Dear Liberals: I Want a Divorce!

[bobcollum]

Not absurd in the least. Nor do you have to believe what I tell you I have seen with my own eyes. I am fairly certain that several of the conservatives reading along would vouch for the truth of the statement since we've all probably been subjected to such comments from time to time.

But it isn't important what you think of me. It has already been agreed that liberals and conservatives don't like each other much, don't trust each other much, don't agree with each other much, etc. Such irreconcilable differences are why we are divorcing after all.

So if you can make a better argument for how liberals revere, respect, and admire the Constitution including its origins, and therefore Liberalland wants the Constitution as is, go for it. I've made my case. Make yours.

You think all you see is all there is, if that isn't ignorant than I've been reading the wrong definition.

The strawman hasn't gone unnoticed. Conservatives have plenty of blood on their hands with regards to unconstitutionality.

All the more reason you should relish the divorce and help us reach an agreement to get it accomplished. We accept that you think Conservatives have blood on their hands for many many sins. So again, make your case for how liberals respect, admire, and revere all the Constitution was intended to be, was, and is. I've made mine. If you want the Constitution as is for Liberalland, you should be able to articulate a good argument for that.

And if you don't appreciate the origins, purpose, intent, and execution of the Constitution as the Founders delivered it to us, why in the world would you want it? Why wouldn't you jump at the chance to write a Constitution that embodies all the ideals of liberalism?

I guess I'm not much of a quitter. Maybe we should change the plan to split the partisans from the non-partisans.

I'm not going to attempt to deal with your continued strawman argument about Liberals not wanting or respecting the Constitution. It's so blindingly partisan it doesn't deserve a legitimate response, so don't plan on one.

 

[occupied]

Nah. We don't have to go back to the Stone Age. We only have to go back as far as Teddy Roosevelt. That was when the seeds of modern day Liberalism were sown. Those seeds were put on steroids in the 1960's and have snowballed since.

There are no do-overs in this game, only set-backs.

I don't see what I said has anything to do with do-overs, but of course we can have do-overs. That's the whole purpose of a divorce. A new start for both sides.

No fair however in rejecting something but not wanting the other side to have it either. That's just mean.

So far we've only accomplished one decision. The illegals go to Liberalland where they will be properly respected, nurtured, and cared for.

Now we're working on who gets the Constitution as is, with original intent.

Working would indicate progress on a question that really only has one answer, what's the use in keeping a document that conservatives have no intention of following? They have been trying to get out of equal protection and equal rights since the ideal came into being, of course, it is these parts you intend to shed with your "original intent" remark. That alone negates any possibility of greater freedom under a monolithic conservative government stuck in reverse and dictating what rights you do not have anymore.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

In other words, I have never heard a liberal praise the Constitution or give it credit for much of anything.

Nonsense.

Liberals are the greatest defenders and advocates of the Constitution and its case law.

Certainly no liberal has ever articulated how the Constitutionis a document of American exceptionalism.

Nor will you.

‘American exceptionalism’ is jingoistic idiocy and nonsense.

Nah. We don't have to go back to the Stone Age. We only have to go back as far as Teddy Roosevelt. That was when the seeds of modern day Liberalism were sown. Those seeds were put on steroids in the 1960's and have snowballed since.

At the advent of the Civil Rights movement, when segregation was brought to an end, when all Americans began to realize actual freedom as guaranteed by the Constitution, and when states and local jurisdictions where no longer allowed to violate their citizens’ civil liberties…

Given the reactionary, authoritarianism of the right and conservatives’ contempt for the Constitution and its case law, it’s understandable they’d look back with contempt upon the beginning of true liberty and justice for all.

 

[Foxfyre]

You think all you see is all there is, if that isn't ignorant than I've been reading the wrong definition.

The strawman hasn't gone unnoticed. Conservatives have plenty of blood on their hands with regards to unconstitutionality.

All the more reason you should relish the divorce and help us reach an agreement to get it accomplished. We accept that you think Conservatives have blood on their hands for many many sins. So again, make your case for how liberals respect, admire, and revere all the Constitution was intended to be, was, and is. I've made mine. If you want the Constitution as is for Liberalland, you should be able to articulate a good argument for that.

And if you don't appreciate the origins, purpose, intent, and execution of the Constitution as the Founders delivered it to us, why in the world would you want it? Why wouldn't you jump at the chance to write a Constitution that embodies all the ideals of liberalism?

I guess I'm not much of a quitter. Maybe we should change the plan to split the partisans from the non-partisans.

I'm not going to attempt to deal with your continued strawman argument about Liberals not wanting or respecting the Constitution. It's so blindingly partisan it doesn't deserve a legitimate response, so don't plan on one.

