Does Anyone Disagree with This?

[Correll]

How do you like those brownshirts in San Jose? Very liberal, wouldn't you say?

What is it exactly that you are referring to?

Sorry, I thought that was clear.


You said that Reagan was wrong on liberalism leading to totalitarianism.

So I pointed out that liberalism since Reagan's time has degenerated, or gone "down" to using Brown shirt tactics, in San Jose, ie using political violence in the streets to suppress the Freedom to Assemble of their enemies.


This is where, in order to disagree with me, you need to claim that those thugs are not representative of the Left and show the steps the democratic mayor took to clear the streets and protect the Trump supporters, and how Hillary has strongly rejected such tactics.

But what if I don't disagree. People who suppress the right of others to speak are not espousing liberal principles. Where does that leave us in terms of liberalism leading to totalitarianism?

Facing the fact that modern American "liberalism" has abandoned liberal principles.

And has since well before Reagan.

Facing the fact that modern American "liberalism" has abandoned liberal principles.

Not entirely, but it does show the folly of trying to place labels on people. In this case, based on the actions of a few. Liberalism doesn't lead to totalitarianism.

Nope. Generalization is part of the process of learning.

YOu don't have to touch all fires to learn that each individual fire burns.

"Liberals" may have abandoned liberal principles, but when I refer to someone as a liberal, you have a general idea what I am saying.

 

[Tehon]

What is it exactly that you are referring to?

Sorry, I thought that was clear.


You said that Reagan was wrong on liberalism leading to totalitarianism.

So I pointed out that liberalism since Reagan's time has degenerated, or gone "down" to using Brown shirt tactics, in San Jose, ie using political violence in the streets to suppress the Freedom to Assemble of their enemies.


This is where, in order to disagree with me, you need to claim that those thugs are not representative of the Left and show the steps the democratic mayor took to clear the streets and protect the Trump supporters, and how Hillary has strongly rejected such tactics.

But what if I don't disagree. People who suppress the right of others to speak are not espousing liberal principles. Where does that leave us in terms of liberalism leading to totalitarianism?

Facing the fact that modern American "liberalism" has abandoned liberal principles.

And has since well before Reagan.

Facing the fact that modern American "liberalism" has abandoned liberal principles.

Not entirely, but it does show the folly of trying to place labels on people. In this case, based on the actions of a few. Liberalism doesn't lead to totalitarianism.

Nope. Generalization is part of the process of learning.

YOu don't have to touch all fires to learn that each individual fire burns.

"Liberals" may have abandoned liberal principles, but when I refer to someone as a liberal, you have a general idea what I am saying.

"Liberals" may have abandoned liberal principles, but when I refer to someone as a liberal, you have a general idea what I am saying.

I know that you are employing it in a derogatory manner in order to denigrate Democrats and I know that Ronald Reagan was influential in promoting that usage from the outset of his political career. Which is why I disagreed with the statement at the outset of this thread. I thought you did as well.

 

[Correll]

Sorry, I thought that was clear.


You said that Reagan was wrong on liberalism leading to totalitarianism.

So I pointed out that liberalism since Reagan's time has degenerated, or gone "down" to using Brown shirt tactics, in San Jose, ie using political violence in the streets to suppress the Freedom to Assemble of their enemies.


This is where, in order to disagree with me, you need to claim that those thugs are not representative of the Left and show the steps the democratic mayor took to clear the streets and protect the Trump supporters, and how Hillary has strongly rejected such tactics.

But what if I don't disagree. People who suppress the right of others to speak are not espousing liberal principles. Where does that leave us in terms of liberalism leading to totalitarianism?

Facing the fact that modern American "liberalism" has abandoned liberal principles.

And has since well before Reagan.

Facing the fact that modern American "liberalism" has abandoned liberal principles.

Not entirely, but it does show the folly of trying to place labels on people. In this case, based on the actions of a few. Liberalism doesn't lead to totalitarianism.

Nope. Generalization is part of the process of learning.

YOu don't have to touch all fires to learn that each individual fire burns.

"Liberals" may have abandoned liberal principles, but when I refer to someone as a liberal, you have a general idea what I am saying.

"Liberals" may have abandoned liberal principles, but when I refer to someone as a liberal, you have a general idea what I am saying.

I know that you are employing it in a derogatory manner in order to denigrate Democrats and I know that Ronald Reagan was influential in promoting that usage from the outset of his political career. Which is why I disagreed with the statement at the outset of this thread. I thought you did as well.

i do indeed, often use liberal in a derogatory manner.

