Questions for Liberals

[TeenageRepublican]

I have some questions for liberals that might never get answered...

Why is it that you claim a hypocritical Democrat (Spitzer) in office is okay but a hypocritical Republican (Craig) in office is just wrong?

How does it feel to have a the incredibly white black racist run for office?

How come all of your leaders end up getting caught with their pants down in some fashion?

If any of you liberals can answer this, I'd appreciate it.

[edgeworth]

Well, let me be the first to say that is an honor to be the first liberal to respond to this. Now, adressing your questions, I believe that your kind of sterotyping liberals a bit. Just because someone has an affiliation with a certian party doesn't mean that they're not rational human beings with an independent thought process. For example, I do believe that it is a little bit hypocritical for one person doing the same thing as another and being treated differently. Personally, I condemn both Elliot Spitzer and Larry Craig for their actions. Responding to your next question, I don't think that any of the current democratic candidates are worth voting for. I, frankly am embarrased by both. Now, as to your last question I would say that the corruption and the pants down moments so, to speak, have been on both sides of the aisle. I personally think that both parties are becoming an embarrasment and a real burden to their constituents, which don't take kindly to having the names of their parties dragged through the mud. This is just my opinon though so do with it what you will.

[BarkleUSA]

To a liberal morality is an annoying obstacle to gaining power and control for the greater good.

[ldb83]

I'll answer as a liberal.

1) I have never met or spoken with a liberal who said "Spitzer in office is okay" after learning about the incident. I never even formed a strong opinion about either Spitzer or Craig. I live far away from where they took office, so the only effect it really has on my life is being barked at me through the news channels 24/7. But I can always change the channel. Anyway, if they are guilty of the accusations made against them, they both got what was coming to them, and it wasn't worth my time to even read about them, let alone make a strong opinion on either matter. Also, a liberal viewpoint doesn't mean I automatically swear allegiance to all Democrats, and I hope you being a conservative doesn't mean you automatically swear allegiance to all Republicans.

2) I see little risk in Obama's presidential bid, or even his presidency if that happens, spreading racism throughout the country. I feel ambivalent about Obama, and I feel ambivalent about his pastor. They are soundbites, and they certainly don't make me tremble in fear. Again, the portrayal of Obama and his pastor as vicious racists is a task that has been completed by the MSM. I tend not to form thoughts based on what I hear from the major networks.

3) All MY leaders? You mean OUR leaders? Corruption, I guess. The nature of the two-party American political system. It is troubling, isn't it?

[Maggie_T]

Wow. Two pretty civil answers from liberals. There's hope for you guys, yet. :biggrin:

Seriously. I do agree that corruption occurs on both sides of the aisle, sadly enough. But you must admit that dems are found with their pants around their ankles more often than 'pubs.

Me, I yet have to be given a good explanation as to why power makes it impossible for (some) men to keep their flyers zipped up, and compells (some) women to pull their knickers down.

As for this

Also, a liberal viewpoint doesn't mean I automatically swear allegiance to all Democrats, and I hope you being a conservative doesn't mean you automatically swear allegiance to all Republicans.


THIS consesrvative doesn't, I assure you. I have no use for a turncoat like McCain, and I have no intention of voting for him, either.

[ldb83]

Wow. Two pretty civil answers from liberals. There's hope for you guys, yet.

The angriest and least civilized of liberals and conservatives tend to believe in the American political false dichotomy, equating liberal with Democrat and conservative with Republican, leaving no room for critical thought.

Seriously. I do agree that corruption occurs on both sides of the aisle, sadly enough. But you must admit that dems are found with their pants around their ankles more often than 'pubs.

I haven't seen the statistics on that, but if you're correct, I am as puzzled as any.

[gnome]

I have some questions for liberals that might never get answered...

Why is it that you claim a hypocritical Democrat (Spitzer) in office is okay but a hypocritical Republican (Craig) in office is just wrong?

I must join the others in stating quite the opposite. I think Spitzer's remaining in office would have been quite wrong.

