Have you had this experience in dealing with the left?

[Cecilie1200]

Let the conflation begin!

Facts are facts.

True. And that post . . . wasn't.

Really? Throughout history in many countries, progressives have fought to unionize, a minimum wage, labor laws, environmental protections.. Conservatives love opposing this stuff though:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/25/opinion/michigans-great-stink.html

In the 1850s, London, the world’s largest city, still didn’t have a sewer system. Waste simply flowed into the Thames, which was as disgusting as you might imagine. But conservatives, including the magazine The Economist and the prime minister, opposed any effort to remedy the situation. After all, such an effort would involve increased government spending and, they insisted, infringe on personal liberty and local control.

It took the Great Stink of 1858, when the stench made the Houses of Parliament unusable, to produce action.

But that’s all ancient history. Modern politicians, no matter how conservative, understand that public health is an essential government role. Right? No, wrong — as illustrated by the disaster in Flint, Mich.

Yes, thank you for yet another meaningless attempt to draw connection lines between people who called themselves liberals a century or more ago, and people who call themselves liberals now.

Just so we're clear, playing semantic games impresses me not at all. I can put on ears and a tail and call myself a cat, but that's not going to make me one.

I'm sorry? Modern liberals are just like the progressives of the past, supporting unions, environmental protection, helping labor.

No, modern liberals are pretending to refight the battles of the past, against opponents who no longer exist, in order to advance agendas that achieve the opposite result.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Our country, the one we live in, was founded by liberals. It was the liberals--the ones who believed that we were all created equal--who fought the union side of the civil war and emanicipated the slaves. It was the liberals who fought for civil rights. It was the liberals who fought for legislation to protect children (e.g., child labor laws), and the environment, and the economy so that we could all prosper. If you're a citizen of the United States, you live in a country created and perpetuated by liberals.

Let the conflation begin!

Facts are facts.

True. And that post . . . wasn't.

Really? Throughout history in many countries, progressives have fought to unionize, a minimum wage, labor laws, environmental protections.. Conservatives love opposing this stuff though:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/25/opinion/michigans-great-stink.html

In the 1850s, London, the world’s largest city, still didn’t have a sewer system. Waste simply flowed into the Thames, which was as disgusting as you might imagine. But conservatives, including the magazine The Economist and the prime minister, opposed any effort to remedy the situation. After all, such an effort would involve increased government spending and, they insisted, infringe on personal liberty and local control.

It took the Great Stink of 1858, when the stench made the Houses of Parliament unusable, to produce action.

But that’s all ancient history. Modern politicians, no matter how conservative, understand that public health is an essential government role. Right? No, wrong — as illustrated by the disaster in Flint, Mich.

Thank you.

My observations disclose that conservatives (as a general proposition) appear to avail themselves of all the societal amenities made possible through the ceaseless work of liberals and take it for granted (for themselves) while they inexplicably complain when others seek to avail themselves of those same societal amenities. It's a baffling phenomena.

So are you one of those leftists who gets one dissent and immediately retreats into discussing the dissent with another leftist rather than answering the dissent directly? Is that how it works? Because it would save a lot of time if you tell me now so I can flush you and move on to someone who isn't a poltroon.

 

[Dovahkiin]

Facts are facts.

True. And that post . . . wasn't.

Really? Throughout history in many countries, progressives have fought to unionize, a minimum wage, labor laws, environmental protections.. Conservatives love opposing this stuff though:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/25/opinion/michigans-great-stink.html

In the 1850s, London, the world’s largest city, still didn’t have a sewer system. Waste simply flowed into the Thames, which was as disgusting as you might imagine. But conservatives, including the magazine The Economist and the prime minister, opposed any effort to remedy the situation. After all, such an effort would involve increased government spending and, they insisted, infringe on personal liberty and local control.

It took the Great Stink of 1858, when the stench made the Houses of Parliament unusable, to produce action.

But that’s all ancient history. Modern politicians, no matter how conservative, understand that public health is an essential government role. Right? No, wrong — as illustrated by the disaster in Flint, Mich.

Yes, thank you for yet another meaningless attempt to draw connection lines between people who called themselves liberals a century or more ago, and people who call themselves liberals now.

Just so we're clear, playing semantic games impresses me not at all. I can put on ears and a tail and call myself a cat, but that's not going to make me one.

