Why do people hate Liberals?

[Uncensored2008]

So it's just a coincidence then that the PNAC leaders advocated and then started an endless war against Fear in the ME?

Huh?

A <> to turquoise....

I am not a fan of the neocons - in case you failed to notice. They are what Rand termed "looters," using government to secure captive markets and exploited labor.

Still, your conspiracy theory is right off the deep end.

 

[Bfgrn]

Because definitions change and are changing all the time, because all political parties these days are entirely self-serving and therefore cannot be associated with any specific ideology, and because intellectual lightweights are incapable of focusing on concepts but rather understand them only within their perceptions or judgment of people or groups, Republican and Democrat doesn't mean a whole hell of a lot any more.

I wish I had $5 for every time I have described a principle of modern conservative/classical liberalism only to be told that my observation is absurd because 'the Republicans yadda yadda. . . .' or ". . . .then why do the Republicans support yadda yadda. . . ." or some such.

The Republican Party has not had a modern conservative/classical liberal platform for a very long time now. And it is as disingenous to point to it as what conservative/classical liberal/libertarian beliefs are as it is disingeuous to condemn the entire Democratic Party as authoritarian Marxists or some such because we can identify a plank or two in their platform that look like that.

Too often we have become a society incapable of separating its biases and prejudices and partisanship from analysis of concepts. Too often we are unable to think criticially and objectively.

Take such a simple concept of 'unalienable rights'. The conservative aka classical liberal aka libertarian knows that an unalienable right is that which requires or demands no contibution or participation by any other. To recognize and respect another's unalienable rights is to believe in ultimate liberty.

But the modern American liberal will not even discuss such a concept because they want to make things like contraceptives, abortion, healthcare, etc. etc. etc. unalienable rights and do not respect as unalienable rights the ability to use certain words or hold certain points of view.

I don't know how we get around that kind of disconnect.

Health care IS an unalienable right. If conservatives would just face that truth we could create a health care system that is proactive instead of reactive.

No one is turned away when they walk into, are carried into or rushed to a hospital...NO ONE. The problem is people who end up at the emergency room get the most expensive care. And if they can't pay, We, the People pay. Everyone who has insurance is paying more per month because of the 'free riders', over $1,000.00 per year.

 

[RKMBrown]

Because definitions change and are changing all the time, because all political parties these days are entirely self-serving and therefore cannot be associated with any specific ideology, and because intellectual lightweights are incapable of focusing on concepts but rather understand them only within their perceptions or judgment of people or groups, Republican and Democrat doesn't mean a whole hell of a lot any more.

I wish I had $5 for every time I have described a principle of modern conservative/classical liberalism only to be told that my observation is absurd because 'the Republicans yadda yadda. . . .' or ". . . .then why do the Republicans support yadda yadda. . . ." or some such.

The Republican Party has not had a modern conservative/classical liberal platform for a very long time now. And it is as disingenous to point to it as what conservative/classical liberal/libertarian beliefs are as it is disingeuous to condemn the entire Democratic Party as authoritarian Marxists or some such because we can identify a plank or two in their platform that look like that.

Too often we have become a society incapable of separating its biases and prejudices and partisanship from analysis of concepts. Too often we are unable to think criticially and objectively.

Take such a simple concept of 'unalienable rights'. The conservative aka classical liberal aka libertarian knows that an unalienable right is that which requires or demands no contibution or participation by any other. To recognize and respect another's unalienable rights is to believe in ultimate liberty.

But the modern American liberal will not even discuss such a concept because they want to make things like contraceptives, abortion, healthcare, etc. etc. etc. unalienable rights and do not respect as unalienable rights the ability to use certain words or hold certain points of view.

I don't know how we get around that kind of disconnect.

Health care IS an unalienable right. If conservatives would just face that truth we could create a health care system that is proactive instead of reactive.

No one is turned away when they walk into, are carried into or rushed to a hospital...NO ONE. The problem is people who end up at the emergency room get the most expensive care. And if they can't pay, We, the People pay. Everyone who has insurance is paying more per month because of the 'free riders', over $1,000.00 per year.