Reagan had a point to make at that time, and the recent behavior of libs in San Jose certainly lends weight to it.

But, the reality of the current situation is that this nation is deeply divided Left To Right, and the more the Left gets it's way the worse it will be for America and Americans.

 

[Tehon]

But what if I don't disagree. People who suppress the right of others to speak are not espousing liberal principles. Where does that leave us in terms of liberalism leading to totalitarianism?

Facing the fact that modern American "liberalism" has abandoned liberal principles.

And has since well before Reagan.

Facing the fact that modern American "liberalism" has abandoned liberal principles.

Not entirely, but it does show the folly of trying to place labels on people. In this case, based on the actions of a few. Liberalism doesn't lead to totalitarianism.

Nope. Generalization is part of the process of learning.

YOu don't have to touch all fires to learn that each individual fire burns.

"Liberals" may have abandoned liberal principles, but when I refer to someone as a liberal, you have a general idea what I am saying.

"Liberals" may have abandoned liberal principles, but when I refer to someone as a liberal, you have a general idea what I am saying.

I know that you are employing it in a derogatory manner in order to denigrate Democrats and I know that Ronald Reagan was influential in promoting that usage from the outset of his political career. Which is why I disagreed with the statement at the outset of this thread. I thought you did as well.

i do indeed, often use liberal in a derogatory manner.

Reagan had a point to make at that time, and the recent behavior of libs in San Jose certainly lends weight to it.

But, the reality of the current situation is that this nation is deeply divided Left To Right, and the more the Left gets it's way the worse it will be for America and Americans.

You mean the worse it will be for a minority of Americans......conservatives, who by their very nature don't except change easily.

 

[Correll]

Facing the fact that modern American "liberalism" has abandoned liberal principles.

And has since well before Reagan.

Facing the fact that modern American "liberalism" has abandoned liberal principles.

Not entirely, but it does show the folly of trying to place labels on people. In this case, based on the actions of a few. Liberalism doesn't lead to totalitarianism.

Nope. Generalization is part of the process of learning.

YOu don't have to touch all fires to learn that each individual fire burns.

"Liberals" may have abandoned liberal principles, but when I refer to someone as a liberal, you have a general idea what I am saying.

"Liberals" may have abandoned liberal principles, but when I refer to someone as a liberal, you have a general idea what I am saying.

I know that you are employing it in a derogatory manner in order to denigrate Democrats and I know that Ronald Reagan was influential in promoting that usage from the outset of his political career. Which is why I disagreed with the statement at the outset of this thread. I thought you did as well.

i do indeed, often use liberal in a derogatory manner.

Reagan had a point to make at that time, and the recent behavior of libs in San Jose certainly lends weight to it.

But, the reality of the current situation is that this nation is deeply divided Left To Right, and the more the Left gets it's way the worse it will be for America and Americans.

You mean the worse it will be for a minority of Americans......conservatives, who by their very nature don't except change easily.

Save your hackneyed phrases.

I said what I meant to say.

This nation is being torn apart. That the coming minority majority will mean a defacto One Party State might mean that the Lefties constantly get to pursue their agenda and policies, but that does not mean that it will be happy for them.

Look at Orlando, for one limited example.

Homosexuals are out and proud. Yeeeah!

And Muslims are welcome with open arms! Yeeeah!!

And sometimes those muslims will kill or main, or wound Homosexuals! Yeeeah, er, wait, what?

 

[eflatminor]

"You and I are told increasingly we have to choose between a left or right. Well I'd like to suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There's only an up or down"



Anyone have a problem with the above thoughts?

I think of it as either collectivist/statist oriented or individual freedom/limited government oriented.

Fascism, socialism, communism, statism, give it whatever name you like. We have to stop heading in that direction, 'cuz big government ain't right!

 

[DonaldFG]

"You and I are told increasingly we have to choose between a left or right. Well I'd like to suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There's only an up or down"



Anyone have a problem with the above thoughts?

I've been saying that for years in other forums. Left, right and their associated terms are propaganda to divide the thinking of citizens. Voting up and down on issues is what is important.

 

[Tehon]

Facing the fact that modern American "liberalism" has abandoned liberal principles.

Not entirely, but it does show the folly of trying to place labels on people. In this case, based on the actions of a few. Liberalism doesn't lead to totalitarianism.

Nope. Generalization is part of the process of learning.

YOu don't have to touch all fires to learn that each individual fire burns.

"Liberals" may have abandoned liberal principles, but when I refer to someone as a liberal, you have a general idea what I am saying.