I'm sorry? Modern liberals are just like the progressives of the past, supporting unions, environmental protection, helping labor.

No, modern liberals are pretending to refight the battles of the past, against opponents who no longer exist, in order to advance agendas that achieve the opposite result.

"Pretending?" Modern liberals around the world continue to fight, and they should, neoliberalism has been dominating since the 1970's, leading to stagnant wages, a decline in fiscal policy..

 

[Debra K]

I've had this experience around 2000. I supported the invasion of Iraq but I defended those who opposed it. I just kind of thought it was healthy for people to disagree with going to war with another country. One of my 'conservative' coworkers who was a soldier during the korean war thought that people shouldn't disagree with their government when it goes to war but I explained that disagreement might be good for good decision making within a democracy. One of my 'liberal' coworkers, of course, jumped on that and seem to be on my side until I mentioned I liked watching the Rush Limbaugh show. It was at that point I became his enemy all because I said I liked watching his show.

I don't know if any other liberal or independent might have had any similar experiences dealing with the left? The minute you disagree with the left on anything you immediately get labeled as a conservative.

One data point is, well one data point. Living in the Bay Area. diverse in many ways including political thinking, I've found a great deal of debate on the issues which divide people, using taxonomy limited to left and right is not helpful or properly descriptive.

Using left and right to describe a person in the manner used today are simply shortcuts, and used primarily as pejoratives; even liberal and conservative no longer hold much value other than to demean one side or the other.

If we are to look to the original use of left and right, used to describe the French Government after their revolution, we would find the Right Wing supported the Power Elite, and the Left Wing supported the masses. Today the balance of power is upset, unless those who seek to become leaders do not understand that business needs labor and labor needs buisness we are doomed to remain a house divided.

The difference between the two is cons tend to do it on an individual basis whereas libs tend to do it through government, television, movies, and in our schools. They trash those they hate through the media and in the courts. It's no contest. Organized bigotry on a massive scale. But all they think they need to do to cancel all of that out is bring up slavery, Jim Crow, or the Spanish Inquisition.

Not one shred of truth or common sense in your post.

 

[Debra K]

Let the conflation begin!

Facts are facts.

True. And that post . . . wasn't.

Really? Throughout history in many countries, progressives have fought to unionize, a minimum wage, labor laws, environmental protections.. Conservatives love opposing this stuff though:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/25/opinion/michigans-great-stink.html

In the 1850s, London, the world’s largest city, still didn’t have a sewer system. Waste simply flowed into the Thames, which was as disgusting as you might imagine. But conservatives, including the magazine The Economist and the prime minister, opposed any effort to remedy the situation. After all, such an effort would involve increased government spending and, they insisted, infringe on personal liberty and local control.

It took the Great Stink of 1858, when the stench made the Houses of Parliament unusable, to produce action.

But that’s all ancient history. Modern politicians, no matter how conservative, understand that public health is an essential government role. Right? No, wrong — as illustrated by the disaster in Flint, Mich.

Thank you.

My observations disclose that conservatives (as a general proposition) appear to avail themselves of all the societal amenities made possible through the ceaseless work of liberals and take it for granted (for themselves) while they inexplicably complain when others seek to avail themselves of those same societal amenities. It's a baffling phenomena.

So are you one of those leftists who gets one dissent and immediately retreats into discussing the dissent with another leftist rather than answering the dissent directly? Is that how it works? Because it would save a lot of time if you tell me now so I can flush you and move on to someone who isn't a poltroon.

Oh my ... forgive me if I haven't formulated a lengthy response your valuable contribution to this thread. In my defense, I did spend part of my day thus far tending to small children. They were delightful, but their mother picked them up a while ago and I'm trying to get caught up on my posting duties. Ha Ha. I will review your contribution, "Let the conflation begin!", and give it the attention it deserves. After all, you did invest "a lot of time" on that particular gem.

 

[Dekster]

That must be some wild planet you hail from. How are you enjoying Earth?

Some people know history and some people prefer to pretend to know things. You clearly are not the former.

 

[Debra K]

Nope, never had that but I keep my politics mostly to myself. My clients think I'm a conservative, since nearly everyone here is and I have the same work ethic, even better in most cases.

