What do liberals want the US to be?

[bripat9643]

Liberals want the US to be a socialist paradise just like North Korea or Cuba. They would think things are peachy keen if we were the old East Germany or Soviet Union. That is how those idiots think.

They don't want to be burdened with having to earn their own way so in their greed they want everything given to them in the name of social justice or some bullshit like that.

Then they wonder why we call them Moon Bats.

We have a political party and *news* channel that caters to people who live in Black-n-White World. Even though nearly all societies have some socialist aspects to them, Faux News and Republicans like to spotlight individual things and label them and anyone who supports them as "socialist."

Most of Faux News viewers are non-1%er retirees, which means they are lapping up most of the socialism the US offers its citizens: social security and Medicare.

What's your point, that the world is full of ticks on the ass of society?

 

[bripat9643]

this is a serious question, please only reply with serious comments.

what specifically do liberals want the US to become?
Tell us exactly what you want changed, and why.

Seriously?

Liberals want a country that provides a level playing field for all people regardless of race, sex, sexuality or social class
Liberals want to help those who need helping

Like in these liberal states?

Is this what liberals want America to look like?

The 5 Worst States for Black Americans

I'm willing to push for jobs programs in those states
Are you?

You mean Democrat re-election slush funds, don't you?

 

[bripat9643]

Liberals want the US to be a socialist paradise just like North Korea or Cuba. They would think things are peachy keen if we were the old East Germany or Soviet Union. That is how those idiots think.

They don't want to be burdened with having to earn their own way so in their greed they want everything given to them in the name of social justice or some bullshit like that.

Then they wonder why we call them Moon Bats.

If you check out the John Birch Society, you will find their goals and philosophy are about the same as The Tea Party...The only difference is, this is 2014 with a catchy name, and tons of money to influence people/elections

So which of their goals do you disagree with, freedom, fiscal responsibility? We already know you disapprove of low taxes and cutting government spending.

 

[bripat9643]

this is a serious question, please only reply with serious comments.

what specifically do liberals want the US to become?
Tell us exactly what you want changed, and why.

Seriously?

Liberals want a country that provides a level playing field for all people regardless of race, sex, sexuality or social class
Liberals want to help those who need helping

Define "level playing field."

And do liberals "want to help those who need helping," or do they want government to "help those who need helping?"

OK
There is a delicate balance between capitalists and labor. In recent years we have valued money earned through capitalism more than that earned through labor. Our economic policies are crafted by the capitalists and designed to minimize the collective power of labor

All money is earned through capitalism.

 

[Londoner]

Kudos for at least sprinkling some ideas inside a lot of unsupported generalizations.

Next, when they're asked to define "Social Justice" will come the obscurant rant which inevitably results in our learning that 'social justice' can't really be defined... that such means different things to different people, and how big a mistake it is to try and pigeon hole people and their respective tenets into narrow definitions... blah blah blah.

Actually social justice has been advanced in a number of different contexts, from the Biblical imperative to care for the least fortunate to an entire infrastructure of concrete legal rights across many nations, including disability rights, civil rights, equal opportunity legislation and an entire universe of class, gender and race based legislation. You can argue with these things at the conceptual, moral and tactical level, e.g., do they make sense? are they fair? can they be executed without harming the very people they were meant to help? Etc., etc. But to say that nobody has defined them makes you look like a partisan hack. Women like Susan B Anthony dedicated their lives to social justice. Achieving suffrage for women is more than obscure ranting.

 

[Flash]

Liberals want the US to be a socialist paradise just like North Korea or Cuba. They would think things are peachy keen if we were the old East Germany or Soviet Union. That is how those idiots think.

They don't want to be burdened with having to earn their own way so in their greed they want everything given to them in the name of social justice or some bullshit like that.

Then they wonder why we call them Moon Bats.

If you check out the John Birch Society, you will find their goals and philosophy are about the same as The Tea Party...The only difference is, this is 2014 with a catchy name, and tons of money to influence people/elections

So which of their goals do you disagree with, freedom, fiscal responsibility? We already know you disapprove of low taxes and cutting government spending.