"Liberals" may have abandoned liberal principles, but when I refer to someone as a liberal, you have a general idea what I am saying.

I know that you are employing it in a derogatory manner in order to denigrate Democrats and I know that Ronald Reagan was influential in promoting that usage from the outset of his political career. Which is why I disagreed with the statement at the outset of this thread. I thought you did as well.

i do indeed, often use liberal in a derogatory manner.

Reagan had a point to make at that time, and the recent behavior of libs in San Jose certainly lends weight to it.

But, the reality of the current situation is that this nation is deeply divided Left To Right, and the more the Left gets it's way the worse it will be for America and Americans.

You mean the worse it will be for a minority of Americans......conservatives, who by their very nature don't except change easily.

Save your hackneyed phrases.

I said what I meant to say.

This nation is being torn apart. That the coming minority majority will mean a defacto One Party State might mean that the Lefties constantly get to pursue their agenda and policies, but that does not mean that it will be happy for them.

Look at Orlando, for one limited example.

Homosexuals are out and proud. Yeeeah!

And Muslims are welcome with open arms! Yeeeah!!

And sometimes those muslims will kill or main, or wound Homosexuals! Yeeeah, er, wait, what?

Yes, there will be times when people with conservative philosophies maim and kill people with liberal philosophies. Much like we saw with the equal rights movement and the civil rights movement, the liberal philosophy will prevail. Though it will take many, many, many years to perfect.

 

[Correll]

Nope. Generalization is part of the process of learning.

YOu don't have to touch all fires to learn that each individual fire burns.

"Liberals" may have abandoned liberal principles, but when I refer to someone as a liberal, you have a general idea what I am saying.

"Liberals" may have abandoned liberal principles, but when I refer to someone as a liberal, you have a general idea what I am saying.

I know that you are employing it in a derogatory manner in order to denigrate Democrats and I know that Ronald Reagan was influential in promoting that usage from the outset of his political career. Which is why I disagreed with the statement at the outset of this thread. I thought you did as well.

i do indeed, often use liberal in a derogatory manner.

Reagan had a point to make at that time, and the recent behavior of libs in San Jose certainly lends weight to it.

But, the reality of the current situation is that this nation is deeply divided Left To Right, and the more the Left gets it's way the worse it will be for America and Americans.

You mean the worse it will be for a minority of Americans......conservatives, who by their very nature don't except change easily.

Save your hackneyed phrases.

I said what I meant to say.

This nation is being torn apart. That the coming minority majority will mean a defacto One Party State might mean that the Lefties constantly get to pursue their agenda and policies, but that does not mean that it will be happy for them.

Look at Orlando, for one limited example.

Homosexuals are out and proud. Yeeeah!

And Muslims are welcome with open arms! Yeeeah!!

And sometimes those muslims will kill or main, or wound Homosexuals! Yeeeah, er, wait, what?

Yes, there will be times when people with conservative philosophies maim and kill people with liberal philosophies. Much like we saw with the equal rights movement and the civil rights movement, the liberal philosophy will prevail. Though it will take many, many, many years to perfect.

That was cute the way you called Muslim Terrorists conservatives.

I hope that such coping mechanisms are enough for you when muslim gay bashing is a normal part of everyday America life.

For one example.

I saw a little bit of No True Scotsman Fallacy in there too.

 

[Freewill]

Humans are humans. Groups of people are groups of people. We will ALWAYS lean toward those with whom we identify....seems like I read that somewhere....something about Anarchy I think....

Yes. I invariably lean towards me.

And so does everyone else.

 

[OKTexas]

I wonder if any of the conservatives want to change their answers.

Ronald Reagan's optimism about the Left being, whatever, human? has been dis-proven with the passage of time.

He was a great man. But he was wrong on this issue.

Left and right really matters.

He was saying that liberalism leads to totalitarianism. I agree with you though, he was wrong on this as he was wrong on most issues.

How do you like those brownshirts in San Jose? Very liberal, wouldn't you say?

What is it exactly that you are referring to?

Sorry, I thought that was clear.


You said that Reagan was wrong on liberalism leading to totalitarianism.

So I pointed out that liberalism since Reagan's time has degenerated, or gone "down" to using Brown shirt tactics, in San Jose, ie using political violence in the streets to suppress the Freedom to Assemble of their enemies.


This is where, in order to disagree with me, you need to claim that those thugs are not representative of the Left and show the steps the democratic mayor took to clear the streets and protect the Trump supporters, and how Hillary has strongly rejected such tactics.

Yeah, that ain't gonna happen.