And most liberals are hardly going to pat you on the back for listening to a program that people who like it are perfectly willing to call themselves Dittoheads. Liberals think for themselves, it's part of being a liberal.

Liberals think for themselves? I guess that's why when one of their own uses certain phrases, it doesn't take long for the butt lickers on here to start repeating those Liberal phrases.

I believe people who lean toward the left are the ones who have repeatedly demonstrated that they read relevant statutory law and supreme court decisions and apply the language and legal concepts to similar cases and controversies. From my observations, they are less likely to fall victim to logical fallacies and disingenuous arguments. They employ critical thinking skills.

When "liberals" derive their "common language" from authoritative sources but their political adversaries derive their "common language" from partisan pundits and talking heads like Rush Limbaugh, then it is fair to say that liberals are more likely than conservatives to think for themselves.

I just heard "I think liberals are smart because they agree with me."

How much time did you spend formulating that zinger? I need an accounting so I may give it the rebuttal time it deserves. Alas, I may have to flush you and your one liners.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Facts are facts.

True. And that post . . . wasn't.

Really? Throughout history in many countries, progressives have fought to unionize, a minimum wage, labor laws, environmental protections.. Conservatives love opposing this stuff though:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/25/opinion/michigans-great-stink.html

In the 1850s, London, the world’s largest city, still didn’t have a sewer system. Waste simply flowed into the Thames, which was as disgusting as you might imagine. But conservatives, including the magazine The Economist and the prime minister, opposed any effort to remedy the situation. After all, such an effort would involve increased government spending and, they insisted, infringe on personal liberty and local control.

It took the Great Stink of 1858, when the stench made the Houses of Parliament unusable, to produce action.

But that’s all ancient history. Modern politicians, no matter how conservative, understand that public health is an essential government role. Right? No, wrong — as illustrated by the disaster in Flint, Mich.

Thank you.

My observations disclose that conservatives (as a general proposition) appear to avail themselves of all the societal amenities made possible through the ceaseless work of liberals and take it for granted (for themselves) while they inexplicably complain when others seek to avail themselves of those same societal amenities. It's a baffling phenomena.

So are you one of those leftists who gets one dissent and immediately retreats into discussing the dissent with another leftist rather than answering the dissent directly? Is that how it works? Because it would save a lot of time if you tell me now so I can flush you and move on to someone who isn't a poltroon.

Oh my ... forgive me if I haven't formulated a lengthy response your valuable contribution to this thread. In my defense, I did spend part of my day thus far tending to small children. They were delightful, but their mother picked them up a while ago and I'm trying to get caught up on my posting duties. Ha Ha. I will review your contribution, "Let the conflation begin!", and give it the attention it deserves. After all, you did invest "a lot of time" on that particular gem.

Can I yawn now? Didn't ask, don't care, not accepting the deflection. You wanted to respond to someone lying you up, instead of someone challenging you, and that's what you did. Case closed, please don't share, I'm not your Mommy or your therapist.

Do you need me to explain the word "conflation" to you? How about "dishonest"?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Nope, never had that but I keep my politics mostly to myself. My clients think I'm a conservative, since nearly everyone here is and I have the same work ethic, even better in most cases.

And most liberals are hardly going to pat you on the back for listening to a program that people who like it are perfectly willing to call themselves Dittoheads. Liberals think for themselves, it's part of being a liberal.

Liberals think for themselves? I guess that's why when one of their own uses certain phrases, it doesn't take long for the butt lickers on here to start repeating those Liberal phrases.

I believe people who lean toward the left are the ones who have repeatedly demonstrated that they read relevant statutory law and supreme court decisions and apply the language and legal concepts to similar cases and controversies. From my observations, they are less likely to fall victim to logical fallacies and disingenuous arguments. They employ critical thinking skills.

When "liberals" derive their "common language" from authoritative sources but their political adversaries derive their "common language" from partisan pundits and talking heads like Rush Limbaugh, then it is fair to say that liberals are more likely than conservatives to think for themselves.

I just heard "I think liberals are smart because they agree with me."

How much time did you spend formulating that zinger? I need an accounting so I may give it the rebuttal time it deserves. Alas, I may have to flush you and your one liners.

Actually, that's a standard response, since, however original and clever you thought you were being, I actually hear the exact same thing multiple times a day.

