# What's Wrong With Liberalism?



## PoliticalChic

Seems to be a regular objection to my OPs by my Leftwing pals that I'm constantly carping about Liberals/Progressives/Democrats.....trying to connect same with communism, Marxism.....

Guilty as charged.
And not by accident.





1. *Liberalism is popular because of the things it gives folks.* But...is that bad?
Let's see....

The progressive era was the origin of the income tax. It was all about 'take from the rich.' And there were enormously *rich folks who used monopolies* to prevent others from obtaining the same level of wealth. 
In other words, there was a basis for progressive reform. Taxation was used ....




2. But the *progressive reform was married to a worldview popularized by Karl Marx *and Engels...the taxation was to take from those with the ability to pay.....and 'give to each according to his need.'

a. Of course, the IRS has been corrupted even further today.....

3.The problems were multiple. First of all, once *government saw how easy the 'taking' was.*...by 1913, the 16th amendment....the income tax. 
The reform of monopolies became corrupted by* joining the idea with equalizing income. *As a function of government?? 
Really....what does one have to do with the other?  
Giving opportunity to all shouldn't mean mandating equality of outcome....but one can see why it would be popular.




4. So, for Liberals/Progressives/Democrats, the scheme was to *grow government so as to have more power *to give more away to those who hadn't yet earned same, ...but the by-product of this plan was to *remove the incentive to achieve, to earn, to become wealthy. It tamps down ambition.* 
The motto became "You didn't build that," which means 'you didn't earn your success.'





5. In order to give things away to people, the early *Progressives actually went to the trouble of changing the Constitution, amending it *as was required. The result was, as above, the 16th amendment. 
And to move influence out of the grasp of the states, as originally designed by the Founders, Progressives passed the 17th amendment to prevent state legislatures from choosing Senators; *so much for federalism, hello, big national government.*





6. But by the 1930's, the Liberals/Progressives/Democrats had a President who considered *the Constitution merely a suggestion. Roosevelt *decided that he could *give people homes* via government grasp of the private market.  Fannie Mae established in 1938.   Perhaps part of the reasoning, flawed though it turned out to be, was that home ownership would change people. 
*Changing human nature *was the cornerstone of communism.

a. "Communist Revolution is based on the idea of transforming human nature. &#8220;The New Soviet man or New Soviet person (Russian: &#1085;&#1086;&#1074;&#1099;&#1081; &#1089;&#1086;&#1074;&#1077;&#1090;&#1089;&#1082;&#1080;&#1081; &#1095;&#1077;&#1083;&#1086;&#1074;&#1077;&#1082, as postulated by the ideologists of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union..." New Soviet man - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

b. "We&#8217;re not interested in social reconstruction; it&#8217;s human reconstruction.&#8221; 
Hillary Rodham

c. Roosevelt simply ignored the enumerated powers; he felt it unnecessary to attempt to amend the Constitution.





7.* LBJ channeled Roosevelt's New Deal with his War on Poverty. *At the time, the poverty rate in America was around 19 percent and falling rapidly. This year, it is reported that the poverty rate is expected to be roughly 15.1 percent and climbing.
Between then and now, t*he federal government gave away roughly $12 trillion *fighting poverty, and state and local governments added another $3 trillion. Yet the *poverty rate never fell below 10.5 percent* and is now at the highest level in nearly a decade. 
Scribd

But sure was popular with a lot of folks getting the 'givings.'





8. Obama has gone way beyond the needs of the current recession to *give more things away. "..., since President Obama took office, federal welfare spending has increased by 41 percent, *more than $193 billion per year.... &#8230;.the dramatically larger increase also suggests that part of t*he program&#8217;s growth is due to conscious 
policy choices by this administration *to ease eligibility rules and expand caseloads&#8230;.income limits for eligibility have risen twice as fast as inflation since 2007..." http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/16/the-sharp-increase-in-the-food-stamps-program/ 
Study: More Than Half a Trillion Dollars Spent on Welfare But Poverty Levels Unaffected | CNS News






Above, I said *Liberalism is popular because of what it gives folks. *

Look closely.....what *Liberals/Progressives/Democrats give is what Marxism is based on: Materialism.*



*Note what is not only not given...but what is taken away:* accomplishment, the need for hard work, self-respect, spirituality, the can-do attitude that Americans were once famous for.....



*That's where conservatism comes in.*


----------



## peach174

PoliticalChic said:


> Seems to be a regular objection to my OPs by my Leftwing pals that I'm constantly carping about Liberals/Progressives/Democrats.....trying to connect same with communism, Marxism.....
> 
> Guilty as charged.
> And not by accident.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1. *Liberalism is popular because of the things it gives folks.* But...is that bad?
> Let's see....
> 
> The progressive era was the origin of the income tax. It was all about 'take from the rich.' And there were enormously *rich folks who used monopolies* to prevent others from obtaining the same level of wealth.
> In other words, there was a basis for progressive reform. Taxation was used ....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2. But the *progressive reform was married to a worldview popularized by Karl Marx *and Engels...the taxation was to take from those with the ability to pay.....and 'give to each according to his need.'
> 
> a. Of course, the IRS has been corrupted even further today.....
> 
> 3.The problems were multiple. First of all, once *government saw how easy the 'taking' was.*...by 1913, the 16th amendment....the income tax.
> The reform of monopolies became corrupted by* joining the idea with equalizing income. *As a function of government??
> Really....what does one have to do with the other?
> Giving all opportunities shouldn't mean mandating equality of outcome....but one can see why it would be popular.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4. So, for Liberals/Progressives/Democrats, the scheme was to *grow government so as to have more power *to give more away to those who hadn't yet earned same, ...but the by-product of this plan was to *remove the incentive to achieve, to earn, to become wealthy. It tamps down ambition.*
> The motto became "You didn't build that," which means 'you didn't earn your success.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 5. In order to give things away to people, the early *Progressives actually went to the trouble of changing the Constitution, amending it *as was required. The result was, as above, the 16th amendment.
> And to move influence out of the grasp of the states, as originally designed by the Founders, Progressives passed the 17th amendment to prevent state legislatures from choosing Senators; *so much for federalism, hello, big national government.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 6. But by the 1930's, the Liberals/Progressives/Democrats had a President who considered *the Constitution merely a suggestion. Roosevelt *decided that he could *give people homes* via government grasp of the private market.  Fannie Mae established in 1938.   Perhaps part of the reasoning, flawed though it turned out to be, was that home ownership would change people.
> *Changing human nature *was the cornerstone of communism.
> 
> a. "Communist Revolution is based on the idea of transforming human nature. The New Soviet man or New Soviet person (Russian: &#1085;&#1086;&#1074;&#1099;&#1081; &#1089;&#1086;&#1074;&#1077;&#1090;&#1089;&#1082;&#1080;&#1081; &#1095;&#1077;&#1083;&#1086;&#1074;&#1077;&#1082, as postulated by the ideologists of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union..." New Soviet man - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> b. "Were not interested in social reconstruction; its human reconstruction.
> Hillary Rodham
> 
> c. Roosevelt simply ignored the enumerated powers; he felt it unnecessary to attempt to amend the Constitution.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 7.* LBJ channeled Roosevelt's New Deal with his War on Poverty. *At the time, the poverty rate in America was around 19 percent and falling rapidly. This year, it is reported that the poverty rate is expected to be roughly 15.1 percent and climbing.
> Between then and now, t*he federal government gave away roughly $12 trillion *fighting poverty, and state and local governments added another $3 trillion. Yet the *poverty rate never fell below 10.5 percent* and is now at the highest level in nearly a decade.
> Scribd
> 
> But sure was popular with a lot of folks getting the 'givings.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 8. Obama has gone way beyond the needs of the current recession to *give more things away. "..., since President Obama took office, federal welfare spending has increased by 41 percent, *more than $193 billion per year.... .the dramatically larger increase also suggests that part of t*he programs growth is due to conscious
> policy choices by this administration *to ease eligibility rules and expand caseloads.income limits for eligibility have risen twice as fast as inflation since 2007..." http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/16/the-sharp-increase-in-the-food-stamps-program/
> Study: More Than Half a Trillion Dollars Spent on Welfare But Poverty Levels Unaffected | CNS News
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Above, I said *Liberalism is popular because of what it gives folks. *
> 
> Look closely.....what *Liberals/Progressives/Democrats give is what Marxism is based on: Materialism.*
> 
> 
> 
> *Note what is not only not give...but what is taken away:* accomplishment, the need for hard work, self-respect, spirituality, the can-do attitude that Americans were once famous for.....
> 
> 
> 
> *That's where conservatism comes in.*




They hide behind the words Liberal/Progressives in order to hide what they really are.
Which is Socialists Marxists. None of them could get elected if they called themselves what they really are.


----------



## NYcarbineer

If you want to argue against Liberalism, argue against what liberals actually believe, support, and advocate for;

don't construct a Marxist strawman, stick a 'Liberal' nametag on him, and then argue against that.

If you want to argue with Marxists, go argue with Marxists.


----------



## percysunshine

NYcarbineer said:


> If you want to argue against Liberalism, argue against what liberals actually believe, support, and advocate for;
> 
> don't construct a Marxist strawman, stick a 'Liberal' nametag on him, and then argue against that.
> 
> If you want to argue with Marxists, go argue with Marxists.



What liberals believe, support, and advocate for is never what they achieve. Liberalism is a utopian dream world that some people never escape from.


----------



## Mad_Cabbie

PoliticalChic said:


