Disagree with 'liberals' on anything any you are thrown out

[NYcarbineer]

How about a new 'baseless liberal bashing' subforum?

 

[aaronleland]

Both sides are guilty of that. I have been accused of being a liberal or conservative so many times on this board that I just laugh it off anymore.

anyone ever accuse you of being a xenophobic misogynist cis-gendered shitlord? that's the politically correct terminology for ''white man'' on some college campuses these days. blacks men are still privileged enough to be called african-americans.

Yes. And I respond, "I'm not cis-gendered."

 

[NYcarbineer]

Yes. We all believe that the OP and Westwall are true liberals. Why wouldn't we believe that?

'True liberal' is code for 'I'm a conservative but I'd really rather not admit it'.

 

[emilynghiem]

This started many years ago and I considered myself quite liberal when I compared myself to many conservatives but the minute I happen to defend anything that sounded remotely conservative for even the slightest reason I was immediately thrown out of the group. They didn't hold a vote or anything but more just started labeling me as 'conservative' simply because I had no issue with creationist themselves. I didn't agree with them but I didn't care if they believed what they believed. I came to the conclusion that 'liberals' only care about one thing and that is the socialist agenda in this country and the more they did the less tolerant they became. I don't know if anyone else has had this experience of being expelled from the democratic party simply because you disagreed with them on anything at all.

Those are progressives you're describing. We liberals don't care. We just want everyone to do well, for all to have good health, and make a fair wage. Whatever someone chooses to believe is their business so long as they don't try and make me believe it. Progressives on the other hand are about power, the collection of it, and the abuse of it against those they don't like.

Progressives are scum.

Interesting westwall I've been using liberals to mean the ones following along with the politicized corporate Democrats,
and progressives to mean the independent Democrats and Greens trying to set up the right programs directly instead of relying on govt which isn't happening.

I was told progressive actually came from conservative types imposing reforms.
Since I align more with Constitutionalists seeking to reform govt by enforcing
common principles to streamline and reorganize resources, I thought this progressive
label better fits me, as most of the active Constitutionalists I find are conservative.
However I don't believe in coercing people either by political or religious groups, but believe in making policies and reforms by consent of parties affected. So that part is more Green.
For the inclusion of diversity and prochoice position, this aligns with Democrats, as well
as helping the poor and disadvantaged "minority interests." With enforcing the Constitution to check govt, that aligns with Libertarians and Republicans. I can't find that with most Democrats.

I am a liberal. And you guys can keep trying to divide us until it is meaningless.............for you. Classification, classification, classification.

OK Disir and westwall so which way are we going to refer to the REAL liberals/progressives and the COMMERCIAL/CORPORATE sellouts?
Since people complain more about "liberals pushing social agenda through govt" I was using Liberal for that type, the Clinton type that's really corporate
but CALLED "liberal" in the media so everyone CALLS them liberals.

Fewer people call the REAL liberal/left movement by progressive which really came from a conservative reform movement that was seen as rather oppressive.
But when I meet "liberal left" activists who are really pushing on the GRASSROOTS level, that is the right way, to set up your own programs
and then it trickles up to the govt by catching with people and spreading by free choice and voluntary adoption of better solutions.
So I was using "progressive" to mean the REAL left. It's all voluntary/by consent, so it is NOT FORCED on other people by political abuse (as the "corporate" politician types in the media who impose this visibly and publicly to reinforce the image of liberals).

Disir if you object to dividing people by "denomination" what do you call the two groups:
1. one is like how the Conservatives complain about -- the sheep who follow the leader who imposes liberal BELIEFS through govt as MANDATES FORCED ON the Public
2. the other are the REAL meaning and purpose, but it's not done by imposing unconstitutionally, it's implemented by consensus and INCLUSION where
people of all diverse groups CHOOSE to collaborate by free will and reason, by proving SECULARLY these solutions work better (not faith based, imposed like a religion)

A. First, do we all agree there are the corporate sell out types that push agenda for power and
it goes against the principles of prochoice and inclusion of diversity by coercion/exclusion
And this is the public image created by imposing liberal BELIEFS on others who disagree and contest these social policies as unconstitutional
B. versus people who LIVE and IMPLEMENT the liberal principles by example (and don't force it on others against their will by bullying)

Do we agree there are two types?
And do we need a term to distinguish these two?
Thanks!