Really so all doctors owe you all the health care you want? They are your slaves? They must be forced to work at your beckon call? Maybe if you put your hands on your ears and scream we'll pay for everything you want. LOL

 

[koshergrl]

Health care is not an inalienable right. The problem with statists is they don't know what constitutes rights in teh first place.

They think they have a right to everything they want. Anything that makes life pleasant.

You don't have a right to that. You have a right to your own life (note..not the lives of others. Your own. You have a right to your own life. Your. Own. Life.) You have a right to move about freely. You have a right to be free...to not belong to another person. You have the RIGHT to PURSUE happiness. You don't have a right to good health. You don't have a right to food. You don't have a right to money. You don't have a right to health care. You have a right to PURSUE happiness via any route bar illegal ones. So if food makes you happy, you have the right to work and buy it. If you have money for it, you have the right to purchase it. Nobody is allowed to prevent you from purchasing it if it's for sale.

You have a right to obtain health care...if health care makes you happy. That means you have the right to work and apply your money towards health care, as you please. Doctors can't DENY you care, if you are able to purchase it.

But you don't have a right to have your happiness provided to you. Get it through your thick, stupid, grasping, lazy heads.

 

[Bfgrn]

Because definitions change and are changing all the time, because all political parties these days are entirely self-serving and therefore cannot be associated with any specific ideology, and because intellectual lightweights are incapable of focusing on concepts but rather understand them only within their perceptions or judgment of people or groups, Republican and Democrat doesn't mean a whole hell of a lot any more.

I wish I had $5 for every time I have described a principle of modern conservative/classical liberalism only to be told that my observation is absurd because 'the Republicans yadda yadda. . . .' or ". . . .then why do the Republicans support yadda yadda. . . ." or some such.

The Republican Party has not had a modern conservative/classical liberal platform for a very long time now. And it is as disingenous to point to it as what conservative/classical liberal/libertarian beliefs are as it is disingeuous to condemn the entire Democratic Party as authoritarian Marxists or some such because we can identify a plank or two in their platform that look like that.

Too often we have become a society incapable of separating its biases and prejudices and partisanship from analysis of concepts. Too often we are unable to think criticially and objectively.

Take such a simple concept of 'unalienable rights'. The conservative aka classical liberal aka libertarian knows that an unalienable right is that which requires or demands no contibution or participation by any other. To recognize and respect another's unalienable rights is to believe in ultimate liberty.

But the modern American liberal will not even discuss such a concept because they want to make things like contraceptives, abortion, healthcare, etc. etc. etc. unalienable rights and do not respect as unalienable rights the ability to use certain words or hold certain points of view.

I don't know how we get around that kind of disconnect.

Health care IS an unalienable right. If conservatives would just face that truth we could create a health care system that is proactive instead of reactive.

No one is turned away when they walk into, are carried into or rushed to a hospital...NO ONE. The problem is people who end up at the emergency room get the most expensive care. And if they can't pay, We, the People pay. Everyone who has insurance is paying more per month because of the 'free riders', over $1,000.00 per year.

Really so all doctors owe you all the health care you want? They are your slaves? They must be forced to work at your beckon call? Maybe if you put your hands on your ears and scream we'll pay for everything you want. LOL

Did I say that, or is that what YOU said? The polarized argument (black or white, all or none) is all you conservatives are capable of. Why is that? Are you that immature?

Doctors are slaves? REALLY. They do NOTHING for free. We now spend almost 20% of our gross domestic product on health care, compared with about half that in most developed countries. Yet in every measurable way, the results our health care system produces are no better and often worse than the outcomes in those countries.

And YES, No one is turned away when they walk into, are carried into or rushed to a hospital...NO ONE.

It is the LAW. Research the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA) signed by Ronald Reagan. It requires hospitals to provide care to anyone needing emergency healthcare treatment regardless of citizenship, legal status or ability to pay. There are no reimbursement provisions.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Health care IS an unalienable right. If conservatives would just face that truth we could create a health care system that is proactive instead of reactive.