> Seems to be a regular objection to my OPs by my Leftwing pals that I'm constantly carping about Liberals/Progressives/Democrats.....trying to connect same with communism, Marxism.....
> 
> Guilty as charged.
> And not by accident.
> 
> 1. *Liberalism is popular because of the things it gives folks.* But...is that bad?
> Let's see....
> 
> The progressive era was the origin of the income tax. It was all about 'take from the rich.' And there were enormously *rich folks who used monopolies* to prevent others from obtaining the same level of wealth.
> In other words, there was a basis for progressive reform. Taxation was used ....
> 
> 2. But the *progressive reform was married to a worldview popularized by Karl Marx *and Engels...the taxation was to take from those with the ability to pay.....and 'give to each according to his need.'
> 
> a. Of course, the IRS has been corrupted even further today.....
> 
> 3.The problems were multiple. First of all, once *government saw how easy the 'taking' was.*...by 1913, the 16th amendment....the income tax.
> The reform of monopolies became corrupted by* joining the idea with equalizing income. *As a function of government??
> Really....what does one have to do with the other?
> Giving opportunity to all shouldn't mean mandating equality of outcome....but one can see why it would be popular.
> 
> 4. So, for Liberals/Progressives/Democrats, the scheme was to *grow government so as to have more power *to give more away to those who hadn't yet earned same, ...but the by-product of this plan was to *remove the incentive to achieve, to earn, to become wealthy. It tamps down ambition.*
> The motto became "You didn't build that," which means 'you didn't earn your success.'
> 
> 5. In order to give things away to people, the early *Progressives actually went to the trouble of changing the Constitution, amending it *as was required. The result was, as above, the 16th amendment.
> And to move influence out of the grasp of the states, as originally designed by the Founders, Progressives passed the 17th amendment to prevent state legislatures from choosing Senators; *so much for federalism, hello, big national government.*
> 
> 6. But by the 1930's, the Liberals/Progressives/Democrats had a President who considered *the Constitution merely a suggestion. Roosevelt *decided that he could *give people homes* via government grasp of the private market.  Fannie Mae established in 1938.   Perhaps part of the reasoning, flawed though it turned out to be, was that home ownership would change people.
> *Changing human nature *was the cornerstone of communism.
> 
> a. "Communist Revolution is based on the idea of transforming human nature. &#8220;The New Soviet man or New Soviet person (Russian: &#1085;&#1086;&#1074;&#1099;&#1081; &#1089;&#1086;&#1074;&#1077;&#1090;&#1089;&#1082;&#1080;&#1081; &#1095;&#1077;&#1083;&#1086;&#1074;&#1077;&#1082, as postulated by the ideologists of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union..." New Soviet man - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> b. "We&#8217;re not interested in social reconstruction; it&#8217;s human reconstruction.&#8221;
> Hillary Rodham
> 
> c. Roosevelt simply ignored the enumerated powers; he felt it unnecessary to attempt to amend the Constitution.
> 
> 
> 7.* LBJ channeled Roosevelt's New Deal with his War on Poverty. *At the time, the poverty rate in America was around 19 percent and falling rapidly. This year, it is reported that the poverty rate is expected to be roughly 15.1 percent and climbing.
> Between then and now, t*he federal government gave away roughly $12 trillion *fighting poverty, and state and local governments added another $3 trillion. Yet the *poverty rate never fell below 10.5 percent* and is now at the highest level in nearly a decade.
> Scribd
> 
> But sure was popular with a lot of folks getting the 'givings.'
> 
> 8. Obama has gone way beyond the needs of the current recession to *give more things away. "..., since President Obama took office, federal welfare spending has increased by 41 percent, *more than $193 billion per year.... &#8230;.the dramatically larger increase also suggests that part of t*he program&#8217;s growth is due to conscious
> policy choices by this administration *to ease eligibility rules and expand caseloads&#8230;.income limits for eligibility have risen twice as fast as inflation since 2007..." http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/16/the-sharp-increase-in-the-food-stamps-program/
> Study: More Than Half a Trillion Dollars Spent on Welfare But Poverty Levels Unaffected | CNS News
> 
> Above, I said *Liberalism is popular because of what it gives folks. *
> 
> Look closely.....what *Liberals/Progressives/Democrats give is what Marxism is based on: Materialism.*
> 
> *Note what is not only not give...but what is taken away:* accomplishment, the need for hard work, self-respect, spirituality, the can-do attitude that Americans were once famous for.....
> 
> *That's where conservatism comes in.*



You are mostly talking about fiscal liberalism. 

I'm a social Liberal (for the most part) and a _fiscal conservative._ 

One of my beefs with the tax code (aside from it deciding how much we pay based on what they think we should pay) Is that it unfairly rewards poor people, while punishing the middle class. 

You cannot blame that on "Liberals" if conservatives in office did nothing to change things when they had the chance.


----------



## Jroc

NYcarbineer said:


> If you want to argue against Liberalism, argue against *what liberals actually believe, support, and advocate for*;
> 
> don't construct a Marxist strawman, stick a 'Liberal' nametag on him, and then argue against that.
> 
> If you want to argue with Marxists, go argue with Marxists.



[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKjPI6no5ng]Obama: If You've Got A Business, You Didn't Build That - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## deltex1

PoliticalChic said:


> Seems to be a regular objection to my OPs by my Leftwing pals that I'm constantly carping about Liberals/Progressives/Democrats.....trying to connect same with communism, Marxism.....
> 
> Guilty as charged.
> And not by accident.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1. *Liberalism is popular because of the things it gives folks.* But...is that bad?
> Let's see....
> 
> The progressive era was the origin of the income tax. It was all about 'take from the rich.' And there were enormously *rich folks who used monopolies* to prevent others from obtaining the same level of wealth.
> In other words, there was a basis for progressive reform. Taxation was used ....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2. But the *progressive reform was married to a worldview popularized by Karl Marx *and Engels...the taxation was to take from those with the ability to pay.....and 'give to each according to his need.'
> 
> a. Of course, the IRS has been corrupted even further today.....
> 
> 3.The problems were multiple. First of all, once *government saw how easy the 'taking' was.*...by 1913, the 16th amendment....the income tax.
> The reform of monopolies became corrupted by* joining the idea with equalizing income. *As a function of government??
> Really....what does one have to do with the other?
> Giving opportunity to all shouldn't mean mandating equality of outcome....but one can see why it would be popular.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4. So, for Liberals/Progressives/Democrats, the scheme was to *grow government so as to have more power *to give more away to those who hadn't yet earned same, ...but the by-product of this plan was to *remove the incentive to achieve, to earn, to become wealthy. It tamps down ambition.*
> The motto became "You didn't build that," which means 'you didn't earn your success.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 5. In order to give things away to people, the early *Progressives actually went to the trouble of changing the Constitution, amending it *as was required. The result was, as above, the 16th amendment.
> And to move influence out of the grasp of the states, as originally designed by the Founders, Progressives passed the 17th amendment to prevent state legislatures from choosing Senators; *so much for federalism, hello, big national government.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 6. But by the 1930's, the Liberals/Progressives/Democrats had a President who considered *the Constitution merely a suggestion. Roosevelt *decided that he could *give people homes* via government grasp of the private market.  Fannie Mae established in 1938.   Perhaps part of the reasoning, flawed though it turned out to be, was that home ownership would change people.
> *Changing human nature *was the cornerstone of communism.
> 
> a. "Communist Revolution is based on the idea of transforming human nature. The New Soviet man or New Soviet person (Russian: &#1085;&#1086;&#1074;&#1099;&#1081; &#1089;&#1086;&#1074;&#1077;&#1090;&#1089;&#1082;&#1080;&#1081; &#1095;&#1077;&#1083;&#1086;&#1074;&#1077;&#1082, as postulated by the ideologists of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union..." New Soviet man - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> b. "Were not interested in social reconstruction; its human reconstruction.
> Hillary Rodham
> 
> c. Roosevelt simply ignored the enumerated powers; he felt it unnecessary to attempt to amend the Constitution.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 7.* LBJ channeled Roosevelt's New Deal with his War on Poverty. *At the time, the poverty rate in America was around 19 percent and falling rapidly. This year, it is reported that the poverty rate is expected to be roughly 15.1 percent and climbing.
> Between then and now, t*he federal government gave away roughly $12 trillion *fighting poverty, and state and local governments added another $3 trillion. Yet the *poverty rate never fell below 10.5 percent* and is now at the highest level in nearly a decade.
> Scribd
> 
> But sure was popular with a lot of folks getting the 'givings.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 8. Obama has gone way beyond the needs of the current recession to *give more things away. "..., since President Obama took office, federal welfare spending has increased by 41 percent, *more than $193 billion per year.... .the dramatically larger increase also suggests that part of t*he programs growth is due to conscious
> policy choices by this administration *to ease eligibility rules and expand caseloads.income limits for eligibility have risen twice as fast as inflation since 2007..." http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/16/the-sharp-increase-in-the-food-stamps-program/
> Study: More Than Half a Trillion Dollars Spent on Welfare But Poverty Levels Unaffected | CNS News
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Above, I said *Liberalism is popular because of what it gives folks. *
> 
> Look closely.....what *Liberals/Progressives/Democrats give is what Marxism is based on: Materialism.*
> 
> 
> 
> *Note what is not only not given...but what is taken away:* accomplishment, the need for hard work, self-respect, spirituality, the can-do attitude that Americans were once famous for.....
> 
> 
> 
> *That's where conservatism comes in.*



We are one with your analysis.


----------



## Derideo_Te

PoliticalSpice puts the *RANT* in intolerant!




> *liberal (&#712;l&#618;b &#601;r &#601;l, &#712;l&#618;b r&#601;l) *
> 
> adj.
> 1. favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.
> 2. (often cap.) designating or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform.
> 3. pertaining to, based on, or having views or policies advocating individual freedom of action and expression.
> 4. of or pertaining to representational forms of government rather than aristocracies and monarchies.
> 5.* free from prejudice or bigotry; tolerant.*
> 6. free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc.; open-minded.
> 7. characterized by generosity and willingness to give in large amounts.
> 8. given freely or abundantly; generous.
> 9. not strict or rigorous; free; not literal: a liberal interpretation of a rule.
> 10. of, pertaining to, or based on the liberal arts: a liberal education.
> n.
> 11. a person of liberal principles or views.
> ​


----------



## Mad_Cabbie

percysunshine said:


> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you want to argue against Liberalism, argue against what liberals actually believe, support, and advocate for;
> 
> don't construct a Marxist strawman, stick a 'Liberal' nametag on him, and then argue against that.
> 
> If you want to argue with Marxists, go argue with Marxists.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What liberals believe, support, and advocate for is never what they achieve. Liberalism is a utopian dream world that some people never escape from.
Click to expand...


Good lord, so you are saying that there are NO REPUBLICANS on the dole? That they would be "closet liberals" or that no welfare folks vote republican? Give me a break - I've been all over this country and poor people in every state vote either way. 

Dems in the inner city vote democrat and poor people in the sticks vote republican. You cannot in good conscience blame all fiscal woe's on "Liberalism." 


Time for republicans to have a little bit of accountability and intellectual honesty.


----------



## peach174

NYcarbineer said:


> If you want to argue against Liberalism, argue against what liberals actually believe, support, and advocate for;
> 
> don't construct a Marxist strawman, stick a 'Liberal' nametag on him, and then argue against that.
> 
> If you want to argue with Marxists, go argue with Marxists.



What are the Liberal Dem's policies?
Class struggles
Capitalism is bad and must be heavily managed though regulations.
Heavy Taxes
National Bank (Federal Reserve Bank)
Content control in news, education and entertainment.
Equal equality (redistribution of wealth).
The very same policies of Communist Marxists.


----------



## percysunshine

Mad_Cabbie said:


> percysunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you want to argue against Liberalism, argue against what liberals actually believe, support, and advocate for;
> 
> don't construct a Marxist strawman, stick a 'Liberal' nametag on him, and then argue against that.
> 
> If you want to argue with Marxists, go argue with Marxists.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What liberals believe, support, and advocate for is never what they achieve. Liberalism is a utopian dream world that some people never escape from.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Good lord, so you are saying that there are NO REPUBLICANS on the dole? That they would be "closet liberals" or that no welfare folks vote republican? Give me a break - I've been all over this country and poor people in every state vote either way.
> 
> Dems in the inner city vote democrat and poor people in the sticks vote republican. You cannot in good conscience blame all fiscal woe's on "Liberalism."
> 
> 
> Time for republicans to have a little bit of accountability and intellectual honesty.
Click to expand...


Did you read the post? Just asking.


----------



## PoliticalChic

NYcarbineer said:


> If you want to argue against Liberalism, argue against what liberals actually believe, support, and advocate for;
> 
> don't construct a Marxist strawman, stick a 'Liberal' nametag on him, and then argue against that.
> 
> If you want to argue with Marxists, go argue with Marxists.