 

[Debra K]

Nope, never had that but I keep my politics mostly to myself. My clients think I'm a conservative, since nearly everyone here is and I have the same work ethic, even better in most cases.

And most liberals are hardly going to pat you on the back for listening to a program that people who like it are perfectly willing to call themselves Dittoheads. Liberals think for themselves, it's part of being a liberal.

Liberals think for themselves? I guess that's why when one of their own uses certain phrases, it doesn't take long for the butt lickers on here to start repeating those Liberal phrases.

Megadittoes Con!!!

Show me where I've used such a phrase. I can show you where plenty have repeated phrases like "you didn't build that", "code words for racism", and the like. If you don't want to be considered a Liberal puppet, quit letting your handlers yank your strings.

Conservative65: Your response above is disingenuous, the same as conservatives who cling to the "state rights" mantra is disingenuous because they use it to justify the passage of state laws that oppress others.

When the mantra "segregation today, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever," lost its efficacy after Brown v. Board of Education, then the proponents of segregation began hanging their hats on "state rights". Historical evidence of conservative use of state powers to oppress women, minorities, and disfavored groups discloses animus. Racism, for instance, is animus directed toward minorities.

Pointing out the truth about your mantra doesn't make someone a liberal puppet.

More or less. The reason we have such a strong federal government to begin with was to stop conservatives from exercising their natural law right to drag people out of jail cells and hang them by the neck until they were dead without even so much as a kangaroo court trial and then the same lynchers would never even get charged with anything. That issue is the basis of the one and only criminal trial to ever take place in the chambers of the United States Supreme Court.

Thank you. I was unaware of this particular case and found the citation and link to the case:

United States v. Shipp 203 U.S. 563 (1906)

I pulled it up on my screen and intend to read it later.

 

[Debra K]

True. And that post . . . wasn't.

Really? Throughout history in many countries, progressives have fought to unionize, a minimum wage, labor laws, environmental protections.. Conservatives love opposing this stuff though:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/25/opinion/michigans-great-stink.html

In the 1850s, London, the world’s largest city, still didn’t have a sewer system. Waste simply flowed into the Thames, which was as disgusting as you might imagine. But conservatives, including the magazine The Economist and the prime minister, opposed any effort to remedy the situation. After all, such an effort would involve increased government spending and, they insisted, infringe on personal liberty and local control.

It took the Great Stink of 1858, when the stench made the Houses of Parliament unusable, to produce action.

But that’s all ancient history. Modern politicians, no matter how conservative, understand that public health is an essential government role. Right? No, wrong — as illustrated by the disaster in Flint, Mich.

Thank you.

My observations disclose that conservatives (as a general proposition) appear to avail themselves of all the societal amenities made possible through the ceaseless work of liberals and take it for granted (for themselves) while they inexplicably complain when others seek to avail themselves of those same societal amenities. It's a baffling phenomena.

So are you one of those leftists who gets one dissent and immediately retreats into discussing the dissent with another leftist rather than answering the dissent directly? Is that how it works? Because it would save a lot of time if you tell me now so I can flush you and move on to someone who isn't a poltroon.

Oh my ... forgive me if I haven't formulated a lengthy response your valuable contribution to this thread. In my defense, I did spend part of my day thus far tending to small children. They were delightful, but their mother picked them up a while ago and I'm trying to get caught up on my posting duties. Ha Ha. I will review your contribution, "Let the conflation begin!", and give it the attention it deserves. After all, you did invest "a lot of time" on that particular gem.

Can I yawn now? Didn't ask, don't care, not accepting the deflection. You wanted to respond to someone lying you up, instead of someone challenging you, and that's what you did. Case closed, please don't share, I'm not your Mommy or your therapist.

Do you need me to explain the word "conflation" to you? How about "dishonest"?

Yawn. Flush your toilet. Go to bed. Whatever. No need to ask my permission. Do what you want. Your one-liners and zingers are undeserving of attention. If you had anything substantive to contribute to the discussion, you would have offered it by now. You present no challenge because you present nothing at all.