No one is turned away when they walk into, are carried into or rushed to a hospital...NO ONE. The problem is people who end up at the emergency room get the most expensive care. And if they can't pay, We, the People pay. Everyone who has insurance is paying more per month because of the 'free riders', over $1,000.00 per year.

Really so all doctors owe you all the health care you want? They are your slaves? They must be forced to work at your beckon call? Maybe if you put your hands on your ears and scream we'll pay for everything you want. LOL

Did I say that, or is that what YOU said? The polarized argument (black or white, all or none) is all you conservatives are capable of. Why is that? Are you that immature?

Doctors are slaves? REALLY. They do NOTHING for free. We now spend almost 20% of our gross domestic product on health care, compared with about half that in most developed countries. Yet in every measurable way, the results our health care system produces are no better and often worse than the outcomes in those countries.

And YES, No one is turned away when they walk into, are carried into or rushed to a hospital...NO ONE.

It is the LAW. Research the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA) signed by Ronald Reagan. It requires hospitals to provide care to anyone needing emergency healthcare treatment regardless of citizenship, legal status or ability to pay. There are no reimbursement provisions.

Any that is forced by law to perform any activity for no additional compensation is being forced to do that additional activity for FREE.

It is so fucking simple that even a libtard should be able to get it through their fucking pea brain.

 

[RKMBrown]

Really so all doctors owe you all the health care you want? They are your slaves? They must be forced to work at your beckon call? Maybe if you put your hands on your ears and scream we'll pay for everything you want. LOL

Did I say that, or is that what YOU said? The polarized argument (black or white, all or none) is all you conservatives are capable of. Why is that? Are you that immature?

Doctors are slaves? REALLY. They do NOTHING for free. We now spend almost 20% of our gross domestic product on health care, compared with about half that in most developed countries. Yet in every measurable way, the results our health care system produces are no better and often worse than the outcomes in those countries.

And YES, No one is turned away when they walk into, are carried into or rushed to a hospital...NO ONE.

It is the LAW. Research the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA) signed by Ronald Reagan. It requires hospitals to provide care to anyone needing emergency healthcare treatment regardless of citizenship, legal status or ability to pay. There are no reimbursement provisions.

Any that is forced by law to perform any activity for no additional compensation is being forced to do that additional activity for FREE.

It is so fucking simple that even a libtard should be able to get it through their fucking pea brain.

Oh they get it. They just won't admit what they are doing is in fact enslavement of the providers and or payers through theft/re-distributions.

They know that free means, free to them through costs past on to paying customers. The ultimate goal being to get the funds for their theft from the general revenue of the tax payer. The intermediate goal being to get the funds from the people who pay for their health care through insurance and out of pocket. This to drive the costs up for those people till they beg to have it funded by the tax payer.

 

[Foxfyre]

I'm still shaking my head that some are under the delusion that an unalienable right is granted by law. How badly our education system has failed us, and I blame that on a brand of mushy headed liberalism that has allowed us to arrive at the sorry state we are now in.

 

[Wolfsister77]

My answer is, if I don't feel like I know enough about a subject, is to just do some research on my own. Read the thread, go study what everyone said, and teach myself.

There is no way anybody knows everything about everything and a lot of it is different interpretations and opinions about things.

If I'm incorrect, I'd like to be told how and how I can learn more to correct myself.

Not be told, as so many do and have, that liberals are uneducated and stupid or don't know history as if all liberals are like that.

How do you know what someone's education level is based solely on a post here?

Assumptions are not a good thing and it really discourages opposing debate.

Just my two cents.

 

[Foxfyre]

My answer is, if I don't feel like I know enough about a subject, is to just do some research on my own. Read the thread, go study what everyone said, and teach myself.

There is no way anybody knows everything about everything and a lot of it is different interpretations and opinions about things.

If I'm incorrect, I'd like to be told how and how I can learn more to correct myself.

Not be told, as so many do and have, that liberals are uneducated and stupid or don't know history as if all liberals are like that.