"If you want to argue against Liberalism, argue against what liberals actually believe, support, and advocate for....."

Okey doke....






Here are some of the issues Liberals actually believe, support, and advocate for.....


1. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.

2. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces. 

3. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.




4. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers' associations. Put the party line in textbooks.

5. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policy-making positions.

6. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.




7. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them "censorship" and a violation of free speech and free press.

8. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as "normal, natural, healthy."




9. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity, which does not need a "religious crutch."

a. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity, which does not need a "religious crutch."





10. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.

11. Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the "common man." Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the "common man."

12. Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture--education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.

13. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.


Now....wouldn't an honest appraisal ....I understand how that omits your input.....agree that all or almost all are clearly the aims and desires of Democrats/Liberals/Progressive leaders?


I mean, seriously......


QED?






Oh...wait.....did I say Democrats/Liberals/Progressives????
Silly me....I got 'em from a website of declared communist goals...
The Communist Takeover Of America - 45 Declared Goals






'don't construct a Marxist strawman, stick a 'Liberal' nametag on him, and then argue against that.'

You must be looking for the Department of Redundancy Department.


----------



## Rozman

> *7. LBJ channeled Roosevelt's New Deal with his War on Poverty. At the time, the poverty rate in America was around 19 percent and falling rapidly. This year, it is reported that the poverty rate is expected to be roughly 15.1 percent and climbing.
> Between then and now, the federal government gave away roughly $12 trillion fighting poverty, and state and local governments added another $3 trillion. Yet the poverty rate never fell below 10.5 percent and is now at the highest level in nearly a decade.
> Scribd*



War on poverty and what to do about education.

The first one the war on poverty has been waged for decades and boatloads of money spent.
The same with education.

The real true Liberals will answer that it has failed because we just didn't spend enough on it.
The same with education.

But that's the liberal answer for everything isn't it.
If they feel not enough money is being spent on these issues no one is stopping them from donating
whatever is needed to fix the problems.

But that's not liberalism.
Liberalism is pointing out what "they " feel are the problems and then demand that other people pay for it.


----------



## freedombecki

Mad_Cabbie said:


> percysunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you want to argue against Liberalism, argue against what liberals actually believe, support, and advocate for;
> 
> don't construct a Marxist strawman, stick a 'Liberal' nametag on him, and then argue against that.
> 
> If you want to argue with Marxists, go argue with Marxists.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What liberals believe, support, and advocate for is never what they achieve. Liberalism is a utopian dream world that some people never escape from.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Good lord, so you are saying that there are NO REPUBLICANS on the dole? That they would be "closet liberals" or that no welfare folks vote republican? Give me a break - I've been all over this country and poor people in every state vote either way.
> 
> Dems in the inner city vote democrat and poor people in the sticks vote republican. You cannot in good conscience blame all fiscal woe's on "Liberalism."
> 
> Time for republicans to have a little bit of accountability and intellectual honesty.
Click to expand...

Suits me. I'm a Republican. Here's some honesty fer ya....

[ame=http://youtu.be/z0PUUpa5X4E]Barack Obama "I Believe in Redistribution of Wealth" Comment Loyola University 1998! - YouTube[/ame]​ ​ [ame=http://youtu.be/TB1dG1Bg1xM]Longer Version: Obama Calls Wealth Distribution 'Neighborly' - YouTube[/ame]​ ​ Income redistribution is not very neighborly, imho. ​


----------



## NYcarbineer

PoliticalChic said:


> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you want to argue against Liberalism, argue against what liberals actually believe, support, and advocate for;
> 
> don't construct a Marxist strawman, stick a 'Liberal' nametag on him, and then argue against that.
> 
> If you want to argue with Marxists, go argue with Marxists.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "If you want to argue against Liberalism, argue against what liberals actually believe, support, and advocate for....."
> 
> Okey doke....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here are some of the issues Liberals actually believe, support, and advocate for.....
> 
> 
> 1. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.
Click to expand...


Show me one measure of American liberal public opinion that supports the above.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Derideo_Te said:


> PoliticalSpice puts the *RANT* in intolerant!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *liberal (&#712;l&#618;b &#601;r &#601;l, &#712;l&#618;b r&#601;l) *
> 
> adj.
> 1. favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.
> 2. (often cap.) designating or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform.
> 3. pertaining to, based on, or having views or policies advocating individual freedom of action and expression.
> 4. of or pertaining to representational forms of government rather than aristocracies and monarchies.
> 5.* free from prejudice or bigotry; tolerant.*
> 6. free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc.; open-minded.
> 7. characterized by generosity and willingness to give in large amounts.
> 8. given freely or abundantly; generous.
> 9. not strict or rigorous; free; not literal: a liberal interpretation of a rule.
> 10. of, pertaining to, or based on the liberal arts: a liberal education.
> n.
> 11. a person of liberal principles or views.
> ​
Click to expand...




Why must you choose Sunday to embarrass yourself thusly?


Aren't the other six days enough time for you to identify yourself as a dunce?


Bet you don't even know that John Dewy lobbied the Socialists to change their name to 'Liberal' due to the terrible defeat that Woodrow Willson's successor received.


And why does it fall to moi to educate fools like you???


Well....OK:

"How Socialist John Dewey Switched Labels
[Socialists] knew that liberalism had a good reputation with the working classes  the very audience which they were targeting. The idea was to adopt the name liberal to describe socialism. Socialism, as socialism, was harder to sell. But by taking a name they did not deserve they felt they could make political gains on the backs of classical liberalism. And they did.

[Classical] liberal describes individuals supporting free markets, private property, profit management and limited governments. o-called liberals support socialism, state ownership, bureaucratic management and statism.             Ending the Liberal Confusion, by Jim Peron


----------



## NYcarbineer

percysunshine said:


> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you want to argue against Liberalism, argue against what liberals actually believe, support, and advocate for;
> 
> don't construct a Marxist strawman, stick a 'Liberal' nametag on him, and then argue against that.
> 
> If you want to argue with Marxists, go argue with Marxists.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What liberals believe, support, and advocate for is never what they achieve. Liberalism is a utopian dream world that some people never escape from.
Click to expand...


So the best measure of how evil a person is is to what extent they are idealists?  

Heaven is the ultimate utopia.  I thought conservatives owned the dream of someday getting to Heaven.

lol


----------



## PoliticalChic

NYcarbineer said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you want to argue against Liberalism, argue against what liberals actually believe, support, and advocate for;
> 
> don't construct a Marxist strawman, stick a 'Liberal' nametag on him, and then argue against that.
> 
> If you want to argue with Marxists, go argue with Marxists.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "If you want to argue against Liberalism, argue against what liberals actually believe, support, and advocate for....."
> 
> Okey doke....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here are some of the issues Liberals actually believe, support, and advocate for.....
> 
> 
> 1. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Show me one measure of American liberal public opinion that supports the above.
Click to expand...




So....we're stipulating that all of the rest of the list are correct?

Good start.



Now for this one: 

"NORTH: The Obama administration plan to disarm America
Nuclear plan is reckless lunacy
Americans following this years presidential campaign would never know it from mainstream media coverage, but the commander in chief we hired nearly four years ago has set the United States on a course for unilateral disarmament."

Read more: NORTH: The Obama administration plan to disarm America - Washington Times 
Follow us: [MENTION=39892]Was[/MENTION]htimes on Twitter


----------



## Derideo_Te

PoliticalChic said:


> Derideo_Te said:
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalSpice puts the *RANT* in intolerant!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *liberal (&#712;l&#618;b &#601;r &#601;l, &#712;l&#618;b r&#601;l) *
> 
> adj.
> 1. favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.
> 2. (often cap.) designating or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform.
> 3. pertaining to, based on, or having views or policies advocating individual freedom of action and expression.
> 4. of or pertaining to representational forms of government rather than aristocracies and monarchies.
> 5.* free from prejudice or bigotry; tolerant.*
> 6. free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc.; open-minded.
> 7. characterized by generosity and willingness to give in large amounts.
> 8. given freely or abundantly; generous.
> 9. not strict or rigorous; free; not literal: a liberal interpretation of a rule.
> 10. of, pertaining to, or based on the liberal arts: a liberal education.
> n.
> 11. a person of liberal principles or views.
> ​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why must you choose Sunday to embarrass yourself thusly?
> 
> 
> Aren't the other six days enough time for you to identify yourself as a dunce?
> 
> 
> Bet you don't even know that John Dewy lobbied the Socialists to change their name to 'Liberal' due to the terrible defeat that Woodrow Willson's successor received.
> 
> 
> And why does it fall to moi to educate fools like you???
> 
> 
> Well....OK:
> 
> "How Socialist John Dewey Switched Labels
> [Socialists] knew that liberalism had a good reputation with the working classes  the very audience which they were targeting. The idea was to adopt the name liberal to describe socialism. Socialism, as socialism, was harder to sell. But by taking a name they did not deserve they felt they could make political gains on the backs of classical liberalism. And they did.
> 
> [Classical] liberal describes individuals supporting free markets, private property, profit management and limited governments. o-called liberals support socialism, state ownership, bureaucratic management and statism.             Ending the Liberal Confusion, by Jim Peron
Click to expand...



Did I forget to mention that We the People support your right to post ignorant rants, PoliticalSpice.


----------



## Redfish

more accurately,  obama is a marxist collectivist.


----------



## NYcarbineer

PoliticalChic said:


> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you want to argue against Liberalism, argue against what liberals actually believe, support, and advocate for;
> 
> don't construct a Marxist strawman, stick a 'Liberal' nametag on him, and then argue against that.
> 
> If you want to argue with Marxists, go argue with Marxists.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "If you want to argue against Liberalism, argue against what liberals actually believe, support, and advocate for....."
> 
> Okey doke....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here are some of the issues Liberals actually believe, support, and advocate for.....
> 
> 
> 1. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.
> 
> 2. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces.
> 
> 3. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers' associations. Put the party line in textbooks.
> 
> 5. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policy-making positions.
> 
> 6. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 7. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them "censorship" and a violation of free speech and free press.
> 
> 8. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as "normal, natural, healthy."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 9. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity, which does not need a "religious crutch."
> 
> a. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity, which does not need a "religious crutch."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 10. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.
> 
> 11. Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the "common man." Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the "common man."
> 
> 12. Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture--education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.
> 
> 13. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.
> 
> 
> Now....wouldn't an honest appraisal ....I understand how that omits your input.....agree that all or almost all are clearly the aims and desires of Democrats/Liberals/Progressive leaders?
> 
> 
> I mean, seriously......
> 
> 
> QED?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh...wait.....did I say Democrats/Liberals/Progressives????
> Silly me....I got 'em from a website of declared communist goals...
> The Communist Takeover Of America - 45 Declared Goals
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'don't construct a Marxist strawman, stick a 'Liberal' nametag on him, and then argue against that.'
> 
> You must be looking for the Department of Redundancy Department.
Click to expand...


I always enjoy it when an attempt to refute something I said results in a total vindication of what I said.