 

[Debra K]

I've had this experience around 2000. I supported the invasion of Iraq but I defended those who opposed it. I just kind of thought it was healthy for people to disagree with going to war with another country. One of my 'conservative' coworkers who was a soldier during the korean war thought that people shouldn't disagree with their government when it goes to war but I explained that disagreement might be good for good decision making within a democracy. One of my 'liberal' coworkers, of course, jumped on that and seem to be on my side until I mentioned I liked watching the Rush Limbaugh show. It was at that point I became his enemy all because I said I liked watching his show.

I don't know if any other liberal or independent might have had any similar experiences dealing with the left? The minute you disagree with the left on anything you immediately get labeled as a conservative.

One data point is, well one data point. Living in the Bay Area. diverse in many ways including political thinking, I've found a great deal of debate on the issues which divide people, using taxonomy limited to left and right is not helpful or properly descriptive.

Using left and right to describe a person in the manner used today are simply shortcuts, and used primarily as pejoratives; even liberal and conservative no longer hold much value other than to demean one side or the other.

If we are to look to the original use of left and right, used to describe the French Government after their revolution, we would find the Right Wing supported the Power Elite, and the Left Wing supported the masses. Today the balance of power is upset, unless those who seek to become leaders do not understand that business needs labor and labor needs buisness we are doomed to remain a house divided.

The difference between the two is cons tend to do it on an individual basis whereas libs tend to do it through government, television, movies, and in our schools. They trash those they hate through the media and in the courts. It's no contest. Organized bigotry on a massive scale. But all they think they need to do to cancel all of that out is bring up slavery, Jim Crow, or the Spanish Inquisition.

I'm not sure if you are using hyperbole as a rhetorical device or if you are really out of touch with reality. In either case you're being your usual mendacious and partisan self.

"organized bigotry"? The progressive / liberal coalition within the Democratic Party is not the set which opposed gay marriage and gay and lesbian patriots who wanted to serve in our military; has not sought to suppress the vote of likely Democratic Voters based on unproved mass fraud; prevent labor unions and government labor from collective bargaining, sought to end efforts to end institutional racism by opposing Affirmative Action, making women suffer and submit to invasive unnecessary medical procedures and / or create road bloc by closing clinics which provided abortion services or send kids born and raised as Americans back to a country foreign to them.

No one needs to bring up historical facts to prove that bigotry and racism is a covert agenda from those who hate and/or fear progressives, liberals, Democrats, Women, minorities, immigrants, etc. Mudwhistle and others like him use the age old strategy of echoing each other claiming that their not well hidden agenda is really an overt agenda by progressives, liberals, Democrats, gays/lesbians, women, minorities, etc. etc.

Having morals and principles is now called Homophobia.

Wanting to have fair and honest elections is now called racism.

Wanting national security is now called Islamophobia.

Abusing the power of the state to deprive others of the fundamental rights that you enjoy is oppression. Moral disapproval of homosexuality does not justify oppression of homosexual persons.

Wanting fair and honest elections is admirable if that was truly the goal, but it isn't.

The oppression of an entire class of people under the guise of national security is still oppression.

 

[Debra K]

I don't think web sites that provide public access to statutory and case law are "left wing propaganda hate sites".

Lol, why?

The best lies are the ones who abuse truthful facts to support their fallacious claims.

You deleted the context. I responded to another poster's accusation that liberals repeat stuff they find on "left wing propaganda hate cites." I lean left on civil rights issues and I often cite to statutory and case law and provide links to websites that provide public access to those things. They are not "left wing propaganda hate sites."

You bring up an alleged issue that wasn't the subject of my response. Thus, your ridicule was unwarranted.

One of the "best lies" I have seen on this site is use of the First Amendment to support the fallacious argument that the free exercise clause somehow allows people who claim religious objections to justify violating laws of general application, such as laws prohibiting discrimination in public accommodations.

So you will not contest the assertion by me that the left is not engaging in critical or rational thought on this message borad, nor typically.

Fine, then I'll have a Coke.

Your alleged "assertion" is incomprehensible. Again, my observation is that those who lean left, as far as I have been able to identify "lefties" thus far during my short tenure as a member of this board, quote authoritative materials and provide links to support their arguments. I've seen it often on this site thus far and I do it myself. Authoritative sources are not "left wing propaganda hate sites." The accusation that liberal arguments are gleaned from hate sites is unfounded.