How does it feel to have a the incredibly white black racist run for office?

I'm not at all convinced he personally holds racist opinions. Failing to sufficiently distance oneself from a racist "ally" is certainly a problem, I just don't think it proves one is actually racist. FWIW, this has caused me of late to rethink the Trent Lott/Strom Thurmond situation (which I was never 100% on board in the first place). I believe we should hold people to the same standard regarldess of party.

How come all of your leaders end up getting caught with their pants down in some fashion?

I wouldn't say all, but it is true that Democrats seem to get this kind of scandal more often. I'm not entirely clear what causes it.

[DoctorDoom]

The dichotomy between conservatism and liberalism is very real. When the soul of a nation is at stake. There is no middle ground.

My question to liberals: given the uniform, abject failure of liberalism over the past several deades, why are you liberals? Tell us what you find appealing in liberalism.

To assist you, here are some of its "accomplishments":

• Monolithic, unaccountable, uncontrollable government
• Confiscatory taxation
• Emasculating our military and our intelligences agencies
• Justifying treasonous behavior by our Congress and hyper-leftist imbeciles
• Calling treason patriotic
• Congress attacking citizens for unpopular speech
• Forcing America to rely for our energy needs on people who hate our country
• Basing energy policies on a pseudoscientific religion
• Forbidding the expansion of proven energy resources while peddling pie-in-the-sky "alternatives"
• Endlessly subsidizing "alternatives" that cannot survive on their own merits
• Forcing the use of "green" technologies that are worse than what they replace
• A constantly growing dependency class
• Multigenerational welfare families
• Worthless, feel-good "social programs" that never achieve their objectives
• Trying to "fix" money-wasting programs by throwing more money at them
• Oppressive legislation and regulation that forces businesses to close or go overseas
• Micromanagement of the private sector by bureaucrats who don't know jack shit about it
• Promoting racism in the name of combatting racism
• Concealing from blacks that "affirmative action" treats them as inferior
• Keeping black people in bondage to their liberal "leaders"
• Attacking successful blacks who did not rely on racist "leaders" for "help"
• Political correctness as a religion
• Corruption or shredding of the Constitution
• Warping the First Amendment into a mockery of its original intent
• Redefining free speech to mean only p-c speech
• Speech codes and redefined words
• Attempting to revive the "Fairness Doctrine" to silence conservatives
• Legitimization of smut and degeneracy
• "Entertainment" that is raw sewage
• Protecting pornography but condemning crosses and creches
• Defecating on the Second Amendment
• Criminalizing self-defense while excusing criminal behavior
• Social engineering
• Destruction of the educational system
• "Graduating" functional illiterates and innumerates whose only skill is using condoms
• Defending drug use while harassing smokers
• 40-million-plus dead babies murdered because of a non-existent "right"
• Marching in support of the "right" to murder a child in the womb
• Allowing perverts to parade in the streets while arresting their critics
• Defining any opposition to perversion as a "hate crime"
• Putting "Heather Has Two Mommies" in school libraries but banning the Bible
• Giving perverts access to classrooms to defend and promote their perversion
• Etcetera, etcetera, etcetera.

I cannot fathom why any sane person would be a liberal.

[TeenageRepublican]

This was more directed at the Democratic Underground liberals. Not the regular liberals.
I just read their site and wanted to ask these questions. Some even blame the Republicans for Spitzer.

[DoctorDoom]

My post was directed at all "modern" liberals (guys like brilliantLiberal don't fit that category) and the type of liberalism that has all but destroyed America since the 60s.

[TeenageRepublican]

My post was directed at all "modern" liberals (guys like brilliantLiberal don't fit that category) and the type of liberalism that has all but destroyed America since the 60s.

I disagree with you there... I think Communism in the 50's is today's liberalism, in my opinion.

[ldb83]

My post was directed at all "modern" liberals (guys like brilliantLiberal don't fit that category) and the type of liberalism that has all but destroyed America since the 60s.

This was more directed at the Democratic Underground liberals. Not the regular liberals.
I just read their site and wanted to ask these questions. Some even blame the Republicans for Spitzer.