It isn't a straw man. I am relating the experience I have had with liberals re the Constitution.

So convince me that you're different. Give me a reason why liberals should have the Constitution that the Founders gave us as is, as iit was intended to be.

(I have never seen a liberal who could do that, but I am prepared to be impressed.)

 

[occupied]

All the more reason you should relish the divorce and help us reach an agreement to get it accomplished. We accept that you think Conservatives have blood on their hands for many many sins. So again, make your case for how liberals respect, admire, and revere all the Constitution was intended to be, was, and is. I've made mine. If you want the Constitution as is for Liberalland, you should be able to articulate a good argument for that.

And if you don't appreciate the origins, purpose, intent, and execution of the Constitution as the Founders delivered it to us, why in the world would you want it? Why wouldn't you jump at the chance to write a Constitution that embodies all the ideals of liberalism?

I guess I'm not much of a quitter. Maybe we should change the plan to split the partisans from the non-partisans.

I'm not going to attempt to deal with your continued strawman argument about Liberals not wanting or respecting the Constitution. It's so blindingly partisan it doesn't deserve a legitimate response, so don't plan on one.

It isn't a straw man. I am relating the experience I have had with liberals re the Constitution.

So convince me that you're different. Give me a reason why liberals should have the Constitution that the Founders gave us as is, as iit was intended to be.

(I have never seen a liberal who could do that, but I am prepared to be impressed.)

Most liberals are not prepared to live in a country where two hundred years of case law has been thrown in the trash and the constitution has been reinterpreted by Glenn Beck or someone like him, someone who has so many axes to grind that liberty takes a back seat to political vengeance. Never talked to a conservative that didn't think our system of jurisprudence was infected by excessive fairness.

 

[Foxfyre]

I guess I'm not much of a quitter. Maybe we should change the plan to split the partisans from the non-partisans.

I'm not going to attempt to deal with your continued strawman argument about Liberals not wanting or respecting the Constitution. It's so blindingly partisan it doesn't deserve a legitimate response, so don't plan on one.

It isn't a straw man. I am relating the experience I have had with liberals re the Constitution.

So convince me that you're different. Give me a reason why liberals should have the Constitution that the Founders gave us as is, as iit was intended to be.

(I have never seen a liberal who could do that, but I am prepared to be impressed.)

Most liberals are not prepared to live in a country where two hundred years of case law has been thrown in the trash and the constitution has been reinterpreted by Glenn Beck or someone like him, someone who has so many axes to grind that liberty takes a back seat to political vengeance. Never talked to a conservative that didn't think our system of jurisprudence was infected by excessive fairness.

Well Glenn Beck will almost certainly choose to live in Conservativeland so he's moot so far as you are concerned.

And what has happened as you interpret it is exactly why we need this divorce. I don't gree with you but I understand that you see it as you just wrote it. Neither of us is going to change the mind of the other so we declare a no fault divorce and each of us goes our separate ways.

But we still have to divvy everything up. I have made my argument for how the Constitution as the Founders gave it to us and intended for us embodies all Conservative concepts.

So again, give me a good argument for why the Constitution as the Founders wrote it and interpreted it and gave it to us should go to Liberalland. What is in it that you guys want?

 

[occupied]

Would there be a death penalty in conservative America? You betcha, and for lots of different crimes like fornication and heresy.

 

[Foxfyre]

Would there be a death penalty in conservative America? You betcha, and for lots of different crimes like fornication and heresy.

Not your problem what there will or won't be in Conservativeland. Your only concern is what you want for Liberalland.

 

[dsolo802]

Would there be a death penalty in conservative America? You betcha, and for lots of different crimes like fornication and heresy.

Yikes, that version of conservative America is an oxymoron. America has only been that obscene in the McCarthy years.

 

[dsolo802]

Most liberals are not prepared to live in a country where two hundred years of case law has been thrown in the trash and the constitution has been reinterpreted by Glenn Beck or someone like him, someone who has so many axes to grind that liberty takes a back seat to political vengeance. Never talked to a conservative that didn't think our system of jurisprudence was infected by excessive fairness.

Right on. Let's not forget the Constitution created the Judiciary as a co-equal branch of our government and entrusted to it presiding over cases and controversies in which they have the final say about what the law is.

I don't know how anyone can call themselves a conservative and read out of the Constitution the parts they don't like.

 

[dsolo802]

Given the reactionary, authoritarianism of the right and conservatives’ contempt for the Constitution and its case law, it’s understandable they’d look back with contempt upon the beginning of true liberty and justice for all.

Unfortunately, because of the propaganda success of what passes as patriots today, our national discourse has been corrupted to such an extent that the contempt neo-cons have for the actual constitution now extends to its defenders - progressives and the cause of progressivism itself.