I have no idea what the heck you're talking about when you ask, "You think that ideologues cant have a link to legal sites?" That's silly. Everyone has access to authoritative materials. The point is that most "conservatives" on this board (again, the ones who identify themselves as such) don't use them as far as I can tell (thus far) ... apparently they think their personal opinions and feelings carry more weight than the actual law. But, they don't carry any weight at all.

If you have a link to an argument in the political forum written by a conservative--an argument that is cogent and well-supported by authority--please provide it. I'm willing to revise my point of view.

 

[NYcarbineer]

You don't want to understand therefore, you don't.

I understand completely.
Liberals have their own world and the rest of us live in this one.

Nope. You have no interest in learning about what a liberal is. You've been told they are evil bad people. For you that's all you need to hear.

Well I know some of them are idiots. They believe some incredibly lame excuses. They can be so gullible simply because of their own bias. Many are part of a protected class that enjoys double standards and special consideration for the race, their sexual orientation, or their wealth. They don't feel shame for their transgressions.

Modesty and humility is foreign to many of them. They feel everyone should think the same way. Everyone else should just leave.

We are allowed to have an opinion as long as it matches their opinion.

Whoever you are talking to, those aren't liberals. I'm a liberal. Talk it up, dumbasses, we granted you said right.

Real liberals are embarrassed to be called liberals because of the negative connotations involved.

Who? I'm not. Your imaginary demons are getting boring.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Lol, OMG, please give me one example of this. Just one.

You didn't quote my post in its entirety.

Check out Sil's and her choir's anti-gay threads and posts on this discussion board. Many examples are present.

I have seen plenty of Sils posts, and while he is far more rational than most liberals most of the time, it isnt what I consider critical thinking.

For example he seems to fail to distinguish between those opposed to gay marriage but support civil unions for them vrs those that oppose any legal recognition of homo spousal partnerships. His talking points memo doesnt seem to have that third pigeonhole for him to use.

But I asked for only one example, you failed to do so, so I think it justifiable to say that rational critical thought among liberals is simply a myth.

The primary reason the left is so anti-Republican is because of the homosexual agenda. Look online and you discover that many of the leading liberals in Hollywood are Gay or bisexual. Therefore they hate Christians, conservatives, heterosexuals, and especially Republicans.

You're wrong. People who lean left are anti-oppression. Throughout history, oppression has proven to be a bad thing. People who lean left do not hate Christians, conservatives, heterosexuals or Republicans. Left-leaning people fight against oppression. If a Christian seeks to oppress others, even if he does so in the name of God, a left-leaning person will express disagreement. Disagreement is not hate.

That explains the death threats Sarah Palin got and made shirts like this.

Because they like freedom of speech.

That's a compliment. A **** has several legitimate uses. Not so Sarah Palin.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Liberals think for themselves? I guess that's why when one of their own uses certain phrases, it doesn't take long for the butt lickers on here to start repeating those Liberal phrases.

Megadittoes Con!!!

Show me where I've used such a phrase. I can show you where plenty have repeated phrases like "you didn't build that", "code words for racism", and the like. If you don't want to be considered a Liberal puppet, quit letting your handlers yank your strings.

The above is very disingenuous, the same as conservatives who cling to the "state rights" mantra is disingenuous because they use it to justify the passage of state laws that oppress others.

When the mantra "segregation today, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever," lost its efficacy after Brown v. Board of Education, then the proponents of segregation began hanging their hats on "state rights". Historical evidence of conservative use of state powers to oppress women, minorities, and disfavored groups discloses animus. Racism, for instance, is animus directed toward minorities.

States' rights is used to explain how the Constitution was written and something you hate.

Racism is used by minorities with program like affirmative action. They complain about race being used to deny yet don't have a problem with race being used when they benefit from it.

Nope, never had that but I keep my politics mostly to myself. My clients think I'm a conservative, since nearly everyone here is and I have the same work ethic, even better in most cases.

And most liberals are hardly going to pat you on the back for listening to a program that people who like it are perfectly willing to call themselves Dittoheads. Liberals think for themselves, it's part of being a liberal.

Liberals think for themselves? I guess that's why when one of their own uses certain phrases, it doesn't take long for the butt lickers on here to start repeating those Liberal phrases.

Megadittoes Con!!!