 

[NYcarbineer]

How do you get 'thrown out' of the Democratic Party?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

This started many years ago and I considered myself quite liberal when I compared myself to many conservatives but the minute I happen to defend anything that sounded remotely conservative for even the slightest reason I was immediately thrown out of the group. They didn't hold a vote or anything but more just started labeling me as 'conservative' simply because I had no issue with creationist themselves. I didn't agree with them but I didn't care if they believed what they believed. I came to the conclusion that 'liberals' only care about one thing and that is the socialist agenda in this country and the more they did the less tolerant they became. I don't know if anyone else has had this experience of being expelled from the democratic party simply because you disagreed with them on anything at all.

You came to the wrong ‘conclusion.’

And your thread premise fails as a straw man fallacy – liberals are advocates of inclusion and practice tolerance, unlike most on the right.

Progressives are inclusive of nothing that does not agree with them, including the US Constitution.

The notion that liberals advocate for a ‘socialist agenda’ is a ridiculous lie.

It is an obvious truth.

liberals defend the right of all Americans to believe whatever they want, or believe in nothing at all.

So long as it agrees with what they believe, or the nothing they believe as the case may be.

This applies in all things.

 

[Two Thumbs]

This started many years ago and I considered myself quite liberal when I compared myself to many conservatives but the minute I happen to defend anything that sounded remotely conservative for even the slightest reason I was immediately thrown out of the group. They didn't hold a vote or anything but more just started labeling me as 'conservative' simply because I had no issue with creationist themselves. I didn't agree with them but I didn't care if they believed what they believed. I came to the conclusion that 'liberals' only care about one thing and that is the socialist agenda in this country and the more they did the less tolerant they became. I don't know if anyone else has had this experience of being expelled from the democratic party simply because you disagreed with them on anything at all.

You came to the wrong ‘conclusion.’

And your thread premise fails as a straw man fallacy – liberals are advocates of inclusion and practice tolerance, unlike most on the right.

The notion that liberals advocate for a ‘socialist agenda’ is a ridiculous lie.

You weren’t ‘thrown out’ of anything by anyone, as liberals have no issue with ‘creationists,’ liberals defend the right of all Americans to believe whatever they want, or believe in nothing at all.

Liberals will appropriately oppose ‘creationists’ and other theists who seek to codify their religious dogma in secular law, as to do so violates the Framers’ mandate that church and state remain separate, but absent efforts by theists to violate the First Amendment, liberals respect and defend the right of theists to believe as they see fit.

He didn't come to a conclusion., He relayed the results.

leftist HATE anyone that does not tow the party line and will fire them for speaking out once.


nothing but lies a fool or leftist would believe.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Libs and cons will exclude the others' comments, yes.

 

[midcan5]

Everyone is liberal and conservative, the thing is the words often have no real meaning especially in online discussions. They get defined as the user sees fit and often have no connection even to the debate. I call myself liberal mostly because everyone who has lived a full life realizes very quickly empathy, compassion, and flexibility. Look at gays or transgender people and the nonacceptance by some. Hardly a realistic point of view but you probably know by now how stones are thrown. I've been on this site a long time and it seems the same stuff is put forward as truth so I'll simply link and post a few earlier thoughts and a parable.

A Conservative Wakes Up

LOL More bizarre word salad, up is really down, and down is sideways or so it seems sometimes. I find it fascinating that the right can only define itself in reaction to a made up bogeyman - the left. One could easily change things around and say this is the right. Proof friends is still in the pudding, when the right can point to some accomplishment other than word salad about their imaginary left, then maybe they would be taken seriously.

Use this handy parable to understand American politics

Conservatism in a Nutshell

A man is lost in the woods and it starts snowing, off in the distance he sees a cabin. Slowly he makes his way only to find a locked gate, he rings the bell and a voice asks what he wants. He tells the voice his plight and is told by the voice that there is a church down the road and that they will pray for him.