I believe that we should have the minimum government possible. Defense, courts, police etc. No welfare, subsidies, entitlements or bailouts. The government should not be in the business of taking money from one person and giving it to another. The despicable Liberals want the corrupt and incompetent government to be an agent of what they call "social justice" which is absolutely unacceptable.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Kudos for at least sprinkling some ideas inside a lot of unsupported generalizations.

Next, when they're asked to define "Social Justice" will come the obscurant rant which inevitably results in our learning that 'social justice' can't really be defined... that such means different things to different people, and how big a mistake it is to try and pigeon hole people and their respective tenets into narrow definitions... blah blah blah.

Actually social justice has been advanced in a number of different contexts, from the Biblical imperative to care for the least fortunate

That is not an example of social justice. That is an example of charitable stewardship.

... to an entire infrastructure of concrete legal rights across many nations, including disability rights, civil rights, equal opportunity legislation and an entire universe of class, gender and race based legislation.

None of those would-be examples are in any way connected to 'rights'. What they are examples of, are the inducement of special-privilege, which set the needs of one group, superior to the rights of another.

You can argue with these things at the conceptual, moral and tactical level, e.g., do they make sense? are they fair? can they be executed without harming the very people they were meant to help? Etc., etc. But to say that nobody has defined them makes you look like a partisan hack. Women like Susan B Anthony dedicated their lives to social justice. Achieving suffrage for women is more than obscure ranting.

That someone goes to the trouble of invoking these things as such, does not a definition make. Social Justice is an indefinable conjuring which is little more than 'a big lie', designed for no other purpose than to empower the nefarious purveyors of such.

It is a manifestation of what is OKA: Evil.

 

[BluesLegend]

How do tax cuts create jobs???

They kill jobs by incentivizing OFF SHORRING jobs AND profits dumbass!

And the near 6,000 new government regulations Obama has slammed businesses with? Is this sending jobs off shore? OH SNAP!

 

[BluesLegend]

80% of the population owns 5% of the wealth.

Do you spend 80% of your day fuming about this? lol

Fuming?

No

But I do question why we continue policies that only contribute to allowing the one percent to control 40% of the wealth

LOL dude you need one of those captain Kurk yelling pics with "The 1%" captioned in your sig line.

Why do you grovel for the 1%ers?

Why do you envy and covet other peoples money? They earned it not you its theirs.

 

[BluesLegend]

Do you spend 80% of your day fuming about this? lol

he probably does. He dreams of being Robin Hood.

I honestly never think about it, I'm too busy 'earning' my own wealth to worry about what somebody else is earning. FACT this country is the very definition of opportunity, its overflowing with opportunities. Too bad the left try to convince their base its hopeless.

The Republican sham of lower taxes and less regulation doesn't help anyone but the richest Americans and Big Business and kill jobs and opportunity for almost everyone, especially in the middle class and poor.

As Bill Maher has observed, the GOPers are good at pushing a falsehood until it's accepted as conventional wisdom

Riiiiight what we need are higher taxes and more regulations...AHAHAHAHAHA! You libs crack me up.

1%ers 1945-1980 had 6%-9% of ALL US income. 23% by 2007. Today about 20% see the tax burden dropping AS their incomes increased DRAMATICALLY?

YOU LOW INFORMED TYPES, CRACK ME UP

^^^ (points and laughs)

 

[BluesLegend]

Riiiiight what we need are higher taxes and more regulations...AHAHAHAHAHA! You libs crack me up.

Try and offer something, anything based on intelligent thought. Could you do that? Or not? So far, you ain't looking to good. Kinda dumb and simple minded is what you seem to be.

Liberal play book page 1, deflect by painting your opponent as uneducated, dumb, not intelligent, simple minded etc. So go ahead you geniuses are the ones who proposed tax increases and regulations = jobs so explain it, be specific how is that going to work? Build a Berlin Wall around corporations with regulations and taxes is that it? lol

 

[rightwinger]

Trickle down

Fool me once....

Trickle down?

You're speaking of the 'economic theory', which confiscates property from those who created it, thus who rightfully own it, keeps most of it to sustain their power and trickles down a small percentage of it to those who could have created their own, but who CHOSE NOT TO... .