 

[OKTexas]

Facing the fact that modern American "liberalism" has abandoned liberal principles.

And has since well before Reagan.

Facing the fact that modern American "liberalism" has abandoned liberal principles.

Not entirely, but it does show the folly of trying to place labels on people. In this case, based on the actions of a few. Liberalism doesn't lead to totalitarianism.

Nope. Generalization is part of the process of learning.

YOu don't have to touch all fires to learn that each individual fire burns.

"Liberals" may have abandoned liberal principles, but when I refer to someone as a liberal, you have a general idea what I am saying.

"Liberals" may have abandoned liberal principles, but when I refer to someone as a liberal, you have a general idea what I am saying.

I know that you are employing it in a derogatory manner in order to denigrate Democrats and I know that Ronald Reagan was influential in promoting that usage from the outset of his political career. Which is why I disagreed with the statement at the outset of this thread. I thought you did as well.

i do indeed, often use liberal in a derogatory manner.

Reagan had a point to make at that time, and the recent behavior of libs in San Jose certainly lends weight to it.

But, the reality of the current situation is that this nation is deeply divided Left To Right, and the more the Left gets it's way the worse it will be for America and Americans.

You mean the worse it will be for a minority of Americans......conservatives, who by their very nature don't except change easily.

Sure we "except" change easily, especially destructive change. We are very willing to "accept" constructive change.

 

[Tehon]

Facing the fact that modern American "liberalism" has abandoned liberal principles.

Not entirely, but it does show the folly of trying to place labels on people. In this case, based on the actions of a few. Liberalism doesn't lead to totalitarianism.

Nope. Generalization is part of the process of learning.

YOu don't have to touch all fires to learn that each individual fire burns.

"Liberals" may have abandoned liberal principles, but when I refer to someone as a liberal, you have a general idea what I am saying.

"Liberals" may have abandoned liberal principles, but when I refer to someone as a liberal, you have a general idea what I am saying.

I know that you are employing it in a derogatory manner in order to denigrate Democrats and I know that Ronald Reagan was influential in promoting that usage from the outset of his political career. Which is why I disagreed with the statement at the outset of this thread. I thought you did as well.

i do indeed, often use liberal in a derogatory manner.

Reagan had a point to make at that time, and the recent behavior of libs in San Jose certainly lends weight to it.

But, the reality of the current situation is that this nation is deeply divided Left To Right, and the more the Left gets it's way the worse it will be for America and Americans.

You mean the worse it will be for a minority of Americans......conservatives, who by their very nature don't except change easily.

Sure we "except" change easily, especially destructive change. We are very willing to "accept" constructive change.

Good one, you got me.

 

[OldLady]

This is the issue of this election: Whether we believe in our capacity for self-government or whether we abandon the American revolution and confess that a little intellectual elite in a far-distant capitol can plan our lives for us better than we can plan them ourselves.

You and I are told increasingly we have to choose between a left or right. Well I'd like to suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There's only an up or down—[up] man's old—old-aged dream, the ultimate in individual freedom consistent with law and order, or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism. And regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would trade our freedom for security have embarked on this downward course.

Thanks, Tehon.

I wonder if any of the conservatives want to change their answers.

Ronald Reagan's optimism about the Left being, whatever, human? has been dis-proven with the passage of time.

He was a great man. But he was wrong on this issue.

Left and right really matters.

Your perception seems warped. Not that what you believe is warped, but that you believe people who have another idea are less than human? That is not letting the sun shine in. That is not going to get us out of the morass we are currently in.

It is not their political positions that make them less than human, but their sociopathic behavior.

You made a really strong point about "listening" earlier.
I posted my opinion on the biggest single cause of "not listening".
You first made it about me personally, and then when I pointed out that that was not why I had brought it up,
you have not bothered to reply.
HOw much are you listening to me?
DId you seriously consider for one microsecond what I was saying?
Or is your mind completely closed?

A thumbs-up/thank you is not a reply?
I am listening, but when you open your response by calling the other side sociopaths, I wonder how much listening YOU are willing to do. This thread is doing much better discussing the OP's point than fussing over personal aspersions. Interpret my lack of further response as you will.

 

[OnePercenter]

"You and I are told increasingly we have to choose between a left or right. Well I'd like to suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There's only an up or down"



Anyone have a problem with the above thoughts?

You and I are told increasingly we have to choose between a left or right. Well I'd like to suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There's only an up or down"

Anyone have a problem with the above thoughts?

You choose a candidate that best fits your needs. The middle class have only one choice, Democrats.

The reasons that many middle class people disagree has been ENDLESSLY discussed.