----------



## Redfish

Derideo_Te said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Derideo_Te said:
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalSpice puts the *RANT* in intolerant!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why must you choose Sunday to embarrass yourself thusly?
> 
> 
> Aren't the other six days enough time for you to identify yourself as a dunce?
> 
> 
> Bet you don't even know that John Dewy lobbied the Socialists to change their name to 'Liberal' due to the terrible defeat that Woodrow Willson's successor received.
> 
> 
> And why does it fall to moi to educate fools like you???
> 
> 
> Well....OK:
> 
> "How Socialist John Dewey Switched Labels
> [Socialists] knew that liberalism had a good reputation with the working classes  the very audience which they were targeting. The idea was to adopt the name liberal to describe socialism. Socialism, as socialism, was harder to sell. But by taking a name they did not deserve they felt they could make political gains on the backs of classical liberalism. And they did.
> 
> [Classical] liberal describes individuals supporting free markets, private property, profit management and limited governments. o-called liberals support socialism, state ownership, bureaucratic management and statism.             Ending the Liberal Confusion, by Jim Peron
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Did I forget to mention that We the People support your right to post ignorant rants, PoliticalSpice.
Click to expand...



OK, so you cannot refute anything she said, but you can hurl insults-------------typical dem/lib.    

aren't you guys about due for a Palin attack thread?


----------



## NYcarbineer

Redfish said:


> more accurately,  obama is a marxist collectivist.



And the Pope too?


----------



## Redfish

NYcarbineer said:


> Redfish said:
> 
> 
> 
> more accurately,  obama is a marxist collectivist.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And the Pope too?
Click to expand...


The Pope is head of the Catholic church.   Last time I checked he was not the leader of any country.   His views are religious views, not political ones.

comparing obama to the pope is like comparing Pontius Pilot to Jesus.


----------



## NYcarbineer

PoliticalChic said:


> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> "If you want to argue against Liberalism, argue against what liberals actually believe, support, and advocate for....."
> 
> Okey doke....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here are some of the issues Liberals actually believe, support, and advocate for.....
> 
> 
> 1. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Show me one measure of American liberal public opinion that supports the above.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So....we're stipulating that all of the rest of the list are correct?
> 
> Good start.
> 
> 
> 
> Now for this one:
> 
> "NORTH: The Obama administration plan to disarm America
> Nuclear plan is reckless lunacy
> Americans following this years presidential campaign would never know it from mainstream media coverage, but the commander in chief we hired nearly four years ago has set the United States on a course for unilateral disarmament."
> 
> Read more: NORTH: The Obama administration plan to disarm America - Washington Times
> Follow us: [MENTION=39892]Was[/MENTION]htimes on Twitter
Click to expand...


A nutty editorial is not evidence.

Show me one reliable measure of liberal public opinion that supports your looney claim that liberals want to totally disarm America.

Once you concede your claim was idiocy, we can move on to the next.


----------



## NYcarbineer

Redfish said:


> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Redfish said:
> 
> 
> 
> more accurately,  obama is a marxist collectivist.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And the Pope too?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Pope is head of the Catholic church.   Last time I checked he was not the leader of any country.   His views are religious views, not political ones.
> 
> comparing obama to the pope is like comparing Pontius Pilot to Jesus.
Click to expand...


So you can't be a Marxist unless you hold political office?

lol, that is the most retarded duck and dodge I've heard in a long time.


----------



## Redfish

NYcarbineer said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Show me one measure of American liberal public opinion that supports the above.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So....we're stipulating that all of the rest of the list are correct?
> 
> Good start.
> 
> 
> 
> Now for this one:
> 
> "NORTH: The Obama administration plan to disarm America
> Nuclear plan is reckless lunacy
> Americans following this years presidential campaign would never know it from mainstream media coverage, but the commander in chief we hired nearly four years ago has set the United States on a course for unilateral disarmament."
> 
> Read more: NORTH: The Obama administration plan to disarm America - Washington Times
> Follow us: [MENTION=39892]Was[/MENTION]htimes on Twitter
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> A nutty editorial is not evidence.
> 
> Show me one reliable measure of liberal public opinion that supports your looney claim that liberals want to totally disarm America.
> 
> Once you concede your claim was idiocy, we can move on to the next.
Click to expand...




Liberals: Explain how disarming law-abiding citizens will stop criminals? - Yahoo Answers


----------



## NYcarbineer

Redfish said:


> Derideo_Te said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why must you choose Sunday to embarrass yourself thusly?
> 
> 
> Aren't the other six days enough time for you to identify yourself as a dunce?
> 
> 
> Bet you don't even know that John Dewy lobbied the Socialists to change their name to 'Liberal' due to the terrible defeat that Woodrow Willson's successor received.
> 
> 
> And why does it fall to moi to educate fools like you???
> 
> 
> Well....OK:
> 
> "How Socialist John Dewey Switched Labels
> [Socialists] knew that liberalism had a good reputation with the working classes  the very audience which they were targeting. The idea was to adopt the name liberal to describe socialism. Socialism, as socialism, was harder to sell. But by taking a name they did not deserve they felt they could make political gains on the backs of classical liberalism. And they did.
> 
> [Classical] liberal describes individuals supporting free markets, private property, profit management and limited governments. o-called liberals support socialism, state ownership, bureaucratic management and statism.             Ending the Liberal Confusion, by Jim Peron
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did I forget to mention that We the People support your right to post ignorant rants, PoliticalSpice.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> OK, so you cannot refute anything she said, but you can hurl insults-------------typical dem/lib.
> 
> aren't you guys about due for a Palin attack thread?
Click to expand...



She claimed that most American liberals want to totally, unilaterally disarm the United States.  

She is incapable of providing any credible evidence to support that nonsense.

That is my refutation.  Would you like to help her out, or admit that she's full of shit on that one?


----------



## Geaux4it

Plain and simple- Liberalism is a disease. Just something wrong between the ears

-Geaux


----------



## Spoonman

well I'd be glad to make a list but I don't think the site has enough bandwidth to host it


----------



## Redfish

NYcarbineer said:


> Redfish said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> And the Pope too?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Pope is head of the Catholic church.   Last time I checked he was not the leader of any country.   His views are religious views, not political ones.
> 
> comparing obama to the pope is like comparing Pontius Pilot to Jesus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So you can't be a Marxist unless you hold political office?
> 
> lol, that is the most retarded duck and dodge I've heard in a long time.
Click to expand...


since thats not what I said, your comment is of no value.   Are you claiming that the catholic church is marxist?   are you claiming that marx was a catholic?


----------



## Geaux4it

Redfish said:


> more accurately,  obama is a marxist collectivist.



And a card carrying narcissist.

-Geaux


----------



## NYcarbineer

Redfish said:


> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> So....we're stipulating that all of the rest of the list are correct?
> 
> Good start.
> 
> 
> 
> Now for this one:
> 
> "NORTH: The Obama administration plan to disarm America
> Nuclear plan is reckless lunacy
> Americans following this years presidential campaign would never know it from mainstream media coverage, but the commander in chief we hired nearly four years ago has set the United States on a course for unilateral disarmament."
> 
> Read more: NORTH: The Obama administration plan to disarm America - Washington Times
> Follow us: [MENTION=39892]Was[/MENTION]htimes on Twitter
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A nutty editorial is not evidence.
> 
> Show me one reliable measure of liberal public opinion that supports your looney claim that liberals want to totally disarm America.
> 
> Once you concede your claim was idiocy, we can move on to the next.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Liberals: Explain how disarming law-abiding citizens will stop criminals? - Yahoo Answers
Click to expand...


I know without even opening that that there is no credible evidence within that proving that most Liberals want to totally disarm America.

Stop insulting our intelligence.


----------



## peach174

Geaux4it said:


> Plain and simple- Liberalism is a disease. Just something wrong between the ears
> 
> -Geaux



I think that their electrical wirer's aren't connected right and they had to be rerouted.
That's why they are unable to think logically.


----------



## M14 Shooter

What's Wrong With Liberalism? 

If nothing else, its creation and support of the welfare state, where people are forced to provide goods and services to others w/o compensation, is, inarguably, involuntary servitude.


----------



## candycorn

The funny thing is that everyone has some liberalism in them; it probably explains why conservatives are usually so hateful, they have this internal conflict of inbred hypo-criticism.


----------



## NYcarbineer

Redfish said:


> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Redfish said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Pope is head of the Catholic church.   Last time I checked he was not the leader of any country.   His views are religious views, not political ones.
> 
> comparing obama to the pope is like comparing Pontius Pilot to Jesus.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So you can't be a Marxist unless you hold political office?
> 
> lol, that is the most retarded duck and dodge I've heard in a long time.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> since thats not what I said, your comment is of no value.   Are you claiming that the catholic church is marxist?   are you claiming that marx was a catholic?
Click to expand...


You claimed that the Pope has no political views.  That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard.


----------



## M14 Shooter

NYcarbineer said:


> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Show me one measure of American liberal public opinion that supports the above.
> 
> 
> 
> A nutty editorial is not evidence.
Click to expand...

You asked for "one measure of American liberal public opinion".  
You got it. 
Realizing this, you then moved the goalposts:


> Show me one *reliable *measure of liberal public opinion that supports...


Eat it and smile.


----------



## JWBooth

Modern or Classical?


----------



## M14 Shooter

candycorn said:


> The funny thing is that everyone has some liberalism in them; it probably explains why conservatives are usually so hateful, they have this internal conflict of inbred hypo-criticism.


Interesting how all of your words, above, add nothing of value to the conversation.


----------



## NYcarbineer

M14 Shooter said:


> What's Wrong With Liberalism?
> 
> If nothing else, its creation and support of the welfare state, where people are forced to provide goods and services to others w/o compensation, is, inarguably, involuntary servitude.



Who supports having a country where no taxes can be levied, for anything?  You?


----------



## M14 Shooter

NYcarbineer said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> 
> What's Wrong With Liberalism?
> 
> If nothing else, its creation and support of the welfare state, where people are forced to provide goods and services to others w/o compensation, is, inarguably, involuntary servitude.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who supports having a country where no taxes can be levied, for anything?  You?
Click to expand...

I accept your red herring as a concession of the point.
You are thusly dismissed.


----------



## Redfish

NYcarbineer said:


> Redfish said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> So you can't be a Marxist unless you hold political office?
> 
> lol, that is the most retarded duck and dodge I've heard in a long time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> since thats not what I said, your comment is of no value.   Are you claiming that the catholic church is marxist?   are you claiming that marx was a catholic?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You claimed that the Pope has no political views.  That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard.
Click to expand...


I said that his views come from religion, not politics.   Can you show where he ever campaigned for any political candidate or party?