Apparently we're getting somewhere. We're identifying various types of liberal thought now? So it doesn't always fit one little mold? That's good to know. Liberals aren't necessarily Communist hippie Democrats? Thank goodness.

[buzzthepug!]

As much as I can't stand liberals, socialist theory, communism, feminism,etc...I am having a problem with Republicans. True, being Rep doesn't necessarily make one conservative. I just see a lot of hyprocrisy in the Republican Party. It makes me sick to vote for McCain but I'd NEVER vote for Obama or Clinton. I think the majority of the Republican Party is asleep at the wheel. They obviously need a daily dose of Free Conservatives!

[ldb83]

As much as I can't stand liberals, socialist theory, communism, feminism,etc...I am having a problem with Republicans. True, being Rep doesn't necessarily make one conservative. I just see a lot of hyprocrisy in the Republican Party. It makes me sick to vote for McCain but I'd NEVER vote for Obama or Clinton. I think the majority of the Republican Party is asleep at the wheel. They obviously need a daily dose of Free Conservatives!

These are the same sorts of reasons I won't vote Democrat just because I tend to have more moderate-to-liberal views.

The most important question for you and for the rest of our country is why you would ever cast a vote for someone who makes you sick. Why are you going to vote for McCain? That's the epitome of group-think, and it destroys our democratic process. Millions everywhere vote for who they think will win, rather than the candidate with whom they most genuinely agree, as though voting for the person who ultimately gets elected automatically means they're a winner for making the "correct" selection.

Whether you like Nader or not, you have to admit that he has a point when he says "Every four years, Americans vote for the least of the worst, and every four years, all become worse."

[DeclinetoState]

Whether you like Nader or not, you have to admit that he has a point when he says "Every four years, Americans vote for the least of the worst, and every four years, all become worse."Unfortunately, Nader is an even more undesirable alternative than the mainstream Democrats and Republicans.

[ldb83]

Unfortunately, Nader is an even more undesirable alternative than the mainstream Democrats and Republicans.

He may be, but when we're choosing between an undesirable Democrat and an undesirable Republican, it's worth our time to listen to those who don't appear to have an agenda related to either party's politics.

[DeclinetoState]

More government regulation of just about everything and opposition to nuclear power—both of which seem to be pretty close to Nader's ideals—are positions more likely to be held by liberal Democrats than conservative Republicans.

[buzzthepug!]

These are the same sorts of reasons I won't vote Democrat just because I tend to have more moderate-to-liberal views.

The most important question for you and for the rest of our country is why you would ever cast a vote for someone who makes you sick. Why are you going to vote for McCain? That's the epitome of group-think, and it destroys our democratic process. Millions everywhere vote for who they think will win, rather than the candidate with whom they most genuinely agree, as though voting for the person who ultimately gets elected automatically means they're a winner for making the "correct" selection.

Whether you like Nader or not, you have to admit that he has a point when he says "Every four years, Americans vote for the least of the worst, and every four years, all become worse."


I have to vote for McCain so Obama, Clinton or Nader do not get the presidency. A vote for McCain keeps the evil, murdering socialists out of office for 4 more years. It makes me sick to vote for McCain over Romney. I would be a lot happier if I was pulling the voting lever for Bobby Jindal. Maybe in 2012.

The point is to keep the murdering, evil, vile, socialist libs OUT of office.

[TeenageRepublican]

Apparently we're getting somewhere. We're identifying various types of liberal thought now? So it doesn't always fit one little mold? That's good to know. Liberals aren't necessarily Communist hippie Democrats? Thank goodness.

What's wrong with that?
The fact is that there are different breeds of both conservatives and liberals. That's nothing to bitch about.

[ldb83]

I have to vote for McCain so Obama, Clinton or Nader do not get the presidency. A vote for McCain keeps the evil, murdering socialists out of office for 4 more years. It makes me sick to vote for McCain over Romney. I would be a lot happier if I was pulling the voting lever for Bobby Jindal. Maybe in 2012. The point is to keep the murdering, evil, vile, socialist libs OUT of office.