The nation is divided, polarized and made weak before the world by our "patriots". Job well done!

 

[occupied]

Would there be a death penalty in conservative America? You betcha, and for lots of different crimes like fornication and heresy.

Not your problem what there will or won't be in Conservativeland. Your only concern is what you want for Liberalland.

The liberalland of the op is a political impossibility that is not even close to equitable and a set-up for failure and easy subjugation, no liberal land could exist long with conservative land and their paranoia right next door. No experiment in socialism has ever just been allowed to develop in peace, many of the people you really like in history have done everything to undermine populism on the other side of the globe, what would they do to liberal land out of fear or plain boredom? Conservative land would be the crazy ex husband that drunkenly kicks in the door one night.

 

[Foxfyre]

Given the reactionary, authoritarianism of the right and conservatives’ contempt for the Constitution and its case law, it’s understandable they’d look back with contempt upon the beginning of true liberty and justice for all.

Unfortunately, because of the propaganda success of what passes as patriots today, our national discourse has been corrupted to such an extent that the contempt neo-cons have for the actual constitution now extends to its defenders - progressives and the cause of progressivism itself.

The nation is divided, polarized and made weak before the world by our "patriots". Job well done!

I suggest you read the OP dsolo, as the whole point of this thread is the very contempt you hold for conservatives and conservatism and we aren't that impressed with your perspectives or philosophies either. That is why we are working to divide up the stuff in a no fault divorce, shake hands, and part company.

That way you will never again have to put up or deal with or hear about evil people like me and you can create whatever utiopia would look like in Liberalland.

We have already given you all the illegal aliens.

Now we're deciding which side the Constitution suits better. We conservatives like it as it was intended, support all the concepts that the Founders wrote into it, and want to keep it. So far the liberals have been all indignant about that, but haven't offered a single argument for why it is better suited for Liberalland.

And with that I'm bookmarking the thread and going to bed. Back tomorrow.

 

[candycorn]

Every time I see something like this I wonder how conservatives think they can stay free in a country of their own design where those in the ruling class are unencumbered by taxation, regulation and accountability and the freely exploited working class is on its own and works for practically nothing. No social mobility, no access to medical care, crappy bible based education and no way on earth to get a fair hearing of grievances.

Apparently they love war and English speaking folk (most can't spell in English interestingly enough). And little else.

 

[Ravi]

You should try to meet more people.

And it is comments like yours that definitely indicates that you should go to Liberalland where such will be considered intelligent debate,. Unfortunately, there are a few who philosophically belong in Conservativeland that we will need to send over to your side because they tend to debate in the same manner. But there aren't many of them so they shouldn't be much of a problem for you.

I'm fairly certain that wherever I live, cutsey imaginary lands full of ideologues, devoid of people who don't share my opinions (you know, the kinds of people folks like yourself have likely never bothered to meet) won't be a component of any "intelligent debate."

The fact that you're mentally sending people to this or that "side" of your ideological Candyland is fucking terrifying.

Not to mention contrary to what the country was founded on. It actually sounds rather fascist.

 

[kwc57]

Meaningless stereotype is nothing to base a nation on, in fact, it may be the worse thing.

But that is the beauty of the divorce. To you it is meaningless stereotype. That's why you are a liberal. For me it is a partial explanation for who and what I am and why I am a conservative.

The OP already acknowledges that this huge divide cannot be bridged which is why we need the divorce. We don't ask you to love us. We just ask you to take your most beloved toys and go do your own thing and leave us to do ours. We understand that you think we'll have an absolutely horrible terrible country. But it won't be your concern as you will be building your own shining, glorious utopia of Liberalland.

Sharing the continent with an authoritarian military/corporate plutocracy would be a concern for "liberalland" , your free country would have tanks rolling through our streets in 5 years.

Why? We would have no interest in mud huts, bicycles and candles.

 

[kwc57]

You should try to meet more people.

And it is comments like yours that definitely indicates that you should go to Liberalland where such will be considered intelligent debate,. Unfortunately, there are a few who philosophically belong in Conservativeland that we will need to send over to your side because they tend to debate in the same manner. But there aren't many of them so they shouldn't be much of a problem for you.

I'm fairly certain that wherever I live, cutsey imaginary lands full of ideologues, devoid of people who don't share my opinions (you know, the kinds of people folks like yourself have likely never bothered to meet) won't be a component of any "intelligent debate."

The fact that you're mentally sending people to this or that "side" of your ideological Candyland is fucking terrifying.

Try this, I think it might help.