It's a Deceitful theory which uses FRAUDULENT reasoning as a means to influence the Ignorant.

Deceit, FRAUD and Ignorance: The Fundamental Elements of Socialism.

Save us your libertarian logic

Contributing to the society from which you benefit is not a confiscation of property. Our wealthy are paying at one of the lowest levels in our history and laughing all the way to the bank

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Trickle down

Fool me once....

Trickle down?

You're speaking of the 'economic theory', which confiscates property from those who created it, thus who rightfully own it, keeps most of it to sustain their power and trickles down a small percentage of it to those who could have created their own, but who CHOSE NOT TO... .

It's a Deceitful theory which uses FRAUDULENT reasoning as a means to influence the Ignorant.

Deceit, FRAUD and Ignorance: The Fundamental Elements of Socialism.

Save us your libertarian logic

Contributing to the society from which you benefit is not a confiscation of property. Our wealthy are paying at one of the lowest levels in our history and laughing all the way to the bank

Confiscation of one's property is confiscation. Contributions are those things given without penalty.

And just as an FYI: That evil confiscates less at one time or more at another, is irrelevant... DUMBASS!

 

[rightwinger]

Seriously?

Liberals want a country that provides a level playing field for all people regardless of race, sex, sexuality or social class
Liberals want to help those who need helping

Now if any of their policies could accomplish anything they set out do without the corruption, malfeasance and political pandering ... They might be worthy of note.

Truly excellent initiatives and desires ... As soon as they can offer anything that actually accomplishes any of that ... Then we have a chance of being more helpful.

.

Which policies payed off?
Civil rights, women's rights, worker protections, social security, Medicare, affirmative action

 

[rightwinger]

Trickle down

Fool me once....

Trickle down?

You're speaking of the 'economic theory', which confiscates property from those who created it, thus who rightfully own it, keeps most of it to sustain their power and trickles down a small percentage of it to those who could have created their own, but who CHOSE NOT TO... .

It's a Deceitful theory which uses FRAUDULENT reasoning as a means to influence the Ignorant.

Deceit, FRAUD and Ignorance: The Fundamental Elements of Socialism.

Save us your libertarian logic

Contributing to the society from which you benefit is not a confiscation of property. Our wealthy are paying at one of the lowest levels in our history and laughing all the way to the bank

Confiscation of one's property is confiscation. Contributions are those things given without penalty.

And just as an FYI: That evil confiscates less at one time or more at another, is irrelevant... DUMBASS!

Taxation is the way society pays for itself. We have one of the lowest levels of taxation of any industrialized country
Stop with the confiscation of property bullshit

 

[rightwinger]

everyone wants to help those who need help. Where in the USA today is the playing field not level? Do you want more affrimative action that penalizes the majorities?

I asked for specifics, you provided generalizations. What exactly do you want?

OK...let's look at where the playing field is not level
We have a wealthy class who get a disproportional say in how legislation is crafted and who it helps. Specific legislation includes tax structure, deductions, labor laws
Affirmative action was an immensely successful liberal program that helped all people. Yes, it did level the playing field

Did it help the people who got passed over due to adding points to the people who got in due to it?

It helped those who were never given an opportunity to fill management or Complex jobs. In a society where blacks were only allowed menial jobs and women were only allowed subservient jobs, affirmative action was necessary
Affirmative action worked

That it was necessary and successful doesn't mean it didn't trample the rights of those who were pushed aside. It was justice for those who needed a gov't hand up but not for those who lost out.

Seems women as a group took the hand up, and made it, blacks, not so much.

Tell that to President Obama

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Taxation is the way society pays for itself. ...

No, dumbass.. taxation is the way society pays for GOVERNMENT.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Tell that to President Obama

Peasantpimp obama... he's not President of anything. He's the Peasantpimp of the Union States.

 

[rightwinger]

Taxation is the way society pays for itself. ...

No, dumbass.. taxation is the way society pays for GOVERNMENT.

Government provides the collective services of our society. To try to separate one from the other is assinine

 

[rightwinger]

Tell that to President Obama

Peasantpimp obama... he's not President of anything. He's the Peasantpimp of the Union States.

Resorting to childish name calling ....a sure signal of your submission