young man or woman in dire need of help who is desperately trying to carve out a future. That person may even be a poor conservative. Or, "Paul" could be injured, sickly, desperate, indebted, you name it. I am certain there are conservatives out there who, if it weren't for government programs like FoodShare, would suffer and be homeless.

As for "intelligence," please be careful when using that word. Intelligence is solely the acquisition and application of knowledge and skills. Intelligence is not and never will be synonymous with any political ideology out there. Not ever. So no, don't tell me that "intelligent people" can only be intelligent if they believe one thing or another. That notion is partisan bull crap. There are highly intelligent people on both the Left and the Right, so pretending that only one side has a monopoly on collective intelligence is a sign of partisan zealotry.

It is my opinion that to care for people you need to help them become self-reliant. By teaching a man how to fish, he learns to gather enough fish for himself to live... from that point onward. However, America isn't one big lake with a nearly endless line of fishermen. Sometimes, people need assistance... or they've going to starve, suffer, and maybe even die. I am in favor of giving people limited assistance for a set period of time, depending on their respective situations, while also working with these people to find jobs. Lastly, it must be reconciled that right now it is very difficult to find a job... with many people looking for only a limited amount of jobs there's going to be massive competition and a lot of suffering. That needs to be understood. It must. For example, I'm a Caregiver/CNA. I had to apply with resume in hand at over 25 different organizations just to net a job that's currently part-time. It's really tough out there.

^^ Perfect analysis of the fallacy of hasty generalization.

 

[thanatos144]

Republicans just want all of these things to disappear, but have no clue how to accomplish that other than banning them. And that's the problem: the party of individual rights and self-sufficiency, is busy telling people how to live their lives. No abortions, no birth control, no medical bills, or, my personal favourite "godless behaviour".

I notice especially that women's health care is high on the list of things they don't want to fund. Women having sex always drives right-wingers to distraction.

No demanding we pay for your slutish behavior drives us nuts.... Get a ******* job and pay for the pill yourself or cross your ******* legs.

And the war on women continues.

there is no war on women.

 

[thanatos144]

Republicans just want all of these things to disappear, but have no clue how to accomplish that other than banning them.And that's the problem: the party of individual rights and self-sufficiency, is busy telling people how to live their lives. No abortions, no birth control, no medical bills, or, my personal favourite "godless behaviour".I notice especially that women's health care is high on the list of things they don't want to fund. Women having sex always drives right-wingers to distraction.

Bull. Republicans are for self-sufficiency. Liberals are for handouts. Most Republicans are winners. Most liberals are losers. Repubs don't want to fund ANYONE'S health care and rightly so: it is NOT their job/responsibility. Godless liberals...

No demanding we pay for your slutish behavior drives us nuts.... Get a ******* job and pay for the pill yourself or cross your ******* legs.

AMEN!

These two knuckledraggers ^^ demonstrate why this conversation cannot happen. One contingent is so busy demonizing people, yea verily even unto wild slurs on the moral codes of posters they don't even know, that they can't hear what the demonized side is even saying.

It would be crawling into the same sewer they call home to suggest that this contingent is representative of the entire "side" -- yet we hear no one from that "side" condemning it, so we're left to assume assent.

Until that bit of hatred is resolved, nothing gets done here.

stop asking me to pay for your ******* pill

 

[Uncensored2008]

Did I call you a coffee slut that needs to learn to say no to creamers?

;-)

The proper term is Caffiend...

And I didn't go on national TV demanding that the failure of taxpayers to provide free Starbucks to all men is a national health crisis..

 

[Pogo]

No demanding we pay for your slutish behavior drives us nuts.... Get a ******* job and pay for the pill yourself or cross your ******* legs.

And the war on women continues.

there is no war on women.

Try reading your own post quoted above. Duh.

 

[Pogo]

Did I call you a coffee slut that needs to learn to say no to creamers?

;-)

The proper term is Caffiend...

And I didn't go on national TV demanding that the failure of taxpayers to provide free Starbucks to all men is a national health crisis..

Nor did Fluke, even by analogy. But perhaps you're "too stupid to grasp it".

 

[Uncensored2008]

Nor did Fluke, even by analogy. But perhaps you're "too stupid to grasp it".

No, Fluke went on TV and demanded that taxpayers provide contraceptives for all women.

And saying "no" to partisan scum like Fluke is hardly a "war on women."

More of a war on petulant spoiled brats who demand that others pay for what they want.

Standard Disclaimer: I'd say "**** Fluke," but everyone has done that already...