Show me where I've used such a phrase. I can show you where plenty have repeated phrases like "you didn't build that", "code words for racism", and the like. If you don't want to be considered a Liberal puppet, quit letting your handlers yank your strings.

If you want to argue that megadittos isn't a word that Limbaugh followers like sheep have bleated out for decades,

let's hear it.

I guess we won't be hearing that argument...

 

[NYcarbineer]

Nope, never had that but I keep my politics mostly to myself. My clients think I'm a conservative, since nearly everyone here is and I have the same work ethic, even better in most cases.

And most liberals are hardly going to pat you on the back for listening to a program that people who like it are perfectly willing to call themselves Dittoheads. Liberals think for themselves, it's part of being a liberal.

I haven't seen any evidenced of that in this forum. I see the same old talking points regurgitated from left wing propaganda hate sites over and over and over again.

I don't think web sites that provide public access to statutory and case law are "left wing propaganda hate sites".

When has any leftwinger posted anything like that?

Yup. TRY to get a left-winger to cite relevant law. I dare you.

On what issues won't liberals cite relevant law.

Name 3.

Any help for Cecile here? She's stumped.

 

[Debra K]

Face it, you're an idiot who has no idea what a liberal is, let alone what they believe. You were told they are bad people, and you believe it.

So you're saying that your problem is nobody understands you fuckers?

You don't want to understand therefore, you don't.

I understand completely.
Liberals have their own world and the rest of us live in this one.

Our country, the one we live in, was founded by liberals. It was the liberals--the ones who believed that we were all created equal--who fought the union side of the civil war and emanicipated the slaves. It was the liberals who fought for civil rights. It was the liberals who fought for legislation to protect children (e.g., child labor laws), and the environment, and the economy so that we could all prosper. If you're a citizen of the United States, you live in a country created and perpetuated by liberals.

In 1776 liberals were conservatives compared to today's liberal. You have no idea how far left liberals have become.

I know for a fact that the 1776 liberals and the ones who wrote the Constitution were smart enough to reserve the entire universe of individual rights ... none were surrendered. The same principles they applied then, we apply now ... and we're fortunate that our body of knowledge has expanded since then and our understanding is greater.

 

[Debra K]

I haven't seen any evidenced of that in this forum. I see the same old talking points regurgitated from left wing propaganda hate sites over and over and over again.

I don't think web sites that provide public access to statutory and case law are "left wing propaganda hate sites".

When has any leftwinger posted anything like that?

Yup. TRY to get a left-winger to cite relevant law. I dare you.

On what issues won't liberals cite relevant law.

Name 3.

Any help for Cecile here? She's stumped.

She was yawning earlier. Placing fingers to keyboard to type short posts without substance wears her out.

 

[Dekster]

Liberals think for themselves? I guess that's why when one of their own uses certain phrases, it doesn't take long for the butt lickers on here to start repeating those Liberal phrases.

Megadittoes Con!!!

Show me where I've used such a phrase. I can show you where plenty have repeated phrases like "you didn't build that", "code words for racism", and the like. If you don't want to be considered a Liberal puppet, quit letting your handlers yank your strings.

Conservative65: Your response above is disingenuous, the same as conservatives who cling to the "state rights" mantra is disingenuous because they use it to justify the passage of state laws that oppress others.

When the mantra "segregation today, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever," lost its efficacy after Brown v. Board of Education, then the proponents of segregation began hanging their hats on "state rights". Historical evidence of conservative use of state powers to oppress women, minorities, and disfavored groups discloses animus. Racism, for instance, is animus directed toward minorities.

Pointing out the truth about your mantra doesn't make someone a liberal puppet.

More or less. The reason we have such a strong federal government to begin with was to stop conservatives from exercising their natural law right to drag people out of jail cells and hang them by the neck until they were dead without even so much as a kangaroo court trial and then the same lynchers would never even get charged with anything. That issue is the basis of the one and only criminal trial to ever take place in the chambers of the United States Supreme Court.

Thank you. I was unaware of this particular case and found the citation and link to the case:

United States v. Shipp 203 U.S. 563 (1906)

I pulled it up on my screen and intend to read it later.

It is quite a bizarre set of fact surrounding that whole case. That was where the federal courts took their first big turn toward cracking down on yahoos.