Free Reading Comprehension Worksheets

 

[kwc57]

I'm sure you'll be surprised to hear that I agree with a good deal of this, I'm against all of the perks that illegal aliens recieve except for health-care, I don't think anyone should be denied that. The US has made it as much or more of a priority to help others here and abroad instead of it's own citizens...but I don't believe some vast conspiracy is at hand, I chalk it up to our own success and prosperity, that the pressing need to fix what's here wasn't so pressing when things were generally going well.



Good, you finally answered the question...but that would be a problem for you guys.

It won't be a problem for us if they all go to Liberalland which I presume will be the case as nobody on their side has objected to taking them and nobody on our side wants them. Sure as heck beats trying to round them up and deport them.

And in Conservativeland, illegals won't be denied any humanitarian or emergency healthcare or anything else. We'll feed em, put on a band-ade or whatever treatment they need, and then send them on to Liberalland. They will also be handed a bill. And if they should decide they don't like it over there in Liberalland and try to come back, they will not only be breaking the law and subject to arrest and deportation but they'll be expected to pay the bill. No money? No problem. We'll accept watches, rings, or anything else of value that the folks over there in Liberalland supplied them with.

And then right back across the border they will go.

But that sort of puts you in a dilemma doesn't it Bob? You don't want all the expense that goes with taking care of the illegals, but the liberals have insisted that all that free housing, food, healthcare, education etc. be furnished to them.

So does that mean that Conservativeland would be preferable to you than the situation over in Liberalland? In Conservativeland you can hold any opinions about anything you want, but you will be expected to abide by a conservative social contract. Will that be okay?

"Conservative social contract" is the scariest neo-fascist comment you have made yet. Is it where concern for the poor is forbidden and helping them is punishable by deportation to "liberalland"?

You might benefit from this as well.

Free Reading Comprehension Worksheets

 

[kwc57]

I'm sure you'll be surprised to hear that I agree with a good deal of this, I'm against all of the perks that illegal aliens recieve except for health-care, I don't think anyone should be denied that. The US has made it as much or more of a priority to help others here and abroad instead of it's own citizens...but I don't believe some vast conspiracy is at hand, I chalk it up to our own success and prosperity, that the pressing need to fix what's here wasn't so pressing when things were generally going well.



Good, you finally answered the question...but that would be a problem for you guys.

It won't be a problem for us if they all go to Liberalland which I presume will be the case as nobody on their side has objected to taking them and nobody on our side wants them. Sure as heck beats trying to round them up and deport them.

And in Conservativeland, illegals won't be denied any humanitarian or emergency healthcare or anything else. We'll feed em, put on a band-ade or whatever treatment they need, and then send them on to Liberalland. They will also be handed a bill. And if they should decide they don't like it over there in Liberalland and try to come back, they will not only be breaking the law and subject to arrest and deportation but they'll be expected to pay the bill. No money? No problem. We'll accept watches, rings, or anything else of value that the folks over there in Liberalland supplied them with.

And then right back across the border they will go.

But that sort of puts you in a dilemma doesn't it Bob? You don't want all the expense that goes with taking care of the illegals, but the liberals have insisted that all that free housing, food, healthcare, education etc. be furnished to them.

So does that mean that Conservativeland would be preferable to you than the situation over in Liberalland? In Conservativeland you can hold any opinions about anything you want, but you will be expected to abide by a conservative social contract. Will that be okay?

Without due process – obviously.

Rightwingistan will clearly have no Bill of Rights, no rule of law, no consistent application of justice.

In Rightwingistan civil rights can be taken and given by the government, at the capricious whim of politicians.

Maybe you, greenbeard and occupied can carpool.

Free Reading Comprehension Worksheets

 

[kwc57]

You think all you see is all there is, if that isn't ignorant than I've been reading the wrong definition.

The strawman hasn't gone unnoticed. Conservatives have plenty of blood on their hands with regards to unconstitutionality.

All the more reason you should relish the divorce and help us reach an agreement to get it accomplished. We accept that you think Conservatives have blood on their hands for many many sins. So again, make your case for how liberals respect, admire, and revere all the Constitution was intended to be, was, and is. I've made mine. If you want the Constitution as is for Liberalland, you should be able to articulate a good argument for that.

And if you don't appreciate the origins, purpose, intent, and execution of the Constitution as the Founders delivered it to us, why in the world would you want it? Why wouldn't you jump at the chance to write a Constitution that embodies all the ideals of liberalism?

I guess I'm not much of a quitter. Maybe we should change the plan to split the partisans from the non-partisans.

I'm not going to attempt to deal with your continued strawman argument about Liberals not wanting or respecting the Constitution. It's so blindingly partisan it doesn't deserve a legitimate response, so don't plan on one.

Perhaps you should start following the comments of some of the more vocal liberals here at USMB........and no, I won't do that homework for you. No need to do any historical searches of threads, just start reading. You'll see it isn't a strawman at all.