How do you know what someone's education level is based solely on a post here?

Assumptions are not a good thing and it really discourages opposing debate.

Just my two cents.

I don't know if that was directed at me, but the questions are valid and pertinent. The assumption that liberals are being accused of being uneducated and stupid is not valid or pertinent. Being wrong is not the same thing as being uneducated or stupid. And being wrong about one thing or some things is not the same thing as being wrong about everything.

It doesn't take too much effort to find liberals with PhD's and other impressive credentials stating all the stuff you find liberals posting on message boards. Sometimes they're right. Sometimes not.

Now then, if your comments were not directed at me but were directed at those who accuse others of being ignorant, fools, morons, or idiots rather than simply say "I don't agree with that, and here's why. . . .", I agree with you. Those calling names look a whole lot more uneducated than those they accuse in that case . . . .

unless. . . .

They are just participating in typical message board food fight banter that seems to be sport these days. In which case no harm, no foul, and kudos for not caring if you look like an idiot. (Just kidding.) (It is annoying to those who would like to discuss a topic however.)

My primary quarrel with liberals, apart from the damage I believe they do to our liberties and opportunities and choices, is that most can't or won't argue a concept, but they engage ONLY in accusing or attacking people with opposing views or people who don't share their political party or professed ideology.

I have problems with conservatives for the same reason, but most conservatives CAN at least give a rationale, apart from fuzzy emotionalism, for their convictions and beliefs.

 

[numan]

No one is turned away when they walk into, are carried into or rushed to a hospital...NO ONE.

That is not true.

.

 

[RKMBrown]

My answer is, if I don't feel like I know enough about a subject, is to just do some research on my own. Read the thread, go study what everyone said, and teach myself.

There is no way anybody knows everything about everything and a lot of it is different interpretations and opinions about things.

If I'm incorrect, I'd like to be told how and how I can learn more to correct myself.

Not be told, as so many do and have, that liberals are uneducated and stupid or don't know history as if all liberals are like that.

How do you know what someone's education level is based solely on a post here?

Assumptions are not a good thing and it really discourages opposing debate.

Just my two cents.

I don't know if that was directed at me, but the questions are valid and pertinent. The assumption that liberals are being accused of being uneducated and stupid is not valid or pertinent. Being wrong is not the same thing as being uneducated or stupid. And being wrong about one thing or some things is not the same thing as being wrong about everything.

It doesn't take too much effort to find liberals with PhD's and other impressive credentials stating all the stuff you find liberals posting on message boards. Sometimes they're right. Sometimes not.

Now then, if your comments were not directed at me but were directed at those who accuse others of being ignorant, fools, morons, or idiots rather than simply say "I don't agree with that, and here's why. . . .", I agree with you. Those calling names look a whole lot more uneducated than those they accuse in that case . . . .

unless. . . .

They are just participating in typical message board food fight banter that seems to be sport these days. In which case no harm, no foul, and kudos for not caring if you look like an idiot. (Just kidding.) (It is annoying to those who would like to discuss a topic however.)

My primary quarrel with liberals, apart from the damage I believe they do to our liberties and opportunities and choices, is that most can't or won't argue a concept, but they engage ONLY in accusing or attacking people with opposing views or people who don't share their political party or professed ideology.

I have problems with conservatives for the same reason, but most conservatives CAN at least give a rationale, apart from fuzzy emotionalism, for their convictions and beliefs.

QFT... sometimes it can be fun acting like an idiot. Blow off some steam so to speak.

 

[numan]

Given modern methods of brainwashing and social control, I think it is a distinct possibility.

All the methods used in the USSR, still the people demanded liberty.

Oh, you are such a child!!

Modern methods of brainwashing are light-years beyond the crude, primitive methods of the Soviets, Nazis and Maoists!!

The most effective brainwashing is below the threshhold of conscious awareness!!

A crude, tongue-tip taste :

.

 

[koshergrl]

My answer is, if I don't feel like I know enough about a subject, is to just do some research on my own. Read the thread, go study what everyone said, and teach myself.

