Why Do So Few Admit To Being Liberals?

[Titanic Sailor]

Really, this should be good. Explain:

 

[Titanic Sailor]

I'm sure you'll be liberal with the truth, so can't wait.

 

[Titanic Sailor]

A Liberal is a nuclear conservative, scared shit of their own shadows.

 

[Intense]

I don't think Bush ever admitted being a liberal either. It's in their genes I guess.........

In terms of race and ethnicity..Bush was pretty colorblind..and Liberal.

But in terms of most everything else..Bush's policies were very conservative.

That's why he took all those long walks holding hands with Teddy Kennedy and totally caved on Education, Right?????

 

[NYcarbineer]

In my words, Obama is a Tyrant.

In my words, you're a Sore Loser.

It has nothing to do with losing. We all lose when tyrants reign. It is about injustice and the corruption of principle. There is no mechanism that is of more value than it's reason for being. When there is a conflict with purpose and function, it is the function that must adapt in the service of Purpose, of justice. When the function of the mechanism takes priority over purpose, for which it was created, designed to serve, the service is corrupted by denying it's first responsibility, it's primary trust an obligation. The mechanism is corrupted, not the purpose that it fails to serve. Compound that flaw and you find yourself staring at modern government and the history of failures and corruptions that have brought us to where we are today. Tyranny, by any path is not the solution. Argue cause and effect, yet denying the evidence of poor leadership and decision making, merely diverts from realization, learning, healing, correction. Hiding from the lessons, failure upon failure, rewarding incompetence at every turn. Compounding the burden you place on the rest of us is not fair play. I don't expect you to go back in time, I expect each of us to try our best to make things right in the present. Principle is neither past, present, or future, it is timeless.

Barack Obama has done nothing 'tyrannical'. Quit making a fool of yourself.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Is it history that is a problem for you, or reading, in general?

Clearly, you fail to understand that Wilson and the Progressives were so reviled by the American public, that John Dewey changed the name to 'liberal' to wrap the ugly political concept is the cloak of what he wished to be understood as: classical liberalism.

1. Wilson and the Progressives tried to make war socialism permanent, but the voters didn’t agree. They (Progressives) began to agree more and more with Bismarckian top-down socialism, and looked to Russia and Italy where ‘men of action’ were creating utopias. Also, John Dewey renamed Progressivism as ‘liberalism,’ which had referred to political and economic liberty, along the lines of John Locke and Adam Smith: maximum individual freedom under a minimalist state. Dewey changed the meaning to the Prussian meaning: alleviation of material and educational poverty, and the removal of old ideas and faiths. Classical liberals were more like what we call Conservatives.

2. “Finally, Dewey arguably did more than any other reformer to repackage progressive social theory in a way that obscured just how radically its principles departed from those of the American founding. Like Ely and many of his fellow progressive academics, Dewey initially embraced the term "socialism" to describe his social theory. Only after realizing how damaging the name was to the socialist cause did he, like other progressives, begin to avoid it. In the early 1930s, accordingly, Dewey begged the Socialist party, of which he was a longtime member, to change its name. "The greatest handicap from which special measures favored by the Socialists suffer," Dewey declared, "is that they are advanced by the Socialist party as Socialism.”
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m.../ai_n45566374/

3. “DEWEY'S influential 1935 tract, Liberalism and Social Action, should be read in light of this conclusion. In this essay, Dewey purportedly recounts the "history of liberalism." "Liberalism," he suggests, is a social theory defined by a commitment to certain "enduring," fundamental principles, such as liberty and individualism. After defining these principles in the progressives' terms--…” http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_24_61/ai_n45566374/

You really give pseudo-intellectualism a bad name.

Predictably, when you can't answer you resort to an Alinsky #5: Ridicule with a side of schmear.

Pathetic.

I've already answered. Already comprehensively refuted this rubbish so many times I can't count them.

The ridicule is just bonus material.

 

[NYcarbineer]

You really give pseudo-intellectualism a bad name.

Predictably, when you can't answer you resort to an Alinsky #5: Ridicule with a side of schmear.

Pathetic.

you even gave the child links to look things up. Guess he didn't bother, just spewed and ran.

All PC does is cut and paste gibberish she doesn't have a clue about. She won't debate us; I won't debate dead people.

 

[shintao]

Very pretty cat. Very ugly logic.

My thinking is, I watched 8 years of Con. corporate handouts ranging from millions to billions to trillions, and I just don't give a damn, it is the peoples turn to have more than table scraps, and I don't care if it bankrupts American doing it. I can guarantee the republican return to power will be a repeat of the Bush blitz to screw Americans for the corporate cause. At least Americans got some relief out of this.

I think the reason they are saying your logic is wrong is because Bush is only the president. Congress figures it all out and the president signs it in or vetos it or whatever... Bush had a Republican congress for 6 years, not 8 and while yes they were horrible many of the really bad things were done with a full democrat congress...

You make four errors in logic. 1. Democrats did not have a Party majority (2/3rds) to overcome the veto. 2. Bush used signing statements to define the legislation. 3. Bush had the power of Executive Orders. 4. Bush had total control of the Attorney General's office to decide what would reach the Supreme Court.

Really, you have 6 years of a republican congress and 4 years of a democrat congress. Congress are the people making the laws and rules, the president simply gives the law the OK or veto... So in 10 horrible years 40% of that "shittty congress' has been Dems.