----------



## CrusaderFrank

Redfish said:


> Derideo_Te said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why must you choose Sunday to embarrass yourself thusly?
> 
> 
> Aren't the other six days enough time for you to identify yourself as a dunce?
> 
> 
> Bet you don't even know that John Dewy lobbied the Socialists to change their name to 'Liberal' due to the terrible defeat that Woodrow Willson's successor received.
> 
> 
> And why does it fall to moi to educate fools like you???
> 
> 
> Well....OK:
> 
> "How Socialist John Dewey Switched Labels
> [Socialists] knew that liberalism had a good reputation with the working classes  the very audience which they were targeting. The idea was to adopt the name liberal to describe socialism. Socialism, as socialism, was harder to sell. But by taking a name they did not deserve they felt they could make political gains on the backs of classical liberalism. And they did.
> 
> [Classical] liberal describes individuals supporting free markets, private property, profit management and limited governments. o-called liberals support socialism, state ownership, bureaucratic management and statism.             Ending the Liberal Confusion, by Jim Peron
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did I forget to mention that We the People support your right to post ignorant rants, PoliticalSpice.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> OK, so you cannot refute anything she said, but you can hurl insults-------------typical dem/lib.
> 
> aren't you guys about due for a Palin attack thread?
Click to expand...



It's straight out of Alinsky, it's Alinsky #5 (Ridicule) with a side of schmear


----------



## M14 Shooter

CrusaderFrank said:


> Redfish said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Derideo_Te said:
> 
> 
> 
> Did I forget to mention that We the People support your right to post ignorant rants, PoliticalSpice.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OK, so you cannot refute anything she said, but you can hurl insults-------------typical dem/lib.
> 
> aren't you guys about due for a Palin attack thread?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's straight out of Alinsky, it's Alinsky #5 (Ridicule) with a side of schmear
Click to expand...

Hi Frank!    How's the Jaegering?


----------



## NYcarbineer

M14 Shooter said:


> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Show me one measure of American liberal public opinion that supports the above.
> 
> 
> 
> A nutty editorial is not evidence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You asked for "one measure of American liberal public opinion".
> You got it.
> Realizing this, you then moved the goalposts:
> 
> 
> 
> Show me one *reliable *measure of liberal public opinion that supports...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Eat it and smile.
Click to expand...


I sometimes forget I'm not dealing with literate sensible adults when I'm talking to the rightwing inmates here at USMB.

An unreliable source is not evidence.  I asked for evidence.  I was provided an unreliable source, which apparently the poster was too stupid to know that an unreliable source is not evidence.


----------



## Redfish

NYcarbineer said:


> Redfish said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> A nutty editorial is not evidence.
> 
> Show me one reliable measure of liberal public opinion that supports your looney claim that liberals want to totally disarm America.
> 
> Once you concede your claim was idiocy, we can move on to the next.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Liberals: Explain how disarming law-abiding citizens will stop criminals? - Yahoo Answers
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I know without even opening that that there is no credible evidence within that proving that most Liberals want to totally disarm America.
> 
> Stop insulting our intelligence.
Click to expand...


did you read the cite?   afraid it might prove you wrong?

BTW,  most is not all.    some libs retain a modicum of intelligence, and some libs are gun owners--------Senator Boxer has a CC permit.


----------



## Katzndogz

At its heart, liberalism is totalitarianism.  It can be nothing else.


----------



## NYcarbineer

CrusaderFrank said:


> Redfish said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Derideo_Te said:
> 
> 
> 
> Did I forget to mention that We the People support your right to post ignorant rants, PoliticalSpice.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OK, so you cannot refute anything she said, but you can hurl insults-------------typical dem/lib.
> 
> aren't you guys about due for a Palin attack thread?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's straight out of Alinsky, it's Alinsky #5 (Ridicule) with a side of schmear
Click to expand...


So what you're saying is, every post from PoliticalChic that contains ridicule is straight out of Alinsky.

Tell her that, fatso.


----------



## NYcarbineer

Redfish said:


> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Redfish said:
> 
> 
> 
> Liberals: Explain how disarming law-abiding citizens will stop criminals? - Yahoo Answers
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I know without even opening that that there is no credible evidence within that proving that most Liberals want to totally disarm America.
> 
> Stop insulting our intelligence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> did you read the cite?   afraid it might prove you wrong?
> 
> BTW,  most is not all.    some libs retain a modicum of intelligence, and some libs are gun owners--------Senator Boxer has a CC permit.
Click to expand...


I read it now.  It was even dumber than I thought it would be.  There isn't even one identifiable liberal on there who calls for the total disarmament of America.

Such as unilaterally getting rid of all of our nuclear weapons.

You're getting more stupid every day.  It's very entertaining.


----------



## PoliticalChic

NYcarbineer said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you want to argue against Liberalism, argue against what liberals actually believe, support, and advocate for;
> 
> don't construct a Marxist strawman, stick a 'Liberal' nametag on him, and then argue against that.
> 
> If you want to argue with Marxists, go argue with Marxists.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "If you want to argue against Liberalism, argue against what liberals actually believe, support, and advocate for....."
> 
> Okey doke....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here are some of the issues Liberals actually believe, support, and advocate for.....
> 
> 
> 1. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.
> 
> 2. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces.
> 
> 3. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers' associations. Put the party line in textbooks.
> 
> 5. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policy-making positions.
> 
> 6. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 7. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them "censorship" and a violation of free speech and free press.
> 
> 8. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as "normal, natural, healthy."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 9. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity, which does not need a "religious crutch."
> 
> a. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity, which does not need a "religious crutch."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 10. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.
> 
> 11. Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the "common man." Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the "common man."
> 
> 12. Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture--education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.
> 
> 13. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.
> 
> 
> Now....wouldn't an honest appraisal ....I understand how that omits your input.....agree that all or almost all are clearly the aims and desires of Democrats/Liberals/Progressive leaders?
> 
> 
> I mean, seriously......
> 
> 
> QED?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh...wait.....did I say Democrats/Liberals/Progressives????
> Silly me....I got 'em from a website of declared communist goals...
> The Communist Takeover Of America - 45 Declared Goals
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'don't construct a Marxist strawman, stick a 'Liberal' nametag on him, and then argue against that.'
> 
> You must be looking for the Department of Redundancy Department.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I always enjoy it when an attempt to refute something I said results in a total vindication of what I said.
Click to expand...





Merely because you don't admit it.....especially with your track record on honesty.....has no bearing on the truth of my post.


----------



## PoliticalChic

NYcarbineer said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Show me one measure of American liberal public opinion that supports the above.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So....we're stipulating that all of the rest of the list are correct?
> 
> Good start.
> 
> 
> 
> Now for this one:
> 
> "NORTH: The Obama administration plan to disarm America
> Nuclear plan is reckless lunacy
> Americans following this years presidential campaign would never know it from mainstream media coverage, but the commander in chief we hired nearly four years ago has set the United States on a course for unilateral disarmament."
> 
> Read more: NORTH: The Obama administration plan to disarm America - Washington Times
> Follow us: [MENTION=39892]Was[/MENTION]htimes on Twitter
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> A nutty editorial is not evidence.
> 
> Show me one reliable measure of liberal public opinion that supports your looney claim that liberals want to totally disarm America.
> 
> Once you concede your claim was idiocy, we can move on to the next.
Click to expand...





"Show me one reliable measure of liberal public opinion....blah, blah, blah...."

"President Obama won a second term tonight as ABC News projects he will be re-elected and he promised his thrilled supporters "that for the United States of America the best is yet to come."
President Obama Wins Re-Election and Promises 'Best Is Yet to Come' - ABC News


----------



## Redfish

PoliticalChic said:


> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> "If you want to argue against Liberalism, argue against what liberals actually believe, support, and advocate for....."
> 
> Okey doke....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here are some of the issues Liberals actually believe, support, and advocate for.....
> 
> 
> 1. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.
> 
> 2. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces.
> 
> 3. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers' associations. Put the party line in textbooks.
> 
> 5. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policy-making positions.
> 
> 6. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 7. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them "censorship" and a violation of free speech and free press.
> 
> 8. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as "normal, natural, healthy."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 9. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity, which does not need a "religious crutch."
> 
> a. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity, which does not need a "religious crutch."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 10. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.
> 
> 11. Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the "common man." Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the "common man."
> 
> 12. Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture--education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.
> 
> 13. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.
> 
> 
> Now....wouldn't an honest appraisal ....I understand how that omits your input.....agree that all or almost all are clearly the aims and desires of Democrats/Liberals/Progressive leaders?
> 
> 
> I mean, seriously......
> 
> 
> QED?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh...wait.....did I say Democrats/Liberals/Progressives????
> Silly me....I got 'em from a website of declared communist goals...
> The Communist Takeover Of America - 45 Declared Goals
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'don't construct a Marxist strawman, stick a 'Liberal' nametag on him, and then argue against that.'
> 
> You must be looking for the Department of Redundancy Department.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I always enjoy it when an attempt to refute something I said results in a total vindication of what I said.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Merely because you don't admit it.....especially with your track record on honesty.....has no bearing on the truth of my post.
Click to expand...


Aw, ya beat me to it.  your comment also applies to his post #50.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Geaux4it said:


> Redfish said:
> 
> 
> 
> more accurately,  obama is a marxist collectivist.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And a card carrying narcissist.
> 
> -Geaux
Click to expand...




A tribute to the President...and one of my fav pieces: Ethelbert Nevin's 'Narcissus"


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qNm-IhQ_h08]Ethelbert Nevin: Water Scenes Op. 13 No. 4 - Narcissus - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## PoliticalChic

peach174 said:


> Geaux4it said:
> 
> 
> 
> Plain and simple- Liberalism is a disease. Just something wrong between the ears
> 
> -Geaux
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think that their electrical wirer's aren't connected right and they had to be rerouted.
> That's why they are unable to think logically.
Click to expand...



Great minds think alike....Coulter said basically what you just posted:

'Let me give you a little tip: if you want liberalism to continue in this country, you have to realize that liberal students are being let down by their professors!  They have liberal school teachers, and read the liberal press!  Because of this weak preparation, they are unable to argue, to think beyond the first knee-jerk impulse. They cant put together a logical thought. Now, compare that to a college Republican'


----------



## Mad_Cabbie

freedombecki said:


> Mad_Cabbie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> percysunshine said:
> 
> 
> 
> What liberals believe, support, and advocate for is never what they achieve. Liberalism is a utopian dream world that some people never escape from.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Good lord, so you are saying that there are NO REPUBLICANS on the dole? That they would be "closet liberals" or that no welfare folks vote republican? Give me a break - I've been all over this country and poor people in every state vote either way.
> 
> Dems in the inner city vote democrat and poor people in the sticks vote republican. You cannot in good conscience blame all fiscal woe's on "Liberalism."
> 
> Time for republicans to have a little bit of accountability and intellectual honesty.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Suits me. I'm a Republican. Here's some honesty fer ya....
> 
> [ame=http://youtu.be/z0PUUpa5X4E]Barack Obama "I Believe in Redistribution of Wealth" Comment Loyola University 1998! - YouTube[/ame]​ ​ [ame=http://youtu.be/TB1dG1Bg1xM]Longer Version: Obama Calls Wealth Distribution 'Neighborly' - YouTube[/ame]​ ​ Income redistribution is not very neighborly, imho. ​
Click to expand...


No, honesty would be admitting that your party does this too.


----------



## M14 Shooter

Mad_Cabbie said:


> No, honesty would be admitting that your party does this too.


There are a good number of liberals in the GOP - everyone knows this.
How does this address the point in any meaningful way?