There is no way anybody knows everything about everything and a lot of it is different interpretations and opinions about things.

If I'm incorrect, I'd like to be told how and how I can learn more to correct myself.

Not be told, as so many do and have, that liberals are uneducated and stupid or don't know history as if all liberals are like that.

How do you know what someone's education level is based solely on a post here?

Assumptions are not a good thing and it really discourages opposing debate.

Just my two cents.

Good for you.

The fact that multiple posters have no clue what inalienable rights are by definition, and further don't understand the laws that protect their own liberty...and yet who insist on interjecting themselves into the dialogue making demands as if they are afforded those things is indicative of a crap education. People who are knowledgeable can certainly discern the education level in any given topic by the vapidity of the comments made. Those of us who do have a working knowledge of history, and our country's political system, and the government, can absolutely recognize deficiencies in the education of people whose comments make it OBVIOUS that they don't have adequate understanding of the topics they opine on to make an intelligent, educated decision.

The ignorance of the left is pervasive, and it is directly attributable to leftist educators, and a progressive system meant to control, rather than educate, the people.

 

[Foxfyre]

My answer is, if I don't feel like I know enough about a subject, is to just do some research on my own. Read the thread, go study what everyone said, and teach myself.

There is no way anybody knows everything about everything and a lot of it is different interpretations and opinions about things.

If I'm incorrect, I'd like to be told how and how I can learn more to correct myself.

Not be told, as so many do and have, that liberals are uneducated and stupid or don't know history as if all liberals are like that.

How do you know what someone's education level is based solely on a post here?

Assumptions are not a good thing and it really discourages opposing debate.

Just my two cents.

I don't know if that was directed at me, but the questions are valid and pertinent. The assumption that liberals are being accused of being uneducated and stupid is not valid or pertinent. Being wrong is not the same thing as being uneducated or stupid. And being wrong about one thing or some things is not the same thing as being wrong about everything.

It doesn't take too much effort to find liberals with PhD's and other impressive credentials stating all the stuff you find liberals posting on message boards. Sometimes they're right. Sometimes not.

Now then, if your comments were not directed at me but were directed at those who accuse others of being ignorant, fools, morons, or idiots rather than simply say "I don't agree with that, and here's why. . . .", I agree with you. Those calling names look a whole lot more uneducated than those they accuse in that case . . . .

unless. . . .

They are just participating in typical message board food fight banter that seems to be sport these days. In which case no harm, no foul, and kudos for not caring if you look like an idiot. (Just kidding.) (It is annoying to those who would like to discuss a topic however.)

My primary quarrel with liberals, apart from the damage I believe they do to our liberties and opportunities and choices, is that most can't or won't argue a concept, but they engage ONLY in accusing or attacking people with opposing views or people who don't share their political party or professed ideology.

I have problems with conservatives for the same reason, but most conservatives CAN at least give a rationale, apart from fuzzy emotionalism, for their convictions and beliefs.

QFT... sometimes it can be fun acting like an idiot. Blow off some steam so to speak.

Yeah, when it is engaged in as harmless sport, again no harm, no fou and no doubt is fun for manyl. . . .BUT. . . .it still is annoying when it completely derails a thread and makes having a serious discussion impossible. Which it so often does.

 

[RKMBrown]

I don't know if that was directed at me, but the questions are valid and pertinent. The assumption that liberals are being accused of being uneducated and stupid is not valid or pertinent. Being wrong is not the same thing as being uneducated or stupid. And being wrong about one thing or some things is not the same thing as being wrong about everything.

It doesn't take too much effort to find liberals with PhD's and other impressive credentials stating all the stuff you find liberals posting on message boards. Sometimes they're right. Sometimes not.

Now then, if your comments were not directed at me but were directed at those who accuse others of being ignorant, fools, morons, or idiots rather than simply say "I don't agree with that, and here's why. . . .", I agree with you. Those calling names look a whole lot more uneducated than those they accuse in that case . . . .

unless. . . .