Dramatic rhetoric aside, your voting strategy is not abnormal (Democrat voters operate the same way), but it's exactly what's wrong with our democratic process. If our voting choices are shitty and shittier (since we're all only voting for whoever we're told has the best chance to keep the OTHER guy out of office), we're still left with a shitty best-case scenario, are we not?

What's wrong with that? The fact is that there are different breeds of both conservatives and liberals. That's nothing to bitch about.

There was no sarcasm or bitching in my post. I am honestly pleased that this basic concept can be acknowledged.

[Naturalized-Texan]

Modern American conservatives are classical liberals like our Founding Fathers. If they were alive today, the vast majority of our Founding Fathers would be conservative Republicans.

Modern American liberals are direct descendants of the Progressives of the early 20th Century. That Progressivism was the model for Italian Fascism, German Nazism, and modern American liberalism. Fore more details and impeccable documentation, please read Liberal Fascism (http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=12919) by Jonah Goldberg. Also, Liberal Fascism Recap (http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/6394/).

[DesertFox]

That Recap is excellent, Tex. Thanks.

[Maggie_T]

Hear, hear.

I cannot, for the life of me, understand how anyone in his/her right mind can be for even the mildest form of socialism. History is just chock-o-block full of examples of socialist failure and yet some people insist on supporting that murderous fraud.

I'll never understand it.

[TeenageRepublican]

There was no sarcasm or bitching in my post. I am honestly pleased that this basic concept can be acknowledged.

Sorry. My bad.

[gnome]

Hear, hear.

I cannot, for the life of me, understand how anyone in his/her right mind can be for even the mildest form of socialism. History is just chock-o-block full of examples of socialist failure and yet some people insist on supporting that murderous fraud.

I'll never understand it.

All I can say is that a failure of one extreme does not warrant rushing to another extreme.

[Beowulf]

Whether you like Nader or not, you have to admit that he has a point when he says "Every four years, Americans vote for the least of the worst, and every four years, all become worse."

So true, 83. You will find that there are many of us here that will NOT vote for McCain. Those of us that aren't won't take the bait of "consider the alternative."

[Naturalized-Texan]

All I can say is that a failure of one extreme does not warrant rushing to another extreme.
What other extreme are you referring to, pray tell? There are no candidates who are as far out on the extreme fringe as those liberal fascists, Hillary and Obama.

[gnome]

What other extreme are you referring to, pray tell? There are no candidates who are as far out on the extreme fringe as those liberal fascists, Hillary and Obama.

I wasn't actually speaking of candidates, mainly referring to the concept that if extreme socialism fails, that anything with even a hint of socialism must automatically fail. I don't believe that.

We've been running on a somewhat hybrid system for most of our history.

[Gonzo67]

I'm not at all convinced he personally holds racist opinions. Failing to sufficiently distance oneself from a racist "ally" is certainly a problem, I just don't think it proves one is actually racist.


Your argument falls apart here...

A man that attends a "Klan Rally" ever week for 20 years, I guarantee you, has a white robe hanging in his closet.

You do not return to AA every week if you don't believe they can help you. You don't call yourself a Christian and go to a Roman Catholic church twice a week.

Obama supports what that racist prick preaches. He attended that church for over 20 years for some reason, it's a safe bet it wasn't because he DISAGREED with the sermons.

[Naturalized-Texan]

I wasn't actually speaking of candidates, mainly referring to the concept that if extreme socialism fails, that anything with even a hint of socialism must automatically fail. I don't believe that.

We've been running on a somewhat hybrid system for most of our history.
Not true. That's only been the case for much of the time since FDR. FDR prolonged and deepened the Great Depression with his socialism (actually liberal fascism that won high praise from both Mussolini and Hitler, but that's another story) and it's been part of Democrat administrations ever since.

Hillary and Obama are advocating an even more extreme version of socialism (i.e., liberal fascism) than has ever been part of our history.