----------



## PoliticalChic

candycorn said:


> The funny thing is that everyone has some liberalism in them; it probably explains why conservatives are usually so hateful, they have this internal conflict of inbred hypo-criticism.






Let's begin by correcting this aspect of your lacunae....

....the entire compendium of same is beyond the time and scope of the post.


Classical liberalism:  individualism, free markets, and limited constitutional government.


And, here, a bonus tidbit for you. "explains why conservatives are usually so hateful,..."

It was Liberal/Progressive/Democrats who formed the KKK, instituted eugenics, and locked up innocent Japanese Americans.
That seems pretty hateful a history......


Please take notes so you don't make the same mistake again.


----------



## PoliticalChic

NYcarbineer said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> 
> What's Wrong With Liberalism?
> 
> If nothing else, its creation and support of the welfare state, where people are forced to provide goods and services to others w/o compensation, is, inarguably, involuntary servitude.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who supports having a country where no taxes can be levied, for anything?  You?
Click to expand...




Do you know the history of taxation?

Of course not.

Do you understand the difference between apportioned taxation, e.g., what the Constitution called for, and direct taxation?

Of course not.



OK.....try this: for conservatives, taxation is to pay for the legitimate functions of government, any excess to be returned via tax cuts.

For Liberals, taxes are a punishment for success.


----------



## regent

''For the framers of the Constitution were the most liberal thinkers of all the ages and the charter they produced out of the liberal revolution of their time has never been and is not now surpassed in liberal thought." 

General Douglas MacArthur


----------



## candycorn

PoliticalChic said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> The funny thing is that everyone has some liberalism in them; it probably explains why conservatives are usually so hateful, they have this internal conflict of inbred hypo-criticism.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let's begin by correcting this aspect of your lacunae....
> 
> ....the entire compendium of same is beyond the time and scope of the post.
> 
> 
> Classical liberalism:  individualism, free markets, and limited constitutional government.
> 
> 
> And, here, a bonus tidbit for you. "explains why conservatives are usually so hateful,..."
> 
> It was Liberal/Progressive/Democrats who formed the KKK, instituted eugenics, and locked up innocent Japanese Americans.
> That seems pretty hateful a history......
> 
> 
> Please take notes so you don't make the same mistake again.
Click to expand...


Yawn!
Did you say something?


----------



## peach174

PoliticalChic said:


> peach174 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Geaux4it said:
> 
> 
> 
> Plain and simple- Liberalism is a disease. Just something wrong between the ears
> 
> -Geaux
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think that their electrical wirer's aren't connected right and they had to be rerouted.
> That's why they are unable to think logically.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Great minds think alike....Coulter said basically what you just posted:
> 
> 'Let me give you a little tip: if you want liberalism to continue in this country, you have to realize that liberal students are being let down by their professors!  They have liberal school teachers, and read the liberal press!  Because of this weak preparation, they are unable to argue, to think beyond the first knee-jerk impulse. They cant put together a logical thought. Now, compare that to a college Republican'
Click to expand...



They think differently.
I was saying this in the 70's way before Coulter.
An example would be Atlas Shrugged.
Conservatives see it logically as big government and corruption was causing the collapse.
Liberals saw it as promoting the rich.
In another thread on this board someone posted about their sisters mentality.
Conservatives saw it as entitlement give me, give me mentality.
Liberals saw it as just a story or a dysfunctional family.


----------



## M14 Shooter

regent said:


> ''For the framers of the Constitution were the most liberal thinkers of all the ages and the charter they produced out of the liberal revolution of their time has never been and is not now surpassed in liberal thought."
> General Douglas MacArthur


Doug was speaking in terms of classical liberalsm, not Modern American Liberalism.

Anyone with a tenth of a brain and the smallest iota of intellectual honesty understands the difference, both literal and contextual.


----------



## candycorn

regent said:


> ''For the framers of the Constitution were the most liberal thinkers of all the ages and the charter they produced out of the liberal revolution of their time has never been and is not now surpassed in liberal thought."
> 
> General Douglas MacArthur



Liberals are what separated this nation from all other nations that came before (or have gone since) it's inception.  It's what made and makes us unique in the world.  

The difference is that liberals embrace the uniqueness of America and conservatives want us to be like every other nation.


----------



## peach174

candycorn said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> ''For the framers of the Constitution were the most liberal thinkers of all the ages and the charter they produced out of the liberal revolution of their time has never been and is not now surpassed in liberal thought."
> 
> General Douglas MacArthur
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Liberals are what separated this nation from all other nations that came before (or have gone since) it's inception.  It's what made and makes us unique in the world.
> 
> The difference is that liberals embrace the uniqueness of America and conservatives want us to be like every other nation.
Click to expand...


Conservatives want a free market health care system.
Liberals are the one who passed a health care bill that is like every other nation.


----------



## JWBooth

Modern Liberalism


----------



## PoliticalChic

regent said:


> ''For the framers of the Constitution were the most liberal thinkers of all the ages and the charter they produced out of the liberal revolution of their time has never been and is not now surpassed in liberal thought."
> 
> General Douglas MacArthur





Classical liberalism....what, today, would be called conservatism.

You might want to pick up the following:

The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Constitution (Politically Incorrect Guides) by Kevin R. C. Gutzman 


It will inform your understanding.


----------



## boedicca

The question "What is wrong with Liberalism?" is better addressed by asking people what is right with Liberalism.

Answer: Nothing.


----------



## PoliticalChic

candycorn said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> The funny thing is that everyone has some liberalism in them; it probably explains why conservatives are usually so hateful, they have this internal conflict of inbred hypo-criticism.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let's begin by correcting this aspect of your lacunae....
> 
> ....the entire compendium of same is beyond the time and scope of the post.
> 
> 
> Classical liberalism:  individualism, free markets, and limited constitutional government.
> 
> 
> And, here, a bonus tidbit for you. "explains why conservatives are usually so hateful,..."
> 
> It was Liberal/Progressive/Democrats who formed the KKK, instituted eugenics, and locked up innocent Japanese Americans.
> That seems pretty hateful a history......
> 
> 
> Please take notes so you don't make the same mistake again.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yawn!
> Did you say something?
Click to expand...




I see the level of attention you paid in school hasn't changed.

At least you're consistent.


----------



## PoliticalChic

JWBooth said:


> Modern Liberalism






Good pic of how big government works.

And let me add this.....

 Culture is a stubborn opponent. The Soviet Union attempted to create the New Soviet Man with gulags, psychiatric hospitals, and firing squads for seventy years and succeeded only in producing a more corrupt culture. 
Bork, Slouching Toward Gomorrah, p. 198


----------



## candycorn

PoliticalChic said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Let's begin by correcting this aspect of your lacunae....
> 
> ....the entire compendium of same is beyond the time and scope of the post.
> 
> 
> Classical liberalism:  individualism, free markets, and limited constitutional government.
> 
> 
> And, here, a bonus tidbit for you. "explains why conservatives are usually so hateful,..."
> 
> It was Liberal/Progressive/Democrats who formed the KKK, instituted eugenics, and locked up innocent Japanese Americans.
> That seems pretty hateful a history......
> 
> 
> Please take notes so you don't make the same mistake again.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yawn!
> Did you say something?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I see the level of attention you paid in school hasn't changed.
> 
> At least you're consistent.
Click to expand...


You're consistently boring (and wrong).


----------



## candycorn

peach174 said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> ''For the framers of the Constitution were the most liberal thinkers of all the ages and the charter they produced out of the liberal revolution of their time has never been and is not now surpassed in liberal thought."
> 
> General Douglas MacArthur
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Liberals are what separated this nation from all other nations that came before (or have gone since) it's inception.  It's what made and makes us unique in the world.
> 
> The difference is that liberals embrace the uniqueness of America and conservatives want us to be like every other nation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Conservatives want a free market health care system.
> Liberals are the one who passed a health care bill that is like every other nation.
Click to expand...


In the case of healthcare (and gun control--likely a contributor to the graphic below); the rest of the world has it right.


----------



## PoliticalChic

candycorn said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yawn!
> Did you say something?
> 
> 
> 
> I see the level of attention you paid in school hasn't changed.
> 
> At least you're consistent.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You're consistently boring (and wrong).
Click to expand...




You are today's winner in the category of 'Unintentional Humor."


First you post "yawn" and suggest that you didn't read my instruction to you.....



Then you say I'm wrong.....so you must have read same.



I love it.



Dunce.


----------



## candycorn

PoliticalChic said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> I see the level of attention you paid in school hasn't changed.
> 
> At least you're consistent.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're consistently boring (and wrong).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are today's winner in the category of 'Unintentional Humor."
> First you post "yawn" and suggest that you didn't read my instruction to you.....
> Then you say I'm wrong.....so you must have read same.
> I love it.
> Dunce.
Click to expand...


You're garbage.  I'm the only one who is being honest with you.


----------



## PoliticalChic

candycorn said:


> peach174 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Liberals are what separated this nation from all other nations that came before (or have gone since) it's inception.  It's what made and makes us unique in the world.
> 
> The difference is that liberals embrace the uniqueness of America and conservatives want us to be like every other nation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Conservatives want a free market health care system.
> Liberals are the one who passed a health care bill that is like every other nation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> In the case of healthcare (and gun control--likely a contributor to the graphic below); the rest of the world has it right.
Click to expand...





Wrong again....
The United States has the greatest life expectancy.


"Life Expectancy. Another frequently cited statistic is that according to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, the U.S. ranks 18th among 30 world democracies in life expectancy. However, health care is not the only factor in life expectancy. If you correct for *two causes of death not directly related to health care**homicides and automobile accidents*the U.S. actually rises to the *top of the list* for life expectancy."
http://www.nrlc.org/news/2009/NRL05/InaccurateGrounds.html



Too nuanced for you?


Dunce.


----------



## PoliticalChic

candycorn said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> You're consistently boring (and wrong).
> 
> 
> 
> You are today's winner in the category of 'Unintentional Humor."
> First you post "yawn" and suggest that you didn't read my instruction to you.....
> Then you say I'm wrong.....so you must have read same.
> I love it.
> Dunce.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You're garbage.  I'm the only one who is being honest with you.
Click to expand...



As I have yet to find you to be correct in anything.....

....I'm gonna chalk this post of your up to your consistency.


Dunce.


----------



## candycorn

PoliticalChic said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> peach174 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Conservatives want a free market health care system.
> Liberals are the one who passed a health care bill that is like every other nation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In the case of healthcare (and gun control--likely a contributor to the graphic below); the rest of the world has it right.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong again....
> The United States has the greatest life expectancy.
> 
> 
> "Life Expectancy. Another frequently cited statistic is that according to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, the U.S. ranks 18th among 30 world democracies in life expectancy. However, health care is not the only factor in life expectancy. If you correct for *two causes of death not directly related to health care**homicides and automobile accidents*the U.S. actually rises to the *top of the list* for life expectancy."
> http://www.nrlc.org/news/2009/NRL05/InaccurateGrounds.html
> 
> 
> 
> Too nuanced for you?
> 
> 
> Dunce.
Click to expand...


Political Hick logic:
_
Living longer doesn't mean you lived longer._

You're garbage.