Libertarianism in a Nutshell

The snow continues and growing more tired and cold, the man sees another cabin, struggling he barely makes it, he knocks and finally opens the door to warm himself. There is a full kettle of hot soup, he helps himself. Soon out of a back room comes a man, he scolds the man and tells him to leave as this is private property. The man stumbles out the door.

Liberalism in a Nutshell

Nearly exhausted the man sees a third cabin. Slowly he makes his way, opens the door and warms himself. There is soup in a kettle and he helps himself. From a back room a woman enters, she sits down next to him and they talk. He sleeps the night on the floor and the next morning goes on his way.

"What is conservatism? Is it not adherence to the old and tried, against the new and untried?" Abraham Lincoln Source: February 27, 1860 Cooper Union

"Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes that you can do these things. Among them are a few Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or businessman from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid." President Dwight Eisenhower

"President Eisenhower describes his administration's political philosophy as 'dynamic conservatism,' then as 'progressive, dynamic conservatism,' then as 'progressive moderation,' then as 'moderate progressivism,' and then as 'positive progressivism.'" William Manchester quote from 'The Power and the Glory'

How the Right Hijacked the Magic Words. How the Right Hijacked the Magic Words

To understand the conservative mind check this book out, the fellows above are simply contemporary versions. 'The Rhetoric of Reaction: Perversity, Futility, Jeopardy' Albert O. Hirschman

I have two other posts in this thread [link below], that it is still active demonstrates a level of partisanship that exists in America today and says lots about why we are declining as a nation. No longer is debate over ideas or policies, it is rather finger pointing paid for by powers that benefit from the confusion. Agitprop rules the mind of too many.

Why do people hate Liberals? post# 114
Why do people hate Liberals? post# 1604

"If by a 'Liberal' they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people -their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties -- someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a 'Liberal,' then I'm proud to say I'm a 'Liberal.'" President John F Kennedy on September 14, 1960

 

[Mac1958]

...liberals are advocates of inclusion and practice tolerance...

You see stuff like this, you shake your head, and you realize there is nothing you can say.
.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Yes. We all believe that the OP and Westwall are true liberals. Why wouldn't we believe that?

 

[Moonglow]

Yes. We all believe that the OP and Westwall are true liberals. Why wouldn't we believe that?

Because Westwall never kicks anyone off the forum for what they say..

 

[Mac1958]

 

[LoneLaugher]

He's right. He's a liberal. What is your point?

 

[Mac1958]

This started many years ago and I considered myself quite liberal when I compared myself to many conservatives but the minute I happen to defend anything that sounded remotely conservative for even the slightest reason I was immediately thrown out of the group. They didn't hold a vote or anything but more just started labeling me as 'conservative' simply because I had no issue with creationist themselves. I didn't agree with them but I didn't care if they believed what they believed. I came to the conclusion that 'liberals' only care about one thing and that is the socialist agenda in this country and the more they did the less tolerant they became. I don't know if anyone else has had this experience of being expelled from the democratic party simply because you disagreed with them on anything at all.

I can relate.

Just remember that the people perpetrating this are not traditional liberals, they're Regressive Leftists. Distortions, perversions of liberalism.

The problem is that their cancer appears to be spreading -- helped in no small part by the absolutist behaviors of the hard Right.
.

 

[emilynghiem]

Both sides are guilty of that. I have been accused of being a liberal or conservative so many times on this board that I just laugh it off anymore.

anyone ever accuse you of being a xenophobic misogynist cis-gendered shitlord? that's the politically correct terminology for ''white man'' on some college campuses these days. blacks men are still privileged enough to be called african-americans.

Yes. And I respond, "I'm not cis-gendered."

I'm definitely NOT cis-party!

All my conservative friends tell me I'm "not really a Democrat"
And someday I'll come out as a conservative Republican, but I don't think so.
When I tell them I'm prochoice and I have voted for Sheila Jackson Lee.
That sorta gives me away, no Republican I know would do THAT!

My friends who are Democrats/Greens ie Peace and Justice/KPFT types
do not question I am on that side, mostly because I respect diversity and inclusion to reach consensus.