They are just participating in typical message board food fight banter that seems to be sport these days. In which case no harm, no foul, and kudos for not caring if you look like an idiot. (Just kidding.) (It is annoying to those who would like to discuss a topic however.)

My primary quarrel with liberals, apart from the damage I believe they do to our liberties and opportunities and choices, is that most can't or won't argue a concept, but they engage ONLY in accusing or attacking people with opposing views or people who don't share their political party or professed ideology.

I have problems with conservatives for the same reason, but most conservatives CAN at least give a rationale, apart from fuzzy emotionalism, for their convictions and beliefs.

QFT... sometimes it can be fun acting like an idiot. Blow off some steam so to speak.

Yeah, when it is engaged in as harmless sport, again no harm, no fou and no doubt is fun for manyl. . . .BUT. . . .it still is annoying when it completely derails a thread and makes having a serious discussion impossible. Which it so often does.

Well if you are on the left, then all you have is derailing by name calling and such, as there is no reasoning to support their policies.

 

[Wolfsister77]

QFT... sometimes it can be fun acting like an idiot. Blow off some steam so to speak.

Yeah, when it is engaged in as harmless sport, again no harm, no fou and no doubt is fun for manyl. . . .BUT. . . .it still is annoying when it completely derails a thread and makes having a serious discussion impossible. Which it so often does.

Well if you are on the left, then all you have is derailing by name calling and such, as there is no reasoning to support their policies.

How do you know this?

 

[Foxfyre]

Yeah, when it is engaged in as harmless sport, again no harm, no fou and no doubt is fun for manyl. . . .BUT. . . .it still is annoying when it completely derails a thread and makes having a serious discussion impossible. Which it so often does.

Well if you are on the left, then all you have is derailing by name calling and such, as there is no reasoning to support their policies.

How do you know this?

While RKM's statement was more perjorative than I would have phrased it, sadly he does have a point. Again and again and again I have challenged leftists/progressives/modern liberals here at USMB and on numerous other boards to defend a socioeconomic or political concept - ANY concept - without naming or accusing or blaming or deferring to what another person, group, or political party did. In other words, defend the concept on its own merit without referencing anybody.

To date, not one--count them, not one!--has taken me up on that challenge. Those who claim they did so will invariably blame, accuse, or negatively refer to some person, group, or poliical party. They simply cannot defend what their preach on the merits of what they preach, and they become extremely hostile if they are challenged on what they profess.

It seems to be in the liberal psyche.

Even saying this, there are numerous people who lean left that I admire, and have watched, heard, or read over many years now and have learned from. So there are exceptions. They just don't seem to be all that typical. Liberalism seems to mostly have no philosophical center, nothing specific to defend, and is based mostly on a kind of self righteous oneupsmanship and ad hominem.

 

[mamooth]

Yeah, when it is engaged in as harmless sport, again no harm, no fou and no doubt is fun for manyl. . . .BUT. . . .it still is annoying when it completely derails a thread and makes having a serious discussion impossible. Which it so often does.

Cut the crap, Fox. You made it clear that you consider providing actual data to be derailing a thread. I witnessed that many times in the Environment folder. You showered praise on the insult-only rightie crowd, and declared that anyone contributing actual data was "doing a big cut-and-paste to distract everyone from the real issues", the "real issues" being your fact-free retard conspiracy theory about how global warming was a socialist plot. You also did that charming thing of declaring that everyone who disagreed with you was a sock, and therefore unworthy of your response.

The only things you've ever cared about are how fervently you can kiss up to the more aggressive members of your tribe, pretending you're not a mindless partisan shill, and projecting your own sleazy actions on to honest people. I see you've found a new group to kiss up to here, so by all means proceed. Just don't think you're fooling anyone with your "I'm so independent and rational" charade. People who can debate, do. People who can't do nothing but whine about how awful the other side is. That would be you.

 

[Foxfyre]

Cut and pasted liberal crap is just as much crap as parroted crap, Mamooth. And when the person pasting it has no clue what it even means, yeah, that can derail a thread.

Just as your post is totally non responsive to the point I was making here.