----------



## PoliticalChic

candycorn said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> In the case of healthcare (and gun control--likely a contributor to the graphic below); the rest of the world has it right.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong again....
> The United States has the greatest life expectancy.
> 
> 
> "Life Expectancy. Another frequently cited statistic is that according to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, the U.S. ranks 18th among 30 world democracies in life expectancy. However, health care is not the only factor in life expectancy. If you correct for *two causes of death not directly related to health care**homicides and automobile accidents*the U.S. actually rises to the *top of the list* for life expectancy."
> http://www.nrlc.org/news/2009/NRL05/InaccurateGrounds.html
> 
> 
> 
> Too nuanced for you?
> 
> 
> Dunce.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Political Hick logic:
> _
> Living longer doesn't mean you lived longer._
> 
> You're garbage.
Click to expand...




You really have no way to argue that my post wasn't dispositive....


Of course the graph you posted was designed to fool the easily fooled, i.e., Liberals

That validates the appellation: Dunce.


----------



## candycorn

PoliticalChic said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong again....
> The United States has the greatest life expectancy.
> 
> 
> "Life Expectancy. Another frequently cited statistic is that according to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, the U.S. ranks 18th among 30 world democracies in life expectancy. However, health care is not the only factor in life expectancy. If you correct for *two causes of death not directly related to health care**homicides and automobile accidents*the U.S. actually rises to the *top of the list* for life expectancy."
> http://www.nrlc.org/news/2009/NRL05/InaccurateGrounds.html
> Too nuanced for you?Dunce.
> 
> 
> 
> Political Hick logic:
> _
> Living longer doesn't mean you lived longer._
> You're garbage.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You really have no way to argue that my post wasn't dispositive....
> Of course the graph you posted was designed to fool the easily fooled, i.e., Liberals
> That validates the appellation: Dunce.
Click to expand...




> the U.S. ranks 18th among 30 world democracies in life expectancy



Your source.


----------



## PixieStix

What is wrong with liberalism?

I give you a quote from C.S. Lewis

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. They may be more likely to go to Heaven yet at the same time likelier to make a Hell of earth. This very kindness stings with intolerable insult. To be "cured" against one's will and cured of states which we may not regard as disease is to be put on a level of those who have not yet reached the age of reason or those who never will; to be classed with infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals.


----------



## NYcarbineer

PoliticalChic said:


> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> "If you want to argue against Liberalism, argue against what liberals actually believe, support, and advocate for....."
> 
> Okey doke....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here are some of the issues Liberals actually believe, support, and advocate for.....
> 
> 
> 1. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.
> 
> 2. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces.
> 
> 3. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers' associations. Put the party line in textbooks.
> 
> 5. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policy-making positions.
> 
> 6. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 7. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them "censorship" and a violation of free speech and free press.
> 
> 8. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as "normal, natural, healthy."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 9. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity, which does not need a "religious crutch."
> 
> a. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity, which does not need a "religious crutch."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 10. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.
> 
> 11. Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the "common man." Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the "common man."
> 
> 12. Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture--education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.
> 
> 13. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.
> 
> 
> Now....wouldn't an honest appraisal ....I understand how that omits your input.....agree that all or almost all are clearly the aims and desires of Democrats/Liberals/Progressive leaders?
> 
> 
> I mean, seriously......
> 
> 
> QED?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh...wait.....did I say Democrats/Liberals/Progressives????
> Silly me....I got 'em from a website of declared communist goals...
> The Communist Takeover Of America - 45 Declared Goals
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'don't construct a Marxist strawman, stick a 'Liberal' nametag on him, and then argue against that.'
> 
> You must be looking for the Department of Redundancy Department.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I always enjoy it when an attempt to refute something I said results in a total vindication of what I said.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Merely because you don't admit it.....especially with your track record on honesty.....has no bearing on the truth of my post.
Click to expand...


Your post is shit.  

Where's the evidence that most liberals want to totally disarm the US?


----------



## PoliticalChic

candycorn said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Political Hick logic:
> _
> Living longer doesn't mean you lived longer._
> You're garbage.
> 
> 
> 
> You really have no way to argue that my post wasn't dispositive....
> Of course the graph you posted was designed to fool the easily fooled, i.e., Liberals
> That validates the appellation: Dunce.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the U.S. ranks 18th among 30 world democracies in life expectancy
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your source.
Click to expand...




It's like I'm speaking to a child....or a liberal.


OK....as slowly as I can>?

1. Your graph was provided to put American healthcare in a poor light.

2.My post referred to your's and showed that while the graph suggests "the U.S. ranks 18th among 30 world democracies in life expectancy,"....

....it is erroneous.

3. The error is that it includes causes of death unrelated to healthcare: homicides and auto accidents.

4. The take-away is twofold:

a. based on healthcare....the United States is number one in longevity.

b. you are as dumb as asphalt....i.e., a Dunce.


----------



## M14 Shooter

candycorn said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> ''For the framers of the Constitution were the most liberal thinkers of all the ages and the charter they produced out of the liberal revolution of their time has never been and is not now surpassed in liberal thought."
> 
> General Douglas MacArthur
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *CLASSICAL *Liberals are what separated this nation from all other nations that came before (or have gone since) it's inception.  It's what made and makes us unique in the world.
Click to expand...

Fixed that for you



> The difference is that liberals embrace the uniqueness of America and conservatives want us to be like every other nation.


You're confused.   Modern American Liberals point to Europe, et al, and say "Look what they do!  We should do that too!"
Your confusion is likely deliberate.


----------



## PoliticalChic

NYcarbineer said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> I always enjoy it when an attempt to refute something I said results in a total vindication of what I said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Merely because you don't admit it.....especially with your track record on honesty.....has no bearing on the truth of my post.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your post is shit.
> 
> Where's the evidence that most liberals want to totally disarm the US?
Click to expand...




Profanity is the effort of a feeble mind to express itself forcefully.


----------



## M14 Shooter

JWBooth said:


> Modern Liberalism


Very nice.


----------



## M14 Shooter

candycorn said:


> peach174 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Liberals are what separated this nation from all other nations that came before (or have gone since) it's inception.  It's what made and makes us unique in the world.
> 
> The difference is that liberals embrace the uniqueness of America and conservatives want us to be like every other nation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Conservatives want a free market health care system.
> Liberals are the one who passed a health care bill that is like every other nation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> In the case of healthcare (and gun control--likely a contributor to the graphic below); *the rest of the world has it right*.
Click to expand...

Hey!   

What did you just say?
*The difference is that liberals embrace the uniqueness of America and conservatives want us to be like every other nation.*

What did I just say in response?
*Modern American Liberals point to Europe, et al, and say "Look what they do! We should do that too!"*

Thank you for proving me correct - not that there was any question.


----------



## Pogo

PoliticalChic said:


> Seems to be a regular objection to my OPs by my Leftwing pals that I'm constantly carping about Liberals/Progressives/Democrats.....trying to connect same with communism, Marxism.....
> 
> Guilty as charged.
> And not by accident.







'Nuff said.  Nothing to argue with there.



















Here's your prollem:

















This inane list of whines that I snipped has nothing to do with Liberalism.  It's a melange of leftism and myth.  Not Liberalism.













You don't know the difference.

















.


----------



## Plasmaball

No the regular rejection is that you have no clue as what you are speaking about. You use loose snippets of copy and pasted info as your sources. Mix that in with your own bias speculation ( that you consider fact) and you get every thread youve ever created period. 

When confronted with questions you just deflect with insults because you cant defend what you post. Unless the person agrees with you. 

You are a try hard intellectual that wishes she could be an amn coulter.


----------



## PoliticalChic

plasmaball said:


> no the regular rejection is that you have no clue as what you are speaking about. You use loose snippets of copy and pasted info as your sources. Mix that in with your own bias speculation ( that you consider fact) and you get every thread youve ever created period.
> 
> When confronted with questions you just deflect with insults because you cant defend what you post. Unless the person agrees with you.
> 
> You are a try hard intellectual that wishes she could be an amn coulter.





ok


----------



## NYcarbineer

peach174 said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> regent said:
> 
> 
> 
> ''For the framers of the Constitution were the most liberal thinkers of all the ages and the charter they produced out of the liberal revolution of their time has never been and is not now surpassed in liberal thought."
> 
> General Douglas MacArthur
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Liberals are what separated this nation from all other nations that came before (or have gone since) it's inception.  It's what made and makes us unique in the world.
> 
> The difference is that liberals embrace the uniqueness of America and conservatives want us to be like every other nation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Conservatives want a free market health care system.
> Liberals are the one who passed a health care bill that is like every other nation.
Click to expand...


Where does the poor person get healthcare in a free market healthcare system?


----------



## NYcarbineer

PoliticalChic said:


> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Merely because you don't admit it.....especially with your track record on honesty.....has no bearing on the truth of my post.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your post is shit.
> 
> Where's the evidence that most liberals want to totally disarm the US?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Profanity is the effort of a feeble mind to express itself forcefully.
Click to expand...


I'm merely trying to find the level at which you would debate the merits of your claims, since you obviously won't debate them at an adult level.


----------



## NYcarbineer

PoliticalChic said:


> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Merely because you don't admit it.....especially with your track record on honesty.....has no bearing on the truth of my post.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your post is shit.
> 
> Where's the evidence that most liberals want to totally disarm the US?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Profanity is the effort of a feeble mind to express itself forcefully.
Click to expand...


No.  Blurting out 'Marxist!' tourettes style every time the subject of liberalism comes up would much better fit your description.


----------



## PoliticalChic

NYcarbineer said:


> peach174 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Liberals are what separated this nation from all other nations that came before (or have gone since) it's inception.  It's what made and makes us unique in the world.
> 
> The difference is that liberals embrace the uniqueness of America and conservatives want us to be like every other nation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Conservatives want a free market health care system.
> Liberals are the one who passed a health care bill that is like every other nation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Where does the poor person get healthcare in a free market healthcare system?
Click to expand...






President Reagan made certain that emergency rooms would take care of any person who came in.

When RomneyCare was passed in Massachusetts, er usage rose 17%.....

...yet, the windbag in the White House claimed he took Romney's idea for ObamaCare....


----------



## PoliticalChic

NYcarbineer said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your post is shit.
> 
> Where's the evidence that most liberals want to totally disarm the US?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Profanity is the effort of a feeble mind to express itself forcefully.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm merely trying to find the level at which you would debate the merits of your claims, since you obviously won't debate them at an adult level.
Click to expand...




So....that's the way a Liberal apologizes?


----------



## candycorn

NYcarbineer said:


> peach174 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Liberals are what separated this nation from all other nations that came before (or have gone since) it's inception.  It's what made and makes us unique in the world.
> 
> The difference is that liberals embrace the uniqueness of America and conservatives want us to be like every other nation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Conservatives want a free market health care system.
> Liberals are the one who passed a health care bill that is like every other nation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Where does the poor person get healthcare in a free market healthcare system?
Click to expand...


"Let them die"


----------



## PoliticalChic

candycorn said:


> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> peach174 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Conservatives want a free market health care system.
> Liberals are the one who passed a health care bill that is like every other nation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Where does the poor person get healthcare in a free market healthcare system?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "Let them die"
Click to expand...