Well, I have shown you otherwise. I say Bush and the republicans failed in these first 6 years, to recend all gun laws, to stop abortions, to roll back social programs. Of course the bailouts of corporations was carried out through his entire administration, in millions, billions of taxpayers money

 

[Titanic Sailor]

The healthcare sellout to the insurance and medical industries by Obama was pretty tyrannical. That battle could go on for years now.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Do Progressives think that Wilson's quote supports a limited Constitutional government? What?

Wilson is dead. Make a note of that.

 

[Titanic Sailor]

So are the Democrats who used to care about the people. Make a note of that too.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The healthcare sellout to the insurance and medical industries by Obama was pretty tyrannical. That battle could go on for years now.

You mean the healthcare bill that passed by a significant majority of our Constitutionally established Congress?

If the manner in which bills become law is now to be defined as tyranny, well, I guess we are all under the boot heel of a tyrannical founding document.

 

[Intense]

In my words, you're a Sore Loser.

It has nothing to do with losing. We all lose when tyrants reign. It is about injustice and the corruption of principle. There is no mechanism that is of more value than it's reason for being. When there is a conflict with purpose and function, it is the function that must adapt in the service of Purpose, of justice. When the function of the mechanism takes priority over purpose, for which it was created, designed to serve, the service is corrupted by denying it's first responsibility, it's primary trust an obligation. The mechanism is corrupted, not the purpose that it fails to serve. Compound that flaw and you find yourself staring at modern government and the history of failures and corruptions that have brought us to where we are today. Tyranny, by any path is not the solution. Argue cause and effect, yet denying the evidence of poor leadership and decision making, merely diverts from realization, learning, healing, correction. Hiding from the lessons, failure upon failure, rewarding incompetence at every turn. Compounding the burden you place on the rest of us is not fair play. I don't expect you to go back in time, I expect each of us to try our best to make things right in the present. Principle is neither past, present, or future, it is timeless.

Barack Obama has done nothing 'tyrannical'. Quit making a fool of yourself.

The Thought Police are back??? Show me a Government that is the impartial Referee, establishing justice and fair play, on the playing field, not a government playing referee with players on the other team, money invested in the game, picking the winners and losers, changing the rules, based on personal interest, arbitrarily ******* us over, anytime it feels the urge, and I will show you the Federalist Constitutional Republic that Madison Envisioned before Hamilton undermined it, you stupid ****. How much is in it for you subjugating others you dishonest damage controlling propagandist ****????? What is your cut, parasite????

 

[NYcarbineer]

So are the Democrats who used to care about the people. Make a note of that too.

If Democrats were to make you happy,

they'd be Republicans.

 

[Titanic Sailor]

No, I meant the Obama sellout of the American people to the insurance, healthcare, and government industry.

I never read the bill, and neither did anyone in Washington DC. remember?

Big victory for you though, you must must be still partying.

 

[Titanic Sailor]

We were all Democrats years ago, that Party left us a long time ago my friend. You must be a government worker.

 

[NYcarbineer]

It has nothing to do with losing. We all lose when tyrants reign. It is about injustice and the corruption of principle. There is no mechanism that is of more value than it's reason for being. When there is a conflict with purpose and function, it is the function that must adapt in the service of Purpose, of justice. When the function of the mechanism takes priority over purpose, for which it was created, designed to serve, the service is corrupted by denying it's first responsibility, it's primary trust an obligation. The mechanism is corrupted, not the purpose that it fails to serve. Compound that flaw and you find yourself staring at modern government and the history of failures and corruptions that have brought us to where we are today. Tyranny, by any path is not the solution. Argue cause and effect, yet denying the evidence of poor leadership and decision making, merely diverts from realization, learning, healing, correction. Hiding from the lessons, failure upon failure, rewarding incompetence at every turn. Compounding the burden you place on the rest of us is not fair play. I don't expect you to go back in time, I expect each of us to try our best to make things right in the present. Principle is neither past, present, or future, it is timeless.

Barack Obama has done nothing 'tyrannical'. Quit making a fool of yourself.

The Thought Police are back??? Show me a Government that is the impartial Referee, establishing justice and fair play, on the playing field, not a government playing referee with players on the other team, money invested in the game, picking the winners and losers, changing the rules, based on personal interest, arbitrarily ******* us over, anytime it feels the urge, and I will show you the Federalist Constitutional Republic that Madison Envisioned before Hamilton undermined it, you stupid ****. How much is in it for you subjugating others you dishonest damage controlling propagandist ****????? What is your cut, parasite????

lol, I've provoked a meltdown.

I love it when overgrown children lament that the government doesn't act exactly the way THEY think it should,

therefore, profound conclusion...

...it must be EVIL.

Classic me-centric childish behaviour.

 

[Trajan]

The healthcare sellout to the insurance and medical industries by Obama was pretty tyrannical. That battle could go on for years now.

You mean the healthcare bill that passed by a significant majority of our Constitutionally established Congress?

I cannot believe you posted that with a straight face..you were laughing right?

 

[Sallow]

The healthcare sellout to the insurance and medical industries by Obama was pretty tyrannical. That battle could go on for years now.

Tyrannical? How so?

It was voted on.

 

[NYcarbineer]

We were all Democrats years ago, that Party left us a long time ago my friend. You must be a government worker.

You are in a minority that will never be large enough to govern this country. Get used to it. Your time is past. Your agenda is wasting away as we speak.