Have you EVER listened to those reasons? Or just dismissed them and called them names?

The reasons that many middle class people disagree has been ENDLESSLY discussed.

Have you EVER listened to those reasons? Or just dismissed them and called them names?

I have. And more importantly, according to the middle class the two biggest problems facing them today are wages and the economy. The ONLY party addressing either or both are Democrats.

 

[Unkotare]

"You and I are told increasingly we have to choose between a left or right. Well I'd like to suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There's only an up or down"



Anyone have a problem with the above thoughts?

You and I are told increasingly we have to choose between a left or right. Well I'd like to suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There's only an up or down"

Anyone have a problem with the above thoughts?

You choose a candidate that best fits your needs. The middle class have only one choice, Democrats.

The reasons that many middle class people disagree has been ENDLESSLY discussed.

Have you EVER listened to those reasons? Or just dismissed them and called them names?

The reasons that many middle class people disagree has been ENDLESSLY discussed.

Have you EVER listened to those reasons? Or just dismissed them and called them names?

I have. And more importantly, according to the middle class the two biggest problems facing them today are wages and the economy. The ONLY party addressing either or both are Democrats.

...according to a completely partisan democrat....what a fucking surprise.

 

[OnePercenter]

This is the issue of this election: Whether we believe in our capacity for self-government or whether we abandon the American revolution and confess that a little intellectual elite in a far-distant capitol can plan our lives for us better than we can plan them ourselves.

You and I are told increasingly we have to choose between a left or right. Well I'd like to suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There's only an up or down—[up] man's old—old-aged dream, the ultimate in individual freedom consistent with law and order, or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism. And regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would trade our freedom for security have embarked on this downward course.

Thanks, Tehon.

I wonder if any of the conservatives want to change their answers.

Ronald Reagan's optimism about the Left being, whatever, human? has been dis-proven with the passage of time.

He was a great man. But he was wrong on this issue.

Left and right really matters.

Ronald Reagan's optimism about the Left being, whatever, human? has been dis-proven with the passage of time.

He was a great man. But he was wrong on this issue.

Left and right really matters.

Funny thing was; When he was Governor of California, he signed the most significant consumer rights laws in the nation, which for the most part are still in effect. That, of course, was before the ideology change when Republicans were the 'left.'

 

[OnePercenter]

"You and I are told increasingly we have to choose between a left or right. Well I'd like to suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There's only an up or down"



Anyone have a problem with the above thoughts?

You and I are told increasingly we have to choose between a left or right. Well I'd like to suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There's only an up or down"

Anyone have a problem with the above thoughts?

You choose a candidate that best fits your needs. The middle class have only one choice, Democrats.

The reasons that many middle class people disagree has been ENDLESSLY discussed.

Have you EVER listened to those reasons? Or just dismissed them and called them names?

The reasons that many middle class people disagree has been ENDLESSLY discussed.

Have you EVER listened to those reasons? Or just dismissed them and called them names?

I have. And more importantly, according to the middle class the two biggest problems facing them today are wages and the economy. The ONLY party addressing either or both are Democrats.

...according to a completely partisan democrat....what a fucking surprise.

...according to a completely partisan democrat....what a fucking surprise.

No rebuttal, just bloviation.

 

[Unkotare]

"You and I are told increasingly we have to choose between a left or right. Well I'd like to suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There's only an up or down"



Anyone have a problem with the above thoughts?

You and I are told increasingly we have to choose between a left or right. Well I'd like to suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There's only an up or down"

Anyone have a problem with the above thoughts?

You choose a candidate that best fits your needs. The middle class have only one choice, Democrats.

The reasons that many middle class people disagree has been ENDLESSLY discussed.

Have you EVER listened to those reasons? Or just dismissed them and called them names?

The reasons that many middle class people disagree has been ENDLESSLY discussed.

Have you EVER listened to those reasons? Or just dismissed them and called them names?

I have. And more importantly, according to the middle class the two biggest problems facing them today are wages and the economy. The ONLY party addressing either or both are Democrats.

...according to a completely partisan democrat....what a fucking surprise.

...according to a completely partisan democrat....what a fucking surprise.

No rebuttal....

"Rebuttal"? To "only democrats have any answers to anything! Republicans are poopy-heads!"? If you want to be taken seriously, try being more than some mindless, partisan drone.

 

[Agit8r]

"You and I are told increasingly we have to choose between a left or right. Well I'd like to suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There's only an up or down"



Anyone have a problem with the above thoughts?

At best, we get to choose between center and far-right.