[Democrat] "GOV. LAMM ASSERTS ELDERLY, IF VERY ILL, HAVE 'DUTY TO DIE'"
GOV. LAMM ASSERTS ELDERLY, IF VERY ILL, HAVE 'DUTY TO DIE' - NYTimes.com


----------



## peach174

NYcarbineer said:


> peach174 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Liberals are what separated this nation from all other nations that came before (or have gone since) it's inception.  It's what made and makes us unique in the world.
> 
> The difference is that liberals embrace the uniqueness of America and conservatives want us to be like every other nation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Conservatives want a free market health care system.
> Liberals are the one who passed a health care bill that is like every other nation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Where does the poor person get healthcare in a free market healthcare system?
Click to expand...


They all ready exist and they are all over America.
The National Association of Free & Charitable Clinics


----------



## Delta4Embassy

Nothing if you enjoy receiving Social Security and other governmental benefits, or are worker and not management. People who bash liberalism either don't know what liberalism is, or are so rich any tax hike pisses them off. But since most people need their GI Bill, Social Security, Medicare, retirement pensions, labor unions, etc. liberals are the bees knees. 

"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich." - Napolean Bonaparte


----------



## PoliticalChic

Delta4Embassy said:


> Nothing if you enjoy receiving Social Security and other governmental benefits, or are worker and not management. People who bash liberalism either don't know what liberalism is, or are so rich any tax hike pisses them off. But since most people need their GI Bill, Social Security, Medicare, retirement pensions, labor unions, etc. liberals are the bees knees.
> 
> "Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich." - Napolean Bonaparte







Let's confine our discussion to the United States.

The only document that the people of the nation agreed to be governed by is the Constitution.
Article 1, section 8 enumerates the powers of the national government.

Which of the programs you've indicated are authorized by the above, or by an amendment to the Constitution, as, for example, income taxation was?

If not, why not?




BTW...
Your Napoleon quote is nonsense.....there is no perennial group known as 'the rich' in this nation.
The reference is a bête noire designed to focus the hate of the envious.

Seems you've fallen for it.


----------



## PoliticalChic

candycorn said:


> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> peach174 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Conservatives want a free market health care system.
> Liberals are the one who passed a health care bill that is like every other nation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Where does the poor person get healthcare in a free market healthcare system?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "Let them die"
Click to expand...




Interesting that you've posted a quote from *Democrat* Lamm......

...Seems you've shot yourself in your own foot.


----------



## Delta4Embassy

PoliticalChic said:


> Delta4Embassy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing if you enjoy receiving Social Security and other governmental benefits, or are worker and not management. People who bash liberalism either don't know what liberalism is, or are so rich any tax hike pisses them off. But since most people need their GI Bill, Social Security, Medicare, retirement pensions, labor unions, etc. liberals are the bees knees.
> 
> "Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich." - Napolean Bonaparte
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let's confine our discussion to the United States.
> 
> The only document that the people of the nation agreed to be governed by is the Constitution.
> Article 1, section 8 enumerates the powers of the national government.
> 
> Which of the programs you've indicated are authorized by the above, or by an amendment to the Constitution, as, for example, income taxation was?
> 
> If not, why not?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BTW...
> Your Napoleon quote is nonsense.....there is no perennial group known as 'the rich' in this nation.
> The reference is a bête noire designed to focus the hate of the envious.
> 
> Seems you've fallen for it.
Click to expand...


So if the racist slave owners who wrote the Constitution (and said slaves are only counted as three-fifths a free man) didn't write it, we should repeal it? Well there goes 99% of law then. While I'm all for simplification, I'm not sure that much simplification would actually improve things.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Delta4Embassy said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Delta4Embassy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing if you enjoy receiving Social Security and other governmental benefits, or are worker and not management. People who bash liberalism either don't know what liberalism is, or are so rich any tax hike pisses them off. But since most people need their GI Bill, Social Security, Medicare, retirement pensions, labor unions, etc. liberals are the bees knees.
> 
> "Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich." - Napolean Bonaparte
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let's confine our discussion to the United States.
> 
> The only document that the people of the nation agreed to be governed by is the Constitution.
> Article 1, section 8 enumerates the powers of the national government.
> 
> Which of the programs you've indicated are authorized by the above, or by an amendment to the Constitution, as, for example, income taxation was?
> 
> If not, why not?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BTW...
> Your Napoleon quote is nonsense.....there is no perennial group known as 'the rich' in this nation.
> The reference is a bête noire designed to focus the hate of the envious.
> 
> Seems you've fallen for it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So if the racist slave owners who wrote the Constitution (and said slaves are only counted as three-fifths a free man) didn't write it, we should repeal it? Well there goes 99% of law then. While I'm all for simplification, I'm not sure that much simplification would actually improve things.
Click to expand...





What a pity you didn't educate yourself before resorting to slander of the Founders, the authors of the greatest political document ever written.




1. "So if the racist slave owners who wrote the Constitution...."
The presumption of an anti-American dunce.

Usually, the Founders refers to these six: Madison, Jefferson and Washington, Adams, Hamilton, and Franklin.

a.	The three non-Southerners *worked tirelessly against slavery*.

b.	While reading Ron Chernows book Alexander Hamilton, though, I found out that Hamilton was a strong advocate for the abolition of slavery. During the 1780s, Hamilton was one of the founders of the New York Society for Promoting the Manumission of Slaves, which was instrumental in the abolition of slavery in the state of New York. 
Alexander Hamilton and the New York Manumission Society | Angelolopez's Weblog

c.	*Many of the other Founding Fathers were activists like Alexander Hamilton*. In 1787 Benjamin Franklin agree to serve as president of the Pennsylvania Abolition Society, which set out to abolish slavery and set up programs to help freed slaves to become good citizens and improve the conditions of free African Americans. 

On February 12, 1790, Benjamin Franklin and the Pennsylvania Abolition Society presented a petition to the House of Representatives calling for the federal government to take steps for the gradual abolition of slavery and end the slave trade. 

As a young lawyer, Thomas Jefferson represented a slave in court attempting to be set free and during the 1770s and 1780s, Jefferson had made several attempts to pass legislation to gradually abolish slavery and end the slave trade. John Jay was the first president of the New York Manumission Society and was active in Societys efforts to abolish slavery. Ibid.



2. An excellent read on the matter is a brilliant book called "Miracle in Philadelphia", by Catherine Drinker Bowen, which recounts the actual history and debates around the Constitutional Convention in 1787.

Slavery was a huge issue during that convention, and many of the Founding Fathers wanted it outlawed, but ran into an impasse after many hours of debate with the southern colonies whose agricultural productivity depended on it.

The *Founders who wanted to set the stage for the abolition of slavery* came up with a compromise involving the issue of apportionment.

The southern colonies that favored slavery wanted all residents of their states, slave and free, counted equally when it came to deciding how many seats they were going to receive in Congress. Some of the northern colonies, who mostly had few slaves and thus nothing to lose didnt want slave residents counted at all.

*The Founders compromise was to count each slave as 3/5 of a man for the purposes of apportionment*, and when that passed after a great deal more debate and lobbying, legislators from the *slave states were permanently limited to a minority*. With that one stroke, the state was set for slaverys eventual demise, and the proof of how effective it was came in 1804, when the slave states were powerless to stop Congress from outlawing the importation of slaves to the new nation.

The stage was set, even if it took 70 years and a bloody war.
Breitbart News: Big Journalism



3. "Well there goes 99% of law then."
Caselaw?

Really.

*Caselaw is the illegitimate child of the Progressive Era.
It's parents were Roscoe Pound and Christopher Columbus Langdell.*

Not a chance in the world that you know who they were and what they did.
Educate yourself.


----------



## candycorn

Delta4Embassy said:


> Nothing if you enjoy receiving Social Security and other governmental benefits, or are worker and not management. People who bash liberalism either don't know what liberalism is, or are so rich any tax hike pisses them off. But since most people need their GI Bill, Social Security, Medicare, retirement pensions, labor unions, etc. liberals are the bees knees.
> 
> "Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich." - Napolean Bonaparte



Americans want more government than they aer willing to pay for.  It's really that simple.


----------



## PoliticalChic

candycorn said:


> Delta4Embassy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing if you enjoy receiving Social Security and other governmental benefits, or are worker and not management. People who bash liberalism either don't know what liberalism is, or are so rich any tax hike pisses them off. But since most people need their GI Bill, Social Security, Medicare, retirement pensions, labor unions, etc. liberals are the bees knees.
> 
> "Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich." - Napolean Bonaparte
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Americans want more government than they aer willing to pay for.  It's really that simple.
Click to expand...




You are truly amazing!


From choosing a slut as  your avi to the absurdity you just posted.....


...amazing how truly dumb you are!


"In U.S., Fear of Big Government at Near-Record Level"
"WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Americans' concerns about the threat of big government continue to dwarf those about big business and big labor, and by an even larger margin now than in March 2009. The 64% of Americans who say big government will be the biggest threat to the country...."
In U.S., Fear of Big Government at Near-Record Level


 I would rather Amy Winehouse do my Lasik surgery than rely on you for advice.....


----------



## candycorn

PoliticalChic said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Delta4Embassy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing if you enjoy receiving Social Security and other governmental benefits, or are worker and not management. People who bash liberalism either don't know what liberalism is, or are so rich any tax hike pisses them off. But since most people need their GI Bill, Social Security, Medicare, retirement pensions, labor unions, etc. liberals are the bees knees.
> 
> "Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich." - Napolean Bonaparte
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Americans want more government than they aer willing to pay for.  It's really that simple.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are truly amazing!
> From choosing a slut as  your avi to the absurdity you just posted.....
> ...amazing how truly dumb you are!
> "In U.S., Fear of Big Government at Near-Record Level"
> "WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Americans' concerns about the threat of big government continue to dwarf those about big business and big labor, and by an even larger margin now than in March 2009. The 64% of Americans who say big government will be the biggest threat to the country...."
> In U.S., Fear of Big Government at Near-Record Level
> 
> 
> I would rather Amy Winehouse do my Lasik surgery than rely on you for advice.....
Click to expand...


Fear and hatred...all the conservatives preach.  You scared, sad, moron.


----------



## PixieStix

What is wrong with liberalism?.... is that the "progressives" have hijacked it, and the liberals are unaware of it, or....... they have all been cloned


----------



## PoliticalChic

candycorn said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Americans want more government than they aer willing to pay for.  It's really that simple.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are truly amazing!
> From choosing a slut as  your avi to the absurdity you just posted.....
> ...amazing how truly dumb you are!
> "In U.S., Fear of Big Government at Near-Record Level"
> "WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Americans' concerns about the threat of big government continue to dwarf those about big business and big labor, and by an even larger margin now than in March 2009. The 64% of Americans who say big government will be the biggest threat to the country...."
> In U.S., Fear of Big Government at Near-Record Level
> 
> 
> I would rather Amy Winehouse do my Lasik surgery than rely on you for advice.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fear and hatred...all the conservatives preach.  You scared, sad, moron.
Click to expand...







Here....let me help you with that.


Conservatism is based on individualism, free markets, and limited constitutional government.


You should write that down.


----------