When it won't make a difference, being clear Texas is going to give all the votes to the GOP anyway,
I will vote Green to help work toward their goals of growing as a party.
Since it will take a combination of contributions, leadership and model solutions
from ALL parties, the Green idea of "proportional representation" and decisions by consensus
make the best template I have found to piece together people and platforms from the other parties.

 

[emilynghiem]

How about a new 'baseless liberal bashing' subforum?

Yeah, NYcarbineer, it's called the entire Internet!

 

[Moonglow]

Both sides are guilty of that. I have been accused of being a liberal or conservative so many times on this board that I just laugh it off anymore.

anyone ever accuse you of being a xenophobic misogynist cis-gendered shitlord? that's the politically correct terminology for ''white man'' on some college campuses these days. blacks men are still privileged enough to be called african-americans.

Yes. And I respond, "I'm not cis-gendered."

I'm definitely NOT cis-party!

All my conservative friends tell me I'm "not really a Democrat"
And someday I'll come out as a conservative Republican, but I don't think so.
When I tell them I'm prochoice and I have voted for Sheila Jackson Lee.
That sorta gives me away, no Republican I know would do THAT!

My friends who are Democrats/Greens ie Peace and Justice/KPFT types
do not question I am on that side, mostly because I respect diversity and inclusion to reach consensus.

When it won't make a difference, being clear Texas is going to give all the votes to the GOP anyway,
I will vote Green to help work toward their goals of growing as a party.
Since it will take a combination of contributions, leadership and model solutions
from ALL parties, the Green idea of "proportional representation" and decisions by consensus
make the best template I have found to piece together people and platforms from the other parties.

I vote for green also...

 

[aaronleland]

Both sides are guilty of that. I have been accused of being a liberal or conservative so many times on this board that I just laugh it off anymore.

anyone ever accuse you of being a xenophobic misogynist cis-gendered shitlord? that's the politically correct terminology for ''white man'' on some college campuses these days. blacks men are still privileged enough to be called african-americans.

Yes. And I respond, "I'm not cis-gendered."

I'm definitely NOT cis-party!

All my conservative friends tell me I'm "not really a Democrat"
And someday I'll come out as a conservative Republican, but I don't think so.
When I tell them I'm prochoice and I have voted for Sheila Jackson Lee.
That sorta gives me away, no Republican I know would do THAT!

My friends who are Democrats/Greens ie Peace and Justice/KPFT types
do not question I am on that side, mostly because I respect diversity and inclusion to reach consensus.

When it won't make a difference, being clear Texas is going to give all the votes to the GOP anyway,
I will vote Green to help work toward their goals of growing as a party.
Since it will take a combination of contributions, leadership and model solutions
from ALL parties, the Green idea of "proportional representation" and decisions by consensus
make the best template I have found to piece together people and platforms from the other parties.

I vote for green also...

She was talking about the party.

 

[emilynghiem]

This started many years ago and I considered myself quite liberal when I compared myself to many conservatives but the minute I happen to defend anything that sounded remotely conservative for even the slightest reason I was immediately thrown out of the group. They didn't hold a vote or anything but more just started labeling me as 'conservative' simply because I had no issue with creationist themselves. I didn't agree with them but I didn't care if they believed what they believed. I came to the conclusion that 'liberals' only care about one thing and that is the socialist agenda in this country and the more they did the less tolerant they became. I don't know if anyone else has had this experience of being expelled from the democratic party simply because you disagreed with them on anything at all.

I can relate.

Just remember that the people perpetrating this are not traditional liberals, they're Regressive Leftists. Distortions, perversions of liberalism.

The problem is that their cancer appears to be spreading -- helped in no small part by the absolutist behaviors of the hard Right.
.

So @Mac1950 / SuperDemocrat: what to call that bunch - dogmatic bullies? Regressives?
Billy_Kinetta agrees with me that @C_Clayton's approach is NOT inclusive.
But I find westwall to be workable with, and I do try to remove any barriers preventing mutual inclusion.

What do you call the type that DOES include all people of all views, like some of the Greens and Tea Party?
What do you call the type that kicks out the opposition in order to dominate? bullying by coercion or exclusion?

Regressive sounds like going backwards. But even the bully liberals ARE trying to push forward, not backwards,
but are doing it by imposing beliefs instead of building a consensus and investing in programs by free choice.